Mullenweg founded Automattic, the company behind WordPress, in 2005, and began hiring in the traditional way: using resume screening, reference checks, and interviews. He focused on the experience candidates had and paid special attention to what other start-ups they'd worked for. He and his colleagues invested a lot of energy in the process and believed that they were being as rigorous as they could. But when some hires didn't work out, they began to examine their approach in light of Automattic's unconventional philosophy: Work where you want and when you want; you'll be measured by outputs, not by time spent at a desk in an office. They realized that being well-spoken or charming in an interview often had little bearing on how a candidate would perform the job in question. So they introduced tryouts. After an initial screening, promising candidates are required to work with the company for three to eight weeks (with pay), performing real tasks that are closely related to the jobs they're applying for, and working alongside the people who will be their colleagues if they're hired. They can size up the company as it evaluates and provides feedback to them, benefiting all concerned.

Most people expend a lot of energy at work attempting to hide their inadequacies from colleagues. The authors believe that this is the single biggest cause of wasted resources in nearly every company today. When they went in search of firms where people see their mistakes not as vulnerabilities but as prime opportunities for growth, they found only a handful. Two stood out: Bridgewater Associates, an East Coast investment firm, and the Decurion Corporation, a West Coast real estate manager, cinema operator, and senior living center owner. Both are committed to developing every one of their people by weaving personal growth into daily work--and both are highly successful businesses. The authors spent hundreds of hours observing their practices and interviewing employees at all levels. What they saw was people working together, in meetings, in one-on-one sessions, and in the course of their everyday work to get at the root causes of problems and devise more-productive ways of doing things. Many companies conduct root cause analysis but stop short of crossing into an employee's interior world, where so many problems begin--in, for example, a tendency to avoid confrontation, to act before thinking things through, to be overly aggressive if one's ideas are criticized, and other counterproductive thinking and behavior. At Decurion and Bridgewater, everyone from the CEOs on down to the teenaged ushers work on identifying and overcoming these patterns as part of doing their jobs well.

As the planet warms, storms and floods are becoming wilder--killing thousands, disrupting supply chains and power grids, and causing billions of dollars in damage. Meanwhile, supplies of all kinds of resources are dwindling, and demand is rising. These two megachallenges--extreme weather and resource scarcity--could have an unprecedented impact on corporate profits and global prosperity, warns Winston. To manage these threats, companies must do what he calls "the big pivot." The big pivot represents a radical change in strategy, operations, and mind-set. Instead of focusing first on short-term earnings and treating environmental challenges as niche issues, firms must prioritize tackling the world's big problems and use the tools of capitalism to do so profitably. That means taking new approaches to vision, valuation, and collaboration: Companies must set long-term goals based on science and pursue innovations that seem heretical (dyes that don't need water, say, or services that replace products). They'll need new ROI tools that factor in unpriced costs and benefits. And they'll have to work with other organizations, including competitors, to reduce resource dependency (for instance, sharing methods for reducing energy use). By making these moves, firms will increase their resilience to volatile resource prices, electrical outages, and shifts in customer needs. They will improve business performance while advancing the common good.

As the CFO of UPS--and a founding member of its sustainability steering committee--Kuehn wrestled with the question of where and how to most effectively direct the company's resources. The approach he developed is rooted in two beliefs: Companies have a responsibility to contribute to society and the environment, and every investment a company makes should return value to the business. These beliefs don't have to be at odds, he writes, although they often mean that sustainability programs must be subjected to alternative financial evaluation models. In fact, the programs with the most impact not only align with companies' strategies but move in tandem with those companies' activities. UPS's breakthrough came when it recognized that efficiency would be greatest in any initiative where momentum existed and where the company was positioned to make a pivotal or tipping-point difference. To guide its sustainability choices and investments, UPS has implemented a clear process of (1) assessing its strengths; (2) choosing its spots; (3) finding momentum; (4) building productive partnerships; and (5) convening other sources of strength. This approach avoids missteps such as executive pet projects and directing the volunteerism of employees to tasks at which they are not actually good. Kuehn draws lessons from UPS's own experience and from that of others, including Campbell Soup, Pfizer, and Marks and Spencer.

