This is what big think needs more of. Real world talk about real world issues. Michio can amaze us with predictions 200 years into the future, but what I want are ideas that are useful right now, in the present. Huge companies are humanity's future, getting 50 000 experts to work on a common goal is what makes substantial change. Thanks to Adam for giving everyone an inside look on how that happens.
Being a grass roots (multi)national company is essentially a contradiction in terms. "Culture" varies from town to town, suburb to suburb. Whenever someone tries to create a specific culture, people pick up on that very quickly. Unless it's done perfectly and honestly people will see it for what it is, a facade, a lie. Culture can be guided by certain decisions, but not created. The reason for that is that culture is as much down to the consumers as it is to the CEOs, if not more so. That is the key aspect many businesses miss out on when it comes to culture, it's not about them, it's about their consumers.
"A simple plan" - true, and also the story of how you got there.. I've worked with many top level CEO's and the most memorable & successful would tell the story at bi-annual company meetings of how he started hiring and planning this $100+ million company in the hotel lobby when he first was hired and moved to the new town to set things up.
If you work 100 hours per week u will deliver much higher results than if you work 100 hours in two weeks. The intensity which exist in 100 hours in one weeks is much more dense. Higher results are usually dense and cant be made with lower density. Of course it should be accompanied with isolation in order to let the genius in you go up
Ok, good culture is important; but It would be interesting now to expose the structure of a (good or bad) culture, i.e., break culture it down so it is possible to analyse it as a system. Also, could be interesting to show how can that (breakdown) can be achieved (if it can at all).
I don't see how the fact of him saying something should be a clue to anything other than your own opinion. Even a serious examination would still be just your opinion. But opinions make you tube spin so yours is noted and filed.
I didn't hear any science in his lecture on culture but I think peer reviewed science can vary from peer to peer And validate Al Gores and shun Nikola Teslas. when talking about psychedelics its going to be full of assertions and no evidence. The reputation of someone can be changed to good or bad with media it doesn't change the person. Saying hes a charlatan is implying he was out to scam us and I don't see it. But I guess my mind isn't as open as yours.. thank you
science is a very fancy word that can be added into every conversation and still not mean shit. We don't have to agree on anything. I'm perfectly OK with disagreeing, Unless you prefer to agree then I agree that we should.
MhadPhee science is a verb. science is a simple series of steps. science isn't fancy. science is our greatest intellectual achievement, it knows how we're wrong, and works by making us do it right. science can be a lifelong source of wonder, happiness, friendship and lifesaver.
There is a bigger picture behind The Importance of Culture in the Workplace. Have we resolved issues like long work hours and the toll its taking to our lifes? No, but big thinkers dirorient common ppl from the real issues. U know the ones that make our lifes unbearable. Imo, find a serious subject or dont bother.
I just don't understand the general distaste for this video. Corporate culture is such a fascinating example of interpersonal motivation and relationship, and it seems like a fine example of broader cultural interactions that influence us all constantly.
Lots of thumbs down because most people doing the base level work ie. the grunt work feel under appreciated and over worked. It's fine for the top executives to sit back and analyze high ideals while joe or Jane everyday has to go punch the clock daily and be judged according to how much revenue they have generated for said executive to sit there and have hi minded ideals there is a HUGE disconnect from the thinkers and the do-ers
There's no need for culture in the workplace when using zero-hour contracts. The moment an "employee" runs out of favour with their boss/manager then get replaced.
I thought he made one simple but valid point, which I have paraphrased here in my own words because he kind of lost track ... It's the leaders job to make sure everyone knows exactly how their work is contributing to the goals of the company. Pick up to three key metrics to focus on, and make sure this scoreboard is communicated to your team often. ^ This at least creates a visible & realistic rallying point for your team to get inspired by. If you can communicate this scoreboard often, and in a fun or unique way, it could benefit the overall culture. (i.e. number of users, number of products sold, etc...) Lots of thumbs down, but I didn't think it was all that bad as a thought initiator on the topic ... :)
Yes. That's why it has so many dislikes. I think everyone who upvoted it either doesn't understand what the world culture actually pertains too, or they pulled their own meaning out of something he said that wasn't actually what he was saying.
