Posts
Excerpt from : Secrets of the World Class
By Steve Siebold
• The Middle Class competes...the World Class creates.
• The Middle Class avoids risk...the World Class manages risk.
• The Middle Class loves to be comfortable... The World Class is comfortable being uncomfortable.
• The Middle Class hungers for security...The World Class doesn't believe security exists.
• The Middle Class sacrifices growth for safety... The World Class sacrifices safety for growth.
• The Middle Class focuses on having...The World Class focuses on being.
• The Middle Class has a lottery mentality... The World Class has an abundance mentality.
• The Middle Class slows down...The World Class calms down.
• The Middle Class is frustrated...The World Class is grateful.
• The Middle Class operates out of fear and scarcity...The World Class operates from love and abundance.
• The Middle Class has pipedreams...The World Class has vision.
• The Middle Class denies its intuition...The World Class embraces its intuition.
• The Middle Class trades time for money...The World Class trades ideas for money.
• The Middle Class is problem oriented...The World Class is solution oriented.
• The Middle Class sees itself as a victim....The World Class sees itself as responsible.
• The Middle Class thinks it knows enough...The World Class is eager to learn.
• The Middle Class chooses fear...The World Class chooses growth.
• The Middle Class is boastful...The World Class is humble.
• The Middle Class seeks riches...The World Class seeks wealth.
• The Middle Class believes its vision only when it sees it...The World Class knows it will see its vision when it believes it.
Wednesday, 30 September 2009
Coaching used by almost 90% of organisations, CIPD reports
Recent article on Personneltoday.com
By John Charlton, 16 September 2009 15:00
Research to be launched at the upcoming CIPD Coaching at Work conference has found that almost 90% of organisations polled use coaching.
The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) says more than 500 companies were surveyed for the Taking the Temperature of Coaching report, which found that 51% of them see coaching as a key part of learning and development and consider it 'crucial to their strategy'.
According to the survey, coaching is being used at all levels to build on good performance (23%) and improve poor performance (20%), and also in leadership development (23%).
"It is not surprising that so many are turning to coaching and mentoring to improve performance," says Dr John McGurk, CIPD adviser, Learning and Talent. "When budgets are tightened, it's a relatively inexpensive way to develop staff, and it also has the benefit of being tailored to an organisation's specific needs. As well as this, coaching has great scope to improve employee engagement, empower people and boost morale at a time of great uncertainty.
"At the conference, we'll look at how those using coaching and mentoring can make sure that they really reap the benefits throughout the organisation.
"It's vital that coaching's impact is measurable and tightly aligned with the business agenda, as well as helping individuals to develop. Otherwise, it runs the risk of being seen as something which only takes place in the executive suite."
The CIPD coaching conference takes place on 24 September 2009 in London.
Meanwhile, CIPD research among 100 HR professionals - backed by evidence from its quarterly employment outlook - indicated that transferable and flexible skills are the number one attribute sought by employers.
It claimed that evidence from both pieces of research showed that these skills were the most marketable in the current jobs market, cited as such by 45% of HR professionals polled and 47% of employment outlook respondents.
By John Charlton, 16 September 2009 15:00
Research to be launched at the upcoming CIPD Coaching at Work conference has found that almost 90% of organisations polled use coaching.
The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) says more than 500 companies were surveyed for the Taking the Temperature of Coaching report, which found that 51% of them see coaching as a key part of learning and development and consider it 'crucial to their strategy'.
According to the survey, coaching is being used at all levels to build on good performance (23%) and improve poor performance (20%), and also in leadership development (23%).
"It is not surprising that so many are turning to coaching and mentoring to improve performance," says Dr John McGurk, CIPD adviser, Learning and Talent. "When budgets are tightened, it's a relatively inexpensive way to develop staff, and it also has the benefit of being tailored to an organisation's specific needs. As well as this, coaching has great scope to improve employee engagement, empower people and boost morale at a time of great uncertainty.
"At the conference, we'll look at how those using coaching and mentoring can make sure that they really reap the benefits throughout the organisation.
"It's vital that coaching's impact is measurable and tightly aligned with the business agenda, as well as helping individuals to develop. Otherwise, it runs the risk of being seen as something which only takes place in the executive suite."
The CIPD coaching conference takes place on 24 September 2009 in London.
Meanwhile, CIPD research among 100 HR professionals - backed by evidence from its quarterly employment outlook - indicated that transferable and flexible skills are the number one attribute sought by employers.
It claimed that evidence from both pieces of research showed that these skills were the most marketable in the current jobs market, cited as such by 45% of HR professionals polled and 47% of employment outlook respondents.
Wednesday, 2 September 2009
So, the Tax people do have a sense of humour
Picked up by my colleague, Giles Brindley, this is superb:
This is a reply received from HM Revenue and Customs. The Guardian had to ask for permission to print it.
