Management Theory, Part Two

Tonight, I'm again going to quote from Malcolm Gladwell's book, Blink. As my buddy Alana points out, this is hardly his best book, but it is packed with useful, counter-intuitive advice for those of us concerned about how to survive in the post-modern workforce. Unlike the world our parents knew (after the Depression and World War II, that is), our world has few continuities now. Jobs, relationships, marriages, and the homes we live in, our friendships all seem subject to change in ways mostly out of our control.







Nothing seems to last very long. But, within this discontinuous framework, I often sense that a new intimacy may be emerging. It is possible to remain networked with many people on a superficial level through email and social networking sites, or on a more profound level through frequent email or virtual meetings and chats. The boundaries that used to confine us no longer do so. With email, webcams, IM, Skype, Flickr, and now iPhones, we can as easily pursue relationships across continents and oceans as next door or down the street.







Of course, the physical element may be lacking until and unless you can be together in the flesh. But all other aspects of intimacy -- talking, sharing, honesty, staying connected, talking, listening -- are so easily and freely accomplished now, it simply astonishes me when "friends" choose to go silent. I fail to understand this choice. I always am happy to stay in touch with those I love and those I like, and I would never dream of cutting anyone I care at all about off.

Silence is never golden in this new world. There is a mutual obligation, of the nature the Japanese concept of giri conveys, to take care of one another by observing the principles of repricocity. Not talking to someone you know cares for you means only one thing: You don't care back.

***

What, you say, does this rant have to do with management theory? Let me, finally, turn back to Gladwell. In the following passage he is weighing the difference between logical thinkers who are biased toward gathering a massive amount of empirical evidence before making decisions, and those who are perhaps more impulsive, relying on their intuitive sense to move quickly, take risks, and attempt to innovate.

The first group favors safe, proven choices, concentrating on exploiting others' ideas in some way that proves profitable.

The second are disruptive opportunists, who sense the moment, and try to change the direction of history.

BTW, almost none of this has anything to do with Gladwell, so don't hold him accountable for my sins. This is pure Weir Theory. But Gladwell has this to say: "...extra information is more than useless. It's harmful. It confuses the issues." He also notes that "in fact, you need to know very little to find the underlying signature of a complex phenomenon."



The photo above captures a brainstorming meeting at work, and if you look closely, my buddy Mark's reflection is apparent.



As long as any of us are working together with an opportunity to accomplish something -- anything -- my view is that we should not be wasting that precious chance. It's all about impact.



The world actually needs us to resolve our personal dilemmas and become active. But that is an insight well beyond conventional management theory. I'll have more to say about this soon...

-30-