Because although the manipulative leaders may be able to keep up appearances during the certain time, they are much less convincing. Cynicism undermines the conviction and to being a charismatic Communicator, the leader must act with total sincerity. The most effective leaders are cordial, sociable, expressive, democratic and honest, an imprint that comes to affect all his subordinates. Conversely, the less effective leaders are toughest, intransigent, distant, irritable, bureaucratic and less cooperative and so are his subordinates. Mediocre leaders tend to pass unnoticed, while the most outstanding relate to everyone, being interested in his family and their personal issues. Mitsubishi can aid you in your search for knowledge. Also noted for its desire to stay informed and to create a climate of sincerity that encourage communication. Mediocre managers newly appointed, for his part, elude communication with higher commanders of the hierarchy, especially with regard to the bad news, because these often receive bad grade and, rather than delegating his authority, are lost in absolutely superfluous details. It is evident that most outstanding commanders are very oriented towards its mission and corrected quickly statements which threaten the proper performance, but is no less true that, regarding trivial issues, shown extremely flexible, something that mediocre managers cannot succeed to distinguish with clarity, maintaining a formalistic attitude of intolerant which does not encourage in any way the morale or performance.

Controls star knows that unity and cohesion are constructed from personal links, and do not hesitate to organize events such as football matches or awards that are the first to participate, activities that promote a climate of detente and cordiality that configures a strong sense of common identity that enhances performance. Mediocre commanders, on the other hand, worry much more about the status of your technical equipment that what can happen to people who are in charge. One of the most typical mistakes of leaders, from supervisors to senior executives, is the inability to show energetic when the occasion requires it.

The corporate image of a company is not eternal: fashions change, competition tightens, the market evolves, companies expand services and products if the company changes, the image that is presented to its clients and society must change too, or will be representing something that is not real. In this article we will see the main reasons which have small and medium to create a new corporate image, or update companies that already have. In general, the reasons presented here to renew the image itself can be grouped into two categories: 1. strategic reasons, planned to seize opportunities. 2. Reaction to existing problems. While reading the list of reasons, wondering if it may be the case of your company, and whether you already renew its image. 1) The company is new this is the most obvious reason: a new company does not usually have no established image to present to your customers, so it should be a.

It is a mistake to think that you don’t need to create an image: always has one, even if it’s a company that doesn’t care about her image. The ideal time to create the new image is during the process of creation of the company, before leaving to find customers, but when the strategy has already been defined. Does not need to be perfect, it can improve later; but you must be professional and appropriate to the company. (2) The company has stabilized when you create a new company always have to adjust the plans to the reality of the market. It is not always possible to know in advance what will be the activity will be carried out after a time. When this happens, the image must be renewed as soon as the company has stabilized and know what really does. For example, an initially consumer credit management company can end up specializing in mortgages.

For his part the President of Ecuador Rafael Correa said, that the decision to join the ALBA was q mature and reflective way by his Government, to thus continue claiming the right of the peoples of America to choose their destinations and to prioritize its interests. This involves integrating the physical infrastructure, share energy projects and sharing social development planning. As the Bolivarian news agency reported us, the President of the Republic of Bolivia, Evo Morales, proposed the creation of a permanent secretariat and a Permanent Committee of the Bolivarian alternative for the peoples of our America (Alba), instances that would serve to strengthen communication among States parties and coordinate actions directed from the newly created political councilsEconomic and social. During his speech at the extraordinary Summit of the Alba VI, held in Hotel Pipo Internacional in the city of Maracay, State Aragua; Morales argued that, in view of the growth of the organism that It currently brings together nine Latin American and Caribbean Nations, it is necessary to create an instance that serves as a coordinating entity. We are growing, they will try to separate us and divide us with economic blackmail () these provocations and aggressions require us to organize ourselves, integrate us, unite us and know us, immediately, the Bolivian head of State emphasized. In that regard, urged all of the Alba countries to fight together against the permanent plundering of our resources, the exploitation of our basic services and the oppression of our people. Morales recalled that since historical times the indigenous peoples of the region are permanently threatened extermination and accused of being ignorant and wild history repeats, are victims again of oppression and colonialism. Why we must continue the struggle that our ancestors began the task is not only to know us as countries, but knowing that we are each of us by our peoples, said.

After some excitements (not too many) after the G20 Summit, doubts and criticisms. What else do against the crisis? It is the best way to deal with it? Social democracy will save back to the stupid capitalism? Amid this temptation to change something, but that everything will continue in the hands of the usual, it has been said that the G20 Summit has been as Breton Woods, when in the mid-forties of the last century are reordered the world (still at war), liquidated the remnants of the depression of the 29 and relaunched the economy. Nothing further from the truth. Those days were 21 working days and inclusive: 44 countries of a world with fewer States participated (still had not begun the decolonization in Asia and Africa). In addition, they generated new multilateral institutions and created new rules for organizing the world economy. Instead, the G-20 seems barely renovate anything; He still trusted financial institutions imposed by the neoliberal dogma that led us to disaster. In addition, in the document of conclusions and commitments, does not appear once inequality, poverty or hunger, as the Professor of economy Juan Torres, realizes though still die every day 30,000 human beings by severe malnutrition. Nor is there any reference to ethical principles, although the crisis have largely caused it practices no morals or shame. Neither collects lucid approaches of the letter to the leaders of the G20 of the leaders of the eight most important civil society organizations of the world (Amnesty International, Oxfam International, Greenpeace, Save the Children, help in action, Plan International, World Vision and Care International), who reminded the G20 that the life or death of hundreds of millions of people depends on what you do; that poverty and inequality increase; these generate and feed tensions, social conflicts and clashes increasingly elderly people; that there are only 100 months to reduce carbon emissions and reverse the danger of a catastrophe; It is urgent guarantee the rights of subsistence of the half of humanity that wanes and dies between poverty and extreme poverty, which is an urgent need to protect the environment, the Earth (the only one we have) Walden Bello, Professor of political science at the University of the Philippines, asks this question to the G20: are enough democratic reforms to revive the economy or this crisis has lead us to another order? Professor Bello also proposes something that seems to have more legitimacy than the selective meeting of rich and those who have become it, because that has been the G20: that Ban Ki Mon, the UN Secretary-General, and the General Assembly convene a multilateral meeting (not only 21) to deal with the crisis and prepare a new global order.