Drucker Society of Mt. Vernon
New advocacy organization promotes corporate and government social responsibility.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Mt. Vernon resident John Romanin, a local businessman, believes that America needs to teach its youth about the importance of ethics and responsibility and, in so doing, develop a new generation of leaders who will close the "responsibility gap" that exists today in government and business. He proposes to do this by exposing high school students and others in Northern Virginia and elsewhere to the writings, philosophy, and concepts of corporate social responsibility and management espoused by the late Peter Drucker.
Romanin formed the Drucker Society of Mt. Vernon (DSMV) because "I am gravely concerned about the economic future. Drucker was prescient when many years ago he described a conflict between political belief and social reality if the American people began to seriously question our free enterprise system. The propensity of present day leaders to resort to quick fixes is creating unimaginable problems for our children.
"The Drucker Society of Mt. Vernon will focus programs that address what we refer to as the ‘responsibility gap;’ the growing distance between our obligations to be effective managers and ethical leaders and our actions. We will focus significant energy and the resources of our volunteers on the ‘Drucker in the High Schools’ program to do whatever we can to develop solid, effective leaders for our future." Plans are to kick off the first DSMV event this coming spring.
Drucker, author, management consultant, teacher, business "guru," and Presidential Medal of Freedom recipient, is viewed by many as conceiving, through his writings and 39 published books ("Concept of the Corporation," "The End of Economic Man") the basis for responsible organized management as practiced in a number of corporations throughout the U.S. and the world.
The Drucker Institute, located at Claremont Graduate College where the late author taught, acts as a hub for a global network of what now numbers 26 Drucker Societies (including in China and Korea) that are trying to influence people to apply Drucker principles to everyday problems encountered in government and business.
Romanin listed the following present day disciples of the Drucker philosophy: Eric Schmidt, current CEO, Google; Jack Welch, former CEO, General Electric, and Andrew Grove, former CEO, Intel.
感謝造訪 並饋贈 失意錄 hand to mouth 等書
1/17 周日邀請的名單 如此mail 之c.c. list 所示
abei (政大哲研) 買了它 知道此書有索引
我們看到非洲的一群猴子為了吃到某一種椰子肉，竟然學會用工具打開堅硬無比的椰子殼，而這種技術也在這群猴子 間代代相傳。草原上的獵豹三兄弟打破獵豹一向獨來獨往的習性，他們學會一起合作打獵，這一個策略也讓他們可以挑戰體型巨大的鴕鳥。面對大陣仗的殺人鯨，南 極的食蟹海豹以他機警的本能繞著一小塊浮冰，以浮冰作為掩護，不讓殺人鯨接近，一場令人屏息的生死追逐戰就在眼前展開。
為了挑戰野生紀錄片的新境界，「生命脈動」花費超過3000天的外景拍攝，動用業界最優秀的野生動物攝 影師，最先進的高畫質攝影機每秒可以捕捉超上千格的畫面，觀眾將看到平常肉眼無法看到的細微動作，我們將首次見識到變色龍捕食射出的舌頭，這一個動作的加 速度比F16戰機還要快五倍，如今我們得以見到這震撼的一瞬間。
《中英對照讀新聞》FEMA suggests Christmas gifts for the disaster age 美國聯邦急難管理署推薦因應災變時期的耶誕禮物
Imagine tearing open that large present under the Christmas tree with your name on it and finding inside... a fire extinguisher. Or a foldable ladder. Or a smoke alarm in that smaller box.
Those, plus a home disaster kit including food, water and prescription medications for 72 hours, or a first aid certification course are just some of the gifts that the US Federal Emergency Management Agency （FEMA） is suggesting Americans give their loved ones this holiday season.
"Giving a gift of a fire extinguisher might not be the first thing that springs to mind, but for the guy who has everything, it might be perfect," FEMA Administrator Craig Fugate said.
FEMA also advised that, in addition to reading "The Night Before Christmas" to the kids, you take the occasion of having the whole family together to "develop a family disaster plan."
