Published on: March 6, 2025
By Daniel Butcher
Each company that leads its industry vertical is on top of the world—until it isn’t. Charles Darwin’s quote to explain the phenomenon of natural selection applies to the business world: “It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change.”
For every Eastman Kodak, which infamously refused to change its film-oriented business plan and thus missed the boat on the digital-camera business and eventually went under, there are companies such as Google, Amazon, Netflix, and IBM that are nimble enough to adapt to the ever-changing competitive landscape and technological paradigm and stay relevant and profitable. Such examples have important lessons for business leaders and managers who must plan for disruptions and opportunities caused by new technologies such as AI.
Academy of Management Scholar Wendy Smith said that innovation requires senior leaders to have uncomfortable conversations questioning the foundation of their companies’ current business models.
After then-competitors such as General Magic (now defunct) and Compaq Computer Corp. (acquired by HP in 2002) formed business plans based on the recently coined term cloud computing in the mid-1990s, IBM executives began exploring the potential of cloud technology to transform business operations via flexible, scalable products, services, and platforms. In the early days, IBM assigned personnel with experience in providing enterprise IT services to specialize in cloud-based solutions.
Those efforts culminated in 2007, when IBM officially launched its cloud computing division. That same year, the company also partnered with Google and six prestigious U.S. universities to launch a server farm to support research projects in need of fast processors to parse gigantic data sets. However, those successes weren’t a fait accompli; they required making tough decisions about conflicting business models and go-to-market strategies that had a chance to backfire.
“They had to innovate, but they also had millions and millions of dollars invested in their existing relationships with their current clients and their current technology,” Smith said. “They knew they needed to innovate, yet to do so while continuing to manage their existing products—to change the tire while still driving down the highway.”
Smith noted that embracing paradoxes with both/and thinking is critical for leadership in our fast-paced world.
“The best leaders are able to hold both the past, present, and the future—yesterday, today, and tomorrow—the short term and the long term, the existing world and the innovation, and hold them in their mind simultaneously and commit to both at the same time, and that’s what we refer to as paradox mindset,” she said.
-
Daniel Butcher is a writer and the Managing Editor of AOM Today at the Academy of Management (AOM). Previously, he was a writer and the Finance Editor for Strategic Finance magazine and Management Accounting Quarterly, a scholarly journal, at the Institute of Management Accountants (IMA). Prior to that, he worked as a writer/editor at The Financial Times, including daily FT sister publications Ignites and FundFire, as well as Crain Communications’s InvestmentNews and Crain’s Wealth, eFinancialCareers, and Arizent’s Financial Planning, Re:Invent|Wealth, On Wall Street, Bank Investment Consultant, and Money Management Executive. He earned his bachelor’s degree from the University of Colorado Boulder and his master’s degree from New York University. You can reach him at dbutcher@aom.org or via LinkedIn.
View all posts
Up next....
Everyone Will Suffer in the Wake of Trump Administration’s Research Cuts
Source: Shutterstock
By Paul Friedman
This year, the Trump administration has fired many government researchers, canceled scientific and medical research grants, and targeted leading universities, including Harvard, with debilitating funding freezes. Fear of reprisal has caused many scientists, doctors, professors, and university administrators to opt for silence instead of speaking up to defend the research that is getting the ax.
Academy of Management (AOM) Scholar Peter Bamberger of Tel Aviv University says much of the research produced by him and his colleagues, including many AOM members, has a day-to-day impact on industry practitioners, including organizational leaders and managers. Cuts in federal funding for research will have a negative impact on industry, as well as researchers, colleges and universities, and other research institutions.
“What we publish in our primary journals have to be both theoretically important and have practical relevance,” Bamberger said. “It’s got to be interesting from a theoretical perspective and intellectual perspective, and it’s got to have some sort of surprising element—going against conventional wisdom—but it also has to translate that surprising finding into something that managers can do something about.
“And there are thousands of organizational consultants who read the findings published in our journals and then translate that into actual practice in organizations,” he said.
