Author Archives: Michael LoBue
Hard Facts-Dangerous Half-Truths & Total Nonsense (Profiting from Evidence-Based Management)
by: Jeffrey Pfeffer & Robert I. Sutton
Harvard Business School Press
© 2006
Reviewed by: Michael LoBue
What a treat to have two well-respected business school scholars and faculty members expose the hypocriscy that most folks working in business today have known for years. One of my favorite exposés is how the Harvard Business Review’s editorial policies prohibit citations, therefore leaving the distinct impression that most (everything?) published in the magazine is a new and breakthrough idea. The authors point out several specific instances where previous HBR arcticles could not even be referenced to demonstrate that the ideas were not even new to the publication. (And we wonder why these venerable institutions produce unethical business leaders!)
Perhaps the most significant take-away from this important read is that there’s no substitute for creating data-driven organizations, especially since we’re now swimming in data thanks to the Internet. We think this is a must-read for association managers.
The Future of Work
by: Thomas W. Malone
Harvard Business School Press
© 2004
Reviewed by: Michael LoBue
Malone is well respected as an academic and researcher; this book is not so much about his own research, but a very accessible presentation of important findings in his area of research and his own observations about how work is changing and will continue to change.
His chapter on “From Command-and-Control to Coordinate-and-Cultivate” is especially useful in today’s knowledge work environment — particularly applicable to association environments.
The Future of Management
The Dumbest Generation
by: Mark Bauerlein
Jeremy P. Tarcher/Penguin
© 2007
Reviewed by: Michael Majdalany
Based on exhaustive research poring over numerous reports from government agencies, foundations, survey firms, and scholarly institutions in addition to historical and social analysis, Mark Bauerlein draws an alarming portrait of the young American mind. The technology that was supposed to make young adults more astute, diversify their tastes, and improve their minds has had the opposite effect. The author decries that most young people in the US do NOT read literature, work reliably, nor visit cultural institutions of any sort. They cannot explain basic scientific methods nor recount fundamental facts of American history, and do not feel the need to. Instead, they spend unbelievable amounts of time exchanging electronically stories and pictures (mostly of themselves), tunes and texts, dwelling in a world of puerile banter and self-absorbed pursuits.
Well-written (the author is a professor of English at Emory University), the book is a quick read and in spite of some pontification, suggests how we might address these deficiencies.
Democracy in America
by: Alexix de Tocqueville
(Translated by: George Lawrence)
Harper Perenial Modern Classics
© 2006
Reviewed by: Michael LoBue
The book, in any translation, is required reading for any professional manager of a trade association or professional society in the United States!
de Tocqueville’s observations of the American culture are as relevant today as when he made them more than 160 years ago. His observations are important to understanding the nuances of what might appear to be conflicting characteristics. For example, he observed that Americans were very critical of their politicians, other citizens and perhaps even “American traits,” but they were utterly intolerant of criticism from non-Americans.
This is an especially important read for anyone familiar with associations in the United States wanting to “export” the American model abroad. Associations in America are a unique private response to a public issue/need. Rather than requiring the permission of government to form, our laws are crafted to make such private responses easy and inexpensive to undertake.
We Americans may have borrowed the European model for associations, but we put such a unique twist on that model, making it dangerous to assume that associations elsewhere are the same. It’s not necessarily better, but it is uniquely American.
For those interested in just a taste of what de Tocqueville observed about associations in a America, here is his chapter (it’s short) “On the Use Which The Americans Make of Associations in Civil Life.”
Click
by: Bill Tancer
Hyperion
© 2008
Reviewed by: Michael LoBue
Tancer exposes one of the important new tools for understanding what’s important to people – online search data!
While Tancer, and his colleagues, have access to data sets of search traffic that are not available to mere mortals, he was very candid in his descriptions of how he goes about answering questions about trends and consumer preferences. In his final couple of chapters he also reveals some characteristics about how products and services move from alpha/beta stages to fully embraced market phenomenons.
This book is very readable and drove me to rediscover Google analytical tools to run some search-data analysis of interest to me. This is an important read for anyone really interested in creating a “data-driven” organization.
Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community
13 Things That Don’t Make Sense
Are Results of Surplus – Deficit Study Valid?
Michael LoBue writes: As the study results comparing the impact of the start of the recession on standalone and AMC-managed organizations gains attention, there seems to be a general criticism of the study by executives of standalone organizations. The criticism is that the results are not valid because the study samples were not randomly selected. This post responds to that criticism, pointing out how the criticism itself is both short-sighted and (intentionally?) misleading.
Here’s the punch line —true the samples were not randomly drawn, but it’s just as likely the stellar results produced by the AMC-model vs. the standalone model would be even greater (as opposed to less — as implied by the critics) if the study is repeated on randomly drawn groups.
Select the following link to read the entire response to that criticism.