Génie collectif : résumé et revue
Mots clés: Collectivisme, Créativité, Découverte, Expérimentation, Groupe, Innovation, Leadership, Organisations, Projet, Travail en équipe
Veuillez noter: Il y a des liens vers d'autres critiques, résumés et ressources à la fin de cet article.
Critique de livre
Traditional businesses value traits of traditional leaders: bold decision makers who give orders. This autocratic model doesn’t work, however, for innovative businesses. The leadership style that might keep a sustainable business coasting for decades can, in fact, have a corrosive effect on the processes of discovery and innovation. Innovation requires a different style of leadership. A leader who wants to unleash the creative potential of their team needs to nurture an environment that supports innovation.
Les auteurs de Génie collectif assert that creative abrasion, creative agility and creative resolution are necessary tools for teams that want to innovate. And it is the leader’s role to ensure that these elements are all operating in the group. New ideas are generated and tested using these tools.
Génie collectif est lourd d'histoires anecdotiques. Chaque chapitre contient une longue étude de cas tirée d'entreprises bien connues qui illustrent et renforcent les idées discutées. Des endroits comme Acumen, Google et eBay sont recherchés pour des anecdotes. Et pour les auteurs, Pixar semble être l'exemple d'une entreprise innovante. Le livre est bien organisé et lisible, mais certains lecteurs peuvent avoir envie d'exemples plus réels, par opposition aux récits d'entreprise.
Sommaire
Chapitre 1 : À quoi ressemble le génie collectif
Pixar Animation Studios produce one blockbuster after another. And their success is no accident. They’ve been doing this for years, and no other studio comes close to matching their record. Understanding how Pixar gets it right can help us learn how any company can compete and succeed in an environment of change. Why do some companies thrive in an era of innovation and rapid change while other companies fail and fade away?
Pixar est une organisation qui utilise un processus complexe qui se traduit par des produits élégants et agréables. Le produit final est sans couture ; un film Pixar donne presque l'impression qu'il a été réalisé par une seule personne. En réalité, des centaines de personnes coopèrent pour réaliser une animation Pixar. D'autres groupes peuvent ainsi fonctionner comme Pixar. Des masses de personnes peuvent travailler avec une coordination si étroite que le résultat est un produit unifié et cohérent. C'est ainsi que fonctionnent les organisations innovantes.
L'innovation est généralement une entreprise de groupe, malgré le mythe du génie solitaire trimant isolément dans son laboratoire. Plus, mieux, les idées émergent lorsque des personnes ayant des points de vue différents peuvent échanger des idées les unes sur les autres. Chez Pixar, contrairement à d'autres studios, toute l'équipe se rassemble pour regarder les quotidiens (séquence du film en cours qui a été tourné ce jour-là). De cette façon, tout le monde peut participer en fournissant des commentaires.
Les innovations sont généralement découvertes après un long processus d'essais et d'erreurs. Cela implique normalement de nombreuses expérimentations et des erreurs seront commises en cours de route. Parfois, vous devez attaquer le problème sous un angle différent. Cela peut être un travail très chronophage.
Good leaders foster this type of discovery driven learning. (It’s important to have talented people doing the work, but more important than that are leaders who seek innovation.)
Leaders should also work to ensure their organizations are collaborative and make integrative decisions. They should help with conflict resolution instead of imposing a solution on an unwilling group. Good leaders encourage multiple opinions: it keeps more options available longer. At Pixar, if a good idea emerges halfway through film production, the team will go back and revisit the previous work to integrate the new idea into the film. This creates extra work, but it’s worth it. Pixar’s primary goal is to create a high quality animated picture, and they’ll gladly go the extra mile to reach this goal.
Une création réussie demande du talent, certes, mais le talent seul ne suffit pas. (Il y a plein de gens talentueux à Hollywood dont les films s'avèrent être des flops.) Le talent doit être dans le bon contexte, ce qui n'est pas toujours facile.
Le moyen le plus important de réussir en tant qu'organisation innovante est d'avoir un leadership qui favorise l'innovation et la collaboration.
Chapitre 2 : Pourquoi Collective Genius a besoin de leadership
Innovation has many paradoxical aspects. For example, innovation needs both freedom and restraint. Innovation requires that we both unleash and harness resources like talent and ideas. Collaboration is similarly paradoxical because, although there is often harmony in the team, sometimes conflict is necessary to the creative process. A good leader guides the group through this. And while leaders should know when to allow debate, ultimately it’s the leader who makes the decision.