Bamberger points out that a great deal of research is specifically aimed at examining current practices by managers and their efficacy. Recently, he published a study of the managerial approach called design thinking, which focuses on understanding clients’ needs and designing innovative solutions.
“Design thinking has been around for about 10 years,” Bamberger said. “It’s an approach to create more innovative ways of boosting learning and finding innovative solutions to common problems or sometimes even really wicked problems.
“It became a fad and a lot of organizations adopted it, but no one ever bothered to actually assess whether or not it has an impact and whether this impact is any greater than other types of learning-oriented interventions, like team building,” he said.
Bamberger and research colleagues designed a field experiment to test the impact of design thinking as a team learning intervention. They compared over time what happens in terms of the efficiency and productivity of teams using different interventions.
“Is design thinking more efficacious than an alternative?” Bamberger said. “And we found out that in fact it is, and we actually demonstrate the mechanism by which it operates and why it’s more effective than other mechanisms.
“So these types of practical implications are useful to managers and to the extent that we don’t have funding necessary to do this type of research, everybody suffers,” he said.
-
Paul Friedman is a journalist who worked for 45 years at the three major news networks. He began as a writer and reporter and then became a producer of major news broadcasts, including Nightly News and the Today show at NBC, and World News Tonight with Peter Jennings at ABC. He also served as Executive VicePresident of News at ABC and CBS. Later, he taught journalism as a professor at Columbia University, New York University, and Quinnipiac University. Friedman is now semi-retired and lives with his wife in Florida.
View all posts
Up next....
Trump Administration Policies Have Chilling Effects on Academia
Harvard Yard in the winter. Source: Shutterstock
By Paul Friedman
Tighter enforcement of immigration regulations and cuts in research grants under the Trump administration are having negative impacts on academic work in general and on not-for-profit professional associations, including the Academy of Management, in particular.
Academy of Management (AOM) Scholar Peter Bamberger of Tel Aviv University, the president of AOM, says you can see it clearly in the run-up to the AOM’s annual meeting in Copenhagen. Among other issues, there is concern about how the visas of foreign students are being treated by authorities such as U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
“A good number of the research papers that have been accepted for presentation come from doctoral students from the United States; many of the doctoral students in the United States are foreign doctoral students; and some of the foreign doctoral students in management in the U.S. are considering the potential costs of leaving the U.S. to present their paper,” Bamberger said.
“We are concerned that some of these foreign Ph.D. students, rather than taking that risk, may opt to stay at their offices in the USA and not present their research, which would obviously be deleterious to our science,” he said.
“It would be very unfortunate if innovative papers and important findings are not presented at the 2025 conference because foreign U.S.-based scholars are concerned about the validity of their visas.”
Bamberger said he doesn’t know any AOM members whose students have been deported, but he does know that some AOM scholars are among those being hit by cuts in federal funding for research.
“Those individuals who had grant money to study diversity, equity, and inclusion—that’s all gone,” Bamberger said. “Those individuals don’t have the grants anymore and as a result, the research stops.
“Now, it’s the right of a government to determine how it wants to allocate funding for research, so I can’t necessarily say that this is something that’s undemocratic or unfair,” he said. “That was the result of the election, but it is having a problematic effect.”
Bamberger said he sees an ironic example of how cuts in research can have unexpected results.
“A lot of that research on DEI is not necessarily pro-DEI,” he said. “For example, my own research on gender and racial pay equity suggests that contemporary policies oriented towards enhancing the equity have significant unintended negative consequences, including compensation compression.
“So when you cut off the funding for all research that mentions certain keywords assumed to be related to DEI, you’re cutting off the funding of people doing research that indicates problems with DEI policy, as well as perhaps supporting policies that may be favored by certain politicians.”
