亚色在线观看_亚洲人成a片高清在线观看不卡_亚洲中文无码亚洲人成频_免费在线黄片,69精品视频九九精品视频,美女大黄三级,人人干人人g,全新av网站每日更新播放,亚洲三及片,wwww无码视频,亚洲中文字幕无码一区在线

首頁 500強(qiáng) 活動 榜單 商業(yè) 科技 商潮 專題 品牌中心
雜志訂閱

最新研究顯示,,銀行業(yè)者居家辦公出現(xiàn)財(cái)務(wù)不當(dāng)行為的概率降低了五倍

Gleb Tsipursky
2023-07-21

這項(xiàng)研究或許能夠讓摩根大通和高盛集團(tuán)改變立場,。

文本設(shè)置
小號
默認(rèn)
大號
Plus(0條)

摩根大通首席執(zhí)行官杰米·戴蒙是遠(yuǎn)程辦公政策最強(qiáng)烈的批評者之一,。圖片來源:DREW ANGERER—GETTY IMAGES

大多數(shù)公司的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者有一個根深蒂固的理念:辦公室是體現(xiàn)公司誠信的場所,,在領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者的密切監(jiān)督下,勤勞的上班族們遵守恰當(dāng)?shù)男袨闇?zhǔn)則在辦公室里忙忙碌碌,。事實(shí)上,,這是許多公司領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者希望員工在辦公室現(xiàn)場辦公的主要原因:他們感覺這樣可以維持對員工的控制,保證員工遵守法律,、法規(guī)和政策,。然而,《歐洲金融管理》(European Financial Management)雜志最近發(fā)表的一篇經(jīng)過同行審議的研究,,卻暴露了這種傳統(tǒng)觀念的不足:居家辦公,、早上穿著睡衣泡咖啡的銀行業(yè)者,道德標(biāo)準(zhǔn)遠(yuǎn)高于辦公室里衣冠楚楚的同事,。

這項(xiàng)研究或許能夠讓摩根大通(JP Morgan)和高盛集團(tuán)(Goldman Sachs)改變立場,,調(diào)整對員工每周五天在辦公室現(xiàn)場辦公的要求。這些大銀行強(qiáng)行要求現(xiàn)場辦公,可能會無意間增加金融不當(dāng)行為,。

遠(yuǎn)程辦公中的金融行為

想象一位交易員在舒適的家中辦公,,其出現(xiàn)金融不當(dāng)行為的次數(shù)遠(yuǎn)少于在喧鬧的交易大廳里辦公的同行。這種巨大的轉(zhuǎn)折,,可能讓好萊塢的編劇們大賺一筆,。

這個戲劇性的結(jié)論來自對英國前五大銀行之一的數(shù)據(jù)所做的細(xì)致分析。在長達(dá)一年的封城期間,,研究人員審查了與162位交易員有關(guān)的不當(dāng)行為記錄,。分析結(jié)果揭露了一個驚人的事實(shí):居家辦公的交易員觸發(fā)不當(dāng)行為提醒的概率只有7.3%,而現(xiàn)場辦公的同行觸發(fā)不當(dāng)行為提醒的概率高達(dá)驚人的37.6%,。

換言之,,在備受尊崇的辦公室里,交易員出現(xiàn)不當(dāng)行為的概率比遠(yuǎn)程辦公者高五倍,。辦公室經(jīng)常被譽(yù)為體現(xiàn)職業(yè)精神和誠信的典范,。

不道德行為具有傳染性

不道德行為具有傳染性,就像在每周一早上一成不變的辦公室會議上此起彼伏的哈欠一樣,。就像一聲輕笑會變成哄堂大笑一樣,,一位任性妄為的交易員可能導(dǎo)致類似的行為蔓延。

這種趨勢在普通高中并不鮮見,,“融入”團(tuán)體的誘惑可能導(dǎo)致人們做出一連串錯誤選擇,。即使在備受尊崇的金融界,也沒有人可以對具有傳染性的不道德行為免疫,。

研究人員認(rèn)為,,交易員離開充斥著不職業(yè)行為的辦公室,能夠大幅降低他們出現(xiàn)類似不當(dāng)行為的概率,。這就類似于把一盒甜甜圈放到正在節(jié)食的同事看不見的地方——當(dāng)他們看不到誘惑,,也就不會有想吃的念頭。

