Georgeselmer.com Summary

Georgeselmer.com was created 10 years ago. Server is located in United States, IP address 162.241.225.27.

Website Info

Creation date	2014-11-29
Expiration date	2021-11-29
Registrar	FastDomain Inc.
Name servers	ns1.bluehost.com ns2.bluehost.com
IP address	162.241.225.27
Server located	United States
Host name	box5231.bluehost.com

Alexa Traffic Ranks

Global Rank	n/a
Delta (90 Days)	n/a
Most Popular In Country	n/a
Country Rank	n/a

Whois info

Domain Name: GEORGESELMER.COM
Registry Domain ID: 1887847222_DOMAIN_COM-VRSN
Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.bluehost.com
Registrar URL: http://www.bluehost.com/
Updated Date: 2020-11-15T10:25:31Z
Creation Date: 2014-11-29T19:25:34Z
Registrar Registration Expiration Date: 2021-11-29T19:25:34Z
Registrar: FastDomain Inc.
Registrar IANA ID: 1154
Registrar Abuse Contact Email: support@bluehost.com
Registrar Abuse Contact Phone: +1.8017659400
Reseller: BlueHost.Com
Domain Status: clientTransferProhibited https://icann.org/epp#clientTransferProhibited
Registry Registrant ID: 
Registrant Name: DOMAIN PRIVACY SERVICE FBO REGISTRANT
Registrant Organization: THE ENDURANCE INTERNATIONAL GROUP, INC.
Registrant Street: 10 CORPORATE DR, STE 300  
Registrant City: BURLINGTON
Registrant State/Province: MASSACHUSETTS
Registrant Postal Code: 01803
Registrant Country: US
Registrant Phone: +1.8017659400
Registrant Phone Ext: 
Registrant Fax: 
Registrant Fax Ext: 
Registrant Email: WHOIS@BLUEHOST.COM
Registry Admin ID: 
Admin Name: DOMAIN PRIVACY SERVICE FBO REGISTRANT
Admin Organization: THE ENDURANCE INTERNATIONAL GROUP, INC.
Admin Street: 10 CORPORATE DR, STE 300  
Admin City: BURLINGTON
Admin State/Province: MASSACHUSETTS
Admin Postal Code: 01803
Admin Country: US
Admin Phone: +1.8017659400
Admin Phone Ext: 
Admin Fax: 
Admin Fax Ext: 
Admin Email: WHOIS@BLUEHOST.COM
Registry Tech ID: 
Tech Name: DOMAIN PRIVACY SERVICE FBO REGISTRANT
Tech Organization: THE ENDURANCE INTERNATIONAL GROUP, INC.
Tech Street: 10 CORPORATE DR, STE 300  
Tech City: BURLINGTON
Tech State/Province: MASSACHUSETTS
Tech Postal Code: 01803
Tech Country: US
Tech Phone: +1.8017659400
Tech Phone Ext: 
Tech Fax: 
Tech Fax Ext: 
Tech Email: WHOIS@BLUEHOST.COM
Name Server: NS1.BLUEHOST.COM
Name Server: NS2.BLUEHOST.COM
DNSSEC: unsigned
URL of the ICANN WHOIS Data Problem Reporting System: http://wdprs.internic.net/

DNS Records

Host	Type	TTL	Data
georgeselmer.com	A	14399	ip: 162.241.225.27
georgeselmer.com	MX	3600	pri: 5 target: alt1.aspmx.l.google.com
georgeselmer.com	MX	3600	pri: 1 target: aspmx.l.google.com
georgeselmer.com	MX	3600	pri: 10 target: alt3.aspmx.l.google.com
georgeselmer.com	MX	3600	pri: 10 target: alt4.aspmx.l.google.com
georgeselmer.com	MX	3600	pri: 5 target: alt2.aspmx.l.google.com
georgeselmer.com	NS	86400	target: ns2.bluehost.com
georgeselmer.com	NS	86400	target: ns1.bluehost.com
georgeselmer.com	SOA	86400	mname: ns1.bluehost.com rname: dnsadmin.box5231.bluehost.com serial: 2020041600 refresh: 86400 retry: 7200 expire: 3600000 minimum-ttl: 300
georgeselmer.com	TXT	14400	txt: google-site-verification=tWUNYwdMqPXt6Ja3vs6QhvsUfovRsPv2EpX2fDk9WdU
georgeselmer.com	TXT	14400	txt: v=spf1 a mx ptr include:bluehost.com ?all

