As quatro possíveis Europas após o Brexit

The four possible Europes after Brexit

Europe suffers from abysmal growth, which fuels the rising Euroscepticism fire and increases the risk of more exits.

Brexit’s impact on business will depend on which Europe emerges in the aftermath, writes Ilaria Maselli.Ilaria Maselli is a senior economist for Europe at The Conference Board, a global, independent business membership and research association.

On 17 January, Prime Minister May laid out her vision for a “truly global Britain” in the wake of Brexit. Despite the shock of the Brexit Referendum, other European leaders have done little to address the spreading anti-globalization and anti-migration sentiments. As an example of what could unfold, look to the upcoming Dutch, French, Czech, and German elections. Over the next few months, what road integration takes could go a long way in determining Europe’s growth rate and the sources fueling it.

Along with the political and policy outcomes here at home, the dynamism of Europe heavily depends on demand coming from abroad. Global growth provides tremendous oxygen to Europe’s economy, especially the eurozone, which exports more than it imports. According to our research at The Conference Board, head or tailwinds from abroad, plus internal reforms to Europe, could lay the foundation for four alternative Europes to start taking shape.

Sem padrões de gestão a sua empresa não sabe o que está a fazer

Without Management Standards Your Company Doesn't Know What It's Doing

Businesses need a concrete set of expectations to which every manager is held accountable.

There’s an old saying in business: If you can’t measure it, you can’t improve it. When it comes to improving the effectiveness of an organization’s managers, many companies struggle to distinguish the good, the bad and the ugly. After all, how do you objectively assess a manager’s ability to "get to know their people" or "have difficult conversations?" These are big concepts that don’t lend themselves to convenient metrics, but they’re essential to effective management.

A universal and urgent challenge.

It doesn’t matter how big or small your organization is, what industry you’re in or at what stage of growth. The difficulty of assessing manager competence is universal. According to recent data from Wakefield Research and Grovo, 84 percent of middle managers believe their company needs a better way to evaluate manager ability.

Compensar os "perdedores" da globalização

Trade raises productivity but may hurt some unless policies redistribute the benefits

As the global economy struggles with slow growth, political support for freer international trade has weakened, most notably in advanced economies and especially in the United States. While some resistance to freer trade is nothing new, it never stopped the postwar trade liberalization process, which delivered growth in advanced economies and promoted convergence of per capita incomes throughout a significant portion of the developing world.

Opposition to trade remains a minority view—most people gain from trade, but it seems to have many more vocal enemies these days.

Trade enables a country to use its resources more efficiently. But the gains from that greater efficiency may be divided unevenly among a country’s citizens, so that some of them lose out. The result can be greater income inequality and disrupted lives.

Over the past quarter century, the global economy has seen a seismic transformation thanks to increased trade and technological and political changes. While there is much progress to cheer at the global level, most governments have not ensured that gains from economic growth—including those due to trade—are broadly shared. In some places, tepid and declining overall income growth has brought frustrations to a boil.

Trade’s benefits have always been unequally shared, and maybe more so in recent years. But its gains are all the more important in today’s low-growth environment. Countries must protect and expand these gains through policies that redistribute them more equitably. That will also make economies more resilient to a range of market forces, beyond those connected with globalization.

E assim chegou a morte da globalização

Y así llegó la muerte de la globalización

Os especialistas alertam: recordaremos 2016 como o ano em que arrancou a "desglobalização". As causas: o Brexit e o triunfo de Donald Trump, que ameaça fechar as fronteiras. Existe marcha atrás? O maior assessor político de Donald Trump, Steven Bannon, declarou que a chegada do novo presidente à Casa Branca «é um movimento tão excitante como os anos 30». Ou seja: projetos industriais financiados com um endividamento massivo do Estado. É um fecho ao comércio, à emigração e ao investimento internacional. Nem o capital nem o trabalho, que são os dois fatores de produção da economia, se poderão mover de um país para outro: o pilar da globalização. (...) Por: Pablo Pardo Fonte: El Mundo

Los expertos alertan: recordaremos 2016 como el año en que arrancó la "desglobalización".

Las causas: el Brexit y el triunfo de Donald Trump, que amenaza con cerrar las fronteras. ¿Tiene marcha atrás?
Pablo Pardo

La globalización empezó oficialmente en mayo de 1983, cuando la revista Harvard Business Review publicaba un artículo de su director, Theodore Levitt, titulado La Globalización de los Mercados. Hacía más dos décadas que se había generalizado el uso de ese término en Ciencias Sociales. Pero, con ese artículo, se convirtió en un cliché.