遠(yuǎn)程辦公的好處令人意外

遠(yuǎn)程辦公曾經(jīng)被認(rèn)為是僅限于硅谷和獨(dú)立自由職業(yè)者的新鮮事物,,但事實(shí)證明它是防范不道德行為的強(qiáng)大堡壘,。

一個關(guān)鍵原因是,居家辦公者減少了獲取內(nèi)幕信息和市場流言的渠道,,而這些都是助長金融不當(dāng)行為的催化劑,。辦公室環(huán)境通常提供了交流這類信息的大量機(jī)會,例如在抽煙休息的時候悄悄聊天,,或者在茶水間角落里的竊竊私語等,。相比之下,居家辦公者沒有機(jī)會獲取這類秘密信息,。

隱藏的敵人:認(rèn)知偏見

讓我們暫停一下,,想想妨礙道德行為的一個不為人知的因素:認(rèn)知偏見,。這些根深蒂固的心理捷徑經(jīng)常會以我們沒有認(rèn)識到的方式塑造我們的行為。正如我對試圖制定恢復(fù)現(xiàn)場辦公計(jì)劃的客戶公司所說的那樣,,認(rèn)知偏見如同無形的傀儡操縱者一樣,,會以不易察覺的方式操控我們,引導(dǎo)我們的行動,,讓我們在考慮混合辦公時誤入歧途,。

關(guān)于不當(dāng)行為的討論,有兩種認(rèn)知偏見可以給我們提供寶貴的見解,,值得我們特別關(guān)注,,它們分別是確認(rèn)偏見和現(xiàn)狀偏見。

確認(rèn)偏見是影響理性思維的常見因素之一,,包括偏向于確認(rèn)我們現(xiàn)存信念或價值觀的信息,。如果一名交易員堅(jiān)信在高風(fēng)險的金融行業(yè),規(guī)避規(guī)則是標(biāo)準(zhǔn)(盡管是不成文的規(guī)范),,當(dāng)他們聽說有同事操縱市場傳言獲利但沒有任何后果時,,這種信念會被進(jìn)一步增強(qiáng)。這可能會進(jìn)一步降低他們的道德水準(zhǔn),。

在辦公室環(huán)境中,,信息(和虛假信息)自由傳播,這為確認(rèn)偏見增強(qiáng)有害信念創(chuàng)造了一個成熟的環(huán)境,。相反,,遠(yuǎn)程辦公孤立的環(huán)境,能夠?yàn)榻灰讍T隔絕這種有害的確認(rèn),,從而減少不當(dāng)行為,。

現(xiàn)狀偏見是思想欺騙我們的另外一種方式,即我們偏好于保持一成不變,,尤其是在面對變化或不確定性時,。

對于習(xí)慣了殘酷的辦公室文化的交易員而言,為了保持領(lǐng)先,,規(guī)避規(guī)則這種不當(dāng)行為似乎是必要的,,而現(xiàn)狀偏見讓他們即使在有明確的道德準(zhǔn)則的情況下也不愿意改變自己的行為,。他們可能認(rèn)為改變?yōu)榈赖滦袨榇嬖陲L(fēng)險,,會威脅他們的地位或成功。而在居家辦公環(huán)境中,,他們遠(yuǎn)離了辦公室的壓力和根深蒂固的行為準(zhǔn)則,,現(xiàn)狀偏見就失去了很大一部分說服力。

在認(rèn)知偏見的影響下,,創(chuàng)造誠信文化類似于順著滑桿往上爬,。然而,,承認(rèn)這些偏見是打破偏見的第一步。在遠(yuǎn)程辦公環(huán)境下,,確認(rèn)偏見和現(xiàn)狀偏見很少有機(jī)會相互干擾,,這可以解釋遠(yuǎn)程辦公者道德行為增加的原因。

未來提升職業(yè)道德的關(guān)鍵在于混合辦公

如果未來我們采取混合辦公,,我們就正在面臨絕佳的機(jī)會重新塑造道德行為規(guī)范,。在家庭環(huán)境中,我們經(jīng)常會被犯錯的孩子,、咆哮的狗和裝滿的洗衣籃所打斷,,但這可能是減少金融不當(dāng)行為的秘密武器,這種想法雖然奇怪,,卻令人興奮,。

