Why Smart People Struggle with Strategy?

聪明人为什么不见得擅长策略？

by RogerMartin  |  2:00 PM June 12, 2014  {from Harvard Business Review}

聪明人为什么不见得擅长策略？

罗杰‧马丁(Roger Martin)

作者介绍:

多伦多大学罗特曼管理学院院长（RotmanSchool of Management at the University of Toronto in Canada），着有《如何战胜：见识策略的真正威力》（Playing toWin: How Strategy Really Works）。

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

大家通常都认为，拟定策略的工作，应该由聪明绝顶且学业成绩优异的人来负责。不过，只因为这些人对策略很感兴趣，并不表示他们一定很擅长制定策略。

聪明人的问题在于，他们习惯寻找「唯一」正确的答案；可惜在策略方面，你可找不到单一的正确答案。策略所需要的是，对于不确定的未来做出选择。即使你耗尽全力，也不可能找到唯一正确的答案。因为根本没有唯一正确的答案。其实就算是在事后来看，也不可能判定某个人的策略选择是否「正确」，因为我们无法把已选择的做法与未中选的所有做法，放在一起做比较，判断它们的相对质量。在策略上，并没有双盲实验（double-blindexperiment）。

想要成为优秀的策略人员，我们就不能要求一定要找到正确答案，也不能期望因为找到正确答案而获得赞赏。最优秀的策略人员不会因为不确定性和模棱两可的情况，就却步不前；他们拥有足够的创意，能够想象出实际上可能存在或可能不存在的各种可能性，并且愿意尝试探取行动，也清楚知道随着事情的发展，会需要修改甚或完全改变原来的行动方案。

这类人的根本特点在于拥有弹性、想象力和复原力。不过，并没有证据显示这些特质跟纯粹的智慧之间有何关连。已故的组织学习专家克里斯‧阿奇利斯（ChrisArgyris）为《哈佛商业评论》英文版所写的经典文章〈教聪明人学习〉（TeachingSmart People How to Learn），便提出了相反的看法。阿奇利斯研究了策略管理顾问之后，发现聪明人通常都比较脆弱。他们需要觉得自己是正确的，而且其他人必须认可他们是对的。这两个条件若有任何一个不存在，或两个都不存在，聪明人就会变得防卫心更强，而且很难化解这种防卫心。

这并非表示聪明人应该被排除在策略以外。不过，这的确意谓着，策略不应该如同在策略顾问公司里可能会发生的情况一样，变成了专属于高智商分析高手的单一文化（monoculture）。多元的思想和态度，有助于规画出杰出的策略。它不仅需要有成功经验的人，也需要有过失败经验的人。它需要拥有丰富想象力的人，也需要从过往经验里培养复原力的人。而且最重要的是，需要每个人彼此尊重各自拥有的不同特质，可是对于众所皆知最聪明的人来说，这一点通常都是最难做到的。（苏伟信译）

Why Smart People Struggle with Strategy

by RogerMartin  |   2:00 PM June 12, 2014  {from Harvard Business Review}

Strategy is often seen as something really smartpeople do — those head-of-the-class folks with top-notch academic credentials.But just because these are the folks attracted to strategy doesn’t mean theywill naturally excel at it.

The problem with smart people is that they are usedto seeking and finding the right answer; unfortunately, in strategy there is nosingle right answer to find. Strategy requires making choices about anuncertain future. It is not possible, no matter how much of the ocean you boil,to discover the one right answer. There isn’t one. In fact, even after thefact, there is no way to determine that one’s strategy choice was “right,”because there is no way to judge the relative quality of any path against allthe paths not actually chosen. There are no double-blind experiments instrategy.

To be a great strategist, we have to step back fromthe need to find a right answer and to get accolades for identifying it. Thebest strategists aren’t intimidated or paralyzed by uncertainty and ambiguity;they are creative enough to imagine possibilities that may or may not actuallyexist and are willing to try a course of action knowing full well that it willhave to be tweaked or even overhauled entirely as events unfold.

The essential qualities for this type of person areflexibility, imagination, and resilience. But there is no evidence that thesequalities are correlated with pure intelligence. In fact, the lateorganizational learning scholar Chris Argyris argued the opposite in hisclassic HBR article Teaching Smart People How to Learn. In his study ofstrategy consultants, Argyris found that smart people tend to be more brittle.They need both to feel right and to have that correctness be validated byothers. When either or both fail to occur, smart people become defensive andrigidly so.

This does not imply that smart people should bekept away from strategy. It does imply however that strategy should not be amonoculture — as it can become in strategy consulting firms — of high-IQanalytical wizards. Great strategy is aided by diversity of thought andattitude. It needs people who have experienced failure as well as success. Itneeds people who have a great imagination. It needs people who have built theirresilience in the past. And most importantly, it needs people who respect oneanother for their range of qualities, something that is often going to be mostdifficult for the proverbial smartest person in the room.