<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What are the &#8220;Hilbert Problems&#8221; of business?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.hooversbiz.com/2008/05/13/what-are-the-hilbert-problems-of-business/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.hooversbiz.com/2008/05/13/what-are-the-hilbert-problems-of-business/</link>
	<description>Individuals - Companies - Industries: How We Work Now.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 23:09:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Keep big problems in your head. -- Hoover&#8217;s Business Insight Zone</title>
		<link>http://www.hooversbiz.com/2008/05/13/what-are-the-hilbert-problems-of-business/comment-page-1/#comment-13760</link>
		<dc:creator>Keep big problems in your head. -- Hoover&#8217;s Business Insight Zone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 17:43:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hooversbiz.com/?p=819#comment-13760</guid>
		<description>[...] while back I talked about the &#8220;Hilbert Problems&#8221; of business: the huge, permanent, pervasive issues that are attacked by big-idea business thinkers like Ram [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] while back I talked about the &#8220;Hilbert Problems&#8221; of business: the huge, permanent, pervasive issues that are attacked by big-idea business thinkers like Ram [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim Walker</title>
		<link>http://www.hooversbiz.com/2008/05/13/what-are-the-hilbert-problems-of-business/comment-page-1/#comment-6966</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Walker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2008 18:44:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hooversbiz.com/?p=819#comment-6966</guid>
		<description>Dave -- &quot;Organosclerosis&quot; = priceless. I&#039;m gonna be riffing on that, you can be sure. Thanks for these thoughts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dave &#8212; &#8220;Organosclerosis&#8221; = priceless. I&#8217;m gonna be riffing on that, you can be sure. Thanks for these thoughts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dblwyo</title>
		<link>http://www.hooversbiz.com/2008/05/13/what-are-the-hilbert-problems-of-business/comment-page-1/#comment-6899</link>
		<dc:creator>dblwyo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 May 2008 20:26:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hooversbiz.com/?p=819#comment-6899</guid>
		<description>A loverly and and fascinating question indeed. Just for the record I used something similar in presenting to the post-doc symposium at the nat&#039;l logistics conference by listing out the major problems with turning logistics and SCM into useful strategic capabilities to change business performance. That was sometime in the mid-90s. Nothing happened then, soon after or in the decade since.

If you just sample the front-page of the WSJ,et.al. for stories of corporate mis-performance it strikes me that the common symptom is failure to execute combined with failure to innovate and adapt. And the underlying reason is most organizations suffer near-terminally from what I like to call organosclerosis - that is they can&#039;t make effective decisions because they&#039;re so focused on internal battles and politics over who gets what that they neglect focusing on a) delivering value and b) measuring performance, allocating resources and compensating people on those actions with the best return.

We&#039;re used to seeing consultants trot out the next  Big Idea but the two things that&#039;re neglected are that each idea has to be executed in the context of the whole enterprise, i.e. as part of the whole. And b) ideas need to become embedded in that whole as part of the DNA instead of trialed and abandoned. Consider the 70% of Lean initiatives that&#039;ve died off and contrast that with the tribulations of the Auto Industry.

By way of illustration of these points you might find a couple of posts useful...or not.
Auto Industry Performance: http://tinyurl.com/5fql4y
Citigroup as Performance Poster-child:
http://tinyurl.com/5zy8tb

