TED Conversations

Ramesh Ramakrishnan

Founder, RR marketing advisory

This conversation is closed.

Companies, mainly leaders, need to take a bottom-up approach with employees in order to succeed in future

In the future leaders, managers, marketers, HR will have a different challenge or opportunity with each employee building his/her own brand and amplifying their views in the spheres of influence, these members will find it difficult to ‘manage’ human resources, they have to start thinking about how to make the company relevant to these resourceful humans so that they embrace the company objectives and convey the messages in their spheres of influence. The tables are turning, companies that are moving away from hiearchy to wirearchy will survive in the future as they will be agile, resourceful with crowdsourced insights.

Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Apr 4 2013: I believe one could find plenty of evidence that shallow rather than highly hierarchical forms of organization work better in situations in which one needs creativity and flexibility from employees. In many sorts of work, the front line of employees has better information about what those they serve need and what works than do those more distant from the client. Micromanaging professional and creative people is not a good recipe for offering exceptional service.

    It seems to me that there was plenty of evidence on this already by the 1960s or 1970s, but I would need to do a literature search to find it.

    And with communication being so much easier, coordination and information sharing among employees ought to be easier than it has ever been.
    • Apr 4 2013: Thanks Fritzie for your comments, fully agree on value of the front line employee point.

      Some leaders think they know or should know more than their team members and because of this thought they tend to micro manage or not listen. The impact of such culture on the marketing department is immense as they are responsible for the company image etc, but now things are changing.
      • thumb
        Apr 4 2013: Sometimes leaders do know more about some things, while knowing less about others. But in my experience micromanaging has more to do with wanting to control outcomes or a distrust of employees. Specifically objectives at the top and objectives at the bottom might be different. In the literature I believe this is called "the agency problem."
        • Apr 5 2013: Yes, agree that the objectives can be different. Some leaders or organisations have a solution to this, because there is mutual trust, these 2 communities communicate their intent and problems. That makes the other community appreciate the actions and co-operate.

          Problem is when a 2 way trust deficit occurs, people dont communicate the objectives or intent, they dont even communicate their actions. People then stumble upon results after its been carried out, then the blame game starts!

          Ramesh

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.