成人小说亚洲一区二区三区,亚洲国产精品一区二区三区,国产精品成人精品久久久,久久综合一区二区三区,精品无码av一区二区,国产一级a毛一级a看免费视频,欧洲uv免费在线区一二区,亚洲国产欧美中日韩成人综合视频,国产熟女一区二区三区五月婷小说,亚洲一区波多野结衣在线

立即打開
為什么都是科技公司在引領(lǐng)變革?

為什么都是科技公司在引領(lǐng)變革?

Bill Pasmore 2016年03月16日
面臨復(fù)雜且持續(xù)的變革時(shí),等級(jí)分明的傳統(tǒng)企業(yè)總想控制自身的反應(yīng),仿佛這些變革真的能被控制似的。相比之下,靈活性深深嵌在谷歌、Facebook等硅谷巨頭的基因之中,其組織結(jié)構(gòu)和文化就是為了適應(yīng)變革而設(shè)計(jì)的。

世界上唯一不變的就是變化,而且,變化還很復(fù)雜、困難、往往勢(shì)不可擋。

提升我們自身引領(lǐng)變革的技能是個(gè)不小的挑戰(zhàn),而要幫助企業(yè)從我們的知識(shí)和經(jīng)驗(yàn)中獲益更是難上加難。那么,究竟應(yīng)該采用什么新方法來引領(lǐng)復(fù)雜且持續(xù)的變革,才能幫助企業(yè)在真實(shí)世界中激流勇進(jìn)呢?

印度有句俗語(yǔ)稱,幫正要站起來的大象站起來,比幫一頭正要坐下的大象站起來更容易。如果你的企業(yè)正在思考這個(gè)課題,并且已經(jīng)設(shè)計(jì)了一些靈活性因素來幫助員工更好地完成工作,那么,你們將領(lǐng)先于其他企業(yè)。

讓我們用幾個(gè)例子對(duì)照一下。幾年前,我和同事為了避免克里夫蘭市一家工廠陷入關(guān)門停產(chǎn)的境地,決定發(fā)動(dòng)員工參與到企業(yè)的改革之中。工廠母公司的高管們也表示,如果我們真能提高這家工廠的產(chǎn)能并降低成本,他們可能就不再考慮將生產(chǎn)轉(zhuǎn)移到海外。

這家工廠已經(jīng)有年頭了,設(shè)備已經(jīng)過時(shí),實(shí)行的是傳統(tǒng)的等級(jí)文化。人們被局限在狹窄的工作職責(zé)里,大多數(shù)崗位基本上沒有讓人發(fā)揮創(chuàng)造力的機(jī)會(huì)。盡管如此,廠長(zhǎng)還算是個(gè)樂意改革的人,對(duì)我們的嘗試表示支持。

在幾個(gè)員工工作組的幫助下,我們勤奮地工作了幾個(gè)星期,根據(jù)輕重緩急,列出了一張需要變革的任務(wù)清單。到執(zhí)行變革方案的時(shí)候,我們打算在工廠中招募志愿者來幫忙。讓我們感到驚訝的是,沒有一個(gè)人報(bào)名!

我們進(jìn)行了深入調(diào)查,發(fā)現(xiàn)由于工廠可能關(guān)停的消息已經(jīng)散布出去幾個(gè)月了,員工們都已經(jīng)對(duì)未來另有打算。沒人有熱情在這家老舊、骯臟、難受的工廠里多待幾年。這家工廠以前沒讓他們參與過變革,他們現(xiàn)在也沒有任何動(dòng)力去變革它。他們深知,要改變工廠的文化,改革企業(yè)的管理模式,重新定義工作職責(zé),引進(jìn)新技術(shù),讓高管層重拾信心,難度有多么大。直接退出比繼續(xù)前進(jìn)更容易,所以,這家工廠終究還是關(guān)閉了。

我們?cè)倌霉雀琛acebook或其他硅谷創(chuàng)業(yè)公司的例子來做對(duì)比。這些公司的文化極富創(chuàng)業(yè)精神,變革是常態(tài),職責(zé)也定義得很寬松,人們都樂于自動(dòng)學(xué)習(xí)。一旦有新的創(chuàng)意出來,或者一旦競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手有了新動(dòng)向,企業(yè)的戰(zhàn)略就會(huì)相應(yīng)地做出迅速改變。

