The Double Helix, James Watson’s 1968 memoir about discovering the structure of DNA, describes the roller coaster of emotions he and Francis Crick experienced through the progress and setbacks of the work that eventually earned them the Nobel Prize. The authors provide a checklist that managers can use on a daily basis to monitor their progress-enhancing behaviors.
The actions that set in motion the positive feedback loop between progress and inner work life may sound like Management 101, but it takes discipline to establish new habits. It simply must matter to the person doing it. And the work doesn’t need to involve curing cancer in order to be meaningful. On the flip side, small losses or setbacks can have an extremely negative effect. The key is to learn which actions support progress-such as setting clear goals, providing sufficient time and resources, and offering recognition-and which have the opposite effect.Įven small wins can boost inner work life tremendously. This progress principle suggests that managers have more influence than they may realize over employees’ well-being, motivation, and creative output. If the person drags out of the office disengaged and joyless, a setback is likely to blame. If a person is motivated and happy at the end of the workday, it’s a good bet that he or she achieved something, however small. In an analysis of knowledge workers’ diaries, the authors found that nothing contributed more to a positive inner work life (the mix of emotions, motivations, and perceptions that is critical to performance) than making progress in meaningful work. This has three aspects: risk governance (risk assessment, management and communication), science-policy interfaces and the link between precaution and innovation.What is the best way to motivate employees to do creative work? Help them take a step forward every day. The precautionary principle is closely linked to governance. The application of the precautionary principle presents many opportunities as well as challenges. Although most experts agree that the precautionary principle does not call for specific measures (such as a ban or reversal of the burden of proof), opinions are divided on the method for determining when to apply precautionary measures. Different stakeholders, experts and jurisdictions apply different definitions of the principle, mainly depending on the degree of scientific uncertainty required for the authorities to take action. To others, it is an approach that protects human health and the environment.
To some, it is unscientific and an obstacle to progress. The precautionary principle divides opinions. It first emerged during the 1970s and has since been enshrined in a number of international treaties on the environment, in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and the national legislation of certain Member States. The precautionary principle enables decision-makers to adopt precautionary measures when scientific evidence about an environmental or human health hazard is uncertain and the stakes are high.
0 kommentar(er)