"What we’re saying is that the holidays are the only time families really get together. So it’s the ideal time to talk about a family plan in the event of a disaster," Fugate said.
disaster kit︰急難包。kit即是工具包、用品箱。比如，a first-aid kit（急救箱）。
spring︰在此有突然閃現之意。例句︰A rude remark sprang to my lips, but I managed not to say it.（一句無禮粗話突然來到我嘴邊，可是我總算沒說出來。）
take（seize）occasion︰趁機。例句︰I take occasion to tell him my work.（我趁機對他談談我的工作。）
Cf. L. festina lente, make haste slowly; after [Suetonius Augustus xxv. 4.] nihil autem minus perfecto duci quam festinationem temeritatemque convenire arbitratur. crebro itaque illa iactabat: σρɛῦδɛ βραδέως, he [Augustus] thought that haste and rashness were alike unsuited to a well-trained leader. So he often came out with sayings like ‘make haste slowly’ [etc.]; [c 1385 Chaucer Troilus & Criseyde i. 956] He hasteth wel that wisly kan [knows how to] abyde.
Gently make haste. ‥A hundred times consider what you've said.
[1683 Dryden Poems (1958) I. 336]
Make haste slowly.
[1744 B. Franklin Poor Richard's Almanack (Apr.)]
‘Festina lente,’ Miss Dora suggested slyly. ‘Not bad advice,’ Max said cheerfully. At Annie's glare, he added quickly, ‘Make haste slowly.’
[1989 C. G. Hart Little Class on Murder xii.]
〔記 者陳曉宜／台北報導〕馬政府一再聲稱不開放大陸勞工來台，但國民黨立委侯彩鳳昨天戳破這項謊言。她直言，第四次江陳會簽訂的兩岸漁業勞務合作協議，以及未 來陸委會將開放大陸「專業技術人員」來台，都是變相開放陸勞。尤其開放「專業技術人員」來台，更將成為管制陸勞的大漏洞，未來台灣勞工的飯碗將會被陸勞搶 光光。
一 位熟知內情的藍營人士也表示，上述協議還隱藏一個嚴重問題，即協議內容會要求未來台灣船東僱用大陸漁工，必須透過一個中國半官方的仲介公司，也就是說，未 來台籍船東會被中國仲介公司吃死死，他們不僅可任意喊價調高仲介費，大陸漁工還受薪資保障，台灣一些漁會以為有了協議，雇主可以免除黑白兩道施壓，但其實 最後會被中國仲介綁架，試問，如果兩國間真的達成漁業勞務合作協議，又何必還要透過仲介？
侯 彩鳳指出，陸委會想以「專業技術人員」為由開放大陸白領階級來台工作，就是變相開放陸勞，就是變相讓中國勞工來台與台灣勞工搶飯碗。其一、大陸的「專業技 術人員」，會搶了台灣「專業技術人員」的飯碗，以桃園航空城為例，物流公司主要聘用的都是白領階級，藍領很少，一旦開放，「國家機場全是大陸人在上班，這 樣好嗎？」
侯 彩鳳擔憂的說，政府嘴巴說不開放，但總是以各種名目、管道變相開放，以後金融監理合作備忘錄（ＭＯＵ）生效後，還會開放大陸「金融專業經理人」來台，不論 是陸資或台灣的雇主，久而久之，覺得大陸人便宜好用，開放來台的程度及人數就會越來越高，台灣不分白領或藍領勞工的失業率就會不斷升高。
來自「加州大學」（University of California）的鮑恩說，「我認為有一件事已經確定，我們的注意力已被砍成更短的時段，這對更深刻的思考不是好事。」
但「牛津大學」（Oxford University）神經科學教授布雷克摩爾（Colin Blakemore）則表示，「依個人使用情況的不同，人類大腦有成長擴大的能力。處理這樣的新資訊，說不定可能促成新神經細胞的產生。」（譯者：中央社 楊超寰）
An Interview With Colin Blakemore
Justin Loke talks to the CEO of the Medical Research Council (MRC) about the future for medical academia and the MRC
The first time I saw Professor Colin Blakemore was when he was delivering a lecture to the Oxford Medical Alumni at an annual meeting. The talk was on the field of work that made his name, the visual system. It was a fascinating and surprisingly accessible talk on some of the historical background to this area of research. This ability to make relatively complicated topics understandable to the public is probably one of the reasons why Professor Blakemore was appointed Chief Executive Officer of the Medical Research Council (MRC), which is the largest non-commercial funder of medical research in the United Kingdom.