-
Paul Friedman is a journalist who worked for 45 years at the three major news networks. He began as a writer and reporter and then became a producer of major news broadcasts, including Nightly News and the Today show at NBC, and World News Tonight with Peter Jennings at ABC. He also served as Executive VicePresident of News at ABC and CBS. Later, he taught journalism as a professor at Columbia University, New York University, and Quinnipiac University. Friedman is now semi-retired and lives with his wife in Florida.
View all posts
Up next....
AI Is a Tool to Boost Efficiency, Not to Reduce Headcount
Source: Shutterstock
By Paul Friedman
Artificial intelligence is often seen as a threat to employment, but it can be used to preserve jobs in times of uncertainty such as the current one when many economists are sounding the alarm about a looming recession.
Academy of Management Scholar Peter Bamberger of Tel Aviv University said AI can be used to help businesses maintain skilled workforces when they may have to find ways to cut costs.
“What kind of jobs may disappear? What kinds of skills will you still need? What skills can we do without? There’s uncertainty there,” Bamberger said. “Perhaps you want to take that workforce and upgrade them over time.
“You have to know where your business is going and have a good sense as to what kinds of competencies you need,” he said. “There are clearly benefits to retaining your workforce as long as you can afford to train them to augment the AI and enhance its value.
“Increasingly organizations are doing this and using AI in this process.”
Bamberger said AI is now allowing organizations to better understand how to leverage and develop the talent in their workforce.
“Often we refer to something called the talent marketplace, something that organizations probably should have been doing decades ago, which is keeping inventories of their workforce’s competencies and skills,” Bamberger said. “AI is enhancing the ability of organizations to leverage the workforce they have in place by moving people around on short-term internal gigs in organizations and getting them prepared for positions that might open up in the future.
“These are systems that help organizations enhance the competency level of their workforce and limit the need to necessarily turn to the external labor market to secure the talent they need, which can be quite expensive,” he said.
“Ultimately it may offer a far more economical way to maximize the return from investments in human capital.”
There’s also a benefit of AI to employees, according to Bamberger.
“AI—having an understanding of the individual’s background and experiences and skills and competencies—can search through a wide range of projects that may require a month or two of work and then propose those to an employee during that individual’s slack time that they take on this additional project,” he said.
“And if they do enough of these projects over the course of two or three years, they’re going to be set to fill these new roles that they’re interested in doing and the organization needs them to fill.”
-
Paul Friedman is a journalist who worked for 45 years at the three major news networks. He began as a writer and reporter and then became a producer of major news broadcasts, including Nightly News and the Today show at NBC, and World News Tonight with Peter Jennings at ABC. He also served as Executive VicePresident of News at ABC and CBS. Later, he taught journalism as a professor at Columbia University, New York University, and Quinnipiac University. Friedman is now semi-retired and lives with his wife in Florida.
View all posts
Up next....
“Just Add a Woman and Stir” Is Not Enough for Board Success
By Daniel Butcher
Even at organizations that have made strides in adding women and people of color to their governing boards, tokenism is all too common. Diverse board members can’t make a difference if their longer-tenured colleagues routinely disregard their suggestions.
Academy of Management Scholar Kris Byron of Georgia State University said that female board members and those representing an ethnic or racial minority are often sidelined, technically part of the board but to whom the other directors or trustees don’t really listen.
Byron and research colleague Corinne Post of Villanova published an article on this topic in Academy of Management Journal.
“There’s this idea that you just add women and stir and that’s enough, but that’s not enough,” Byron said. “If we’re saying that the ways in which a woman might add value is that she might have different perspectives or a different lens through which to look at an issue, or she might have information or knowledge or experience that maybe some of her male colleagues don’t have.
“That knowledge, experience, and perspectives mean nothing—they’re not going to have any effect—if people aren’t willing to acknowledge the usefulness of that perspective or knowledge or experience,” she said. “There’s probably lots of other things that are important to whether or not the woman on the board is a token, or whether or not there’s some kind of critical mass of female directors on the board.
“Do people think, ‘Oh, she’s just there on the board because we had to fill this quota—she wasn’t the best person to serve in this role; she’s just here for window dressing to make us look good.’”
