個案總覽

Enabled by new digital technologies, openness has become a mega-trend for innovation and the topic du jour for organizations of all kinds. However, little has been said about what this 'new openness' means for the realm of design. In this article, the author reframes open from a design perspective, arguing that we must learn how to design for the loss of control that is inherent in being an increasingly-open organization. Indeed, he argues that a deliberately-designed loss of control may grant companies the most critical competitive advantage available today: access. He describes ten tools of openness and predicts that embracing them and designing for the loss of control will quickly rise to the top of the list of management challenges.

As the ways in which consumers make purchasing decisions continue to multiply, retailers are at a crossroads. One of the key reasons for operating a bricks-and-mortar store-building a strong, distinctive brand experience-no longer seems as relevant. Thanks to the rapid rise of social media and corporate transparency, consumers wield tremendous influence in shaping retail brands and are growing increasingly skeptical of overly-slick store designs, clerks and marketing messages. The once-dependable competitive edges enjoyed by bricks-and-mortar retailers are eroding, which means they can no longer afford to assume any inherent advantages over their online competitors. The authors describe three key paradigm shifts that smart retailers are embracing to solidify customer loyalty and provide shoppers with that increasingly-important window into an organization's soul.

The author argues that as a society, we have become fixated on setting and solving single-answer problems. There is nothing inherently wrong with single-answer problems, she says; without being able to frame and answer them, we would never get anything done. The difficulty lies in our preoccupation with the small fragment of the world that they represent. Regardless of a problem's complexity, our fixation with finding an answer causes us to narrow our attention, and in doing so, we often overlook what matters most. She describes two more complex types of problems -- enigmatic problems and open-ended problems -- and shows how adopting three particular mindsets can enable one to develop a more open mind and become a 'possibilian'.

Prosperous and growth-oriented small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) - generally defined as firms with fewer than 500 employees -- are vital to an economy's health. In our increasingly borderless digital society, the most promising growth opportunities for SMEs tend to lie in foreign markets. But doing business in foreign markets can be both difficult and costly, and as a result, most choose to operate domestically. But the authors argue that the opportunities far outweigh the risks. They encourage SMEs to take the plunge, describing the three challenges that digital markets present and how to build a reputation online beyond a firm's borders.

In this interview, the founder of the Linux operating system, which runs everything from Google to the New York Stock Exchange to Japan's high-speed rail system, describes his evolution from student hacker to the founder of open-source pioneer Linux. He touches on the unique merits of open collaboration, the perils of centralized vs. distributed environments, and why Linux is even more interesting from a social standpoint than from a technical standpoint. In the end, says Torvalds, the most important thing about open source is not any one ideology: it's that everybody can adapt it for their own personal needs and objectives.

This is an MIT Sloan Management Review article. Many companies are trying to leverage the power of Twitter to connect with customers and promote their brands and products. The authors studied the marketing communication between 47 companies and their followers for about three months. Their research identifies factors that increase the likelihood of "retweeting"so that a company's tweets will be shared with recipients'networks and identifies which activities should not be pursued.<BR> <BR>Retweeting is desirable both because the original tweet reaches more people and because a retweet is essentially an endorsement from recipients to their followers. That said, since tweeting by companies is basically a marketing function, there are several practices that don't work well. The most important to avoid is blatant hard-sell messages. In addition, neither using hashtags nor embedding links increased retweeting. Finally, announcing contests or other promotional techniques also did not increase retweeting.<BR> <BR>The authors did find nine practices that increase retweetability, including keeping messages short so there is room for retweeters to add their own messages. Opening with an attention-grabbing headline is important, as is simply asking the recipient to pass the message on. Humanizing the brand has the highest likelihood of causing retweeting, increasing the odds by as much as 70%. The authors also suggest providing information that people can use and act on; offering a deal that can save people money; and making the message relevant and topical. And the best practice of all is when organizations combine several of these practices to get the most out of their marketing messages.<BR>

This is an MIT Sloan Management Review article.

This is an MIT Sloan Management Review article. Multinational corporations are under growing pressure to make sure that their contractors and subcontractors in China meet environmental standards in their operations. Yet traditional approaches to ensuring environmental, health and safety compliance, such as checklist audits, have proved problematic. The authors conducted research over a one-and-a-half-year period with leading multinational buyers (mostly in the apparel and footwear industries) as well as with NGOs and industry groups active in China. Based on their research, the authors report that rather than simply monitoring Chinese suppliers'compliance with local environmental, health and safety (EHS) standards, leading companies are giving suppliers tools and incentives to independently improve environmental performance. They are helping suppliers use energy, water and materials more efficiently and reaching deeper into their supply chains to where the greatest environmental damage occurs. At the same time, they are overcoming their traditional reluctance as competitors to cooperate in monitoring and fixing problems at common suppliers.<BR> <BR>The authors describe innovative approaches that companies such as Nike are taking. More generally, the authors' recommendations include working closely with suppliers and providing incentives for identifying, disclosing and addressing problems; establishing collaborative relationships with NGOs and industry groups; and finding ways both to learn from suppliers'best practices and to facilitate learning among suppliers.<BR>