After completing his pre-clinical degree at Cambridge, Professor Blakemore studied at Berkeley, California on a Harkness Fellowship, which was initially for a year but turned out to be two and a half, with a PhD. He returned to the Department of Physiology at Cambridge where he started by working with Fergus Campbell, who was a leading vision researcher. Together they did influential research, with one of the most highly cited papers in the field, supporting the view that the visual system performs a primitive Fourier analysis of the retinal image. It was Fergus Campbell who had persuaded Blakemore to abandon his University Scholarship for clinical studies at St Thomas’ Hospital and to embark on an academic career. “I never really looked back” he said, “but actually,” he wryly added, “I sometimes wondered what difference it would have made.”
Bearing in mind the massive problem faced by medical academia with recruitment into its ranks, especially at the training grades, I discussed with Professor Blakemore some of the changes proposed by the recent Walport report. The report on the academic stream of Modernising Medical Careers (MMC) was chaired by the director of the Wellcome Trust, Dr. Mark Walport, and his report sought to address some of the issues surrounding the dramatic decline in doctors entering academia. Professor Blakemore, who was a member of the Walport Committee, believes that the strength of the report lies in its recognition of “the complexity of the problem”, since doctors are not only placed under a financial disincentive but are under pressure to prioritise their clinical work and to pursue their professional clinical development and gain National Training Numbers. The Walport report strove not only to allow more flexibility in lectureships and research fellowships but also to increase the absolute numbers of these posts. Although Professor Blakemore feels that the approach has been remarkably successful so far, especially in rallying so many of the funding bodies, and he is impressed by “the depth and conviction” of the report, he warns that significant obstacles still remain, not least the need to overcome the scepticism of some of the Trusts and some of the Royal Colleges.
The MRC has tried to play its part by increasing the number of its Fellowships, and by bringing them into line with the recommendations of the Walport report. The MRC offers Fellowships targeted at both training-level researchers and as well those who are better established in their field.
I voiced some of the cynics’ views that medical research is often fruitless and therefore that there might be little point in having more medical academics. Colin Blakemore was quite certain of his answer. Clinical research has never been more promising or more exciting. The MRC has consistently funded research with the intention of eventual clinical benefit and he personally believes that, while it is essential to support strongly curiosity-driven fundamental research, even the most basic researchers should be constantly thinking about possible implications and applications of their research. This is particularly important at a time when there is such a focus on translational research, aimed at bringing the benefits of scientific discoveries from the bench to the bedside, as well as feeding knowledge from clinical observation of human disease back to the bench scientists. Blakemore quotes Nobel Laureate, Sydney Brenner’s opinion that “the experimental animal of the 21st century is the human being”. He believes that clinical research in the 21st century will be potentiated by the unravelling of the human genome combined with increasing sophistication in experimental studies in human beings. Blakemore backs his belief in the importance of basic scientific research with the history of monoclonal antibodies. In 1975, César Milstein and George Köhler, working in the MRC’s Laboratory of Molecular Biology (LMB) in Cambridge, developed a method for producing large amounts of pure antibody. They won the Nobel Prize for this work in 1984. The original objectives were to study the structure of antibodies and their diversity, and to use them to probe the molecular characteristics of different cell types in the body. Antibody engineering has played a crucial role in molecular biological research. But Milstein recognised immediately the potential commercial and medical value of monoclonal antibodies.
The technique has underpinned the development of the biotech industry and has now led to a whole new generation of so-called ‘biological’ diagnostics and therapies. The translational research needed for this was also done at the LMB, by Greg Winter in the 1980s. He devised ways of making antibodies acceptable to the human immune system, and this led to the development of such important drugs as Herceptin, Avastin, and Humira. Therapeutic antibodies now produce worldwide revenues well in excess of US $12 billion, contributing to a very significant income stream for the MRC.