Diversity is hollow if it isn’t accompanied by equity, inclusion, and fostering a sense of belonging among members of marginalized and minority groups. Actually listening to female board members’ ideas and suggestions and enacting the best of them are crucial for them to have a chance to improve an organization’s leadership.
“There has to be this real belief among the other board directors that these women, that all of the directors, have some value-add, and that isn’t a given,” Byron said. “So that’s what it means that you can’t just add women and stir.
“There has to be some other things that are in place in order for women to have a positive impact on an organization, especially on something that’s so distal or downstream like firm performance,” she said. “Board directors largely have an indirect effect on organizational performance.”
-
Daniel Butcher is a writer and the Managing Editor of AOM Today at the Academy of Management (AOM). Previously, he was a writer and the Finance Editor for Strategic Finance magazine and Management Accounting Quarterly, a scholarly journal, at the Institute of Management Accountants (IMA). Prior to that, he worked as a writer/editor at The Financial Times, including daily FT sister publications Ignites and FundFire, as well as Crain Communications’s InvestmentNews and Crain’s Wealth, eFinancialCareers, and Arizent’s Financial Planning, Re:Invent|Wealth, On Wall Street, Bank Investment Consultant, and Money Management Executive. He earned his bachelor’s degree from the University of Colorado Boulder and his master’s degree from New York University. You can reach him at dbutcher@aom.org or via LinkedIn.
View all posts
Up next....
What Are the Effects of Adding Women to Boards? It’s Complicated.
By Daniel Butcher
Research shows that companies with more female directors can have better firm performance—and this is especially the case in countries that have stronger shareholder protections or that have greater gender equality. In addition, organizations whose boards have more female directors tend to be more engaged in activities that are central to boards’ responsibilities: monitoring and strategy involvement.
Academy of Management Scholar Kris Byron of Georgia State University said that board monitoring refers to the extent to which boards engage in activities that entail oversight of the firm and seek to control managers. Board strategy involvement refers to the extent to which boards engage in activities related to their advising role and decide how firms should compete in the marketplace.
Byron and research colleague Corinne Post of Villanova published an article on this topic in Academy of Management Journal.
“What we found was that there was a positive effect of adding women to the board on strategic involvement and a positive impact on board monitoring, but that board diversity is neither wholly detrimental nor wholly beneficial to firm financial performance,” Byron said. “There is some research showing that when you have more women on your board, they’re more likely to influence fellow directors’ or trustees’ behavior and that the norms of the board changes, for example, attendance gets better.
“There’s this spillover effect that women might have; maybe they come onto the board and they’re more diligent,” she said. “In some ways, that makes sense, because there aren’t tons of women who are in those kinds of senior positions, and so, if she got to that position, then she is probably quite exceptional and especially conscientious.
“Those behaviors may spill over to her male counterparts on the board, and there is research suggesting that that’s something that probably occurs.”
-
Daniel Butcher is a writer and the Managing Editor of AOM Today at the Academy of Management (AOM). Previously, he was a writer and the Finance Editor for Strategic Finance magazine and Management Accounting Quarterly, a scholarly journal, at the Institute of Management Accountants (IMA). Prior to that, he worked as a writer/editor at The Financial Times, including daily FT sister publications Ignites and FundFire, as well as Crain Communications’s InvestmentNews and Crain’s Wealth, eFinancialCareers, and Arizent’s Financial Planning, Re:Invent|Wealth, On Wall Street, Bank Investment Consultant, and Money Management Executive. He earned his bachelor’s degree from the University of Colorado Boulder and his master’s degree from New York University. You can reach him at dbutcher@aom.org or via LinkedIn.
View all posts
Up next....
Eight Tips for More Effective Generative AI Prompts
Source: Shutterstock
By Daniel Butcher
Academy of Management Scholar Herman Aguinis of the George Washington University School of Business, one of the most influential management professors and researchers, said creating prompts is the key to using ChatGPT and other generative-AI software effectively. When users input prompts that lack specificity and crucial contextual information, generative-AI platforms generate too many, too few, or vague recommendations and results that aren’t useful.