Like Bryant said, "culture" is an amorphous concept. Maybe the 59 dislikes just didn't get it. He's clearly making the case for moving away from the "robotic, manufactured, siloed" mentality of 20th century business, and toward a more integrated, networked, individualized, globally aware 21st century model.
I don't think the idea was particularly profound but it's there, that the culture or the atmosphere of the company is a large variable in the productivity of the company but it's not really tangible.
I'm getting very tired of watching these pseudo-philosophical Big Think videos making vague unscientific observations with patchwork conclusions. This guy made zero tangible points. It's all nonsense. edit: And I know, I know, "You don't have to watch them" blah blah blah. But when you tote around people like this guy with people like Michio Kaku, Bill Nye, and Neil deGrasse Tyson it looks really stupid and insulting to the intelligence of anyone watching these videos expecting actually interesting ideas.
company culture: it's important, plan for it, keep it in mind at all times Its an opinions and ideas channel, hence the name "big think". There is no anchorman presenting a survey here. If you don't see any value in their opinions at all, be it you agree or not with their views, then of course there is no point in watching those. I think there is much to learn here, even if they are not explaining a "tangible point". He explaining his view and experience which is a quite valuable resource don't you think?
This is what big think needs more of. Real world talk about real world issues. Michio can amaze us with predictions 200 years into the future, but what I want are ideas that are useful right now, in the present. Huge companies are humanity's future, getting 50 000 experts to work on a common goal is what makes substantial change. Thanks to Adam for giving everyone an inside look on how that happens.
Being a grass roots (multi)national company is essentially a contradiction in terms. "Culture" varies from town to town, suburb to suburb. Whenever someone tries to create a specific culture, people pick up on that very quickly. Unless it's done perfectly and honestly people will see it for what it is, a facade, a lie. Culture can be guided by certain decisions, but not created. The reason for that is that culture is as much down to the consumers as it is to the CEOs, if not more so. That is the key aspect many businesses miss out on when it comes to culture, it's not about them, it's about their consumers.
Add to the mix that that one executive makes more in a year than most of the grunts in a "unit" make combined only adds fuel to the flame
"A simple plan" - true, and also the story of how you got there.. I've worked with many top level CEO's and the most memorable & successful would tell the story at bi-annual company meetings of how he started hiring and planning this $100+ million company in the hotel lobby when he first was hired and moved to the new town to set things up.
If you work 100 hours per week u will deliver much higher results than if you work 100 hours in two weeks. The intensity which exist in 100 hours in one weeks is much more dense. Higher results are usually dense and cant be made with lower density. Of course it should be accompanied with isolation in order to let the genius in you go up
Ok, good culture is important; but It would be interesting now to expose the structure of a (good or bad) culture, i.e., break culture it down so it is possible to analyse it as a system. Also, could be interesting to show how can that (breakdown) can be achieved (if it can at all).
Keep the food and music replace the laws and gods imho
"Culture Is Not Your Friend"-Terence McKenna-
I don't see how the fact of him saying something should be a clue to anything other than your own opinion. Even a serious examination would still be just your opinion.
But opinions make you tube spin so yours is noted and filed.
I didn't hear any science in his lecture on culture but I think peer reviewed science can vary from peer to peer And validate Al Gores and shun Nikola Teslas.
when talking about psychedelics its going to be full of assertions and no evidence.
The reputation of someone can be changed to good or bad with media it doesn't change the person.
Saying hes a charlatan is implying he was out to scam us and I don't see it.
But I guess my mind isn't as open as yours..
thank you
science is a very fancy word that can be added into every conversation and still not mean shit. We don't have to agree on anything. I'm perfectly OK with disagreeing, Unless you prefer to agree then I agree that we should.