這些企業(yè)雖然也有各種架構(gòu)和流程,但它們的設(shè)計(jì)都是為了促進(jìn)持續(xù)的創(chuàng)新。企業(yè)希望員工們貢獻(xiàn)他們的創(chuàng)意。在這樣的企業(yè)里,領(lǐng)導(dǎo)力同時(shí)存在于多個(gè)方向,從上至下,從下至上,甚至橫向。

在以上案例中(克里夫蘭工廠與硅谷創(chuàng)業(yè)公司),誰(shuí)更容易采取新的方法來領(lǐng)導(dǎo)復(fù)雜且持續(xù)的變革呢?答案是明顯的。

當(dāng)僵化的企業(yè)面臨復(fù)雜的變革挑戰(zhàn)時(shí),他們想要控制自己的反應(yīng),會(huì)把自己的反應(yīng)分割成一系列獨(dú)立的項(xiàng)目,每個(gè)項(xiàng)目都有自己的計(jì)劃、日程和領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人。他們想要詳盡的計(jì)劃和經(jīng)常性的流程監(jiān)測(cè),這樣當(dāng)問題發(fā)生時(shí),領(lǐng)導(dǎo)才好進(jìn)行干預(yù)。他們想讓一切都可控,仿佛復(fù)雜的變革真的能被控制似的。

具有創(chuàng)業(yè)精神的企業(yè)則總是準(zhǔn)備迎接變革,其組織結(jié)構(gòu)和文化就是為了適應(yīng)變革而設(shè)計(jì)的。他們期待員工共同參與變革,同時(shí)仍然留出足夠的空間,讓員工無(wú)需等待最高領(lǐng)導(dǎo)層發(fā)出指令便能迅速做出反應(yīng)。在進(jìn)行重大新項(xiàng)目、并購(gòu)、制定戰(zhàn)略等重大決策時(shí),這種企業(yè)會(huì)廣泛聽取意見并集中進(jìn)行決策,但這種企業(yè)基本上沒有或只有極少的微觀管理。人們知道自己能為公司帶來什么,但他們不知道自己未來的具體工作將是什么,因?yàn)楣镜墓ぷ髦匦膶l(fā)生變化。企業(yè)各部門、團(tuán)隊(duì)和級(jí)別之間的邊界并不是密不透風(fēng)。比起爭(zhēng)權(quán)奪利,員工們更關(guān)心企業(yè)的健康和持續(xù)存在。

面臨變革時(shí),這種具有創(chuàng)業(yè)精神的企業(yè)并不會(huì)試圖設(shè)立預(yù)算、時(shí)間期限和考核標(biāo)準(zhǔn)都十分精確的項(xiàng)目。他們會(huì)直接針對(duì)問題開展工作,然后看看會(huì)發(fā)生什么。項(xiàng)目規(guī)模是增長(zhǎng)還是縮水,取決于它能夠展現(xiàn)出什么樣的前景,或者有多么令人興奮。公司的優(yōu)先工作雖然會(huì)變化,但員工對(duì)公司最終成功的信心和付出不會(huì)變化。沒人感覺自己是在高壓管制下的流水線上工作。

每個(gè)人可以自由地發(fā)表意見,每個(gè)人都可以自由地貢獻(xiàn)他所了解的最佳方法。

并不是說,富有創(chuàng)業(yè)精神的企業(yè)必然好于結(jié)構(gòu)嚴(yán)密的企業(yè)。這兩種企業(yè)的設(shè)計(jì)都是為了滿足特定的目標(biāo)。只是當(dāng)面臨復(fù)雜而持續(xù)的挑戰(zhàn)時(shí),具有創(chuàng)業(yè)精神的企業(yè)才能夠顯現(xiàn)優(yōu)勢(shì)。如果你在一家結(jié)構(gòu)嚴(yán)密的企業(yè)工作,是不是就沒希望了?并非如此。