The following guidelines were designed by Aguinis and coauthors Jose Beltran of Rutgers University and Amando Cope of the George Washington University to give leaders tools to improve their ability to write AI prompts and generate more precise, relevant responses:
Source: “How to use generative AI as a human resource management assistant,” Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 53, Issue 1, January–March 2024, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2024.101029
-
Daniel Butcher is a writer and the Managing Editor of AOM Today at the Academy of Management (AOM). Previously, he was a writer and the Finance Editor for Strategic Finance magazine and Management Accounting Quarterly, a scholarly journal, at the Institute of Management Accountants (IMA). Prior to that, he worked as a writer/editor at The Financial Times, including daily FT sister publications Ignites and FundFire, as well as Crain Communications’s InvestmentNews and Crain’s Wealth, eFinancialCareers, and Arizent’s Financial Planning, Re:Invent|Wealth, On Wall Street, Bank Investment Consultant, and Money Management Executive. He earned his bachelor’s degree from the University of Colorado Boulder and his master’s degree from New York University. You can reach him at dbutcher@aom.org or via LinkedIn.
View all posts
Up next....
What It Takes to Be a Powerful Leader
Source: Shutterstock
By Daniel Butcher
To climb the ladder in your profession and achieve success, hard work is table stakes, not a differentiator. And to progress from rank-and-file employee to manager to respected, powerful leader might require a fundamental mindset shift of letting go of a need to be seen as likeable and authentic while cultivating professional relationships.
Academy of Management Scholar Jeffrey Pfeffer of Stanford University, one of today’s most influential management professors and researchers, offers some takeaways on that subject from his book7 Rules of Power, which isa manual for increasing the ability to get things done and benefitting from job performance.
“Good performance by itself is not necessarily going to bring you the level of career success that you need,” Pfeffer said. “In addition, you need technical and political skills to have your boss recognize your good contributions.
“If you think about management, and leadership is managing through other people, you need to learn how to interact with other people across your organization in ways that build your influence and permit you to get the things done that you want to get done,” he said.
Pfeffer’s seven rules power are:
1. Get out of your own way: “Lose the self-descriptions and inhibitions that hold you back, for example, the idea that you have to be liked, because, as an executive, you’re hired to get things done, not necessarily to win a popularity contest. Lose this currently popular idea that you need to be quote-unquote authentic, which is, of course, incorrect.”
2. Break the rules: “In strategy and organizational leadership, if you do what everybody else does, you will probably not succeed—you need to differentiate yourself.”
3. Show up in powerful fashion: “Body language and how we communicate is obviously important.”
4. Create a powerful brand: “If you’re perceived as a powerful, effective, efficacious leader, then that becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy—good people want to work with you, invest with you, and buy from your company.”
5. Network relentlessly: “That’s something that people often don’t want to do, so they underinvest in networking because they feel dirty about it and don’t see it as the value-adding activity that it is.”
6. Use your power: “Not all use of power will be met with unalloyed approval, so leaders need to be willing to incur some level of social disapproval. But because most people are usually averse to conflict, it is surprising how much one can accomplish by seizing the initiative.”
7. Understand that once you have acquired power, what you did to get it will be forgiven, forgotten, or both: “Once you have power and status and success, no one will care how you got it, and people will people will accommodate themselves, because people like to be close to power.”
Upon reading or hearing about those precepts and their implications for workplace power dynamics, many people have an adverse reaction. That’s natural and understandable, Pfeffer said.
“Every person should understand and come to terms with the seven rules of power, and most will go through stages: first, denial—‘This doesn’t work in my organization’s culture’—then they will have anger, which will mostly be directed at me, which is fine,” he said. “Then they will have sadness—‘I’m depressed by it’—and finally, they often come to acceptance that this is not only the way the world works, but they can build agency around this.
