LIFESTYLE – CLEEN QVT https://www.cleenqvt.com Votre partenaire Qualité de Vie au Travail Wed, 21 Oct 2020 11:02:06 +0000 fr-FR hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9 https://www.cleenqvt.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/cropped-CLEEN_QVT_page-0001-removebg-preview-32x32.png LIFESTYLE – CLEEN QVT https://www.cleenqvt.com 32 32 App Development Meeting https://www.cleenqvt.com/zoom-meetings/app-development-meeting/ Wed, 21 Oct 2020 11:02:06 +0000 http://unicoach.wgl-demo.net/?post_type=zoom-meetings&p=2581

Worse, actually choosing a strategy entails making decisions that explicitly cut off possibilities and options. An executive may well fear that getting those decisions wrong will wreck his or her career. The natural reaction is to make the challenge less daunting by turning it into a problem that can be solved with tried and tested tools. That nearly always means spending weeks or even months preparing a comprehensive plan for how the company will invest in existing and new assets and capabilities in order to achieve a target—an increased share of the market, say, or a share in some new one. The plan is typically supported with detailed spreadsheets that project costs and revenue quite far into the future.

This is a truly terrible way to make strategy. It may be an excellent way to cope with fear of the unknown, but fear and discomfort are an essential part of strategy making. In fact, if you are entirely comfortable with your strategy, there’s a strong chance it isn’t very good. You’re probably stuck in one or more of the traps I’ll discuss in this article.
first Session: Team Functioning
  • Build common language around team
  • Establish a spring communication plan
  • Participates in meetings
  • Volunteers to carry out the team’s work
first Session: Team Functioning
  • Build common language around team
  • Establish a spring communication plan
  • Participates in meetings
  • Volunteers to carry out the team’s work

Self-Referential Strategy Frameworks

This trap is perhaps the most insidious, because it can snare even managers who, having successfully avoided the planning and cost traps, are trying to build a real strategy. In identifying and articulating a strategy, most executives adopt one of a number of standard frameworks. Unfortunately, two of the most popular ones can lead the unwary user to design a strategy entirely around what the company can control.

Invalid access token.

All of this is eminently sensible advice that every manager would be wise to follow. However, most managers do not. Instead, most use the idea that a strategy emerges as events unfold as a justification for declaring the future to be so unpredictable and volatile that it doesn’t make sense to make strategy choices until the future becomes sufficiently clear. Notice how comforting that interpretation is: No longer is there a need to make angst-ridden decisions about unknowable and uncontrollable things.

]]> Community Meeting https://www.cleenqvt.com/zoom-meetings/community-meeting/ Wed, 21 Oct 2020 09:33:31 +0000 http://unicoach.wgl-demo.net/?post_type=zoom-meetings&p=2566

Worse, actually choosing a strategy entails making decisions that explicitly cut off possibilities and options. An executive may well fear that getting those decisions wrong will wreck his or her career. The natural reaction is to make the challenge less daunting by turning it into a problem that can be solved with tried and tested tools. That nearly always means spending weeks or even months preparing a comprehensive plan for how the company will invest in existing and new assets and capabilities in order to achieve a target—an increased share of the market, say, or a share in some new one. The plan is typically supported with detailed spreadsheets that project costs and revenue quite far into the future.

This is a truly terrible way to make strategy. It may be an excellent way to cope with fear of the unknown, but fear and discomfort are an essential part of strategy making. In fact, if you are entirely comfortable with your strategy, there’s a strong chance it isn’t very good. You’re probably stuck in one or more of the traps I’ll discuss in this article.
first Session: Team Functioning
  • Build common language around team
  • Establish a spring communication plan
  • Participates in meetings
  • Volunteers to carry out the team’s work
first Session: Team Functioning
  • Build common language around team
  • Establish a spring communication plan
  • Participates in meetings
  • Volunteers to carry out the team’s work

Self-Referential Strategy Frameworks

This trap is perhaps the most insidious, because it can snare even managers who, having successfully avoided the planning and cost traps, are trying to build a real strategy. In identifying and articulating a strategy, most executives adopt one of a number of standard frameworks. Unfortunately, two of the most popular ones can lead the unwary user to design a strategy entirely around what the company can control.

Invalid access token.

All of this is eminently sensible advice that every manager would be wise to follow. However, most managers do not. Instead, most use the idea that a strategy emerges as events unfold as a justification for declaring the future to be so unpredictable and volatile that it doesn’t make sense to make strategy choices until the future becomes sufficiently clear. Notice how comforting that interpretation is: No longer is there a need to make angst-ridden decisions about unknowable and uncontrollable things.

]]> Website Team Meeting https://www.cleenqvt.com/zoom-meetings/website-team-meeting/ Wed, 21 Oct 2020 09:06:03 +0000 http://unicoach.wgl-demo.net/?post_type=zoom-meetings&p=2547

Worse, actually choosing a strategy entails making decisions that explicitly cut off possibilities and options. An executive may well fear that getting those decisions wrong will wreck his or her career. The natural reaction is to make the challenge less daunting by turning it into a problem that can be solved with tried and tested tools. That nearly always means spending weeks or even months preparing a comprehensive plan for how the company will invest in existing and new assets and capabilities in order to achieve a target—an increased share of the market, say, or a share in some new one. The plan is typically supported with detailed spreadsheets that project costs and revenue quite far into the future.

This is a truly terrible way to make strategy. It may be an excellent way to cope with fear of the unknown, but fear and discomfort are an essential part of strategy making. In fact, if you are entirely comfortable with your strategy, there’s a strong chance it isn’t very good. You’re probably stuck in one or more of the traps I’ll discuss in this article.
first Session: Team Functioning
  • Build common language around team
  • Establish a spring communication plan
  • Participates in meetings
  • Volunteers to carry out the team’s work
first Session: Team Functioning
  • Build common language around team
  • Establish a spring communication plan
  • Participates in meetings
  • Volunteers to carry out the team’s work

Self-Referential Strategy Frameworks

This trap is perhaps the most insidious, because it can snare even managers who, having successfully avoided the planning and cost traps, are trying to build a real strategy. In identifying and articulating a strategy, most executives adopt one of a number of standard frameworks. Unfortunately, two of the most popular ones can lead the unwary user to design a strategy entirely around what the company can control.

Invalid access token.

All of this is eminently sensible advice that every manager would be wise to follow. However, most managers do not. Instead, most use the idea that a strategy emerges as events unfold as a justification for declaring the future to be so unpredictable and volatile that it doesn’t make sense to make strategy choices until the future becomes sufficiently clear. Notice how comforting that interpretation is: No longer is there a need to make angst-ridden decisions about unknowable and uncontrollable things.

]]>