This is an MIT Sloan Management Review article. The relentless advance of information technology today means that a key task of the business manager now is to cope with one wave of IT innovations after another. At any given time, an executive is likely to feel more or less inundated by a current wave, unsure of what all the commotion is about, unable to avoid the topic in conversation and yet suspicious that the latest "killer app"may be mostly hype. Is there a better way?<BR> <BR>Drawing on years of his own research as well as the research of others, the author argues that the IT adoption cycle is a kind of wave machine that carries an innovation through five stages: (1) breaking the surface, (2) sending out ripples, (3) causing a squawk, (4) building the swell and (5) riding the crest. An important characteristic of IT innovations, the author notes, is that implementation is frequently costly, time-consuming and highly problematic. One consequence is that the number of adoptions of an IT innovation -which are essentially commitments that organizations make to implement the new technology -may outstrip successful implementations, resulting in a worrisome "implementation gap"that calls for explanation and can serve to dampen enthusiasm for the innovation. The author also points out that the rate at which value is achieved by an IT innovation is likely to peak long after the community's attention to the original organizing vision has dissipated.<BR> <BR>Thus, managers need to distinguish carefully between the attention an IT innovation receives and actual adoption, implementation and value gained from its use. Understanding these dynamics more clearly can lead executives to make better decisions about which "waves"to catch and which to let roll by.<BR>

This is an MIT Sloan Management Review article. Leaders and human resources professionals are searching for ways to generate more value from their employees. Recent studies show that companies perform at a higher level when they have integrated talent management programs that are aligned with business strategy and operations. Organizations can get more from their investments in talent management, the authors argue, by focusing on collaboration.<BR> <BR>Job design and performance management are typically based on individual accountability despite the fact that most work today is collaborative. Talent management practices tend to focus on individual competencies and experiences, while overlooking the importance of employee networks. By examining individual performance data together with the results of organizational network analysis, the authors say, senior managers can look at talent along two important dimensions. In addition to looking at individual employee performance for the purpose of succession or work force planning, they can take a network view to assess the same employees in terms of their broader collaborative contributions to the organization.<BR> <BR>The authors show how applying a network lens reveals a significant number of key players (including marginalized talent, hidden talent and underutilized talent) that traditional performance management systems miss. They identify best practices for nurturing networks through talent management initiatives, illustrating them with examples from organizations including IDEO, Nokia, Dow Chemical, Best Buy, Gallo and the U.S. Army.<BR>

This is an MIT Sloan Management Review article. One of the biggest challenges facing multinational companies is building and sustaining a strong talent pipeline. To learn how leading multinational companies are facing up to the talent test, the team of authors examined both qualitative and quantitative data at leading companies from a wide range of industries. The research drew on 18 in-depth case studies, including IBM, General Electric, Procter & Gamble, Shell, Siemens, IKEA, Infosys and Samsung.<BR> <BR>The companies the authors studied held two distinct views on how best to evaluate and manage talent. One group assumed that some employees had more "value"or "potential"than others and that, as a result, companies should focus the lion's share of corporate attention and resources on them; the second group had a more inclusive view, believing that too much emphasis on the top players could damage morale and hurt opportunities to achieve broader gains.<BR> <BR>Although organizations must pay attention to recruiting, employee development, performance management, compensation and reward systems, and retention, the authors found that competitive advantage in talent management doesn't just come from identifying key activities (for example, recruiting and training) and then implementing "best practices."Rather, they found that successful companies subscribe to six key principles: 1) alignment with strategy, 2) internal consistency, 3) cultural embeddedness, 4) management involvement, 5) balance of global and local needs, and 6) employer branding through differentiation. Adopting a "set of principles"rather than "best practices"may challenge current thinking, but the authors argue that best practices are only "best"in the context for which they were designed; what works for one company may not work in another. The principles, by contrast, have broad application.<BR>

This is an MIT Sloan Management Review article.

Ryan believes that a CEO should spend more time on recruiting and managing people than on any other activity, and that the head of HR is one of the most important people in the company. He insists on his freedom to bypass managers and speak with any employee at any time. And he espouses certain talent-management principles, such as that your best people are usually underpaid (reward them with performance pay) and that people leave jobs mainly because they don't like their managers. Recruiting at Gilt Groupe focuses on references more than on resumes and interviews because, Ryan says, resumes only establish basic qualifications for a job, and interviewers can't help being influenced by well-spoken or attractive people. But reference checks need to go beyond the names supplied by a candidate: Employers should dig up people in their networks who are willing to speak candidly.