“My biggest contribution is causing them to see their own agency and encouraging them to be more ambitious and more agentic around navigating their own career and getting their boss to recognize their talents, instead of sitting back and waiting for the human resources department to offer promotions and raises.”
-
Daniel Butcher is a writer and the Managing Editor of AOM Today at the Academy of Management (AOM). Previously, he was a writer and the Finance Editor for Strategic Finance magazine and Management Accounting Quarterly, a scholarly journal, at the Institute of Management Accountants (IMA). Prior to that, he worked as a writer/editor at The Financial Times, including daily FT sister publications Ignites and FundFire, as well as Crain Communications’s InvestmentNews and Crain’s Wealth, eFinancialCareers, and Arizent’s Financial Planning, Re:Invent|Wealth, On Wall Street, Bank Investment Consultant, and Money Management Executive. He earned his bachelor’s degree from the University of Colorado Boulder and his master’s degree from New York University. You can reach him at dbutcher@aom.org or via LinkedIn.
View all posts
Up next....
How Organizations Undermine Managers’ Effectiveness
Source: Shutterstock
By Daniel Butcher
Many organizations are guilty of some common missteps when it comes to how they’re handling their managers.
Academy of Management Scholar Carol Kulik of the University of South Australia said that part of the problem is that managers don’t have the chance to practice leadership skills or management strategies and tactics before they have to actually put them into practice leading a team.
“Many line managers don’t get proper training before taking on their role, and as a result, their first thought is the impact of employees’ career-development decisions on themselves; this is a very natural reaction,” Kulik said. “So when an employee comes to you and says, ‘I have this other job opportunity, and I’m going to be leaving,’ it’s hard for line managers in the moment to say, ‘Oh, that does sound like a good opportunity; I’m happy for you,’ because what they’re thinking in their head is, ‘Oh, this really sucks for me, because I’ve made this big investment in onboarding and developing you and now I’m going to have to replace you.’
“Leadership has to train line managers to find the right words at the right time,” she said. “And most organizations don’t make that investment in their line managers. “I know it sounds contradictory, but line managers need to have these scripts available, to be prepared for the unexpected.”
Kulik said that she encourages organizations to look carefully at their line managers.
“I often call them the unsung heroes,” she said. “Organizations have so much hanging on the line managers doing the right thing at the right time in individual interactions with their team members, and I think they’re chronically underappreciated in organizations today.”
A sample of Kulik’s AOM research findings:
-
Daniel Butcher is a writer and the Managing Editor of AOM Today at the Academy of Management (AOM). Previously, he was a writer and the Finance Editor for Strategic Finance magazine and Management Accounting Quarterly, a scholarly journal, at the Institute of Management Accountants (IMA). Prior to that, he worked as a writer/editor at The Financial Times, including daily FT sister publications Ignites and FundFire, as well as Crain Communications’s InvestmentNews and Crain’s Wealth, eFinancialCareers, and Arizent’s Financial Planning, Re:Invent|Wealth, On Wall Street, Bank Investment Consultant, and Money Management Executive. He earned his bachelor’s degree from the University of Colorado Boulder and his master’s degree from New York University. You can reach him at dbutcher@aom.org or via LinkedIn.
View all posts
Up next....
A Downside of Human Resource Management Devolution
Source: Shutterstock
By Daniel Butcher
Human resource management (HRM) devolution—leadership transferring HRM responsibilities from specialist executives to managers—is becoming more common worldwide. However, there’s debate over whether it helps employees and organizations or adds too much to managers’ already-full plates.
Academy of Management Scholar Carol Kulik of the University of South Australia noted that HRM devolution is controversial.
“We’ve taken all these activities that used to be the responsibility of HR managers and units and put them in the hands of line managers,” Kulik said. “There’s some research that shows that individual employees have on average two important people-management conversations every week.
“They aren’t having those conversations with HR but rather with their line managers,” she said. “You can have the best people-management practices in the world, but it really comes down to how your individual line manager enacts them on a day-to-day basis.”
