
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Management for management&#8217;s sake</title>
	<atom:link href="http://managingleadership.com/blog/index.php/2007/11/30/management-for-managements-sake/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://managingleadership.com/blog/2007/11/30/management-for-managements-sake/</link>
	<description>The strategic role of the senior executive</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 20:57:14 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Josh More - Starmind Blog &#187; Real Life Lessons: Social Engineering</title>
		<link>http://managingleadership.com/blog/2007/11/30/management-for-managements-sake/#comment-2987</link>
		<dc:creator>Josh More - Starmind Blog &#187; Real Life Lessons: Social Engineering</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2008 15:04:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://managingleadership.com/blog/2007/11/30/management-for-managements-sake/#comment-2987</guid>
		<description>[...] The second way to protect against social engineering attacks is to eliminate the time pressure. You can do this by empowering your employees to solve problems in non-standard ways. If the &#8220;irate client/boss&#8221; refuses to accept rational non-standard solutions, there might be an attack going on. In such a situation, escalating the issue to someone with more experience just makes sense. You can also eliminate the time pressure by investing in highly redundant and flexible systems. This works well if you are devising a new solution&#8230; less well if you are supporting legacy technology. If you are handling legacy systems, the risks of inflexibility should be considered the next time you build a business case for overhaul and replacement. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The second way to protect against social engineering attacks is to eliminate the time pressure. You can do this by empowering your employees to solve problems in non-standard ways. If the &#8220;irate client/boss&#8221; refuses to accept rational non-standard solutions, there might be an attack going on. In such a situation, escalating the issue to someone with more experience just makes sense. You can also eliminate the time pressure by investing in highly redundant and flexible systems. This works well if you are devising a new solution&#8230; less well if you are supporting legacy technology. If you are handling legacy systems, the risks of inflexibility should be considered the next time you build a business case for overhaul and replacement. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The core rationale of management is to accomplish organizational goals &#124; Managing Leadership</title>
		<link>http://managingleadership.com/blog/2007/11/30/management-for-managements-sake/#comment-2510</link>
		<dc:creator>The core rationale of management is to accomplish organizational goals &#124; Managing Leadership</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jan 2008 15:09:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://managingleadership.com/blog/2007/11/30/management-for-managements-sake/#comment-2510</guid>
		<description>[...] Just over a month ago, we prefaced the current series on the implications of certainty and blind faith with a reference to a bit buried in an item from The Economist about the employee-friendly policies of the CEO of SAS; here it is again: &#8220;The purpose of treating his employees well is to succeed in business.&#8221; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Just over a month ago, we prefaced the current series on the implications of certainty and blind faith with a reference to a bit buried in an item from The Economist about the employee-friendly policies of the CEO of SAS; here it is again: &#8220;The purpose of treating his employees well is to succeed in business.&#8221; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Stroup</title>
		<link>http://managingleadership.com/blog/2007/11/30/management-for-managements-sake/#comment-2224</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Stroup</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Dec 2007 21:07:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://managingleadership.com/blog/2007/11/30/management-for-managements-sake/#comment-2224</guid>
		<description>Hi Steve,

I'm glad to know you're a subscriber to The Economist!

It is a good article, isn't it? And it makes the point well enough, although rather quietly - it needs to be given more emphasis and elaboration, I think, in order to make the idea more effective.

I hope your meetings went well!

The extended series on change is terrific - a great, expanded exploration of the topic from a number of important perspectives - thanks for taking time out from that and your other work for the visit!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Steve,</p>
<p>I&#8217;m glad to know you&#8217;re a subscriber to The Economist!</p>
<p>It is a good article, isn&#8217;t it? And it makes the point well enough, although rather quietly - it needs to be given more emphasis and elaboration, I think, in order to make the idea more effective.</p>
<p>I hope your meetings went well!</p>
<p>The extended series on change is terrific - a great, expanded exploration of the topic from a number of important perspectives - thanks for taking time out from that and your other work for the visit!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Roesler</title>
		<link>http://managingleadership.com/blog/2007/11/30/management-for-managements-sake/#comment-2215</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Roesler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Dec 2007 23:23:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://managingleadership.com/blog/2007/11/30/management-for-managements-sake/#comment-2215</guid>
		<description>Hello, Jim,

As an Economist subscriber, I was quick to refer to the SAS article and quote. 

What a great one-liner that cuts through all of the philosophical/pop-psych stuff! 

Looking foward to the management series now that I finished the meeting last week with a highly-structured agenda :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello, Jim,</p>
<p>As an Economist subscriber, I was quick to refer to the SAS article and quote. </p>
<p>What a great one-liner that cuts through all of the philosophical/pop-psych stuff! </p>
<p>Looking foward to the management series now that I finished the meeting last week with a highly-structured agenda <img src='http://managingleadership.com/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
