 |
|||
         |
 |
||
 |
(From
It's About Business, Vol. 6, Issue 4, April-May, 2001)
By Jeffrey A. Govendo In a news item that appeared on the front page of the New York Times, Boston Globe, USA Today, and probably most of the nation's newspapers this past February 9, we learned that a team of 80 scientists at the Brookhaven National Laboratory in Upton, NY had made a startling discovery. They announced the results of an experiment in which the movement of muons, which are subatomic particles similar to electrons, deviated from what would have been predicted under the so-called Standard Model of particle physics, when sent through a particle accelerator. It was noted in the article that The Standard Model has been considered more or less the gospel for over 30 years in explaining the interaction between matter and energy. "If it holds up," said Bradley Keister of the National Science Foundation, "it's a very exciting finding that can change how we see the world, how we look at matter and how it interacts." Now, I don't pretend to understand any more of the actual content of this story than I've reported above. Given a choice between physics or chemistry in high school, I chose the latter, though probably could do no better comprehending a new discovery in that science either. What I do know is that the story likely would never have been told had there not been a group of scientists willing to question The Standard Model as the be-all and end-all of how matter works. Of course, one could argue that it's the job of scientists to question, to probe, to continually be searching for new answers. Seeking new truths outside of what is commonly accepted is the mark of a true scientist; finding them is what we call "progress." This is not always what we see in the world of business. We tend to have a few "standard models" of our own that have become entrenched largely because they seemed to work pretty well in the past. Go back to the 1960's and 70's, for example, when it was a fairly standard (though never openly admitted) operating model in the domestic auto industry that the best way to engender repeat sales was to make sure the car was barely operable or presentable after several years of use (those of you who are old enough might remember when six figures on the odometer meant the scrap heap). Then, some of our foreign competitors came along and demonstrated that you could promote loyalty and repeat sales by manufacturing cars that ran well year after year. People bought newer models not because they had to; they did it because they wanted to. The result - after a lengthy period of enormous pain in Detroit from lost market share and thousands of lost jobs - was a sea change in the way cars are manufactured, marketed and sold. And despite this, Detroit has never fully recovered its lost market share. What are the "standard models" your organization is operating under … those foregone conclusions commonly accepted as "the way things are done around here?" For instance, in many companies, it's a given that when the economy slows down, there has to be a cutback in "non-essential" expenditures, such as management development programs or value-added service to customers. This, despite the likelihood that such decisions will hurt in the long run. Another example: many businesses operate under the assumption that only certain people within specific functions are capable of coming up with ideas for new products and services, or new ways of running the business. Under this model, innovation is the province of the relatively few, and the organization is denied the benefit of much of its own diversity and brainpower. An interesting exercise would be to make a list of "standard models" for your company, or perhaps on a more local level, your own department within the company. What are the unquestioned principles or practices under which your business operates? For each one, ask how it helps in achieving both the organization's and your own goals - and also how it might be getting in the way. What are some of the possibilities that would emerge if you were to consider deviating from them, as did the scientists studying the movement of those errant muons? Remember, many
of our "standard models" exist only because nobody has ventured
into "un-standard" territory to consider the alternatives.
By doing so, you may be surprised at what opens up for you, your colleagues
and the company as a whole! Copyright © 2001 The Innovative Edge™ Inc. The
Innovative Edge, Inc. |
|
|
|
|||