Before we get to three items, Al Sklover shared
some amazing, in-the-moment employee benefits
that firms offer, in place of real pensions…
In the same vein, we link to highlights of an
article on Daniel McFadden about consumer choice,
things that affect our decision making process.
A second link relates to ideas on how scientists
and engineers participate in social media. While
we are for the most part scientists and engineers,
it is interesting to learn what drives and divides
business school talent assessment–
CHOICE DECISION MAKING INFLUENCES
SOURCE: The Economist, “Free exchange“,
Mcfadden overlaid neuroscience and psychology on
economics in relaying a conclusion that our preferences
are “fluid.” He cited:
- mundane things are valued more highly when we
think of them as “our own.” Think: stocks we hold whose
price has dropped, insurance policy deductibles [premiums
for lower deductibles], even our clothes that we own.
- memory and experience of an event are dominated
by how we feel at its peak and near the perceived end.
- order in the presentation of alternate choices and what
happens right before the choice exhibit strong influences.
Think: social networks, online habits
- more choices is not always good.
BUSINESS SCHOOL SELECTION
SOURCE: M. Korn, WSJ 5-2-13 p. B1
It is interesting to track how business schools are
adapting to hiring practices in their industries. They
seem to be adapting assessments of personal
and emotional competencies based on scoring
The art of predicting the future convincingly is being
challenged by a realm of five trends Douglas Rushkoff
crystallizes from the intersection of
(portable information in the moment vs.
story line and trends),
shortened icon-loaded messaging
(texting, IM vs. narrative with detail,
subtelty, and nuance),
how we view time
(I am always “too busy”; helter-skelter
what is next? vs. linear clock based ),
dealing with our identity and completing tasks
(focused attention vs. multi-tasking).
These trends in his book “Present Shock” are in contrast to
what this blog entry notes.
Building on an earlier entry on Peter Diamondis’s
technology trends and an era of abundance, Robert
Stevenson has put forward the notion that the business
horizon for the chemical enterprise is bright and
clear-skied. Sure, there are problems but the story he
tells of a bright future based on raw material supplies
and the technical innovation that brought it about should
give hope internationally.
The reason Rushkoff and Stevenson seem to be opposed
is that Stevenson’s long term view deals with a narrative
with many chapters with focus on few, highly important
tasks where Rushkoff’s view of media and the attention it
divides us into is on the present, multi-tasking where
everything is important and a dilution of effort, especially
on hard, long term goals.
So, despite where the collapse of narrative and living
in the moment is taking us, I believe there is a positive
future that depends on recognizing common goals,
prioritizing efforts to solve problems which are sure
to come up.
- environmental impact of combustion and resource
recovery (water, especially)
- managing electricity generation with evolving use
- developing technology to recover, transport, and
handle wastes (improve fracking, scrubber and
use sustainable concepts)