Connect. Engage. Collaborate.™
The purpose of The Great Workplace 2.0™ is simple: while it is happening, show core changes in great workplaces, so that start-ups, small and mid-size companies, can extract the principles that other companies are discovering. By example, grow in a healthy and sustainable fashion; return to our economy great dividends of revenue, value and innovation.read more →
Participant” purposefully elevates all people, organizations and community that touch the organization to jersey-wearing players, and as such bestows a level of accountability and ownership to them to coincide with their inclusion. If you wear the jersey, if you touch the ball or protect it, you have a sense of accountability.”read more →
“The boss knows how; the leader shows how. The Builder shows why.read more →
“Customers and governments are not interested in more information, more numbers, more reports or more sophisticated press briefings. What civil society is seeking is trustworthy, relevant and understandable information about how a company runs its business and the features of the products and services it offers to the market.”read more →
“Then … walk into work, run into the foul-faced HR people, a boss who looks sideways at you, no one in management says “HI!”, and you are supposed to be highly motivated to bust yer butt to make stuff for products you can’t afford (ever).”read more →
#2 Mistake: Beat Up Your “Participants”:
In The Great Workplace 2.0, a “Participant” is defined as anyone who touches an organization and has an opportunity to help it achieve its Purpose and goals. It includes EMPLOYEES, VENDORS, board of directors, community and Management.
Keep in mind here: HONEY attracts. Regular beatings, lies and misdirection do nothing to create TRUST. TRUST is a CORE value for The Great Workplace 2.0. It is part of Transparent Integrity. It is at the heart of Collaboration.
In this case study, the organization has a mammoth turnover rate. At one point it exceeded 90% in 3 months of new hires. It didn’t really matter who was hired to make their product. That person was not good enough, fast enough or motivated enough.
The fact was (Is): There was no true training (nor onboarding, nor motivation, nor support, nor incentives, ...
read more →