Dear Mr ,
I am writing to you to express our thanks for your more than prompt reply to our latest communication, and also to answer some of the points you raise. I will address them, as ever, in order.
Firstly, I must take issue with your description of our last as a "begging letter". It might perhaps more properly be referred to as a "tax demand". This is how we at the Inland Revenue have always, for reasons of accuracy, traditionally referred to such documents.
Secondly, your frustration at our adding to the "endless stream of crapulent whining and panhandling vomited daily through the letterbox on to the doormat" has been noted. However, whilst I have naturally not seen the other letters to which you refer I would cautiously suggest that their being from "pauper councils, Lombardy pirate banking houses and pissant gas-mongerers" might indicate that your decision to "file them next to the toilet in case of emergencies" is at best a little ill-advised. In common with my own organisation, it is unlikely that the senders of these letters do see you as a "lackwit bumpkin" or, come to that, a "sodding charity". More likely they see you as a citizen of Great Britain, with a responsibility to contribute to the upkeep of the nation as a whole.
Which brings me to my next point. Whilst there may be some spirit of truth in your assertion that the taxes you pay "go to shore up the canker-blighted, toppling folly that is the Public Services", a moment's rudimentary calculation ought to disabuse you of the notion that the government in any way expects you to "stump up for the whole damned party" yourself. The estimates you provide for the Chancellor's disbursement of the funds levied by taxation, whilst colourful, are, in fairness, a little off the mark. Less than you seem to imagine is pent on "junkets for Bunterish lickspittles" and "dancing whores"
whilst far more than you have accounted for is allocated to, for example, "that box-ticking facade of a university system."
A couple of technical points arising from direct queries:
1. The reason we don't simply write "Muggins"on the envelope has to do with the vagaries of the postal system;
2. You can rest assured that "sucking the very marrow of those with nothing else to give" has never been considered as a practice because even if the Personal Allowance didn't render it irrelevant, the sheer medical logistics involved would make it financially unviable.
I trust this has helped. In the meantime, whilst I would not in any way wish to influence your decision one way or the other, I ought to point out that even if you did choose to "give the whole foul jamboree up and go and live in India" you would still owe us the money.
Please send it to us by Friday.
Yours sincerely,
H J Lee
Customer Relations
HM Revenue and Customs
This is a reply received from HM Revenue and Customs. The Guardian had to ask for permission to print it.
Dear Mr ,
I am writing to you to express our thanks for your more than prompt reply to our latest communication, and also to answer some of the points you raise. I will address them, as ever, in order.
Firstly, I must take issue with your description of our last as a "begging letter". It might perhaps more properly be referred to as a "tax demand". This is how we at the Inland Revenue have always, for reasons of accuracy, traditionally referred to such documents.
Secondly, your frustration at our adding to the "endless stream of crapulent whining and panhandling vomited daily through the letterbox on to the doormat" has been noted. However, whilst I have naturally not seen the other letters to which you refer I would cautiously suggest that their being from "pauper councils, Lombardy pirate banking houses and pissant gas-mongerers" might indicate that your decision to "file them next to the toilet in case of emergencies" is at best a little ill-advised. In common with my own organisation, it is unlikely that the senders of these letters do see you as a "lackwit bumpkin" or, come to that, a "sodding charity". More likely they see you as a citizen of Great Britain, with a responsibility to contribute to the upkeep of the nation as a whole.
Which brings me to my next point. Whilst there may be some spirit of truth in your assertion that the taxes you pay "go to shore up the canker-blighted, toppling folly that is the Public Services", a moment's rudimentary calculation ought to disabuse you of the notion that the government in any way expects you to "stump up for the whole damned party" yourself. The estimates you provide for the Chancellor's disbursement of the funds levied by taxation, whilst colourful, are, in fairness, a little off the mark. Less than you seem to imagine is pent on "junkets for Bunterish lickspittles" and "dancing whores"
whilst far more than you have accounted for is allocated to, for example, "that box-ticking facade of a university system."
A couple of technical points arising from direct queries:
1. The reason we don't simply write "Muggins"on the envelope has to do with the vagaries of the postal system;
2. You can rest assured that "sucking the very marrow of those with nothing else to give" has never been considered as a practice because even if the Personal Allowance didn't render it irrelevant, the sheer medical logistics involved would make it financially unviable.
I trust this has helped. In the meantime, whilst I would not in any way wish to influence your decision one way or the other, I ought to point out that even if you did choose to "give the whole foul jamboree up and go and live in India" you would still owe us the money.
Please send it to us by Friday.
Yours sincerely,
H J Lee
Customer Relations
HM Revenue and Customs
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)