Ahora, a falta de un mes para que Donald Trump se mude a la Casa Blanca y de 100 días para que Gran Bretaña inicie las negociaciones para salir de la UE, ¿se está acabando la globalización? El máximo asesor político de Donald Trump, Steven Bannon, ha declarado que la llegada del nuevo presidente a la Casa Blanca «es un movimiento tan excitante como los años 30». O sea: proyectos industriales financiados con un endeudamiento masivo del Estado. Es un cierre al comercio, a la emigración y a la inversión internacional. Ni el capital ni el trabajo, que son los dos factores de producción de la economía, se podrán mover de un país a otro: el pilar de la globalización.

Porque é que saber gerir o tempo está a arruinar-nos a vida?

Porque é que saber gerir o tempo está a arruinar-nos a vida?

Há uma semana entrou em vigor um França uma lei que dá aos trabalhadores o “direito a desligar” o email depois do horário de trabalho. Há anos que os gurus da eficiência e produtividade nos querem ensinar a trabalhar melhor (leia-se, mais e em menos tempo).
OLIVER BURKEMAN

15 de Janeiro de 2017, 7:02 in Público 

A sempiterna demanda do ser humano por uma vida plena – face ao dado inevitável que é a morte – entrou numa nova etapa numa segunda-feira do Verão de 2007. No campus da Google em Silicon Valley, a equipa estava prestes a ouvir a palestra de Merlin Mann, um autor de best-sellers e assumido nerd. Para estes utilizadores da Google, o correio electrónico era o maior problema que se lhes deparava no seu quotidiano profissional – uma praga da era digital que lhes tomava conta dos dias e os privava de tempo para se dedicarem a outras tarefas, quiçá para terem uma vida. Mann, a estrela em ascensão do movimento da “produtividade individual”, parecia ter a resposta.

“Inbox zero”, como Mann chamou ao seu sistema, assenta numa ideia simples: todos nós lidamos mal com o email. Passamos a vida a consultar cada mensagem que entra, e a ideia de que teremos de responder acaba por nos deixar um bocadinho stressados. Mas não o fazemos de imediato, logo, os emails acumulam-se e, aí sim, entramos em stress. No dia da palestra, Mann tinha a seguinte proposta para a sua audiência: de cada vez que consultamos a caixa de correio, deveríamos logo reduzi-la a zero, limpá-la. Por passos: verificamos o que cada email exige de nós – uma resposta imediata; guardar o ficheiro para resposta posterior; atirá-lo para o caixote do lixo. Depois, agimos em conformidade. E repetimos até não termos mais nenhum email. Finda a tarefa, fechamos o Inbox e vamos à nossa vida.

Tendências tecnológicas de 2017 Um grande banco vai cair

2017 tech trends: 'A major bank will fail'

BBC By Matthew WallTechnology of Business editor

Image copyrightTHINKSTOCK

Image captionCould a bank go under following a major hacking theft in 2017?

So what are the big technology trends to watch out for in 2017?The pace of change is accelerating at a dizzying rate, with profound implications for the way we work, play and communicate.

Cybersecurity

Cybersecurity will undoubtedly be the dominant theme of 2017, as all tech innovations could be undermined by data thefts, fraud and cyber propaganda.

Forget Kim Kardashian, it's hacking that could break the internet - and much more besides.

As accusations of Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election continue to reverberate around the world, hackers - whether private or state-sponsored - would seem to be getting the upper hand.

Prof Richard Benham, chairman of the National Cyber Management Centre, gives a dire warning: "A major bank will fail as a result of a cyber-attack in 2017 leading to a loss of confidence and a run on that bank."

O que impulsionará a incerteza política em 2017?

What will drive political uncertainty in 2017?

2017 promises to be another challenging year for Europe's liberal democracies. Many EU member states are facing elections. But it may be cultural backlash rather than economics that will drive populist vote.

BRUEGEL BY: GUNTRAM B. WOLFF DATE: JANUARY 3, 2017

As 2016 draws to a close, a sense of unease is gripping many commentators who look ahead. This year brought victories for Brexit and Donald Trump. The outcome of both votes was largely unexpected. What will 2017 bring? The EU is facing three, or even four, elections in major member states. The Netherlands, France, Germany and possibly also Italy will go to the polls. The results of all four elections are far from certain at this stage. Indeed, voting behaviour seems to have become difficult to predict.

Economic and sociological research points to a number of different factors provoking these recent electoral upsets. The debate is broadly about whether it is economic issues such as income inequality, cultural issues such as a rejection of equal rights for women, minorities and gay people, or factors relating to citizens’ perceived loss of control over their destiny that has driven people to support populist candidates and causes.