大公司的創(chuàng)新困境
????研究員麥斯維爾?維塞爾在《哈佛商業(yè)評(píng)論》(Harvard Business Review)的博客上發(fā)表了一篇大作,文中提出了一個(gè)大公司應(yīng)該如何創(chuàng)新的框架。該文深入詳實(shí)、見解深刻,但行文到最后也同樣讓人頗感沮喪。 ????作為“增長與創(chuàng)新論壇”(Forum for Growth & Innovation)的資深會(huì)員,維塞爾在這篇共有三部分的大作中描述了一個(gè)特有的商業(yè)世界。這個(gè)世界中充斥著平庸不堪、只知道削減成本的經(jīng)理人。他們對(duì)流程極度關(guān)注,總是對(duì)即將發(fā)布的財(cái)務(wù)季報(bào)憂心忡忡,還對(duì)公司的股東怕得要命。作者其實(shí)并沒有挑明這一點(diǎn),實(shí)際上他對(duì)這類經(jīng)理人、乃至這類對(duì)創(chuàng)新毫無興趣的公司深感同情。文中寫道:“經(jīng)驗(yàn)老到的經(jīng)理人總能讓自己的員工乖乖地離開創(chuàng)新探索的藝術(shù)之道,轉(zhuǎn)而埋頭追求如何實(shí)現(xiàn)交付的科學(xué)之路。他們會(huì)教員工如何提高效率,充分利用好現(xiàn)有資產(chǎn)和分銷渠道,同時(shí)對(duì)公司最優(yōu)質(zhì)的客戶言聽計(jì)從(同時(shí)百般取悅)?!?/p> ????或許,更切中要害的觀點(diǎn)是:“這種做法和政策確保了公司高管能向華爾街交出有意義的收入報(bào)表,同時(shí)安撫股東?!?/p> ????比利,你長大了想干什么?“噢,天哪,我想擺平股東!” ????維塞爾深知,很多這類經(jīng)理人(不過顯然他們不都是這樣)此生寧可選擇別的事業(yè)。而且在大多數(shù)情況下,他們選擇的余地很小。他還說,就算是最穩(wěn)定的行業(yè)中、最古板的公司,其大多數(shù)也必須謀求增長,同時(shí)適應(yīng)不斷變化的市場。 ????不過即便在這種情況下,要正確地創(chuàng)新也需要眼光和勇氣。為此維塞爾引用了一個(gè)嘉寶公司(Gerber)當(dāng)年曾試圖離開嬰兒食品市場向外拓展,最終無果而終、聲譽(yù)受損的案例。1974年,嘉寶公司推出了Gerber Singles。它其實(shí)還是一款嬰兒食品,只不過在瓶身上換了個(gè)標(biāo)簽,在雜貨店換個(gè)擺放位置而已。這個(gè)嘗試最后慘淡收?qǐng)?,公司顏面掃地?/p> ????維塞爾寫道,因?yàn)榫推潴w制而言,嘉寶公司【現(xiàn)在已屬于雀巢公司(Nestle)】就必須盡可能高效地推廣其現(xiàn)有產(chǎn)品,所以“嘉寶的管理層針對(duì)成年人推出那款看起來和嘗起來都像兒童食品的產(chǎn)品就再自然不過了。這是他們最大的體制障礙導(dǎo)致的,而不是因?yàn)槿狈ρ酃?。”但這當(dāng)然是因?yàn)槿狈ρ酃?,問題只在于弄清到底是什么導(dǎo)致了這種缺失。維塞爾是這么認(rèn)為的:“…嘉寶面臨組織內(nèi)部壓力,也就是需要高效運(yùn)營,每年實(shí)現(xiàn)數(shù)十億美元的增長,滿足現(xiàn)有客戶——而且要在完成所有這些任務(wù)的同時(shí),不能危及現(xiàn)有的凈收入水平。問題不在于創(chuàng)意,問題來自這種成熟機(jī)構(gòu)對(duì)不斷增長的利潤的不懈追求?!薄臼聦?shí)上恰恰相反,這個(gè)創(chuàng)意本身也夠糟糕的;維塞爾表示,如果嘉寶只是為這款產(chǎn)品換個(gè)包裝,它或許就能成為下一個(gè)奧德瓦拉公司(Odwalla,美國著名新鮮果汁公司——譯注)或堅(jiān)寶果汁公司(Jamba Juice)。但是冰沙畢竟不是嬰兒食品。】 |
????On the Harvard Business Review's blog network, researcher Maxwell Wessel offers a framework for how big companies should go about innovating. It's informative and insightful, but also, ultimately, depressing. ????In his three-part essay, Wessel, a fellow at the Forum for Growth & Innovation, describes a business world filled with stodgy, cost-cutting managers who are hyperfocused on processes, always worried about the coming quarterly report, and scared of their own stockholders. He doesn't say this outright, and in fact he's empathetic to those managers and even to companies that have no interest in innovating. "Seasoned managers," he writes, "steer their employees from pursuing the art of discovery and [toward] engaging in the science of delivery. Employees are taught to seek efficiencies, leverage existing assets and distribution channels, and listen to (and appease) their best customers." ????And, perhaps more to the point: "Such practices and policies ensure that executives can deliver meaningful earnings to the street and placate shareholders." ????What do you want to do when you grow up, Billy? "Why, jeepers, I want to placate shareholders!" ????Wessel knows that many such managers (though clearly not all of them) would rather be doing something else with their lives. And in most cases, they have little choice. Even the most staid companies in the most stable industries must seek growth and adjust to changing markets, he notes. ????But even in those cases, it takes vision and courage to do innovation right. Wessel cites the example of Gerber's infamous attempt to expand beyond the baby-food market. In 1974, it came up with Gerber Singles, which was just baby food with a different label slapped on the jar, and placed in a different part of the grocery store. It was a miserable, humiliating failure. ????Wessel writes that because Gerber (now a subsidiary of Nestle) was institutionally geared toward focusing on marketing its existing products as efficiently as possible, it was "only natural that Gerber executives created a product for adults that looked and felt just like its product for children. This was their biggest barrier, not a lack of vision." ????But of course it was a lack of vision, it's just a matter of determining what caused the lack. Wessel says as much: "...Gerber faced the internal pressure of its organization, the need to operate efficiently, to deliver billion-dollar growth businesses every year, to satisfy existing customers — and to do all this without threatening existing net income levels. The problem wasn't the idea; the problem emerged from the relentless pursuit of incremental profit within mature organizations." (On the contrary, the idea was terrible; Wessel says that if Gerber had simply presented the product differently, it could have become the next Odwalla or Jamba Juice. But smoothies ain't baby food.) |
-
熱讀文章
-
熱門視頻