Addressing global sustainability challenges--including climate change, resource depletion, and ecosystem loss--is beyond the individual capabilities of even the largest companies. To tackle these threats, and unleash new value, companies and other stakeholders must collaborate in new ways that treat fragile and complex ecosystems as a whole. In this article, the authors draw on cases including the Latin American Water Funds Partnership, the Sustainable Apparel Coalition (led by Nike, Patagonia, and Walmart), and Action to Accelerate Recycling (a partnership between Alcoa, consumer packaged goods companies, and local governments, among others) to describe four new collaboration models that create shared value and address environmental protection across the value stream. Optimal collaborations focus on improving either business processes or outcomes. They start with a small group of key organizations, bring in project management expertise, link self-interest to shared interest, encourage productive competition, create quick wins, and, above all, build and maintain trust.

Climate change presents clear and pressing threats to business--materials and product shortages, price volatility, legal bans or consumer backlash, and damaged transportation infrastructure, to name just a few. But there are opportunities as well. Lowitt, a consultant in the sustainability field, has developed a series of detailed checklists that will help smart managers reduce operational, regulatory, and reputational risk while finding new ways to cut costs, improve performance, enhance customer relationships, and otherwise increase competitiveness. The checklist recommendations, tested and refined through Lowitt's research into and work with firms including Coca-Cola, GE, and Owens Corning, cover four broad areas in the product life cycle: sourcing, manufacturing, distribution, and consumption. Actions range from educating and incentivizing employees to use climate change-conscious behavior to measuring and reporting key metrics to deter- mining when alternative materials, methods, sites, or contract partners may be called for. Like any such tool, the checklists don't provide a one-size-fits-all plan. Rather, they equip executives to customize their strategies according to factors such as their goods and services, risk tolerance, customer needs, and reliance on third parties throughout the value chain.

The value of many products and services rises or falls with the number of customers using them; the fewer fax machines in use, the less important it is to have one. These network effects influence consumer decisions and affect companies' ability to compete. Strategists have developed some well-known rules for navigating business environments with network effects. "Move first" is one, and "get big fast" is another. In a study of dozens of companies, however, the authors found that quite often the conventional wisdom was dead wrong. And when the rules failed, the reason was always the same: Companies trip up when they try to attract large volumes of customers without understanding (1) the strength of mutual attraction among various customer groups and (2) the extent of asymmetric attraction among them. Looking at examples such as TripAdvisor, Wikipedia, and the New York Times, the authors offer strategies for competing in markets with network effects. New entrants should focus on customer groups that they are uniquely positioned to serve or appeal to the most attractive customers in a market. Incumbents pursuing growth strategies in adjacent markets or new geographies should consider how similar the needs of new customers are to those of existing customers. Offering complements also allows incumbents to reach additional customer groups.

In his work as an executive coach, psychotherapist Kets de Vries sometimes comes across bosses with mental demons. The four kinds he encounters most frequently are pathological narcissists, who are selfish and entitled, have grandiose fantasies, and pursue power at all costs; manic-depressives, who can leave a trail of emotional blazes behind them; passive-aggressives, who shy away from confrontation but are obstructive and under-handed; and the emotionally disconnected--literal-minded people who cannot describe or even recognize their feelings. Left unchecked, these personalities can warp the interactions, plans, and systems of entire organizations. But with appropriate coaching, toxic bosses can learn to manage their conditions and become effective mentors and leaders. This article describes how to recognize each pathology and, step by step, guide people who suffer from it toward healthier and more-productive interactions.

Manufacturers in developed countries can no longer rely on lean management practices to stay profitable. They face increasing competition from plants in large emerging economies that are able to produce on a large scale at a lower cost, while still providing high quality. The way forward, the authors suggest, can be glimpsed from analyzing past winners of Europe's annual Industrial Excellence Award. Those companies have succeeded by using one or more of these strategies: (1) Leveraging data flows to integrate closely with supply chain partners. Germany's Schmitz Cargobull, for example, has become a leading trailer manufacturer by using sophisticated information technology to help customers monitor their vehicles. (2) Creating value downstream in other parts of the supply chain. One example is Markem-Imaje, a maker of industrial printers for coding products; the company adds value for customers by offering a variety of ancillary services. (3) Collaboratively designing manufacturing processes that can rapidly evolve to meet customers' needs. A prime example is ASML, which works closely with customers and suppliers to make innovations in production technology for the semiconductor industry. (4) Specializing in customized products. Focusing on small runs of custom-designed products has been an effective strategy for companies like BuS Elektronik and the Daimler Group's Smart car division.

