Conceptual complexity theories explore changes in the cognitive resources required at different levels of management. Leaders at higher levels make decisions that affect more people (larger scope), impact systems over longer time frames, and have to manage a larger number of goals. The long winter is over, spring training is nearly done, and the regular season is almost upon us and luckily enough for me, baseball provides an excellent backdrop for discussing these differences. I love baseball. (Click through to read more.) Read more >
Henry Ford is well known for his influence on the auto industry in particular, but also the way manufacturing is done in general. His assembly lines made it possible to put a “car in every driveway” at an affordable price. He is not the topic of this post, however.

Ford Motor Company’s market share went from a high of 50-60% in the early 1920’s down to 20% by World War II. Meanwhile, GM’s market share jumped from 12% all the way to 50%. It was the leadership of a rival executive (and Ford’s disdain for the management practices this rival instituted) that allowed GM to make such gains. This entry is about that rival executive, Alfred P. Sloan, Jr. (namesake of the MIT Sloan School of Management), and the incredible way he managed complexity while leading GM to incredible heights. (And no, the irony of writing about auto execs as great leaders and GM as a dominant company in particular is not at all lost on me.) (Click to read more).
Read more >