As the global economy vacillates between signs of recovery and omens of collapse, businesses and governments are clamping down. But the world doesn't need austerity; it needs audacity--bold, inventive ideas that take on big problems. So HBR asked experts from a range of disciplines to propose them. Robert J. Shiller believes an innovative form of national financing can solve the global debt crisis. Enric Sala has a radical but simple idea for saving the oceans. Bruce Gibney and Ken Howery want venture capitalists to bet on breakthrough start-ups. Bruno S. Frey and Margit Osterloh argue that corporations have been hurt by pay-for-performance schemes and should toss them. Ellen Gustafson says we can end obesity and famine by changing the way we produce food. Gregg Easterbrook thinks NASA must find an affordable way to reach Mars. Doc Searls argues that companies should ditch their data and let consumers direct transactions. Ellen Goodman believes we can change the way we die. Wayne Porter has a new vision for Afghanistan. Linda A. Hill and Kent Lineback say crowdsourced reviews will make executives better managers. Parag Khanna and Karan Khemka think for-profit universities will jump-start the global economy. Arun Majumdar is looking for a battery to serve the bottom of the pyramid. And Eric Schmidt thinks social-impact bonds could transform the prison system.

Capitalism remains the most powerful, flexible, and robust system for driving broad-based prosperity and enhancing quality of life. But keeping capitalism on track will depend on our ability to rethink the priorities that guide everyone in the system, from entrepreneurs to regulators to investors. In particular we will need to throttle back the headlong pursuits of competition and ROE, and that process begins with recognizing them for what they are: runaways. The runaway, a concept from evolutionary biology, is explained best by the peacock's tail. That feature grew ever more flamboyant across the centuries thanks to a simple fact: Peahens showed a preference for large-tailed mates. But after many generations the tail created a problem: It required more nutrients and was heavy, slowing down its owner and making him easier prey--eventually causing the peacock population to decline. Capitalism is on a similar runaway trajectory, say Meyer and Kirby, mostly because it has taken the ideas of competition and ROE--brilliant in their time--too far. By reining in these metrics and developing new ones more suited to today's world, we can reformulate capitalism and break the runaway cycle.

Gross domestic product has long been the chief measure of national success. But there's been a lot of talk lately about changing that, from economists and world leaders alike. GDP is under siege for three main reasons. First, it is flawed even on its own terms: It misses lots of economic activity (unpaid household work, for example) and, as a single-number representation of vast, complex systems, is inevitably skewed. Second, it fails to account for economic and environmental sustainability. And third, readily available alternative measures may reflect well-being far better, by taking into account factors such as educational achievement, health, and life expectancy. HBR's Justin Fox surveys historical and current views on how to assess national progress, from Jeremy Bentham to Robert Kennedy to Nicolas Sarkozy. He also looks at where we may be headed. The biggest success so far in the campaign to supplant or at least supplement GDP, he finds, is the UN's Human Development Index--on which the United States has never claimed the top spot.

Only recently have we been able to apply science to one of the world's oldest questions: "What is the nature of happiness?" In this edited interview, the author of the 2006 best seller Stumbling on Happiness surveys the field. Gilbert explores the sudden emergence of happiness as a discipline, reviews the major findings (including the mistakes we all make in predicting how happy or miserable we'll be), and examines the role of happiness in productivity on the job. He describes what makes us truly happy--it's not a promotion or a new house--and sketches out a "happiness diet" that emphasizes small, routine efforts. Looking forward, Gilbert discusses the breakthrough work of his colleague Matthew Killingsworth, whose iPhone-enabled real-time surveys of people's moods are providing an ultra-high-resolution picture of how our emotional states shift from minute to minute. A sidebar by Killingsworth offers a preliminary look at his findings and their implications for our personal and workplace lives.

What makes for sustainable individual and organizational performance? Employees who are thriving--not just satisfied and productive but also engaged in creating the future. The authors found that people who fit this description demonstrated 16% better overall performance, 125% less burnout, 32% more commitment to the organization, and 46% more job satisfaction than their peers. Thriving has two components: vitality, or the sense of being alive and excited, and learning, or the growth that comes from gaining knowledge and skills. Some people naturally build vitality and learning into their jobs, but most employees are influenced by their environment. Four mechanisms, none of which requires heroic effort or major resources, create the conditions for thriving: providing decision-making discretion, sharing information about the organization and its strategy, minimizing incivility, and offering performance feedback. Organizations such as Alaska Airlines, Zingerman's, Quicken Loans, and Caiman Consulting have found that helping people grow and remain energized at work is valiant on its own merits--but it can also boost performance in a sustainable way.

Most of us assume that success will lead to happiness. Shawn Achor, founder of the corporate strategy firm Good Think, argues that we've got it backward. In work he's done with KPMG and Pfizer, and studies he's conducted in concert with Yale's psychology department, he has seen how happiness actually precedes success. Happy employees are more productive, more creative, and better at problem solving than their unhappy peers. In this article, Achor lays out three strategies for improving your own mental well-being at work. In tough economic times, they're essential for keeping yourself--and your team--at peak performance.

In the 18th century, the Enlightenment ushered in the notion that happiness was the attainment of a worthy life. Since then the pursuit of happiness has spread to every aspect of behavior, from religion and politics to work and parenting. Today the happiness imperative creates pressures that, paradoxically, can make us miserable. Sadness is often mistaken for a pathology. Understanding the cultural commitment to good cheer as an artifact of modern history, not as an inherent feature of the human condition, opens new opportunities for understanding key facets of our social and personal experience.