In the elegant words of Gary Hamel, academic and consultant:

"Those who live by the sword will be shot by those who don’t".

That is the key message in his newest book "Leading the Revolution" which calls for companies to introduce processes to make them perpetual innovators. The risk is to ensure that those new processes have substance and depth rather than appearing to be new for the sake of it – and then failing to produce new approaches. We have seen such failures in the dot.com sector. The wider risk is the tension that constant innovation creates for many people in the workplace when they also want some stability – see the comment below about stress at work.

Recent US research on innovation tried to identify the characteristics of those who innovate – asking questions, listening, coming with alternatives, and selling new ideas too. And the barriers – corporate bureaucracy (inevitably), following HR procedures (also inevitably) and having to get permission. The adage about it being better to beg forgiveness rather than seek permission still holds true! But that can be a risky strategy.

See "Radical Innovation: How Mature Companies Can Outsmart Upstarts" by Leifer, McDermott, and others and published by the HBR.

The Industrial Society has recently published a survey setting out the findings of a survey on health issues in the workplace. Most respondents identified stress as the fastest growing issue in the workplace but few monitored stress and even fewer had policies seeking to help people deal with it.

Is stress a personal responsibility or do organisations accept their own responsibility in creating the conditions that lead to stress? An awful warning is the special needs teacher awarded £250000 for the stress caused by the job and lack of support she was perceived to have got from her employer. The big lesson seems to be that employers need to be seen to be giving positive support to their staff – and that sounds the right message anyway in all circumstances, not just those leading to stress problems.

"As we move into an environment where investors expect bottom-line profitability, there will be influences that will cause internet companies to seem more and more like ordinary companies".

The words of the Head of HR at DoubleClick, a New York advertising company, reported in the FT recently.

It is a problem already seen in the UK with staff call centre reacting against their work environments and the strong control mechanisms with high labour turnover rates and by joining trade unions.

And a research study by London Business School and Korn/Ferry International reported:

"Our study explodes the general consensus that dotcoms offer a better quality of life and a more fun environment. The hours worked are longer, the travel is more onerous and time at home is limited. The new economy company increasingly mirrors the old, but without a supportive structure."

And the comment of the DoubleClick HR Head will echo the thought in many HR minds:

"The challenge for new economy companies is: how do you build an infrastructure that operates in a flexible way".

That challenge seems to apply to all companies not just those in eBusiness. Some old companies have gone quite a way to meet it, usually because they face competitive pressures that has made them change their old ways of working. Just being a dotcoms company with failing share options is not enough. We still need to work on the "old" issues of getting motivation and people management right – or as right as we can get them.