Here’s an interesting, possibly controversial, possibly visionary approach to restructuring from Giles Rhys Jones and Jonathan MacDonald. Both blogs are essential reading.
I’d be interested in seeing whether people agree or violently disagree… Certainly makes more sense than the vague notion of an impending headcount reduction based on undisclosed criteria.
(Most definitely a comment not related to any particular company, including my current employers!)
Edit: In a moment of incompetence, I forgot to point out that it’s in relation to media companies.
I’m a Web2.0 enthusiast, but what is the context?
Isn’t this the cart before the horse? First, we need to see what the market needs. There will be plenty of jobs not requiring much use of IT and many when no IT might be a blessing. How long since you had a GP who didn’t spend 9/10 of an already short consultation playing with the box?
Whilst I think this is a valued model for larger agencies – those that are over 100 employees say, I do not think that it is applicable to the industry as a whole. For agencies with less than 50 employees like, recruitment and retention is intrinsic to our business. Therefore should we find ourselves in a situation where headcount has to be reduced, it will only be from the ‘promote’ box. We do not have the capacity to employ people who fall into the ‘out now’ or ‘migrate out’ boxes as it would have a detrimental effect to the quality of work we produce. However, larger agencies have the capacity to house people who continually fall under the radar, especially if they need a bum to fill a seat. There are agencies out there that settle for second best. We do not.
thanks for the link and the comment.
i think this matrix can be applied to any business (it is actually a GE structure) replace digital with innovative/forward thinking/lateral and you get the same effect. also digital was meant in its widest marketing form rather than technology.
g
I agree that size is a factor in this but it is also attitude. A big part of it is being ruthless with people who seem not to care about their work, especially within probation periods. It is a policy that can work in bigger agencies – it just gets harder to ensure you stay true to it.
Thanks to Giles for adding some of the context I lost in reposting!
And it’s cool to see the other comments. I think Nicola’s point is important, but I’d suspect that in Collective’s case, the plan would be to only hire people in the top right quadrant anyway, as with quite a lot of digital agencies. As Greg said, a lot is about attitude and ensuring you have people who care about their work.
There’s the oft-quoted example of people seemingly wedded to their laptop 24/7 – and they’re doing it because they love their job and what they do (He says, commenting at 9.40pm!). And they’d rather be doing interesting creative things 24/7, than a 9-5.30pm that they want to escape as soon as possible.
I definitely think we’re reaching the point where people that claim no interest in the digital opportunities or existing side of their business are in an increasingly risky position.
The last cocacola comercial I think oit was shot in argentina, the first cab and bus that you get to see for a second from above are form bs as for sure, they later added a yellow cab and some signs in english but that is Buenos Aires for sure. Anyone know if this is right?