Várias leituras (parte III)

Continuado daqui.

.

Gary Hamel põe o dedo na ferida em "What Really Kills Great Companies: Inertia"

.

A inércia, a falta de sentido de urgência, corrói, quer as grandes, quer as pequenas empresas.

.

"In most organizations, change comes in only two flavors: trivial and traumatic. Review the history of the average organization and you’ll discover long periods of incremental fiddling punctuated by occasional bouts of frantic, crisis-driven change. The dynamic is not unlike that of arteriosclerosis: after years of relative inactivity, the slow accretion of arterial plaque is suddenly revealed by the business equivalent of a myocardial infarction. The only option at that juncture is a quadruple bypass: excise the leadership team, slash head count, dump “non-core” assets and overhaul the balance sheet.
.
Why does change have to happen this way? Why does a company have to frustrate its shareholders, infuriate its customers and squander much of its legacy before it can reinvent itself? It’s easy to blame leaders who’ve fallen prey to denial and nostalgia, but the problem goes deeper than that. Organizations by their very nature are inertial."

.

Lembro-me de em 2004 ter uma conversa com um gestor sobre as orientações que tinha da casa-mãe nórdica e algumas ideias de Tom Peters que defendia que é tão difícil e moroso mudar a cultura de uma empresa que é mais fácil e rápido fechar a fábrica antiga, para abrir uma nova fábrica de raiz, com uma nova cultura deliberada de raiz.