Why is there so much beating around the bush here? How could this possibly any else besides feminism-gone-wild - typical of american academia.. 'works-well-with-others?"-gimme a break.
Since the Graduate emerges from Harvard, and the Graduate is created by Harvard, it is ambiguous which originally gave rise to the other. Oh I am sorry that's the chicken and egg dilemma.
So good to hear that skills required for higher level jobs now include "getting along with others", should it ever reach the level of govt...oh I just can't imagine. Could this be an example of bringing the feminine back into the equation which has for so long been dominated by competitive male mind-think?
I think "the feminine" is now a key aspect of the successful leadership equation. Of course, there are all those female leaders out there who've learned to be successful using the old game...but things are changing. As for government leadership...oy oy oy.
I care. I live in Cambridge, and my husband Martin went to Harvard. We met Larry Summers when we were here in Sarasota and he spoke at the Harvard Club. His presidency was not a debacle. But he spoke what he thought.
Hi Teresa. Obviously, I care as well, as the vid hopefully showed. I respectfully disagree with your assessment of Summers' presidency. Definition: "debacle: A sudden, disastrous collapse, downfall, or defeat; a rout." I doubt anyone involved would see his tenure as a success, regardless of his speaking what he thought.
I would consider Larry rather an idiot-savant than an asshole. He was provocative, but not really hostile. Clearly, he was more a savant than an idiot, and he thrived in environments where provocativeness was rewarded (economics faculty) or authority respected (Treasury Department). Surely it is beneficial that such environments exist, but university administration is not one of them, and perhaps should not be.
Getting along with others is a wonderful skill to have and maybe even a must have in business. I don't see as much of it as I would like in our political system. Getting elected or re-elected seems to supersede all else. Who knows maybe one day we can prioritize solving problems over of making each other right or wrong.
Ha, I'm the first one to see this video. As I live in the Netherlands the subject doesn't really concern me but your vids are always informative and you do them with such passion that it's always a joy to watch you. A great weekend to you too Tom.
Great video tom. I would ask, is it not better to only learn those things that enable you to get on with others? Everything else is possibly just a combination of ego and greed. Harsh yes! But maybe this is true in all of us. Taking is so much easier than giving. People who give tend to be admired, seem to be able to do very little (in the way of work) and yet become leaders very quickly. But those that take more than they give generally end up alone.
Sounds like her assignment is something out of Daniel Goleman's (sp?) books on emotional intelligence: Running a successful widget organisation requires far more knowledge of how to get along with people than it requires knowledge about widgets.
No doubt about it: emotional intelligence has become an increasingly important aspect of any leader's repertoire. Technical knowledge is important, but secondary, AND acquirable. Likability and resonance with others is primary, and much more difficult, if not impossible, to acquire. Thanks.
Why is there so much beating around the bush here? How could this possibly any else besides feminism-gone-wild - typical of american academia.. 'works-well-with-others?"-gimme a break.
kimonov 4 years ago
Since the Graduate emerges from Harvard, and the Graduate is created by Harvard, it is ambiguous which originally gave rise to the other. Oh I am sorry that's the chicken and egg dilemma.
ockteby 5 years ago
So good to hear that skills required for higher level jobs now include "getting along with others", should it ever reach the level of govt...oh I just can't imagine. Could this be an example of bringing the feminine back into the equation which has for so long been dominated by competitive male mind-think?
crazymml 5 years ago
I think "the feminine" is now a key aspect of the successful leadership equation. Of course, there are all those female leaders out there who've learned to be successful using the old game...but things are changing. As for government leadership...oy oy oy.
tlg847 5 years ago
Oh, I look forward to checking out the book, looks like a good read.
ExperimentsinHonesty 5 years ago
Sounds like Dr. Faust should run for president of the United States.
pnkdragn 5 years ago
I care. I live in Cambridge, and my husband Martin went to Harvard. We met Larry Summers when we were here in Sarasota and he spoke at the Harvard Club. His presidency was not a debacle. But he spoke what he thought.
MHarris1920 5 years ago
Hi Teresa. Obviously, I care as well, as the vid hopefully showed. I respectfully disagree with your assessment of Summers' presidency. Definition: "debacle: A sudden, disastrous collapse, downfall, or defeat; a rout." I doubt anyone involved would see his tenure as a success, regardless of his speaking what he thought.
tlg847 5 years ago
I would consider Larry rather an idiot-savant than an asshole. He was provocative, but not really hostile. Clearly, he was more a savant than an idiot, and he thrived in environments where provocativeness was rewarded (economics faculty) or authority respected (Treasury Department). Surely it is beneficial that such environments exist, but university administration is not one of them, and perhaps should not be.
DClaudeKatz 5 years ago
Getting along with others is a wonderful skill to have and maybe even a must have in business. I don't see as much of it as I would like in our political system. Getting elected or re-elected seems to supersede all else. Who knows maybe one day we can prioritize solving problems over of making each other right or wrong.
2of6Solutions 5 years ago
Lack of social intelligence, you mean? Some people can be Mensa-members and still have NO social intelligence!
You catch more flies with sugar, right?
It seems to me that many companies here in Europe are now realizing that inspirational, HUMAN leaders bring more stability and get more stuff done.
You should post on LV so I can leave long comments!
Marihani 5 years ago
Søren Kierkegaard? your can't wear a cap like that and not expect people to google it :)
good video too btw
hellyersonline 5 years ago
Ha, I'm the first one to see this video. As I live in the Netherlands the subject doesn't really concern me but your vids are always informative and you do them with such passion that it's always a joy to watch you. A great weekend to you too Tom.
Zephany7 5 years ago
Great video tom. I would ask, is it not better to only learn those things that enable you to get on with others? Everything else is possibly just a combination of ego and greed. Harsh yes! But maybe this is true in all of us. Taking is so much easier than giving. People who give tend to be admired, seem to be able to do very little (in the way of work) and yet become leaders very quickly. But those that take more than they give generally end up alone.
nivek192 5 years ago
Nowdays you are my news reporter Tom, because everytime I watch one of your videos I learn or find out something new.
thanks, keep posting.
selfmademedia 5 years ago
Comment removed
alexhinksman 5 years ago
Old school!
tlg847 5 years ago
Sounds like her assignment is something out of Daniel Goleman's (sp?) books on emotional intelligence: Running a successful widget organisation requires far more knowledge of how to get along with people than it requires knowledge about widgets.
OhhhThatGuy 5 years ago
No doubt about it: emotional intelligence has become an increasingly important aspect of any leader's repertoire. Technical knowledge is important, but secondary, AND acquirable. Likability and resonance with others is primary, and much more difficult, if not impossible, to acquire. Thanks.
tlg847 5 years ago
Interesting analysis of this historic decision. Great video blog.
BMac199 5 years ago