In some industries, a weak labor market has left candidates with fewer options and less leverage, and employers better positioned to dictate terms. Those who are unemployed, or whose current job seems shaky, have seen their bargaining power further reduced. But the complexity of the job market creates opportunities for people to negotiate the terms and conditions of employment. Negotiation matters most when there is a broad range of potential outcomes. There are 15 rules for negotiating a job offer. One is "don't underestimate the importance of likeability," which means managing inevitable tensions in negotiation, being persistent without being a nuisance, and understanding how other people perceive your approach. Another rule is "make it clear they can get you." Indicate that you're serious about working for a potential employer, and don't discourage them from trying to win you by suggesting you have too many better options. You should also "be prepared for tough questions," like Are we your top choice? Don't lie or try too hard to please, lest you lose your leverage. And "consider the whole deal," including the job's perks, location, opportunities for growth, and flexibility in work hours-not just the salary. These and other guidelines can help you attain the terms and conditions of employment you want.

As the founder of a new "ethical" bank focused on environmental sustainability, Jay McGuane realizes that he has to come up with clear rules about how the board should make decisions on "values" grounds--and quickly. Already, the bank is facing loan approvals involving two hot-button issues. Without clear guidelines, the bank's directors may fall into bitter squabbling, which could lead to resignations, negative media attention, and a flight of investors. Expert commentary comes from Ken LaRoe, chairman and CEO of First Green Bank, and John Replogle, president and CEO of Seventh Generation.

The 73-year-old Zandra Rhodes became famous in the 1970s, had to close up shop in the 1990s, and is now enjoying a renaissance. In this interview with senior editor Alison Beard, she talks about working while she travels, how she faces setbacks, and her opinion of the fashion industry today.

As the founder of a new "ethical" bank focused on environmental sustainability, Jay McGuane realizes that he has to come up with clear rules about how the board should make decisions on "values" grounds--and quickly. Already, the bank is facing loan approvals involving two hot-button issues. Without clear guidelines, the bank's directors may fall into bitter squabbling, which could lead to resignations, negative media attention, and a flight of investors. Expert commentary comes from Ken LaRoe, chairman and CEO of First Green Bank, and John Replogle, president and CEO of Seventh Generation.

As the founder of a new "ethical" bank focused on environmental sustainability, Jay McGuane realizes that he has to come up with clear rules about how the board should make decisions on "values" grounds--and quickly. Already, the bank is facing loan approvals involving two hot-button issues. Without clear guidelines, the bank's directors may fall into bitter squabbling, which could lead to resignations, negative media attention, and a flight of investors. Expert commentary comes from Ken LaRoe, chairman and CEO of First Green Bank, and John Replogle, president and CEO of Seventh Generation.

On August 21, 2007, David Viniar, Chief Financial Officer of Goldman Sachs, received an e-mail from a trader in Goldman's Mortgage Department. In the e-mail, addressed also to Goldman Co-Presidents Gary Cohn and Jon Winkelreid, Joshua Birnbaum outlined a proposal for the firm to move from a net short position in subprime mortgage securities and derivatives to a net long position. Birnbaum claimed that the net long position would not only be profitable but also reduce Mortgage Department and firm-wide risk. This proposal came at a critical time for the subprime mortgage markets in the U.S. and around the world. Subprime mortgage originators such as New Century had filed for bankruptcy. Two Bear Sterns hedge funds that traded subprime mortgages had collapsed. The turmoil had also spread to global markets. Goldman Sachs, unique among New York investment banks, had anticipated the downturn in the subprime mortgage markets and had positioned itself to profit from the meltdown. Now, at a critical juncture, traders on the front lines of the subprime mortgage markets wanted to reverse Goldman's net short position and go net long. David Viniar knew that the decision to go long could not be taken lightly and would have major implications for the firm, the firm's overall levels of risk and possibly the firm's survival. Goldman's board of directors and key board members had been monitoring the firm's subprime exposure and would likely want to be consulted regarding such a consequential decision.

