When we spoke about workplaces in 1972 we mainly were referring to old-line manufacturing firms, on the one hand, and Main St. shops and restaurants, on the other. Both of those categories are now insignificant in terms of employment. Today,… — James O'Toole Copy Share
By all indications, American business leaders are more adept at creating business strategies than they are skilled at human capital management. American entrepreneurs are… — James O'Toole Copy Share Image
In a nutshell, the ability of American companies to compete in world markets depends on creating conditions in which workers can add sufficient value to justify their higher wages and benefits, much the Japanese auto manufacturers have done in this country. Until unions and mangers understand the necessity of effectively employing the nation's most important resource, the American worker, we… — James O'Toole Copy Share
Sadly, at Ford, General Motors, and Chrysler sales continually trend downward, manufacturing costs rise, and employment declines. As the result of the decrease in… — James O'Toole Copy Share Image
The current CEO of Wal-Mart says he has "no choice" but to sacrifice the welfare of his employees in order to serve his customers' need for low prices. So, why are they paying the guy millions a year if there is no possibility for him to change things? I think he is either kidding us or himself. The truth is… — James O'Toole Copy Share
The status of women in the workplace has improved dramatically since 1972. More women today have good jobs, the gap between the incomes of… — James O'Toole Copy Share Image
Sadly, too many corporate leaders still believe that the way to boost productivity and profits is to continually reduce salaries, benefits, and training expenditures, a strategy that can be taken only so far. At a certain point in a developed society, salaries and benefits can't be slashed further and, in the long term, comparative economic advantage then must be realized… — James O'Toole Copy Share
In the 80s, Ford's successful introduction of the Taurus was, in large part, due to productivity gains resulting from the setting aside of outmoded work rules. Yet, inexplicably, union leaders ignored such efforts to foster employee involvement, much as unions largely stayed on the sidelines with regard to the equally promising practices of employee stock ownership and gain-sharing. — James O'Toole Copy Share
American managers often say they would like to pay their employees more, they argue that they can't afford to do so and, at the same time, keep the prices of their products competitive. As one CEO recently explained, "I would treat my employees as well as Starbuck's treats theirs, if I could charge the equivalent for my product of three… — James O'Toole Copy Share
When we spoke about workplaces in 1972 we mainly were referring to old-line manufacturing firms, on the one hand, and Main St. shops and restaurants, on the other. Both of those categories are now insignificant in terms of employment. Today, the economy is dominated by the rapidly growing Low-Cost Operators - national discount and mall chain stores, fast food franchises… — James O'Toole Copy Share
The failure of unions to support efforts to increase employee involvement and ownership coincided with their unwillingness to speak out on the broader issues of business effectiveness and performance. When foreign competitors threatened the survival of American manufacturers, unions chose to voice traditional employee demands for higher wages, better benefits, and more security. What they failed to provide were effective… — James O'Toole Copy Share
Value-based leaders believe in democratic workplaces in which employees participate in decisions. — James O'Toole Copy Share Image
If America is to compete effectively in world markets, its corporate leaders must strategically position their companies in the right businesses, and then manage… — James O'Toole Copy Share Image