因此,在我們開始重新定義辦公模式的時候,,應(yīng)該拋棄以辦公室為中心這種過時的模式,。

下一次當(dāng)你想到誠實(shí)和道德時,腦海中涌現(xiàn)出的畫面不應(yīng)該是光鮮亮麗的辦公大樓,,到處都是衣著得體的職業(yè)人士,。相反,你應(yīng)該想到的是樸素但強(qiáng)大的家庭辦公室,,它是默默改善金融誠信的燈塔,。

良好的行為并不取決于你在哪里辦公,而是取決于你自己堅(jiān)持的道德標(biāo)準(zhǔn),。無論你選擇在哪里辦公,,都應(yīng)該將誠信放在首位。(財(cái)富中文網(wǎng))

格列布·齊珀斯基博士(Gleb Tsipursky,,又稱“辦公室耳語者”)幫助科技和金融行業(yè)的高管在混合工作中推動合作,、創(chuàng)新和留住人才。他擔(dān)任精品未來工作咨詢公司Disaster Avoidance Experts的首席執(zhí)行官,。他是七本書的暢銷書作者,,包括《永不與直覺同行》(Never Go With Your Gut)和《領(lǐng)導(dǎo)混合和遠(yuǎn)程團(tuán)隊(duì)》(Leading Hybrid and Remote Teams)。他的專業(yè)知識來自于20多年來為從美國家庭人壽保險公司(Aflac)到施樂(Xerox)的《財(cái)富》美國500強(qiáng)公司提供咨詢,,以及在北卡羅來納大學(xué)教堂山分校(UNC–Chapel Hill)和俄亥俄州立大學(xué)(Ohio State University)擔(dān)任行為科學(xué)家超過15年的學(xué)術(shù)生涯,。

Fortune.com上的評論文章僅代表作者個人觀點(diǎn),不代表《財(cái)富》雜志的觀點(diǎn)和立場,。

翻譯:劉進(jìn)龍

審校:汪皓

大多數(shù)公司的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者有一個根深蒂固的理念:辦公室是體現(xiàn)公司誠信的場所,,在領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者的密切監(jiān)督下,勤勞的上班族們遵守恰當(dāng)?shù)男袨闇?zhǔn)則在辦公室里忙忙碌碌,。事實(shí)上,,這是許多公司領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者希望員工在辦公室現(xiàn)場辦公的主要原因:他們感覺這樣可以維持對員工的控制,,保證員工遵守法律、法規(guī)和政策,。然而,,《歐洲金融管理》(European Financial Management)雜志最近發(fā)表的一篇經(jīng)過同行審議的研究,卻暴露了這種傳統(tǒng)觀念的不足:居家辦公,、早上穿著睡衣泡咖啡的銀行業(yè)者,,道德標(biāo)準(zhǔn)遠(yuǎn)高于辦公室里衣冠楚楚的同事。

這項(xiàng)研究或許能夠讓摩根大通(JP Morgan)和高盛集團(tuán)(Goldman Sachs)改變立場,,調(diào)整對員工每周五天在辦公室現(xiàn)場辦公的要求,。這些大銀行強(qiáng)行要求現(xiàn)場辦公,可能會無意間增加金融不當(dāng)行為,。

遠(yuǎn)程辦公中的金融行為

想象一位交易員在舒適的家中辦公,,其出現(xiàn)金融不當(dāng)行為的次數(shù)遠(yuǎn)少于在喧鬧的交易大廳里辦公的同行。這種巨大的轉(zhuǎn)折,,可能讓好萊塢的編劇們大賺一筆,。

這個戲劇性的結(jié)論來自對英國前五大銀行之一的數(shù)據(jù)所做的細(xì)致分析。在長達(dá)一年的封城期間,,研究人員審查了與162位交易員有關(guān)的不當(dāng)行為記錄,。分析結(jié)果揭露了一個驚人的事實(shí):居家辦公的交易員觸發(fā)不當(dāng)行為提醒的概率只有7.3%,而現(xiàn)場辦公的同行觸發(fā)不當(dāng)行為提醒的概率高達(dá)驚人的37.6%,。

換言之,,在備受尊崇的辦公室里,交易員出現(xiàn)不當(dāng)行為的概率比遠(yuǎn)程辦公者高五倍,。辦公室經(jīng)常被譽(yù)為體現(xiàn)職業(yè)精神和誠信的典范,。

不道德行為具有傳染性

不道德行為具有傳染性,就像在每周一早上一成不變的辦公室會議上此起彼伏的哈欠一樣,。就像一聲輕笑會變成哄堂大笑一樣,,一位任性妄為的交易員可能導(dǎo)致類似的行為蔓延。