Leaders should encourage people to be different, as a wider variety of viewpoints yields better ideas. They should support individuals and create an environment where people feel comfortable contributing their ideas. Pixar is a shining example of a company that functions well as a team while also respecting and valuing the individual. It’s important to create an environment where people can speak their minds and where others will listen to them. However, the team should also challenge ideas. It’s a tricky balance.
The kind of planning and implementation that we usually undertake in furtherance of a goal doesn’t work so well for innovation. No one knows ahead of time where innovation will lead, so instead of marching steadily toward a goal, the objective is to learn through experimentation. It is a time consuming and messy process. Let’s face it — innovation requires a lot of work and effort.
Good leaders encourage their people to experiment, iterate, learn and start over again. Learning, however, should be tempered with a firm’s need for performance. Ultimately, the team will have to follow some kind of schedule and produce something tangible.
Innovation is easier to invoke in an improvisational atmosphere. Change should be a given. To temper all this creative freedom, however, you must have boundaries. (Deadlines inspire us.) Constraints (such as schedules, budgets, rules and procedures) are inevitable, anyway, so we have to deal with them whether or not we like it. But sometimes these constraints can stifle creativity. Keep in mind, however, that these constraints are just tools — don’t confuse them with goals.
Creativity can take time, so be prepared to be patient. Don’t make premature decisions, even if there is pressure to do so. Nevertheless, patience should be balanced with urgency. Urgency is motivating. There’s nothing like a deadline to light a fire under people.
Chapitre 3 : Refonte du rôle du leader
Traditional models of leadership tend to squelch creativity. In these paradigms, the boss comes up with the ideas, dictates the direction and tells everyone what they should do in order for his or her vision to be realized. But this approach doesn’t work very well when the goal is to create something new. Even leaders don’t know what the outcome is going to be, so they won’t be able march people toward that outcome.
The right kind of leadership is essential to cultivate innovative conditions. A leader’s job is to create an environment where people can get their work done, an environment where people can be creative.
Vineet Nayar était PDG de HCL Technologies, une grande société informatique indienne. Il a assumé ce rôle en 2005 à une époque où HCL perdait du terrain : elle se classait cinquième parmi ses concurrents, les clients résiliaient des contrats et la rotation du personnel était élevée. Lorsque HCL a été fondée en 1976, elle était pionnière dans le domaine. Cependant, alors que le reste de l'industrie se recentrait sur le logiciel, HCL a continué à donner la priorité au matériel.
À la fin des années 1990, l'erreur de cette stratégie a été comprise. La société s'est scindée en deux unités : HCL Infosystems, qui est restée axée sur le matériel, et HCL Technologies, qui a fourni des solutions informatiques basées sur des logiciels. HCL était en retard à la fête et a eu du mal à suivre la concurrence.
Lorsque Nayar est devenu PDG, il a voulu faire les choses différemment. Il réfléchit à l'emplacement de la zone de valeur. Dans la plupart des entreprises traditionnelles, la valeur a été créée pour les clients par les concepteurs de produits, à l'intérieur de l'entreprise. HCL était devenue une société de services, et Nayar s'est vite rendu compte que cela déplaçait l'emplacement de la zone de valeur. La valeur se situait désormais à la périphérie de l'entreprise, là où les employés interagissaient avec les clients. La relation entre HCL et ses clients était l'endroit où la valeur était générée.
None of the competitors had come to this insight yet, so Nayar had a good opportunity for innovation. HCL, however, was a traditional company with a traditional management hierarchy. Nayar knew this wouldn’t work for cultivating innovation; a new style of leadership was required.
Nayar established a new team, dubbing them “The Young Sparks.” He put this team next to the executive offices in the company’s headquarters. He increased transparency to build employee trust. He made management more accessible and accountable by setting up a system where employees could flag problems within the company. He also set up a channel so that employees could ask him questions directly (and he devoted hours to answering hundreds of questions). He started many programs and built an infrastructure that put the employees ahead of the managers. As employees became more empowered, they began taking the initiative in more ways. New projects were started and new markets were discovered. The company prospered.
There are some important lessons to be learned from Nayar’s work at HCL. It takes people some time to get used to working in a new way. There needs to be a cultural shift for people to understand that the boss isn’t the key driver of change. People have to be able to collaborate, to fail sometimes, to test ideas and to make decisions. The leader isn’t the visionary; the leader enables innovation.