邁克爾?塔什曼和查爾斯?奧雷利就所謂的“兩面型企業(yè)”這一課題撰寫了大量文章。所謂的“兩面型企業(yè)”,是指根據(jù)情勢(shì)需要,企業(yè)既能夠以結(jié)構(gòu)嚴(yán)密的方式運(yùn)作,也能在更為寬松的模式下運(yùn)作。雖然學(xué)做一家“兩面型企業(yè)”并不容易,但這并非不可能。它只不過需要強(qiáng)烈的目的性和努力。那么,是什么在阻礙企業(yè)成為“兩面型企業(yè)”?不是自然法則,而是那些愛說“我們不能”或“我們不會(huì)”的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)。

為了在企業(yè)的靈活性上實(shí)現(xiàn)突破,領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者需要積極參與發(fā)現(xiàn)、決策、執(zhí)行和辨識(shí)等方面的工作,從而幫助企業(yè)不斷學(xué)習(xí)進(jìn)步。企業(yè)就和人一樣,只有通過練習(xí)才能學(xué)習(xí)和進(jìn)步,前提是學(xué)習(xí)過程得到正確的指導(dǎo)和有力的支持。

領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者需要推動(dòng)企業(yè)實(shí)現(xiàn)更大的“兩面性”,因?yàn)槠渌藷o(wú)權(quán)改變企業(yè)的規(guī)則。一開始的時(shí)候,不需要對(duì)企業(yè)規(guī)則做出永久性改變,老規(guī)矩只需要暫停一段時(shí)間,讓員工大膽嘗試不同的方法來鼓勵(lì)持續(xù)性變革。一旦企業(yè)對(duì)有效和無(wú)效的方法有了深刻認(rèn)識(shí),就可以考慮制定長(zhǎng)期規(guī)則。只有那樣,在應(yīng)對(duì)復(fù)雜且持續(xù)的變革時(shí),企業(yè)才會(huì)實(shí)現(xiàn)真正的突破。(財(cái)富中文網(wǎng))

本文節(jié)選自比爾?帕斯莫爾的《引領(lǐng)持續(xù)變革》一書。

譯者:樸成奎

審校:任文科

Change may be the only constant, but it’s also complex, difficult, and often overwhelming.

Improving our individual skills to lead change can be challenging. Helping our organizations benefit from what we have learned can be even tougher. What does it take to apply new ways of leading complex, continuous change to help our organizations navigate churn in the real world?

There’s an old Indian saying that it is easier to help an elephant get up if it’s already in the process of getting up rather than in the process of sitting down. If your organization is concerned about this issue, and has already designed some flexibility into how people approach their work, you’ll be ahead of the curve.

Let’s contrast a couple of examples. Some years ago colleagues and I decided to see if we could keep a manufacturing plant in Cleveland from closing, by engaging employees in transforming the operation. Executives of the corporation that owned the plant agreed that if we could improve productivity and reduce costs, they would reopen their decision to relocate production offshore.

The plant was very old, with outdated equipment and a traditional hierarchical culture. People were slotted into narrow jobs, most of which allowed little opportunity for creativity. Despite this the plant manager was a student of change and was interested in supporting our experiment.

We worked diligently for several weeks with the help of a number of employee task forces to come up with a prioritized list of changes to pursue. To our surprise, when it came time to implement the changes, we asked for volunteers to help with the implementation—and no one signed on! When we investigated further, we found that employees, having heard months earlier that the plant would close, had already made other plans for their futures. No one was excited about extending their time in a setting that they experienced as old, dirty, and unpleasant. They had little energy for trying to change an organization that had not engaged them in change before. They knew how difficult it would be to shift their culture, change the organization’s approach to management, redefine their jobs, introduce new technology, and win the confidence of senior leadership. It was easier to simply exit and move on. The plant closed.

Contrast this example with Google , Facebook , or Silicon Valley startups. Their cultures are entrepreneurial, change is constant, roles are loosely defined, and people are dedicated to learning. Strategies shift as new ideas are explored or competitors make moves. Structures and processes are introduced but are designed to allow continuous innovation. People are expected to contribute their ideas. Leadership is top-down, bottom-up, and sideways, all at the same time.