這種趨勢在普通高中并不鮮見,,“融入”團(tuán)體的誘惑可能導(dǎo)致人們做出一連串錯誤選擇,。即使在備受尊崇的金融界,,也沒有人可以對具有傳染性的不道德行為免疫。

研究人員認(rèn)為,,交易員離開充斥著不職業(yè)行為的辦公室,,能夠大幅降低他們出現(xiàn)類似不當(dāng)行為的概率,。這就類似于把一盒甜甜圈放到正在節(jié)食的同事看不見的地方——當(dāng)他們看不到誘惑,,也就不會有想吃的念頭,。

遠(yuǎn)程辦公的好處令人意外

遠(yuǎn)程辦公曾經(jīng)被認(rèn)為是僅限于硅谷和獨(dú)立自由職業(yè)者的新鮮事物,但事實(shí)證明它是防范不道德行為的強(qiáng)大堡壘,。

一個關(guān)鍵原因是,,居家辦公者減少了獲取內(nèi)幕信息和市場流言的渠道,而這些都是助長金融不當(dāng)行為的催化劑,。辦公室環(huán)境通常提供了交流這類信息的大量機(jī)會,,例如在抽煙休息的時候悄悄聊天,或者在茶水間角落里的竊竊私語等,。相比之下,,居家辦公者沒有機(jī)會獲取這類秘密信息。

隱藏的敵人:認(rèn)知偏見

讓我們暫停一下,,想想妨礙道德行為的一個不為人知的因素:認(rèn)知偏見,。這些根深蒂固的心理捷徑經(jīng)常會以我們沒有認(rèn)識到的方式塑造我們的行為。正如我對試圖制定恢復(fù)現(xiàn)場辦公計(jì)劃的客戶公司所說的那樣,,認(rèn)知偏見如同無形的傀儡操縱者一樣,,會以不易察覺的方式操控我們,引導(dǎo)我們的行動,,讓我們在考慮混合辦公時誤入歧途,。

關(guān)于不當(dāng)行為的討論,有兩種認(rèn)知偏見可以給我們提供寶貴的見解,,值得我們特別關(guān)注,,它們分別是確認(rèn)偏見和現(xiàn)狀偏見。

確認(rèn)偏見是影響理性思維的常見因素之一,,包括偏向于確認(rèn)我們現(xiàn)存信念或價值觀的信息,。如果一名交易員堅(jiān)信在高風(fēng)險的金融行業(yè),規(guī)避規(guī)則是標(biāo)準(zhǔn)(盡管是不成文的規(guī)范),,當(dāng)他們聽說有同事操縱市場傳言獲利但沒有任何后果時,,這種信念會被進(jìn)一步增強(qiáng)。這可能會進(jìn)一步降低他們的道德水準(zhǔn),。

在辦公室環(huán)境中,,信息(和虛假信息)自由傳播,這為確認(rèn)偏見增強(qiáng)有害信念創(chuàng)造了一個成熟的環(huán)境,。相反,,遠(yuǎn)程辦公孤立的環(huán)境,能夠?yàn)榻灰讍T隔絕這種有害的確認(rèn),,從而減少不當(dāng)行為,。

現(xiàn)狀偏見是思想欺騙我們的另外一種方式,即我們偏好于保持一成不變,,尤其是在面對變化或不確定性時,。

對于習(xí)慣了殘酷的辦公室文化的交易員而言,,為了保持領(lǐng)先,規(guī)避規(guī)則這種不當(dāng)行為似乎是必要的,,而現(xiàn)狀偏見讓他們即使在有明確的道德準(zhǔn)則的情況下也不愿意改變自己的行為,。他們可能認(rèn)為改變?yōu)榈赖滦袨榇嬖陲L(fēng)險,會威脅他們的地位或成功,。而在居家辦公環(huán)境中,,他們遠(yuǎn)離了辦公室的壓力和根深蒂固的行為準(zhǔn)則,現(xiàn)狀偏見就失去了很大一部分說服力,。

在認(rèn)知偏見的影響下,,創(chuàng)造誠信文化類似于順著滑桿往上爬。然而,,承認(rèn)這些偏見是打破偏見的第一步,。在遠(yuǎn)程辦公環(huán)境下,確認(rèn)偏見和現(xiàn)狀偏見很少有機(jī)會相互干擾,,這可以解釋遠(yuǎn)程辦公者道德行為增加的原因,。

