Tags

  • Published on

    Reading—to relax and learn

    Language Performance Readings Research Societal Wellbeing Teaching Time Management

    Are you a reader? I used to be. But university intervened. Thirty years ago, after reading my way through university (text books, journals and articles—not novels or anything of general interest), I lost my appetite for reading. When asked "What are you reading?", I'd answer with "Nothing, university cured me." After plowing my way through heavy material for four years, I had reached the point where I simply did not want to pick up anything longer than an article. I still read a little, but my diet was based entirely on articles published in the popular press (Times, National Geographic, The Economist, HBR), and material I needed to read for work.

    A few years ago, after a long hiatus, a switch flipped. I rediscovered reading again—reading for pleasure and relaxation, that is. I can't recall the time, the place or the exact trigger. Like earlier in my life, I still read to learn. But now I also read to relax. Here's a selection of titles I have read recently:

    • A Beautiful Mind: Sylvia Nasar
    • London, The Biography: Peter Ackroyd
    • Into the Wider World: Brian Turner
    • The Bridge of San Luis Rey: Thornton Wilder

    The following titles are stacked up awaiting my attention:

    • Titan: Ron Chernow
    • Thinking Fast and Slow: Daniel Kahneman
    • One day in the life of Ivan Denisovich: Alexandr Solzhenitsyn
    • Created for Community: Stanley Grenz

    I tend to read about times, people and places—history and biography. I've discovered that, by reading this sort of material, I relax and learn at the same time. Articles like this motivate me. Reading about the past helps me understand today's world

    If you read, I'd be interested to hear your story.

  • Published on

    Social progress and societal wellbeing: What role will you play?

    Complexity Integrity Leadership Performance Societal Wellbeing Sustainability

    One of my core motivations for embarking on my doctoral research is a deep belief that a link exists between good company performance and the 'two socials'—social progress and societal wellbeing. If companies can find ways to sustain high levels of performance, then society will be better for it. Getting ahead is good, we have all heard and read messages extolling the virtue. However, many have interpreted 'getting ahead' as getting rich—presumably to enjoy life to the max, without necessarily sharing the gains with others. The saying "He who dies with the most toys wins" comes to mind. This troubles me.

    My faith in business leaders to do the right thing was restored somewhat this week however, when I read this article. With references to other studies, including a very good report published by Forbes, the authors suggest that mucking in and helping others is going mainstream. Leaders of successful businesses seem to be moving beyond selfish financial goals and beyond handing out cash, to helping out. This is inspiring stuff, and it should give us all hope. But more than that, it is a call to action. We all have a role to play—some as thinkers and 'thought' leaders, others as implementers and 'do' leaders. What role will you play?

  • Published on

    Gender diversity disclosures...on what basis?

    Complexity Diversity Effectiveness Governance Performance

    The discussion about gender diversity disclosures this week piqued my interest.

    Are these calls for gender and age disclosures simply representative of societal pressures towards inclusiveness, or are they because increased gender and age diversity is linked to increased company performance?

    Researchers have been studying the supposed link between board composition factors and company performance for many years. To date, their findings are inconclusive. Gender diversity does, however, seem to lead to more civilised debate in the boardroom, higher accountabilities and better attendance. So, there appears to be goodness in diversity. However, we must to be careful not to confuse these inputs and activity with the desired output of increased company performance.

    New Zealand was first to give women the vote, and that was good for society. Moving towards diversity in the boardroom may also be good for society. However, we don't know that yet. 

    I applaud any move towards increased transparency and disclosure, particularly for listed companies. However, if the motivation is to move down a diversity pathway for which no solid evidence linking increased diversity to company performance is available, are we not on dangerous ground?