Kulik emphasized that managers’ jobs have gotten so much harder. Often, they get insufficient training before being promoted. Further, many are now responsible for managing more employees with smaller budgets.
“Even when they have budgets that look large, because they’re spreading it across more employees, they don’t have as many dollars for training or for rewarding top performers,” Kulik said. “And they’re now managing people on hybrid schedules or in remote environments that they never worked in themselves, so the job itself is getting much, much harder.
“There’s evidence right now that people don’t even want to become line managers—they’re saying, ‘I just want to spend my whole career being an individual contributor,’” she said. “So here’s this incredibly important job, and we have line managers who have never received formal training in people management, because they didn’t see that as part of their the primary part of their role.
“And yet, they’re this critical linchpin in an organization.”
A sample of Kulik’s AOM research findings:
-
Daniel Butcher is a writer and the Managing Editor of AOM Today at the Academy of Management (AOM). Previously, he was a writer and the Finance Editor for Strategic Finance magazine and Management Accounting Quarterly, a scholarly journal, at the Institute of Management Accountants (IMA). Prior to that, he worked as a writer/editor at The Financial Times, including daily FT sister publications Ignites and FundFire, as well as Crain Communications’s InvestmentNews and Crain’s Wealth, eFinancialCareers, and Arizent’s Financial Planning, Re:Invent|Wealth, On Wall Street, Bank Investment Consultant, and Money Management Executive. He earned his bachelor’s degree from the University of Colorado Boulder and his master’s degree from New York University. You can reach him at dbutcher@aom.org or via LinkedIn.
View all posts
Up next....
Ongoing Conversations: A Secret to Managers’ Success
Source: Shutterstock
By Daniel Butcher
There’s a simple best practice for managers to increase their effectiveness: having regular conversations with their direct reports and actually listening to what they say.
Academy of Management Scholar Carol Kulik of the University of South Australia said that, based on her own and colleagues’ research, she encourages managers to have ongoing conversations with their employees.
“One of the things that’s happened in organizations is that so many interactions moved to Zoom or Slack, and these are both media where the conversations are very terse; the communication is very brief and short,” Kulik said. “In a Zoom meeting, managers are conscious of not wanting to waste anybody’s time, so they tend to stick with the agenda, and that’s good; that feels very efficient.
“But it means that you may not be having those chance encounters with employees, where you learn about skills they might be interested in developing or challenges that they’re having at a very early stage where it’s not a big enough problem that they’re going bring it to their manager, but it might surface in a conversation,” she said. “So we really need to encourage managers to have the catchups with employees.”
This piece of advice sounds like common sense, but Kulik said that it’s surprising how often it falls off managers’ radar. Many managers get caught up in other tasks and responsibilities and fail to prioritize one-on-one, face-to-face meetings with their team members.
“Line managers will always say that they plan to have catchups with their employees—sure, they scheduled them at the beginning,” Kulik said. “But line managers have these really big jobs; they’re always trying to put out fires.
“The first thing that goes is that catchup; it gets postponed or rolled into another meeting, so employees don’t get the one-on-one interaction with their manager that could be so important for boosting their performance and career development,” she said.
A sample of Kulik’s AOM research findings:
-
Daniel Butcher is a writer and the Managing Editor of AOM Today at the Academy of Management (AOM). Previously, he was a writer and the Finance Editor for Strategic Finance magazine and Management Accounting Quarterly, a scholarly journal, at the Institute of Management Accountants (IMA). Prior to that, he worked as a writer/editor at The Financial Times, including daily FT sister publications Ignites and FundFire, as well as Crain Communications’s InvestmentNews and Crain’s Wealth, eFinancialCareers, and Arizent’s Financial Planning, Re:Invent|Wealth, On Wall Street, Bank Investment Consultant, and Money Management Executive. He earned his bachelor’s degree from the University of Colorado Boulder and his master’s degree from New York University. You can reach him at dbutcher@aom.org or via LinkedIn.
View all posts