個案總覽

Peace and harmony are overrated. Though conflict-free teamwork is often held up as the be-all and end-all of organizational life, it actually can be the worst thing to ever happen to a company. Look at Lehman Brothers. When Dick Fuld took over, he transformed a notoriously contentious workplace into one of Wall Street's most harmonious firms. But his efforts backfired - directors and managers became too agreeable, afraid to rock the boat by pointing out that the firm was heading into a crisis. Research shows that the single greatest predictor of poor company performance is complacency, which is why every organization needs a healthy dose of dissent. Not all kinds of conflict are productive, of course - companies need to find the right balance of alignment and competition and make sure that people's energies are pointed in a positive direction. In this article, two seasoned business advisers lay down ground rules for the right kinds of fights. First, the stakes must be worthwhile: The issue should involve a noble purpose or create noticeable - preferably game-changing - value. Next, good fights focus on the future; they're never about placing blame for the past. And it's critical for leaders to keep fights sportsmanlike, allow informal give-and-take in the trenches, and help soften the blow for the losing parties.

Leaders who rely forever on the same internal advisers run the risk of being sold short and possibly betrayed. Alternatively, lone-wolf leaders may make enormous, yet preventable, mistakes when trying to sort through difficult decisions. A sophisticated understanding of trust can protect leaders from both fates. During the past decade, author and consultant Saj-nicole Joni studied leadership in more than 150 European and North American companies. Her research reveals three fundamental types of trust: personal trust, expertise trust, and structural trust. Executives may persevere in relationships that are based on personal trust, but such relationships are unlikely to remain static--and probably won't provide the kinds of deep, often specialized knowledge leaders need. In organizations, leaders develop expertise trust by working closely with people who consistently demonstrate their mastery of particular subjects or processes. Structural trust refers to how roles and ambitions influence advisers' perspectives and candor. Advisers in positions of the highest structural trust generally reside outside organizations, providing leaders with insights that their organizations cannot. High-performing leaders' most enduring valuable relationships are characterized by enormous levels of all three kinds of trust.