FWIW</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A loverly and and fascinating question indeed. Just for the record I used something similar in presenting to the post-doc symposium at the nat&#8217;l logistics conference by listing out the major problems with turning logistics and SCM into useful strategic capabilities to change business performance. That was sometime in the mid-90s. Nothing happened then, soon after or in the decade since.</p>
<p>If you just sample the front-page of the WSJ,et.al. for stories of corporate mis-performance it strikes me that the common symptom is failure to execute combined with failure to innovate and adapt. And the underlying reason is most organizations suffer near-terminally from what I like to call organosclerosis &#8211; that is they can&#8217;t make effective decisions because they&#8217;re so focused on internal battles and politics over who gets what that they neglect focusing on a) delivering value and b) measuring performance, allocating resources and compensating people on those actions with the best return.</p>
<p>We&#8217;re used to seeing consultants trot out the next  Big Idea but the two things that&#8217;re neglected are that each idea has to be executed in the context of the whole enterprise, i.e. as part of the whole. And b) ideas need to become embedded in that whole as part of the DNA instead of trialed and abandoned. Consider the 70% of Lean initiatives that&#8217;ve died off and contrast that with the tribulations of the Auto Industry.</p>
<p>By way of illustration of these points you might find a couple of posts useful&#8230;or not.<br />
Auto Industry Performance: <a href="http://tinyurl.com/5fql4y" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/5fql4y</a><br />
Citigroup as Performance Poster-child:<br />
<a href="http://tinyurl.com/5zy8tb" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/5zy8tb</a></p>
<p>FWIW</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim Walker</title>
		<link>http://www.hooversbiz.com/2008/05/13/what-are-the-hilbert-problems-of-business/comment-page-1/#comment-6756</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Walker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2008 21:11:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hooversbiz.com/?p=819#comment-6756</guid>
		<description>Zane -- Thanks for that list of biggies. The key, to me, is figuring out how to link up some of the humanitarian concerns (e.g. food distribution) with the profit motive.  Yes, in theory maybe people *should* want to end hunger out of feelings of goodwill for humanity, but my bet is it will happen much sooner if there&#039;s money to be made off the process.

Breakthrough water technology is a big wave now forming in high-tech-land. Alternative forms of energy are now much better funded than just a few years ago, and will continue to be in the face of high petroleum prices.

Of all of the issues you list, I&#039;m prone to say that fear really does come at the top of the list. We know for certain (I mean, the neuroscientists tell us so) that people are more creative and happier when they are free from fear. My hope is that more companies will figure out more ways to remove fear from the workplace.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Zane &#8212; Thanks for that list of biggies. The key, to me, is figuring out how to link up some of the humanitarian concerns (e.g. food distribution) with the profit motive.  Yes, in theory maybe people *should* want to end hunger out of feelings of goodwill for humanity, but my bet is it will happen much sooner if there&#8217;s money to be made off the process.</p>
<p>Breakthrough water technology is a big wave now forming in high-tech-land. Alternative forms of energy are now much better funded than just a few years ago, and will continue to be in the face of high petroleum prices.</p>
<p>Of all of the issues you list, I&#8217;m prone to say that fear really does come at the top of the list. We know for certain (I mean, the neuroscientists tell us so) that people are more creative and happier when they are free from fear. My hope is that more companies will figure out more ways to remove fear from the workplace.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Zane Safrit</title>
		<link>http://www.hooversbiz.com/2008/05/13/what-are-the-hilbert-problems-of-business/comment-page-1/#comment-6749</link>
		<dc:creator>Zane Safrit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2008 18:05:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hooversbiz.com/?p=819#comment-6749</guid>
		<description>How much time do we have? 

*Fear* Fear of change, fear of difference, fear of failure, fear to be ourselves.

*Freedom* Freedom allows innovation. Innovation creates solutions. 

*Potable, safe drinking water* Hard to be free and freely innovating without it. Water&#039;s set to be the next &#039;oil&#039; for the next generation.

*Sustainable energy supplies* Once we burn through sources of oil...

*Food distribution* There&#039;s enough food. It&#039;s distributed poorly, though. 