A school teacher has decided to open a taqueria in a small, historic New England city. He works with a faculty/student team from the local business school to prepare his business plan, but cannot provide all the necessary information and is reluctant to listen to advice. The case ends with a go/no-go decision and determination of next steps to take.

This case focuses on whether Litehouse Foods should switch its signature creamy salad dressings from glass to plastic packaging. The central figure in the case is Doug Hawkins Jr., the company's Senior Business Development Manager (Marketing lead). The company, which is one of three major players nationally in the refrigerated salad dressing market, has been selling its dressings in glass jars for 50 years, and these glass jars are considered an important element in how consumers think about the Litehouse brand. Two of Litehouse Foods' competitors have recently switched to plastic, however, and this has helped them achieve a significant price advantage over Litehouse at retail. Switching to plastic jars would save Litehouse $1.5 million/year and allow it to narrow the price advantage opened up by competitors. Doug must develop a recommendation to the company's executive committee that considers the cost savings potential of plastic against the value of the glass packaging to the brand. Complicating this decision are the environmental implications of a switch from glass to plastic, both real and perceived, as well as how a change at this time would mesh with the company's recently launched growth strategy.

Prior to the turn of the century, North Carolina was the hub of prosperous furniture manufacturing. However, competition from global manufacturers, the rise of Internet retailers, and the turbulent U.S. economy created significant challenges and changes for the industry. Many U.S.-based firms exited the industry due to global competition and poor financial performance. Robert Drake, owner of North Carolina-based Southern Chair Company, recognized the need for a new Strategic Plan; a plan to guide his company both through and beyond the challenging times. He remained committed to the long-term health of his manufacturing firm and hoped that his company would not join the ranks of his former, now defunct, competitors. In this case, the reader steps into the shoes of Robert Drake to create a strategic plan for Southern Chair Company while considering trends in external environments, key components of the business, and Robert's personal goals for the company.

Technology Plus was a Virginia IT firm, servicing information technology systems for businesses and government. The firm had grown through acquisition, expanding its technology solution capabilities, areas of expertise, vendor relationships and client bases. In early 2010, the firm was at a crossroads - how far and how fast to expand, how to incorporate prior acquisitions into current operations, and how to obtain financing for continued high growth, whether organic (financed through current earnings), or through additional acquisitions. Decisions about the future of the firm were complicated because the three owners were unable to agree. CEO Ethan Brennan wanted to continue to grow the firm, but was hampered by the inability of his partners to agree on future financing. Founder Gary Hesse was unwilling to put his personal assets at greater risk and vetoed any risky expansions that might require additional collateral. Ethan found his position frustrating enough to consider bankruptcy, selling his portion of the firm, or selling the entire firm.

It was February 2009, and Nick Hughes, head of Global Payment Solutions at Vodafone, contemplated his notes as he waited to enter the company's Executive Meeting at its headquarters in Newbury, amid the Berkshire countryside outside London. M-PESA (M for mobile, Pesa meaning 'money' in Swahili), Vodafone's mobile money payments service- had grown exponentially the previous two years; far beyond he or anyone else had imagined. What had begun as a corporate social responsibility project was now a much heralded story of financial innovation, offering financial services to millions of 'unbanked' customers. Safaricom, Vodafone's Kenyan affiliate, planned to increase the range of services developing beyond payments into other financial products, while the M-Pesa service had been rolled out to Tanzania and Afghanistan, where it was gaining momentum. Vodafone had multiple options as to what to do next with M-PESA. They could further tap the three country markets in which they were currently offering the service, for example by creating new services or expanding their customer base within these markets. Or they could develop new markets, by launching the core M-PESA service in other countries. The success in Kenya suggested that further roll-outs were attractive but where? Vodafone's existing business footprint was expanding but was not extensive and focused mainly on Europe rather than in developing countries. Regulation was a stumbling block in some markets; India being one example where regulators had ruled that only licensed banks could issue 'electronic money'. Some Vodafone executives were suggesting that the services could be introduced in Europe, Vodafone's home region, where it had a direct customer base of over 100 million existing customers. This, though, would fundamentally change the nature of the service from one targeting the unbanked. Alternatively, as a non-core business stream, Vodafone could spin off the service.