HTTP Headers

Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 21:28:20 GMT
Server: Apache
Link: ; rel="https://api.w.org/"
Set-Cookie: wordpress_clef_state=vU7Fty1vkGCRH2rf2vQYxKVl; expires=Fri, 27-Nov-2020 21:28:21 GMT; Max-Age=86400; path=/; HttpOnly
Upgrade: h2,h2c
Vary: Accept-Encoding
Accept-Ranges: none
host-header: c2hhcmVkLmJsdWVob3N0LmNvbQ==
Keep-Alive: timeout=5, max=75
Transfer-Encoding: chunked
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Connection: Close
Proxy-Connection: Close
x-encoded-content-encoding: gzip

Recently updated domains

Meta Tags

Title	George Selmer \| Winning work, increasing impact
Description	Some years ago, I was running large scale employability services in the North West of England. There were three 'prime' contractors in the same area and, we decided, it might be a good idea to get around the table and talk about how we might work together. If we collaborated, we reasoned, we might all get better results - this would be good for us, good for our shareholders, good for job seekers and good for tax payers. We tentatively started to talk about how we might share job vacancies that we were unable to fill, so that our employers wouldn't get let down, a broader pool of job seekers would get the benefit of the vacancy and we would all have a better chance of hitting (if not exceeding) our targets. Unfortunately, the tone was set from the beginning when at the outset of our first meeting a senior manager from one of our competitors told us straight: 'I'm looking forward to this, we are going to get access to all of your employers, steal all of your relationships and then we can destroy you.' It wasn't quite the spirit envisaged. I'm sure I'm not the only one with a similar anecdote. It comes to mind because there is, again, a lot of talk at the moment about the importance of collaboration in the employability sector. We've tried competition, the argument goes, and it's not worked. If everyone worked together, rather than trying to beat each other, we'd get better results. The counter-argument goes something like this. We've tried competition and it has worked. The reason that it's not worked as well as we wanted is that we've not has much unbridled competition as we should have had. If we just stopped trying to get organisations to be nice to each and work together and let them focus on beating each other, we'd get better results. As always, what we need is a balance between the two. We need to properly understand what competition means (and we don't really need to invent any silly new words, like 'coopetition'!) A lot of the current debate is built on a misunderstanding of the nature of market competition and in ignorance of a weight of evidence that shows how strategic co-operation with your competitors creates a rising tide that lifts all boats. The root meaning of the word 'competition' means 'to strive together' - in the sense of alongside each other as well as against each other. As so often, the ancient world knew much better than we did how the world worked. You can't compete without your competitors. Just like cyclists in the peloton, there are times when it's best for the whole pack to work together - and times when we need to push for the 'win'. Simple Game Theory (for example, the Prisoner's Dilemma or the Battle of the ***es) shows that co-operation can result in all parties being better off - even though the gains from co-operation can be unequal. What stops 'players' from co-operating is the potential inequality of the 'win-win' outcome - even though it puts them into a potential 'win-lose' scenario that results in them being worse off. The fact that people (and thus organisations) aren't always rational, but emotional animals is what makes behavioural economics the inexact science that it is. Smart organisations get this. They compete - hard - but are prepared, at strategic moments and on strategic grounds to collaborate with their competitors in order to mutually benefit both parties. This is why, for example, in 2019, Apple and Samsung announced an 'unthinkable' deal to offer Apple content on Samsung TVs (just weeks after Apple announced a similar deal with Amazon). The challenge is that this is primarily about culture and, as my opening anecdote illustrates, the employability sector hasn't always had a particularly strong collaborative culture. Culture stems from leadership and this also raises a difficult question about the general state of leadership within the sector. Government are keen to promote or incentivise collaboration in the employability sector, because they've decided it's a good thing. The challenge is that culture change is hard. You can't bring it about easily through regulation, requirement or programme design. But, government does have other, 'soft' policy levers at its