????未來幾十年，只有那些能夠緊緊跟隨變化本身，迅速同步做出改變的組織才能生存下去。

????今天，似乎沒有多少組織能夠一下子提前好些年做出改變。要想讓適應(yīng)能力深入組織的骨髓，我們就需要重新設(shè)置每一個管理流程，這樣它才能夠激發(fā)（而不是阻撓）突破性思維和無情的試驗(yàn)。創(chuàng)新需要變成一種本能，一種內(nèi)在沖動。“員工”需要在經(jīng)濟(jì)上依附于組織，非常聽組織的話，像這樣的觀念將不得不被拋棄。

????目標(biāo)：讓主動性、創(chuàng)造性和激情在工作場所蓬勃迸發(fā)，讓職業(yè)和副業(yè)的分割線消失。

????要想讓這一切成為現(xiàn)實(shí)，官僚體系就必須滅亡。為什么呢？因?yàn)楣倭朋w系……

????? 增加開銷 ——官僚體系建立了多層次結(jié)構(gòu)，數(shù)以百計(jì)的管理人員把時間花在了管理其他管理人員上面。

????? 產(chǎn)生摩擦 ——官僚體系迫使新創(chuàng)意不得不接受多層級審查，造成嚴(yán)重滯后。

????? 扭曲決策——官僚體系給予高級主管過多的權(quán)力，而這些人往往會把資源投資在舊的流程上面。

????? 錯配權(quán)力——官僚體系獎勵那些政治手腕高明的人士，而不是最有能力的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者。

????? 打壓異議——官僚體系創(chuàng)建了不對稱的權(quán)力關(guān)系，使得下屬很難暢所欲言。

????? 誤導(dǎo)競爭——官僚體系鼓勵個人角逐晉升機(jī)會和政治優(yōu)勢。

????? 阻撓創(chuàng)新——管理體系過于看重經(jīng)驗(yàn)，歧視超常規(guī)思維。

????? 束縛主動性——官僚體系給冒險(xiǎn)行為設(shè)置了重重障礙。

????? 抹殺細(xì)微差別——官僚體系集中了過多的決策權(quán)，并要求所有人遵守統(tǒng)一的規(guī)則和程序。

????官僚體系通過所有這些方式征收一種“管理稅”(management tax)。就像動脈斑塊一樣，它基本上是無形的，但它的危險(xiǎn)性并不會因此而降低一絲一毫。為了避免這種管理稅，我們需要設(shè)法采用一種“免稅”的方式獲得控制，協(xié)調(diào)和一致性。值得慶幸的是，信息技術(shù)可以幫助我們做到這一點(diǎn)。

????現(xiàn)代官僚體系出現(xiàn)在一個信息主要以紙張承載，傳遞成本極其高昂的時期。以控制范圍狹窄為特征的傳統(tǒng)層級結(jié)構(gòu)恰恰就是對這個問題的回應(yīng)。在這種結(jié)構(gòu)下，10個左右的下屬把信息上報(bào)給一位管理人員，后者隨即匯總這些數(shù)據(jù)，然后沿著指揮鏈進(jìn)一步向上推送。在這種“鞏固和升級”的模式下，身居高位者確實(shí)知道得更多。

????受到挑戰(zhàn)時，身居高位的人往往會捍衛(wèi)自己根據(jù)數(shù)量更多的知識做出的決策（無論他們的決策是否真的有事實(shí)根據(jù)）。這些人通常具有長期的工作資歷，進(jìn)而能夠聲稱自己比下屬更有經(jīng)驗(yàn)——這是另一個為自上而下的決策機(jī)制辯護(hù)的理由。但現(xiàn)如今，拜信息技術(shù)所賜，信息可以很容易地存儲，共享和定制。通信和信息技術(shù)每前進(jìn)一步，為官僚體系辯護(hù)的理由就會減弱一分。

????The organizations that survive in the coming decades will be those that are capable of change as fast as change itself.

????Today, few organizations seem to be able to out-run change for more than a few years at a time. To build organizations that are adaptable at their core, we will need to rework every management process so it enables, rather than frustrates, breakthrough thinking and relentless experimentation. Innovation will need to become instinctual and intrinsic. The notion of the economically dependent, easily biddable "employee" will have to be ditched.

????The goal: a workplace where initiative, creativity, and passion flourish, and where the line separating vocation and avocation disappear.

????For any of this to happen, bureaucracy must die. Why? Because bureaucracy …

????? Adds overhead -- by creating multi-tiered structures where hundreds of managers spend their time managing other managers.

????? Creates friction -- by forcing new ideas to run a multi-level gauntlet of approval that creates significant lag time.

????? Distorts decisions -- by giving too much power to senior executives who often have an investment in older processes.

????? Misallocates power -- by rewarding those who are the most politically adept rather than those who are the most capable leaders.

????? Discourages dissent -- by creating asymmetric power relationships that make it difficult for subordinates to speak up.

????? Misdirects competition -- by encouraging individuals to compete for promotion and political advantage.

????? Thwarts innovation -- by over-weighting experience and under-weighting unconventional thinking.

????? Hobbles initiative -- by throwing up barriers to risk-taking.

????? Obliterates nuance -- by centralizing too many decisions and demanding compliance with uniform rules and procedures.

????In all these ways, bureaucracy imposes a "management tax." Like arterial plaque, it is mostly invisible, but no less dangerous because of that. To avoid the management tax, we need to find ways of acquiring control, coordination, and consistency "duty free." Thankfully, information technology can help us do that.

????Modern bureaucracy emerged at a time when information was mostly paper-based and expensive to move. The traditional hierarchy, with its narrow span of control, was a response to this problem. Ten or so subordinates would channel information up to a manager who would then summarize the data and push it further up the chain of command. In this model of "consolidate and escalate," those at the top really did know more.

????When challenged, they could defend their decisions on the basis of superior knowledge (whether or not their decisions were really based on facts.) And those at the top typically had long tenures and could claim to be more experienced than their subordinates -- another justification for top-down decision-making. But today, thanks to IT, information can be easily stored, shared, and customized, and with each new advance in communications and information technology, the rationale for bureaucracy dwindles further.