Partie I : Les leaders créent la volonté d'innover
Chapitre 4 : Créer une communauté
Luca de Meo était responsable des ventes et du marketing chez Volkswagen. Volkswagen était une entreprise florissante, mais ils en voulaient plus, et De Meo était aligné sur cet objectif.
À l'époque, le marketing chez Volkswagen était décentralisé. Le siège a établi les paramètres, mais les différents marchés ont développé leurs propres stratégies. Parfois, les relations entre les commerçants locaux et le siège social étaient superficielles et bureaucratiques. Les départements de l'entreprise étaient cloisonnés, chacun s'occupant de ses propres préoccupations, et la communication entre et entre les départements était limitée. Il n'y avait pas de cohésion dans toute l'entreprise, et surtout pas à travers les marchés fragmentés.
De Meo felt the company should do better at speaking in a single, unified voice, but because marketing was fragmented, it wouldn’t be easy to get the kind of collaboration that innovation requires. De Meo used the brand to unify and motivate his employees. Focusing on the brand was a key factor, not only in marketing to customers, but also in leveraging employee pride and a sense of unity toward a common goal.
Il a créé un laboratoire où les employés de différents départements pouvaient travailler ensemble à la recherche et au développement de projets importants. Ils ont également travaillé au renforcement de la marque. Au fur et à mesure qu'ils travaillaient ensemble, leurs compétences de collaboration se sont améliorées. Ils ont également commencé à trouver des solutions innovantes aux problèmes sur lesquels ils travaillaient.
De Meo a créé une équipe interfonctionnelle pour gérer un lancement de produit. Il a donné au groupe peu de direction et une autonomie presque complète. En fin de compte, l'équipe s'est vu attribuer un chef, mais seulement après avoir terminé une bonne partie du travail. Ils ont élaboré un excellent plan de lancement et le conseil d'administration a été satisfait des résultats.
He led many initiatives to draw people together and inspire them to find innovative solutions, and Volkswagen enjoyed stellar success during De Meo’s tenure. Profits soared and the company grew, even as other European automakers were closing factories. The company was the subject of glowing articles in leading magazines such as L'économiste et Forbes; et en 2012, ils ont remporté le prix CLIO en tant qu'annonceur mondial de l'année 2012.
De Meo a réussi parce qu'il comprenait des choses importantes sur le fait d'être un leader. Les dirigeants créent l'espace pour l'innovation. Les dirigeants favorisent un environnement dans lequel les gens veulent faire le travail et dans lequel les gens sont capables de faire le travail.
People need to feel like they’re part of a community, working on something bigger than themselves. But cultivating this atmosphere is easier said than done. Community is important because it’s part of identity. When people care about the group, they will work hard to maintain it and do the work. “We” becomes as important as “I.” The group needs a sense of purpose, a sense of why. Purpose is what creates communities.
Chapitre 5 : Au-delà du but : valeurs et règles d'engagement
Pentagram était un collectif de designers. Les concepteurs de Pentagram avaient une autonomie avec leurs projets et le personnel qu'ils employaient, mais ils travaillaient également ensemble pour fonctionner comme une communauté. L'entreprise est un exemple utile de la façon dont les gens peuvent se rassembler autour d'un objectif commun et comment ils peuvent créer une communauté innovante.
The purpose of the group was innovative solutions for their customers. They believed design has an important social element, that it can improve people’s quality of life. And Pentagram designers wanted their designs to have a positive impact on society. Having a collective purpose helped bind them together as a group.
At the retirement of Pentagram’s founder, it was decided that the chairman’s job would have a two-year limit. The role came without any added power, so the chairman acted more as a facilitator than anything.
Pentagram exhibited the features that a group must have in order to stay cohesive and survive over the years. Shared values — sometimes implicit and sometimes explicit — are really important. Values define what matters to a group; they shape the group’s priorities. Innovative groups can have a wide range of values, but they all share four core values: bold ambition, collaboration, learning and responsibility.
A group with bold ambition isn’t afraid to take on big challenges. A desire to solve problems leads them to look for projects that will have maximum impact. Bold groups want the world to be a better place, and they feel that they have the power to improve it.
Les entreprises innovantes valorisent la collaboration et intègrent intentionnellement la collaboration dans leurs méthodes et stratégies. L'innovation est suscitée par la synergie de personnes diverses avec des perspectives différentes qui travaillent ensemble. Chez Pentagram, les partenaires collaboraient non seulement avec leurs collègues partenaires et leurs équipes de travail, mais aussi avec leurs clients.