MhadPhee science is a verb. science is a simple series of steps. science isn't fancy. science is our greatest intellectual achievement, it knows how we're wrong, and works by making us do it right. science can be a lifelong source of wonder, happiness, friendship and lifesaver.
There is a bigger picture behind The Importance of Culture in the Workplace.
Have we resolved issues like long work hours and the toll its taking to our lifes?
No, but big thinkers dirorient common ppl from the real issues. U know the ones that make our lifes unbearable.
Imo, find a serious subject or dont bother.
I just don't understand the general distaste for this video. Corporate culture is such a fascinating example of interpersonal motivation and relationship, and it seems like a fine example of broader cultural interactions that influence us all constantly.
Culture, there's a clue in the first four letters
Lots of thumbs down because most people doing the base level work ie. the grunt work feel under appreciated and over worked. It's fine for the top executives to sit back and analyze high ideals while joe or Jane everyday has to go punch the clock daily and be judged according to how much revenue they have generated for said executive to sit there and have hi minded ideals there is a HUGE disconnect from the thinkers and the do-ers
There's no need for culture in the workplace when using zero-hour contracts. The moment an "employee" runs out of favour with their boss/manager then get replaced.
I thought he made one simple but valid point, which I have paraphrased here in my own words because he kind of lost track ...
It's the leaders job to make sure everyone knows exactly how their work is contributing to the goals of the company. Pick up to three key metrics to focus on, and make sure this scoreboard is communicated to your team often.
^ This at least creates a visible & realistic rallying point for your team to get inspired by. If you can communicate this scoreboard often, and in a fun or unique way, it could benefit the overall culture. (i.e. number of users, number of products sold, etc...)
Lots of thumbs down, but I didn't think it was all that bad as a thought initiator on the topic ... :)
Make culture as essential as your business strategy- it’s too crucial to disregard.
Why so many dislikes?
Its pandering to a group of sociopaths.
Science has discovered culture to be a form of intelligence without anybody having to think. 💡
Decided upon dogma is not science.
He just went on about culture for six minutes but never said what he meant by it.
Big Squat.
And in the face of weather and climate modification, these big clowns push co2 climate change makes them big liars.
Did anyone else feel that this guy didn't really say anything? I mean he said allot of words, but they meant nothing really.
Yes. That's why it has so many dislikes. I think everyone who upvoted it either doesn't understand what the world culture actually pertains too, or they pulled their own meaning out of something he said that wasn't actually what he was saying.
Like Bryant said, "culture" is an amorphous concept. Maybe the 59 dislikes just didn't get it. He's clearly making the case for moving away from the "robotic, manufactured, siloed" mentality of 20th century business, and toward a more integrated, networked, individualized, globally aware 21st century model.
I don't think the idea was particularly profound but it's there, that the culture or the atmosphere of the company is a large variable in the productivity of the company but it's not really tangible.
Dont heard any specific, sorry, I may missed tge point....
Wow, I loved all the Big think videos, up until this one. what bunch of hogwash.
Sounds like bullshit.
I'm getting very tired of watching these pseudo-philosophical Big Think videos making vague unscientific observations with patchwork conclusions. This guy made zero tangible points. It's all nonsense.
edit: And I know, I know, "You don't have to watch them" blah blah blah. But when you tote around people like this guy with people like Michio Kaku, Bill Nye, and Neil deGrasse Tyson it looks really stupid and insulting to the intelligence of anyone watching these videos expecting actually interesting ideas.
company culture: it's important, plan for it, keep it in mind at all times
Its an opinions and ideas channel, hence the name "big think". There is no anchorman presenting a survey here. If you don't see any value in their opinions at all, be it you agree or not with their views, then of course there is no point in watching those. I think there is much to learn here, even if they are not explaining a "tangible point". He explaining his view and experience which is a quite valuable resource don't you think?
A lot of things in life aren't tangible or quantifiable - it doesn't mean they're not worth considering.
LEADERS,LEADERS,LEADERS,HITLERS,MUSSOLINIS,STALINS,(?)