<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Critical Growth Path</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.strategycentral.org/2007/05/the-critical-growth-path.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.strategycentral.org/2007/05/the-critical-growth-path.html</link>
	<description>Where Strategy and Purpose Collide</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Aug 2011 19:07:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Howell</title>
		<link>http://www.strategycentral.org/2007/05/the-critical-growth-path.html/comment-page-1#comment-241</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Howell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2007 13:17:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gettingtothere.com/strategycentral/2007/05/the-critical-growth-path.html#comment-241</guid>
		<description>Hmmmm.  It may be semantics, but what I mean by a &quot;zero sum&quot; game is that you can only spend the resource on one thing.  Yes, in the case of people you have a lifetime to invest.  But at any moment in your organization&#039;s existence and effort, that one person&#039;s talent can only be spent one time.  In other words, they have a finite capacity.  When they&#039;re sitting in the wrong seat on your bus (their choice or yours) and spending their finite capacity on a project that isn&#039;t the one that leads to the critical growth path...well, it&#039;s a zero sum game.  Not that you can&#039;t recruit and develop other players, but that every one of the players you do recruit has a kind of capacity that must be invested in the right effort for maximum return.
Does that make more sense?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmmmm.  It may be semantics, but what I mean by a &#8220;zero sum&#8221; game is that you can only spend the resource on one thing.  Yes, in the case of people you have a lifetime to invest.  But at any moment in your organization&#8217;s existence and effort, that one person&#8217;s talent can only be spent one time.  In other words, they have a finite capacity.  When they&#8217;re sitting in the wrong seat on your bus (their choice or yours) and spending their finite capacity on a project that isn&#8217;t the one that leads to the critical growth path&#8230;well, it&#8217;s a zero sum game.  Not that you can&#8217;t recruit and develop other players, but that every one of the players you do recruit has a kind of capacity that must be invested in the right effort for maximum return.<br />
Does that make more sense?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: david</title>
		<link>http://www.strategycentral.org/2007/05/the-critical-growth-path.html/comment-page-1#comment-240</link>
		<dc:creator>david</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2007 12:19:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gettingtothere.com/strategycentral/2007/05/the-critical-growth-path.html#comment-240</guid>
		<description>is it really a &quot;zero sum game&quot;?  is there really even such a thing?
particularly when we&#039;re dealing with people, i think we always have the potential to produce resources by investing in people for growth and multiplication...
i don&#039;t disagree that &quot;leadership&quot; is difficult, but i wonder if the &quot;zero sum&quot; assumption holds us back sometimes?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>is it really a &#8220;zero sum game&#8221;?  is there really even such a thing?<br />
particularly when we&#8217;re dealing with people, i think we always have the potential to produce resources by investing in people for growth and multiplication&#8230;<br />
i don&#8217;t disagree that &#8220;leadership&#8221; is difficult, but i wonder if the &#8220;zero sum&#8221; assumption holds us back sometimes?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