Which of these examples (the plant in Cleveland or a Silicon Valley startup) would be more receptive to adopting new approaches to leading complex, continuous change? The answer is obvious. When rigid organizations face complex change challenges, they want to control how they respond. They want to divide their response into a series of independent projects, each with its own plans, schedules, and leaders. They want elaborate plans and regular progress metrics so that leaders can intervene when issues arise. They want to keep things under control, as if complex change can actually be controlled.

Entrepreneurial organizations expect change to happen and design for it. They leave room for people to react without central guidance, although they expect people to engage one another as they do so. Big decisions about major new projects, acquisitions, or company strategies are made centrally with a lot of input, but there is little or no micromanagement. People know what they bring to the table, but they don’t know what work they will be doing in the future because priorities will change. Boundaries are permeable across units, teams, and levels in the organization. People are more concerned about the well-being and continued existence of the organization than accumulating power and influence.

When faced with change, these entrepreneurial companies do not try to formulate projects with precise budgets, deadlines, and metrics. They start working on things and see what happens. Projects shrink or grow with the promise they show and the excitement they generate. Priorities shift but not people’s commitment to the ultimate success of the company. No one feels like he or she is working on a production line under tight constraints.

Everyone is free to comment and to try to contribute in the best way he or she knows how.

It is not that entrepreneurial organizations are better than more tightly structured companies. Each is designed to be fit for a purpose. Yet when it comes to being ready for complex, continuous change, the entrepreneurial organization has the clear advantage. If you are in a tightly structured company, is the situation hopeless? No. Michael Tushman and Charles O’Reilly have written extensively on the topic of ambidextrous organizations, by which they mean that organizations should develop the capability of operating in a tightly structured manner when they need to and in a looser fashion when that is called for. Although learning to become ambidextrous isn’t easy, there’s no law against it. It just requires intention and effort. What keeps organizations from becoming more ambidextrous? Not laws of nature but rather leaders who say “we can’t” or “we won’t.”

To achieve breakthroughs in organizational agility, leaders need to help their organizations learn by engaging in Discovering, Deciding, Doing, and Discerning. Just like individuals, organizations learn from practice, provided the learning is well directed and well supported.

Leaders need to support greater ambidexterity because no one else has permission to change the rules. At first the rules don’t need to be changed permanently; they just have to be suspended for a period of time as people are invited to experiment with different approaches to continuous change. Once an organization gains greater insights into what works and what doesn’t, more-permanent rule changes can be considered. Only then will true breakthroughs in responding to complex, continuous change occur.

掃碼打開財(cái)富Plus App
国内精品免费久久久久电影院97| 亚洲AV综合性爱网亚| 曰韩亚洲AV人人夜夜| 国产高清国内精品福利| 亚洲日本香蕉91视频| 亚洲精品无码久久久| 青青久久久久精品亚洲AV中文| 久久久久久一级毛片| 免费一区二区三区毛片完整版| 伊伊成人综合无码视频| 欧美日韩中文国产一区发布| 国产一区二区三区怡红院| 无码精油按摩潮喷在| 99re在线视频久久综合久久鬼色| 日韩欧美亚洲国产精品字幕久久久| 粉嫩大学生无套内射无码卡视频| 在线成人精品国产区免费| 人妻丰满熟妇一区二区三| 小仙女粉嫩高潮白浆在线看视频| 国产精品无码一级免费看A级毛激情| 亚洲成av人在线观看无堂无码| 精品无码一区二区三区在线| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三区| 亚洲欧美日韩中文字幕人妻| 无码一区二区免费波多野播放搜索| 亚洲av乱码一区二区三区| 色综合婷婷在线观看66| 制服丝袜长腿无码专区第一页| 女人下边被添全过视频| 思思久久婷婷精品在热线热| 久久精品国产99国产精品导航| 精品国产污网站在线观看91| 国产黄a一级二级三级看三区| 嘿咻视频无码免费区在线观看| 国内精品久久人妻互换| 中文字幕人妻无码一夲道| 国产精品成人片在线| 国产成人亚洲综合色就色| 国产精品高清一区二区三区不卡| 久久天天躁狠狠躁夜夜免费观看| 亚洲AV秘 无码一区二区四区|