Leadership

Teams that fight wildfires have much to teach business managers about preventing complex and dynamic problems from spiraling out of control.

Should coworkers have sex with each other? Should employers try to stop them? The answer to the first question is that the question isn't worth answering--because office romance is inevitable anyway. The answer to the second is more interesting. And due to recent shifts in the legal climate, for companies, it's also more scary. There is a misunderstanding at the epicenter of the office romance debate, even as it attracts increasing scrutiny due to famous examples such as the recent episode involving CBS's "Late Show With David Letterman" host. Contrary to some commonly misread signals, managers are not interested in stamping out employee dating. However, sexual relationships and romances change office dynamics in potentially problematic ways, presenting legal challenges such as allegations about sexual harassment and a hostile work environment, and those challenges need to be managed skillfully This article explores the changing legal and managerial landscape regarding office romance, and explains what practices companies should take to avoid trouble.

Management is too often idealized as work that should involve detached planning and strategizing.

Companies need to help telecommuters overcome workplace isolation and limited visibility.

The recent economic downturn has left many organizations in a quandary. Just several years ago, the major issue was winning the so-called "war for talent": how to attract, motivate and retain the best and the brightest. But then the current recession turned that thinking upside down. Now, many organizations are scrambling to figure out how best to restructure and cut costs without jeopardizing the valuable human capital that they built during the prior period of growth. To help such companies, the authors have developed a framework that integrates the seemingly paradoxical practices of talent management and downsizing. The framework looks at two important dimensions. The first is the type of downsizing, either reactive or proactive. The second dimension of the framework is the approach to managing employees, either control-oriented or commitment-oriented. Those two dimensions--type of downsizing and approach to talent management--can be combined to form a two-by-two matrix consisting of four quadrants. Each quadrant represents a different strategy, with a distinct philosophy, focus and key HR and downsizing best practices. The authors contend that there is no "one size fits all" approach to downsizing and that managers need to devise the approach that makes the best sense for their particular company, depending on its position in the matrix's quadrants.

Executives who fail to understand power forces at play may find their careers in jeopardy.

Nancy Duarte and Garr Reynolds help world-renowned executives, politicians and thought leaders deliver stronger presentations. In a talk with MIT Sloan Management Review, they consider not how to make better presentations--their books handle that--but how to become a better manager by thinking more like a designer. They argue that managers and designers have to do many of the same things: embrace restraints, take risks, question everything and make sure that tools don't get in the way of ideas. And they reveal how design concepts such as hierarchy, balance, contrast, clear space and harmony are just as relevant to managers as they are to designers.

With appropriate processes, virtual teams can even outperform their colocated counterparts.