Blakemore stresses two conclusions from this example. First, the essential underpinning science wasn’t aimed at medical application; it was curiosity-driven research of the highest quality. Second, the process of translating the discovery into hugely valuable products took more than 20 years. While it might be possible in the future to speed up the translation process, it is essential not to neglect the investment in basic science.
It would be hard to deny that I was impressed by the rigour of Blakemore’s arguments, which were backed by a number of other historical anecdotes. We moved on to discuss his views on the level of funding of the MRC. His answers were diplomatic but unequivocal. He said that “he did not wish to sound ungrateful” because the Labour government had halted the decrease in scientific funding by the Tories in the last years of their government and the overall level of public funding for science has increased greatly since 1999.
Admittedly, much of this increase has gone to investment in infrastructure and renovation in the universities and, recently, in the new Full Economic Costs (FEC) system; here, more is given to universities by research councils to pay for the overheads of research. Once again Blakemore’s command of the figures is persuasive: in a recent comparison of percentage increases in the budgets of medical funding agencies around the world, the MRC is at the bottom of the league table compared with such countries as Singapore, Canada and the USA. Per head of population, the NIH (the US equivalent of the MRC) spends 6.5 times more, and Singapore 8 times more than the MRC.
Despite a tripling in its funding of university research grants over the past 3 years, the MRC has the lowest rate of grant approvals of all the research councils, with fewer than 20% of grant applications being accepted. It is widely agreed among funding agencies that they have great difficulty in operating with a success rate below about 15%, because the peer-review process and the award committees become disillusioned, and the administrative burden becomes intolerably high. The peer review system is under challenge at the moment, not just because of its cost, but also because it might be biased against translational and applied research. But Blakemore argues that, although different types of peer review are needed for varying kinds of research, it is essential that the rigour of the process is sustained if we are not to waste money on studies of lower quality.
The annual increase in funding of the MRC between 2005 and 2008 will be little more than 4% per annum, after FEC and other unavoidable increases in costs are stripped from the figure. This is barely higher than the rate of domestic inflation, not to mention the larger inflator for medical research. Nevertheless, the MRC has managed to launch a wide range of new schemes to stimulate clinical and translational research, and to support young scientists. The recent review of public funding through the MRC and the Department of Health — the Cooksey review — offers new opportunities for increased efficiency, especially in clinical research. But Blakemore argues that a real increase in funding for the MRC is desperately needed to feed the capacity of UK researchers to contribute to future advances in medicine. He dreams of a doubling of the budget, which he believes would allow the MRC to build on its amazing track record of 27 Nobel Prizes and to make its proper contribution to the future health of the UK.
I questioned him on what alternatives there are to raising funds from the government. In response, he reminded me of the success of MRC Technology (MRCT), the knowledge transfer company of the MRC, which produces more income for the MRC than the technology transfer offices of all the British Universities combined. Last year MRCT completed a record deal with industry, worth a total of nearly $300 million, more than $200 million of which came to the MRC, based on the licensing of the anti TNF-a monoclonal antibody, Humira. However, despite this success in securing commercial income, Blakemore believes that this is no substitute for government funding to sustain the science base.
Given a shortage in the MRC’s funding for global health projects, Blakemore emphasised that the MRC wanted to sustain its strong tradition for supporting these, with two research units in Africa and research projects all over the world, as well as here in the UK. At the MRC’s National Institute for Medical Research at Mill Hill, there is important work on malaria and TB, as well as the World Influenza Centre, and here in Oxford there is important research on vaccines for HIV and other diseases of the developing world.Towards the end of the interview Blakemore admitted his nervousness about the future as he contrasted the prestigious history of the MRC and its extremely high standing around the world with the current statistics, which present a serious challenge to its standing in the international world of medical research
Further Up the Organization: How Groups of People Working Together for a Common Purpose Ought to Conduct Themselves for Fun and Profit 1988
The B-2 Chronicles: Uncommon Wisdom for Un-corporate America (Paperback) ~ Robert Townsend1995
From the author of the New York Times #1 bestseller Up the Organization comes an engaging parable packed with valuable insights for the next generation of business. "The most original, zany, and important management book of the '90s."--Warren Bennis, author of On Becoming a Leader.