Learning and a willingness to uncover information is crucial to innovation. There are many mistakes to be made when you’re trying something new. A sense of curiosity is vital for staying engaged with the process.
Enfin, le sens des responsabilités partagées est essentiel. Les membres du groupe ont besoin de sentir qu'ils s'approprient collectivement les résultats.
In any group, the way that people act is important. To be collaborative, people should trust each other and respect each other. They should listen to each other and be able to influence one another. The way people think is also important. People should question everything. They should be driven by data. It’s important that they can see the bigger picture.
Partie II : Les leaders créent la capacité d'innover
Chapitre 6 : Abrasion créative
Good ideas are produced by discussion and debate, so people need to be good at disagreeing if they want their groups to be creative and innovative. Creative abrasion comes from the friction of ideas rubbing against each other. There’s an element of conflict. It’s a process of creating and exploring ideas through discussion and disagreement.
The first step for creative abrasion is to generate a lot of ideas. This isn’t the same thing as brainstorming — it’s more disciplined and focused. With brainstorming, ideas are generated without judgement or criticism. Creative abrasion has the supportive elements of brainstorming, but is also includes confrontation.
La diversité signifie plus que la diversité démographique (race, sexe, classe, etc.). La diversité comprend également la diversité intellectuelle, les personnes qui pensent différemment et les personnes qui ont des compétences différentes. La diversité de pensée est importante pour le groupe. Différentes voix s'ajoutent au mélange. La diversité attire des personnes créatives qui sont stimulées par l'exposition à un mélange d'idées. Chez Pixar, ils ont embauché un large éventail de personnes différentes qui se sont toutes respectées. Malgré leurs différences, ils se sont tous traités d'égal à égal.
Conflict is a valuable tool. Intellectual conflict is nothing to fear. In fact, it’s good. But when conflict becomes personal and people turn on each other, it’s destructive. Leaders must point out destructive conflict when it arises; it shouldn’t be tolerated. It can be hard not to take offense when people don’t like your ideas. It can feel like a personal attack, and things can spiral out of control quickly. Some people will withdraw from the process rather than risk conflict.
Productive conflict is a lot of work, and doing it right requires a lot of trust between team members. The feeling of community is important for the group to survive the conflict. If everyone has a deep sense of common purpose, they won’t take it too personally when their ideas are critiqued. Community makes people feel safe offering their ideas, even if people disagree with them.
It is the leader’s job to remind people of the group’s purpose and values. The leader encourages people when they become frustrated with the process, the leader keeps the group working by asking questions and the leader strives to keep people stimulated and thinking. It’s important to keep people with diverse ideas talking to each other. It’s also important to connect different parts of the organization that might not otherwise be in communication. Leaders should avoid imposing solutions on the team. Instead, they should ask probing questions that motivate the team to generate their own solutions.
L'abrasion créative est une compétence qui peut être apprise et pratiquée.
Chapitre 7 : Agilité créative
L'agilité créative est la capacité d'un groupe à essayer à plusieurs reprises de découvrir ce qui fonctionne. L'apprentissage et le développement sont importants, mais il en va de même pour le travail. En fin de compte, le processus devrait avoir des résultats tangibles, car en fin de compte, la performance est ce qui compte vraiment.
Trop de structure étouffe l'innovation, mais pas assez de structure entraînera le chaos et l'absence de progrès. Trouver le bon équilibre est délicat, et le leader doit toujours surveiller la situation et ajuster la structure en conséquence.
Constant experimentation fuels innovation. Innovation, after all, comes from discovery rather than planning. Trial and error is the best way to explore when the path forward isn’t fully known, and good leaders encourage important creative activities. They support the pursuit of new ideas; they foster reflection and analysis; and they promote adjustments based on lessons learned. These activities take place repeatedly to work a problem until a solution emerges. Each cycle incorporates the lessons learned from the last cycle. How long it takes depends on how complex the problem is — sometimes it only takes a few iterations to find a solution, but sometimes experimentation can continue for years.
New ideas should be pursued quickly and proactively. Keep your options open by testing several solutions. Don’t try to define what the solution will look like ahead of time. Spend as little time as possible in planning; instead, make prototypes, test them and repeat. Groups that spend most of their time planning are less successful than groups that are immersed in experimentation.