未來提升職業(yè)道德的關(guān)鍵在于混合辦公

如果未來我們采取混合辦公,我們就正在面臨絕佳的機(jī)會重新塑造道德行為規(guī)范,。在家庭環(huán)境中,,我們經(jīng)常會被犯錯的孩子、咆哮的狗和裝滿的洗衣籃所打斷,,但這可能是減少金融不當(dāng)行為的秘密武器,,這種想法雖然奇怪,卻令人興奮,。

因此,,在我們開始重新定義辦公模式的時候,應(yīng)該拋棄以辦公室為中心這種過時的模式,。

下一次當(dāng)你想到誠實(shí)和道德時,,腦海中涌現(xiàn)出的畫面不應(yīng)該是光鮮亮麗的辦公大樓,到處都是衣著得體的職業(yè)人士,。相反,,你應(yīng)該想到的是樸素但強(qiáng)大的家庭辦公室,它是默默改善金融誠信的燈塔,。

良好的行為并不取決于你在哪里辦公,,而是取決于你自己堅(jiān)持的道德標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。無論你選擇在哪里辦公,,都應(yīng)該將誠信放在首位,。(財(cái)富中文網(wǎng))

格列布·齊珀斯基博士(Gleb Tsipursky,又稱“辦公室耳語者”)幫助科技和金融行業(yè)的高管在混合工作中推動合作、創(chuàng)新和留住人才,。他擔(dān)任精品未來工作咨詢公司Disaster Avoidance Experts的首席執(zhí)行官,。他是七本書的暢銷書作者,包括《永不與直覺同行》(Never Go With Your Gut)和《領(lǐng)導(dǎo)混合和遠(yuǎn)程團(tuán)隊(duì)》(Leading Hybrid and Remote Teams),。他的專業(yè)知識來自于20多年來為從美國家庭人壽保險公司(Aflac)到施樂(Xerox)的《財(cái)富》美國500強(qiáng)公司提供咨詢,,以及在北卡羅來納大學(xué)教堂山分校(UNC–Chapel Hill)和俄亥俄州立大學(xué)(Ohio State University)擔(dān)任行為科學(xué)家超過15年的學(xué)術(shù)生涯,。

Fortune.com上的評論文章僅代表作者個人觀點(diǎn),,不代表《財(cái)富》雜志的觀點(diǎn)和立場。

翻譯:劉進(jìn)龍

審校:汪皓

Most business leaders harbor a deeply-rooted belief: Offices as sanctuaries of corporate integrity, bustling with industrious individuals who diligently toe the line of right conduct under the leader’s watchful eye. Indeed, that’s a major reason why many business leaders want their employees in the office: they feel they can keep control, ensuring compliance with laws, rules, and policies. However, a recent peer-reviewed study in the European Financial Management journal comes to puncture this inflated balloon of conventional wisdom: Bankers working from home, while brewing their morning coffees in pajamas, have been setting a higher ethical standard than their well-heeled office counterparts.

That certainly puts a different twist on the demands by JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs that their bankers work from the office five days a week! These major banks could be unwittingly opening the door for greater financial misconduct by forcing in-office work.

Financial conduct in a remote world

Imagine a trader, comfortably ensconced in a cozy home office, engaging in remarkably fewer instances of financial misconduct than their counterparts in the tumultuous trading floor. It’s a plot twist that could give a Hollywood scriptwriter a run for their money.

This dramatic revelation was born from the meticulous analysis of data from one of the top five U.K. banks. During the year-long period of lockdown, researchers scrutinized misconduct reports relating to 162 traders. The resulting data unveiled a startling truth: traders working from home had a modest 7.3% chance of sparking a misconduct alert, while their office-going brethren had a spine-chilling 37.6% probability.

In other words, the hallowed office, often hailed as a paragon of professionalism and integrity, was home to over five times more instances of misconduct than the remote workplace.

Unethical behavior is contagious

Unethical conduct, it seems, is as contagious as a yawn during a monotonous Monday morning office meeting. Like a chuckle that leads to a laugh riot, one wayward trader can lead to an avalanche of similar behavior.

This trend is not dissimilar to a classic high school scenario where the temptation to “fit in” can lead to a spiral of poor choices. Even within the hallowed halls of finance, no one is immune to the infectious nature of unethical behavior.

