Imaging you're about to lead army into a battle
There are a two advisers available for you right now. Someone who is never seen a battlefield ever before, but smart and brave or an experienced veteran? Or someone proven to be loyal or someone suspected in cheating?
I wouldn’t say there is a unique single answer to this question. Most likely we will not follow the one who suspected in cheating, but the experienced veteran might have an interesting effect of knowing everything he knows. What does it mean? It means that a flow and information creates in our minds a system of views like a water flow creates a channel, which occasionally might become so deep, nothing else is feasible anymore. There is a good book "Wilful Blindness"where you can read about a common phenomenon of how humans so often fail to see what is right in front of them and how to find the truth.
This is exactly what I’m saying about the experts, in our fast changing world any person can be wrong about something which has been absolute true just recently and to catch the waive we must extensively learn and have a few different opinions, so we can compare them and distinguish facts from disinformation. This is a great example of when I try to collect a few different opinions and analyse the facts following by a scientific method.
Another idea, just popped up in my mind, that two personalities I described in the first sentence can be compared with a start up and a large corporation. People in start up are smart and brave, a group of people who wants to change the world and people in a corporation who are knowledgable in their area and they always know what to do and how within the limits of their knowledge.
However, are people in large corporations not smart or not brave? I think they are, but not many of those corporations found a way how to manage processes more efficiently. Last week, I spoke with people from one of our supplier, their relatively small organisation was bought by a corporation and they are passing through a three month integration process, where their job duties and their titles are changing. There was so much pain and frustration about it in their words. I think it makes them very unhappy.
Another good example might be an approval process, for example, a new laptop for an employee. If a chain of approval is more than 2 people, it makes not only an employee unhappy, it makes company spend more resources on internalprocess rather than on effective work with their product or with customers.
So, getting back to an army and a battle — soldiers have the same or even higher importance than generals because their every minute efforts moving things forward, but leadership role is clear — they must give clear directions, listen to employees ideas and consider them in decision-making.
Another important point is trying to avoid politics and different tribes inside the business. That gives lots of damage when people fight each other inside organisation for resources, power or what ever it is.
I wouldn’t say there is a unique single answer to this question. Most likely we will not follow the one who suspected in cheating, but the experienced veteran might have an interesting effect of knowing everything he knows. What does it mean? It means that a flow and information creates in our minds a system of views like a water flow creates a channel, which occasionally might become so deep, nothing else is feasible anymore. There is a good book "Wilful Blindness"where you can read about a common phenomenon of how humans so often fail to see what is right in front of them and how to find the truth.
This is exactly what I’m saying about the experts, in our fast changing world any person can be wrong about something which has been absolute true just recently and to catch the waive we must extensively learn and have a few different opinions, so we can compare them and distinguish facts from disinformation. This is a great example of when I try to collect a few different opinions and analyse the facts following by a scientific method.
Another idea, just popped up in my mind, that two personalities I described in the first sentence can be compared with a start up and a large corporation. People in start up are smart and brave, a group of people who wants to change the world and people in a corporation who are knowledgable in their area and they always know what to do and how within the limits of their knowledge.
However, are people in large corporations not smart or not brave? I think they are, but not many of those corporations found a way how to manage processes more efficiently. Last week, I spoke with people from one of our supplier, their relatively small organisation was bought by a corporation and they are passing through a three month integration process, where their job duties and their titles are changing. There was so much pain and frustration about it in their words. I think it makes them very unhappy.
Another good example might be an approval process, for example, a new laptop for an employee. If a chain of approval is more than 2 people, it makes not only an employee unhappy, it makes company spend more resources on internalprocess rather than on effective work with their product or with customers.
So, getting back to an army and a battle — soldiers have the same or even higher importance than generals because their every minute efforts moving things forward, but leadership role is clear — they must give clear directions, listen to employees ideas and consider them in decision-making.
Another important point is trying to avoid politics and different tribes inside the business. That gives lots of damage when people fight each other inside organisation for resources, power or what ever it is.