The faster a group can test ideas, the faster the group will learn. And the faster it learns, the quicker it can figure out what does and does not work. Of course, this isn’t license to be sloppy — speed should be balanced with patience and a measure of rigor.
In any group, a certain amount of failure is inevitable, so leaders must learn to tolerate it. Making mistakes is an important part of learning. If your group isn’t experiencing some failure, the team probably isn’t trying enough options. They are likely taking a low risk approach which will not result in innovative discovery. But while failure should be tolerated — and to a certain extent even cultivated — don’t try experiments that could damage the company or people if they fail.
When failure occurs, don’t punish or try to assign blame. If you hunt out the guilty parties every time something goes wrong, no one will want to risk making mistakes. Everyone will try to play it safe. This will kill innovation.
Sometimes people think that experiments are like pilot projects. They are not. Pilots are the first step in taking a new course of action, the first step in implementing an idea that has already been decided on. The goal of a pilot isn’t to learn new things, but to make sure the plan works. The goal of an experiment, on the other hand, is to explore.
Une étape précieuse dans le processus d'expérimentation est de passer un certain temps à réfléchir sur les résultats. C'est là que les expériences sont payantes. Rassemblez les données de l'expérience, obtenez les commentaires des participants et analysez les informations. Toute l'équipe doit être impliquée dans le processus.
Then, take what you have learned and decide on next steps. There might be strong indications of what the next round of experiments should entail, you might conclude that you’ve solved the problem on which you were working, or you might find that the entire approach is unworkable and the project should be abandoned.
Chapitre 8 : Résolution créative
Les idées de nouvelles solutions sont générées par la discussion et les conflits, et les solutions sont testées par essais et erreurs. La prochaine étape du processus est la résolution créative.
At this stage of the game, it’s important to balance perseverance with endurance. Try to maintain a sense of urgency, while at the same time cultivating patience. The flow of ideas should be bottom up, not top down. Leaders establish the boundaries and conditions for the work, but for the most part, innovation comes from below. The leader is the “social architect” who makes innovation possible.
Leaders should remind people to avoid either-or thinking. This mentality can prevent people from seeing possible alternatives. It’s important that the group doesn’t get locked into simplistic, binary thinking patterns. Part of the leader’s job is to help people hold several ideas at once. This isn’t easy to do: the instinctive reaction is to simplify things and gravitate toward one of the ideas. But the leader should help people avoid that mentality.
Many leaders think their role is to make decisions, to act boldly, and they will be tempted to rush to a decision. But it’s important to resist the pressure to make quick decisions. The more patient a leader can remain in the face of complexity, the better the solution. It’s vital to trust the process.
Leaders don’t tell people what direction to take, but they should be ready to tell the team to go back and search for a better solution. It’s OK to cultivate indecision in order to allow more time for ideas to develop. Eventually, though, a decision must be made. (Even then, unused ideas should be recognized for their value to the process.)
Les règles sont des outils qui structurent l'effort du groupe. Lorsque les règles sont appréciées pour elles-mêmes, les organisations peuvent devenir rigides et inflexibles. Au lieu de cela, les règles doivent être adaptées aux besoins de l'équipe. Les horaires, les devoirs et même la disposition des sièges sont autant d'outils qui devraient faciliter plutôt qu'entraver les progrès. Mais ces structures doivent toutes être flexibles, afin qu'elles puissent être modifiées au fur et à mesure que les besoins du groupe changent.
Leaders should stay engaged with the group, asking difficult questions, raising issues that might otherwise be overlooked and sharing information that the team may need. They should require teams to show how their ideas could work in the real world. Giving the team autonomy and allowing the team to take risks, however, doesn’t mean the leader can disengage.
Creative abrasion, creative agility and creative resolution are the organizational abilities that comprise a team’s ability to innovate. They are closely tied, working to help groups generate ideas. But the group must be willing to work together using these abilities. The leader has to ensure that these elements are all at play within the group.
Partie III : Collective Genius 2.0 : Inventer le futur
Chapitre 9 : Cultiver un écosystème d'innovation
Some challenges are so large and complex that they don’t fit within the bounds of a single organization — there are no traditional ways of dealing with them. Solutions must come from several disciplines; innovative ecosystems must be created across organizations. This is collective genius 2.0, and it is growing throughout society.
There are challenges to maintaining innovative ecosystems, and competing goals and culture clashes can contribute to failure. Researchers are currently investigating how to build these kinds of ecosystems and make them thrive, and the leader’s role in all of this has yet to receive much attention. Clearly, innovation across organizations creates even more challenges for leaders who must bring together people from different groups and backgrounds and turn them into a collaborative team.
