If you answer "yes" to most of these questions, please contact us to discuss how we can work together.
1. Is there a particular challenge you wish to solve?
While each of our custom programs is built from the ground up with every new partner, our material is reflective of our faculty's expertise and areas of research. Knowing the specific challenge you wish to address will help us involve the right faculty right away and create program material based on the most current research relevant to your situation.
2. Could this challenge be addressed efficiently in small teams?
We integrate action learning projects into most of our programs. Could your situation be examined sufficiently during the five days our custom programs generally require?
3. Do you have an idea of the timeframe for the program?
Our custom programs are led by MIT's most senior faculty, all of whom are world renowned researchers and widely sought after speakers and consultants. Having an approximate timetable will help us be more expeditious with your time and ours.
4. Do you know a specific person in your organization who will serve as the executive sponsor?
Each of our custom programs is a collaboration, requiring considerable commitment from both sides. In our experience with past and current corporate partners, we have found that dedicated senior-level leadership involvement throughout the program is essential to ensuring its success.
Your privacy is important to us. Please take a moment and review your MySloanExecEd profile settings by clicking on the "Edit Profile" button at the top of your MySloanExecEd profile page. Site visitors must register for the MySloanExecEd community before they are allowed to see any of your profile information, invite you to join their network, or post messages to your profile.
Within your profile settings you can choose how much or how little information you share. Your contact information will not be shared with anyone except for those who you choose to add to your network. If you choose to do so, you have the option of making your profile private inside the community. You will still be able to network with other users, comment on videos, join groups, and attend programs. If private, other members of the community will only be able to view your first name, last initial, certificate status, program days, profile views, the number of people in your network, last log in, and when you joined. If you choose to network with other users they will be able to see all portions of your profile set to "Shared" in the "Edit Profile" screen.
The U.S. is unflinching in its optimism and ability to move forward after a crisis, such as the 2008 recession. And yet the drawback to this reflex is the ability to quickly forget what landed us in the situation to begin with. As our economy recovers, we potentially risk a growing complacency and inadequate financial oversight.
Just months ago, the country of Cyprus made global headlines as their banks’ ballooning assets grew far beyond what the country could support. Losing over 4.5 billion euros, the Cyprian banks tried to repair the damage by confiscating secure deposits, affecting the assets and the trust of investors throughout Europe and Russia and causing a ripple effect of investment withdrawals. The contagious effects of this crisis are a warning of how interconnected we are, and how one failed system could halt economic recovery elsewhere.
While the developed world continues trudging through a slow economic recovery, parts of the developing world’s economy are being rapidly transformed by a new form of disruptive technology: mobile money.
Mobile money—a cash management service available on mobile phones or the internet—is having more than a moment; it’s making a profound impact, powerful enough to shift economies across country borders. Studying the impact of mobile money in its most successful beta launch to date in Kenya can teach us a lot about the impact and adoption of disruptive innovations within a country and beyond its borders.
Microsoft recently announced a significant restructuring in hopes of reclaiming its lost market share and the trust of its customers. In response, many are asking, “Is restructuring the answer? What changes will Microsoft need to make to regain its competitive edge?”
The Lean Forward Approach
According to Steven Spear, Senior Lecturer at MIT Sloan and recognized expert on high velocity organizations, the most successful organizations are the ones creating high value with their products, in less time, using less effort. These organizations, says Spear, use the lean forward approach: they consistently seek immediate clarification and amplification of their customer’s voice by leaning into their users’ domain to discover the problems as well as delights of their experience.
While the number of women holding positions on scientific advisory boards (SAB) is increasing, it may come as a surprise that those numbers are still low.
According to the U.S. National Science Foundation, although the proportion of women in industrial and academic science is on the rise—women make up 25 percent of tenured academics in science and engineering and more than 25 percent of industry scientists in research and development—when it comes to women serving on SABs, the numbers aren’t as positive. And, women are losing out because of it: membership on these boards is not without its advantages, including access to promising research, consulting opportunities, and monetary rewards.
A paper published last October by MIT Sloan Professor Fiona Murray, along with Toby Stuart at the University of California, Berkeley, and Waverly Ding at the University of Maryland in College Park, examined the gender gap in corporate SABs. As part of the study, they reviewed a national sample of 6,000 life scientists whose careers span more than 30 years. In addition, the group looked at all publicly available lists of U.S. biotech SABs, including about 500 companies.
How do you negotiate when you need to make a positive impression? The answer may depend on your gender.
In Sheryl Sandberg’s much discussed Lean In, the author describes research findings that women perceived as hard-charging types are liked less. She advises women to smile profusely during a negotiation, use the word “we” instead of “I,” and express appreciation to your bosses. Of course, Sandberg is aware of the contradictions implicit in these instructions, given the tenet of the book itself and adds, “No wonder women don’t negotiate.”
Her point is not lost on negotiation theorists who understand that for both genders there exists a tension between claiming value for oneself and being likeable in a conversation or negotiation. Women are assumed to be warm and relational, which might represent a barrier to advocating for themselves, whereas men are assumed to be competitive and thus less empathic in a conflict.