disposal - such as education and training - and it could do much more with those. The evidence shows that collaborative activities among companies across a range of sectors has a net impact on innovation, which has a net impact on business performance. Businesses that collaborate perform better over the medium and long term than those that don't (conversely, those that don't collaborate may do better in the short-term, but less well over the long-haul). In his book, Grow the Pie, Alex Edmans talks about two kinds of mentality within business - pie-splitting or pie-growing. Pie-splitters think that the 'pie' is fixed in size and that the only way that they (or their organisation) can gain is by reducing others' share. But Edmans shows clearly that markets don't work in this way and that the 'pie-growing' mentality (i.e. one that seeks to deliver impact and return to all stakeholders rather than simply shareholders) isn't just 'doing good' it is evidentially 'good business'. Too often, players see the employability market as a pie of fixed-size and pursue pie-splitting courses of action. But, it's obvious that there are not a fixed amount of job seekers, a fixed amount of employers or a fixed amount of vacancies (over time) and they never run out. Numbers may rise and fall over economic cycles, but they never go away. In addition, actions taken in and around the market can increase the supply of all of these flows and hence grow the size of the pie. There isn't a fixed amount of programme money – government doesn't have a fixed budget and, were the sector to perform at a level that significantly demonstrates its benefit (which I don't think it has yet managed) then government would be more likely to invest more in the market, hence growing the pie. If we think of the pie as fixed then we start to cut things away from various stakeholders – so, for example, we reduce the salary we pay our staff, which impacts on the quality of the service we deliver to our job seekers, which reduces the amount of money we save the tax payer, which reduces the amount of income we generate, which in turn (once we have extracted profits) reduces the amount that we have available to invest in paying our staff (or, conversely, reduces the amount we can extract in profits for reinvestment in other things, including innovation and other socially and economically useful activity). If we could start to see that the pie is expandable – i.e. that our organisations creates value through creating value for the whole stakeholder chain and society at large, then we would be in a different space. I'm not going to thrash out all of the areas that organisations in the employability sector should collaborate on here, but let's take one, simple example. It's still obvious that, if we shared unfilled job vacancies between providers then, overall, over time the whole market would gain. More people would be placed into more vacancies and more employers would have more vacancies filled. Providers would win some, lose some and overall everyone would be better off (though some may benefit more than others, of course). The credibility of the sector would be higher and more employers would give providers more vacancies, because they would trust them to fulfil their needs. Government would invest in more services, because they were convinced of the efficacy of their investment. Employability sector leaders need to start to think counter-intuitively – and realise that they might be in a better position being in the middle (or even at the bottom) of a market that was performing 25 percent better overall, than 5 percent clear of a market that was way short of fulfilling its potential. Apart from the fact that this would create a more diverse and healthy market place, fully justifying the investment made and making the case for more in the future, it will mean many, many more people helped back into sustainable work, more businesses growing in the economy because they can access the labour they need more effectively, a much lower welfare bill and all of the attendant benefits to our communities that come with prosperity and economic resilience. And that's what we do this for, isn't it?
Keywords	cooperation,employability,leadership,purpose,joint venture,bidding,business development,lessons,public services,apprenticeships,levy,markets,politics,tools,people,team,investment,wow services,money,psr,corporate culture,big data,change,consultancy,market intelligence,strategy,growth,how to,insights as a service,performance,crm,business growth,growth strategy

Similar Websites

kevintaylor.me

magdalenabibik.com

kccupp.com

jmonen.com

Websites to explore

stencil.com

topsolar.com

nendeb-biz.jp

saintlucy.net

ombl.org

ga-com.nl

glitternote.wordpress.com

fanarasrestaurant.com

ubcsigs.com

davemacdonaldlcsw.com