Blog

  • Thank you for writing me. No, seriously. All you ever want to do is read, read, read. I am not a story to be read, I am one you write. How that’s supposed to work? Easy. I will guide you through it. In the end, you will probably have problems to stop writing it. Please do take a pen and paper, then let’s proceed.

    Disclaimer: If you have experienced trauma or are working with a psychologist, then please don’t. Trigger warning. To the rest, enjoy the ride.

    Posted , Author

  • Many attempts at a definition of servant-leadership have been made. Whereas one big problem in organisations nowadays is the question whether leaders should be turned into servants, Greenleaf’s original work took the complementary perspective of the servant as a leader (1977). Although servant-leadership descriptions display typical transformational qualities, i.e., transforming the team into ever better versions of itself, it is sometimes separated in that it shifts attention from the organisational objectives and processes towards the people (Dutta & Khatri, 2017), or takes an indirect approach at achieving organisational objectives through development (and service to) the people (Hall, 1991, Northhouse, 2004, Stone et al., 2004). Servant-Leadership is frequently mentioned in the context of agile methodology and an agile mindset. The connection between the three terms deserves closer examination. Within the multitude of explanation approaches, two links emerge between servant-leadership and the agile mindset: the focus on individual agency and being based on principles, values, and beliefs.

    Posted , Author

  • Easy takeaway from this lecture of Jordan Peterson: Peterson claims that humans are not 100% rational, not everything is transparent to us. We do things that we don’t understand all the time. That … is the shortest precise definition of Freud’s “unconscious” I have heard yet.

    Posted , Author

  • Agile is not agile. People often cannot agree on meeting culture. Different ways of thinking sometimes are not so subject specific. Rather, complete mindscapes can be defined that shape indivual thinking. At least Maruyama (1980) gave us a model to think along these lines. What does “agile” mean for all four proposed thinking types? Read here …

    Posted , Author

  • Behaviourism’s big problem is that it refers to the skin as the border of the person. This makes all the “internals” eerie thingies, subject to mentalist blabla that, from that external perspective, can never be understood. Therefore, Skinner always argued that the enactor is the “speaker”, thoughts being mere stimuli and unrelated to will.

    Posted , Author

← Older Newer →