Three of these items would be categorized as outside the &#039;core&#039; consumer goods that economists, etal, use to discuss inflation and changes for interest rates. But then you could argue these days that &#039;war is peace&#039; and &#039;fear makes us more secure&#039;. I disagree. Solve these 5 problems and we got ourselves us a sustainable species and civilization.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How much time do we have? </p>
<p>*Fear* Fear of change, fear of difference, fear of failure, fear to be ourselves.</p>
<p>*Freedom* Freedom allows innovation. Innovation creates solutions. </p>
<p>*Potable, safe drinking water* Hard to be free and freely innovating without it. Water&#8217;s set to be the next &#8216;oil&#8217; for the next generation.</p>
<p>*Sustainable energy supplies* Once we burn through sources of oil&#8230;</p>
<p>*Food distribution* There&#8217;s enough food. It&#8217;s distributed poorly, though. </p>
<p>Three of these items would be categorized as outside the &#8216;core&#8217; consumer goods that economists, etal, use to discuss inflation and changes for interest rates. But then you could argue these days that &#8216;war is peace&#8217; and &#8216;fear makes us more secure&#8217;. I disagree. Solve these 5 problems and we got ourselves us a sustainable species and civilization.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim Walker</title>
		<link>http://www.hooversbiz.com/2008/05/13/what-are-the-hilbert-problems-of-business/comment-page-1/#comment-6660</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Walker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 14:36:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hooversbiz.com/?p=819#comment-6660</guid>
		<description>John -- This is an EXCELLENT point. It&#039;s one that&#039;s being addressed six ways from Sunday by &lt;a href=&quot;http://caliandjody.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Cali &amp; Jody&lt;/a&gt; with their &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.hooversbiz.com/2008/02/12/the-results-only-work-environment-rowe-a-first-look/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;ROWE method&lt;/a&gt; and with their forthcoming book, Why Work Sucks. I&#039;ll be posting my review of this book soon.

Basically what we see are many, many instances where companies are keeping old, industrial-age metrics for work (esp. hours in the office) instead of thinking deeper about what the metrics SHOULD be in the post-industrial age.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John &#8212; This is an EXCELLENT point. It&#8217;s one that&#8217;s being addressed six ways from Sunday by <a href="http://caliandjody.com" rel="nofollow">Cali &#038; Jody</a> with their <a href="http://www.hooversbiz.com/2008/02/12/the-results-only-work-environment-rowe-a-first-look/" rel="nofollow">ROWE method</a> and with their forthcoming book, Why Work Sucks. I&#8217;ll be posting my review of this book soon.</p>
<p>Basically what we see are many, many instances where companies are keeping old, industrial-age metrics for work (esp. hours in the office) instead of thinking deeper about what the metrics SHOULD be in the post-industrial age.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Johansen</title>
		<link>http://www.hooversbiz.com/2008/05/13/what-are-the-hilbert-problems-of-business/comment-page-1/#comment-6657</link>
		<dc:creator>John Johansen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 12:56:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hooversbiz.com/?p=819#comment-6657</guid>
		<description>1. Getting the white-collar business world to change their metrics for success.
Showing up to the office from 9-5 and putting in your 40 hours a week is a relic. Being in the office doesn&#039;t mean you&#039;re productive, just that you&#039;re there.

Most professional work is becoming task or project based. Companies should determine how much output they need from an employee to justify their cost and  structure their workload accordingly.

Professional workers should be developing their own time management skills so they can (with some accuracy) forecast how long certain tasks and projects will take.

Office hours, and resources, should be made available on flexible schedules so that work can get done in a timely manner while integrating into the natural flow of life.

(Caveat: Jobs that are known for pushing people past 40-hours could be considered to already be task-based. But, often times it&#039;s either a competitive culture or poor management that requires more &#039;face time&#039; without necessarily more work getting done.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>1. Getting the white-collar business world to change their metrics for success.<br />
Showing up to the office from 9-5 and putting in your 40 hours a week is a relic. Being in the office doesn&#8217;t mean you&#8217;re productive, just that you&#8217;re there.</p>
<p>Most professional work is becoming task or project based. Companies should determine how much output they need from an employee to justify their cost and  structure their workload accordingly.</p>
<p>Professional workers should be developing their own time management skills so they can (with some accuracy) forecast how long certain tasks and projects will take.</p>
<p>Office hours, and resources, should be made available on flexible schedules so that work can get done in a timely manner while integrating into the natural flow of life.</p>
<p>(Caveat: Jobs that are known for pushing people past 40-hours could be considered to already be task-based. But, often times it&#8217;s either a competitive culture or poor management that requires more &#8216;face time&#8217; without necessarily more work getting done.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