The researchers assert that removing a trader from an office environment riddled with unprofessional conduct significantly reduces their likelihood of engaging in similar indiscretions. The analogy is akin to moving a box of doughnuts away from a group of dieting colleagues–when temptation is out of sight, it’s also out of mind.

The surprising strengths of remote work

The phenomenon of remote work, once considered a novelty limited to Silicon Valley and independent freelancers, has revealed itself to be a mighty fortress against unethical behavior.

One key reason lies in the diminished access to inside information and market rumors–both potent catalysts for financial misconduct. Office environments often provide ample opportunities for such information to be exchanged, like over a clandestine chat during a smoke break or a whispered conversation in the corner of the canteen. In contrast, a home office makes the window for such under-the-table information exchanges elusive.

The hidden enemy of cognitive biases

Before we go any further, let’s pause and consider the silent saboteurs of ethical behavior: cognitive biases. These deeply ingrained mental shortcuts often shape our behavior in ways we don’t recognize. Like invisible puppeteers, they subtly pull our strings, guiding our actions, often leading us astray in thinking about hybrid work, as I tell my client companies trying to figure out their return-to-office plans.

In the case of misconduct, let’s focus on two specific cognitive biases that provide valuable insight into our discussion: the confirmation bias and the status quo bias.

Confirmation bias, a classic villain in the plot of rational thinking, involves favoring information that confirms our pre-existing beliefs or values. If a trader firmly believes that bending the rules is a norm (albeit unspoken) in the high-stakes financial industry, when they hear snippets of chatter about a colleague who manipulated market rumors for gain without facing consequences, their belief is reinforced. This reinforcement might nudge them further down the unethical path.

In an office environment, where information (and misinformation) flows freely, confirmation bias has a ripe playground to reinforce harmful beliefs. Conversely, the isolation of remote work might shield traders from such damaging confirmations, leading to a decrease in misconduct.

Status quo bias, another way our minds deceive us, is our preference for keeping things the same, especially when faced with change or uncertainty.

For a trader who’s grown accustomed to the cutthroat office culture, where bending rules is sometimes deemed a necessary evil to stay ahead, the status quo bias might make them reluctant to alter their behavior, even in the face of clear ethical guidelines. They might perceive a change towards ethical conduct as a risky shift, threatening their standing or success. In a home setting, away from the immediate pressures and ingrained norms of the office, this bias loses much of its persuasive power.

When cognitive biases are at play, achieving a culture of integrity can be akin to climbing a greased pole. However, recognizing these biases is the first step in combating them. In a remote work setup, confirmation bias and status quo bias have fewer chances to interfere, which could explain the surprising upswing in ethical behavior observed among remote workers.

The future of ethics is hybrid

If the future of work is, indeed, a hybrid model, we find ourselves on the cusp of a unique opportunity to reshape the norms of ethical conduct. It’s a strange yet thrilling thought that a domestic environment–often punctuated with errant kids, barking dogs, and overflowing laundry baskets–could be the secret weapon in the battle against financial misconduct.

So, as we embark on the journey to redefine work, it’s high time we discarded the antiquated, office-centric playbook.

The next time you think of honesty and ethics, don’t visualize gleaming office towers filled with well-dressed professionals. Instead, picture the humble home office–unpretentious yet powerful, an unassuming beacon of financial integrity.

Good behavior isn’t dictated by where you sit, but by the ethical stand you take. No matter where we choose to log in from, integrity must always be a priority.

Gleb Tsipursky, Ph.D. (a.k.a. “the office whisperer”) helps tech and finance industry executives drive collaboration, innovation, and retention in hybrid work. He serves as the CEO of the boutique future-of-work consultancy Disaster Avoidance Experts. He is the bestselling author of seven books, including Never Go With Your Gut and Leading Hybrid and Remote Teams. His expertise comes from over 20 years of consulting for Fortune 500 companies from Aflac to Xerox and over 15 years in academia as a behavioral scientist at UNC–Chapel Hill and Ohio State.

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.

財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)所刊載內(nèi)容之知識產(chǎn)權(quán)為財(cái)富媒體知識產(chǎn)權(quán)有限公司及/或相關(guān)權(quán)利人專屬所有或持有,。未經(jīng)許可,,禁止進(jìn)行轉(zhuǎn)載、摘編,、復(fù)制及建立鏡像等任何使用,。
0條Plus
精彩評論
評論

撰寫或查看更多評論

請打開財(cái)富Plus APP

前往打開
熱讀文章