Governance and structure is important here. There should be clear boundaries, and everyone should understand the basic ground rules. The real challenge, however, is to foster willingness among groups that may feel competitive, or even hostile, to one another. Unlike innovative teams that are contained within a single firm, teams that cross organizations often don’t begin with any sense that they are playing on the same side. And while leaders in these circumstances may focus a little too much on the rules and setting boundaries, it’s more important to foster participants’ willingness to engage.
It’s vital to build community in the innovation team, and the first step is to get everyone to agree on the goal of the effort. Once they have decided on the purpose, the group itself should set the rules for working together. This can nurture a sense of community.
Un leader doit modéliser le comportement qu'il attend de l'équipe : inclusif, non compétitif et tolérant à l'échec. (Cela peut être un nouveau comportement pour certaines personnes.)
Creating community is sort of a mystery, an art form if you will. It’s not really something a leader can force; sometimes you must step back and let the process take care of itself. Nevertheless, it is important for the leader to create the conditions in which community can develop and flourish. A sense of community is essential to the process of innovation.
Épilogue
Many organizations’ assumptions about leadership hold them back from achieving innovation. Great leadership isn’t about barking directions; it’s about creating and maintaining an environment where creativity and productivity can flourish. To help organizations recognize potential leaders, there are some key leadership traits that you should look for.
Les grands leaders partagent certains traits de personnalité et, comme le processus d'innovation lui-même, nombre de ces traits sont paradoxaux. Par exemple, les leaders sont idéalistes mais pragmatiques. Ils affrontent des problèmes difficiles et repoussent les limites du possible, confiants dans leur succès. En même temps, ils ont la tête froide et comprennent qu'il faut travailler dur pour surmonter les défis qui ne manqueront pas de survenir.
Une capacité à apprécier les complexités d'un problème est un autre signe d'un bon leader. Les dirigeants peuvent penser de manière holistique et comprendre la multiplicité des facteurs en jeu dans une organisation. Même ainsi, ils sont orientés vers l'action. Ils expérimenteront et testeront des solutions, allant au-delà de la théorie pour trouver des résultats réels.
Leaders should be happy to share credit for success. They are secure enough in themselves that they don’t mind sharing power. Nonetheless, they are also demanding. They hold people accountable for their work; they expect results. Because their priority is the work, they are willing to fire those people who are unable to perform at the needed level of competency.
Comme tout le monde, les bons leaders ne sont que des humains. Ils ont leurs défauts, leurs angoisses et leurs peurs. Ils font des erreurs et ils se mettent sur la défensive. Mais peu importe combien de fois ils peuvent tomber, ils se relèvent encore et encore. Ils sont résilients, ce qui leur donne la capacité d'accepter leurs propres échecs et de rester calmes lorsque les gens autour d'eux se sentent dépassés.
Great leaders aren’t necessarily born that way; rather, they have learned from their life experiences. Organizations can also help people to develop their leadership skills.
Sometimes potential leaders aren’t recognized because of preconceived notions that leaders should know more than everyone else, or that they should be assertive, or that they should be tough. But these things aren’t really helpful traits for leaders of innovation.
Another reason that some people are bypassed for leadership roles is because they are “demographic invisibles.” They may have great potential, but they are overlooked because of their ethnicity, gender, height or other traits. Managers might have unconscious biases, such that when they look at these people, they don’t think of tomorrow’s leaders. To overcome the potential for biases to interfere in identifying good leaders, managers should have specific criteria and should take a hard look at people in their organization to identify those who should take leadership roles.
Le leadership est la clé de l'innovation. Les leaders créent les conditions de l'innovation, ils encouragent la volonté de changement et ils nourrissent la capacité de découvrir de nouvelles façons de faire les choses. Les dirigeants savent que leurs organisations doivent avoir les capacités d'abrasion créative, d'agilité créative et de résolution créative.
Vous pouvez être l'un de ces leaders. Cela commence par l'introspection. Examinez-vous en profondeur et faites les premiers pas vers l'innovation.
Ressources additionnelles
Examen de Creative Destruction par Knowledge@Wharton
Examen de Creative Destruction par Publishers Weekly
Examen de Creative Destruction par Fast Company
Examen de Creative Destruction par CNN
Examen de Creative Destruction par Soundview Executive Book Summaries