http://talentdevelop.com/articles/OTCIU.html
Openness to
conflicting ideas urged
By Richard Evans (Financial Times), Los Angeles Times
The modern world is an ever-changing mass of contradictions. Reconciling them is fundamental to success, whether in business or in life.
As F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote: "The ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function is the sign of a first-rate intelligence."
F•斯科特•菲茨杰拉德(F. Scott Fitzgerald)曾表示，一流智慧的標誌是，頭腦中能夠允許互相矛盾的想法同時存在，而且依然能夠正常地行為處事。
His
comment is cited by Roger Martin, author of "The
Opposable Mind: How Successful Leaders Win Through Integrative Thinking."
Unfortunately,
most business people follow a this-or-that, either-or
approach that oversimplifies the complexities of the real world.
What
they require instead, Martin argues, is to learn new "integrative"
thought processes that would allow them to embrace contradictions and
attain more nuanced decisions and business strategies.
Martin is dean of the University of Toronto's Rotman School of Management and a former director of Monitor Co., a consulting firm.
Martin is dean of the University of Toronto's Rotman School of Management and a former director of Monitor Co., a consulting firm.
In
this book, he draws on discussions with about 50 global leaders --
including Four Seasons hotel mogul Isadore Sharp, Procter &
Gamble's Chief Executive A.G. Lafley and billionaire software
entrepreneur Bob Young -- to demonstrate that their success is based on
an ability to reconcile contradictions and integrate profoundly
differing views.
Take Sharp, creator of one of the most respected and luxurious hotel brands. When he started, the industry was dominated by two business models: large hotels whose economies of scale allowed them to provide business travelers with extra services, and small places that offered intimacy but few services.
Hotel business logic said you could not offer 24-hour secretarial help, fancy communications and stylish dining, entertainment and meeting facilities unless you had revenue from at least 1,000 rooms.
But Sharp realized that many business travelers wanted both intimacy and service, and would pay for them. He fused elements of two contradictory business models to create a new strategy.
Such are the powers of integrative thinking. "The first difference between integrative thinkers and conventional thinkers is that integrative thinkers take a broader view of what is salient," Martin writes.
Lafley's leadership of Procter & Gamble offers another example of taking a creative mental leap by using "the opposable mind."
Take Sharp, creator of one of the most respected and luxurious hotel brands. When he started, the industry was dominated by two business models: large hotels whose economies of scale allowed them to provide business travelers with extra services, and small places that offered intimacy but few services.
Hotel business logic said you could not offer 24-hour secretarial help, fancy communications and stylish dining, entertainment and meeting facilities unless you had revenue from at least 1,000 rooms.
But Sharp realized that many business travelers wanted both intimacy and service, and would pay for them. He fused elements of two contradictory business models to create a new strategy.
Such are the powers of integrative thinking. "The first difference between integrative thinkers and conventional thinkers is that integrative thinkers take a broader view of what is salient," Martin writes.
Lafley's leadership of Procter & Gamble offers another example of taking a creative mental leap by using "the opposable mind."
When
Lafley took the helm of the troubled consumer products group in 2000,
it was losing market share to cheaper generic and store brands, profit
was falling and it had just issued two consecutive quarterly profit
warnings.
Senior management was split into two camps: those who wanted to slash costs and compete on price, and those who wanted to pump money into new innovative products.
Seemingly forced to choose between price and quality, Lafley improved innovation by outsourcing half of all development to smaller companies and laboratories while cutting the cost of centralized research and development.
"We weren't going to win if it was an 'or,' " he told the author. "Everybody can do 'or,' everybody can do trade-offs. But you're not going to win if you're in a trade-off game."
A refusal to compromise or to accept mediocrity is a sign of an integrative thinker and leader. This also accounts for the success of Young, the billionaire entrepreneur who turned a tiny company called Red Hat into the leading purveyor of open-source Linux software.
Young succeeded, where others said it was not possible, by improving product, service and consulting quality so much that large organizations decided it was worth entrusting their information technology operations to Linux freeware instead of to "safe" but more expensive suppliers such as Microsoft and Oracle.
What distinguishes successful, fast-adapting leaders is an idiosyncratic "stance," or set of ideas, that drives their vision of the business.
Senior management was split into two camps: those who wanted to slash costs and compete on price, and those who wanted to pump money into new innovative products.
Seemingly forced to choose between price and quality, Lafley improved innovation by outsourcing half of all development to smaller companies and laboratories while cutting the cost of centralized research and development.
"We weren't going to win if it was an 'or,' " he told the author. "Everybody can do 'or,' everybody can do trade-offs. But you're not going to win if you're in a trade-off game."
A refusal to compromise or to accept mediocrity is a sign of an integrative thinker and leader. This also accounts for the success of Young, the billionaire entrepreneur who turned a tiny company called Red Hat into the leading purveyor of open-source Linux software.
Young succeeded, where others said it was not possible, by improving product, service and consulting quality so much that large organizations decided it was worth entrusting their information technology operations to Linux freeware instead of to "safe" but more expensive suppliers such as Microsoft and Oracle.
What distinguishes successful, fast-adapting leaders is an idiosyncratic "stance," or set of ideas, that drives their vision of the business.
For
Lafley it was the realization that he was good at
synthesizing information from his experts and comfortable with taking
risks.
Young describes his stance thus: "Wait, reserve judgment and build data over time. I learned early on not to do anything I didn't understand."
Less successful in the book is where Martin attempts, possibly because of his business school background, to teach "generative reasoning" or to provide readers with specific conceptual tools and a knowledge system for integrative thinking.
Even without such instruction, the book's case studies are compelling enough, and the thesis that fresh thought processes are required to deal with the world's contradictions and complexities rings true.
Richard Evans is a contributor to the Financial Times of London, in which this review first appeared.
Article from the Los Angeles Times February 10, 2008
Young describes his stance thus: "Wait, reserve judgment and build data over time. I learned early on not to do anything I didn't understand."
Less successful in the book is where Martin attempts, possibly because of his business school background, to teach "generative reasoning" or to provide readers with specific conceptual tools and a knowledge system for integrative thinking.
Even without such instruction, the book's case studies are compelling enough, and the thesis that fresh thought processes are required to deal with the world's contradictions and complexities rings true.
Richard Evans is a contributor to the Financial Times of London, in which this review first appeared.
Article from the Los Angeles Times February 10, 2008
沒有留言:
張貼留言