O salto sem rede!

Estão a ver aqueles que acreditam que os académicos, ou os políticos sabem quais as decisões a tomar para gerir uma empresa?

Estão a ver a leviandade com que se afirma que uma empresa que entra em insolvência tem sempre por trás um caso de gestão danosa? Ainda recentemente Catarina Martins usou essa técnica no caso da Helsar, "Helsar: Catarina Martins afirma que gestão danosa não pode ficar impune".

De "I’m a scientist. This is what I had to ‘unlearn’ to build a successful business" sublinhei:

"Having a background in science was key in the inquiry, but I quickly realized that my degree in genetics and biotechnology didn’t exactly equip me with the skills to successfully bring it to market. In fact, I’d even say I had to “unlearn” a few aspects of my scientific training in order to become an entrepreneur.
...
In getting my company off the ground, however, I learned that entrepreneurs have to go about things from the other direction—asking instead, “How do we make this happen?” Rather than focusing on questions, it’s about focusing on answers, assuming solutions are out there, and working to find them.
...
The scientist in me could have happily stayed in the lab forever, tweaking chemistries in an effort to gather more information and hit on a more “perfect” formulation. But as anyone who’s even dabbled in business knows, getting something to market, and iterating based on real feedback from customers, is essential.
You have to trust you’ll find the answers as you go, not hold yourself back until you think you’ve got every potential problem figured out. The more I let go of my scientist’s tendency to continually ask “what if,” the more I found that the concrete “how to’s” began to reveal themselves.
...
I couldn’t have imagined back in my basement lab where I’d be today. Science got me started on this path, and I couldn’t keep up with the progress our team is making in our labs and workshops without that background. But the entrepreneurial toolkit—one so rarely taught formally or in schools—has been equally important: the confidence to chase answers, not just questions, and move, however haltingly, from theory to solutions that create real value and impact."

O salto sem rede! O abandono da navegação de cabotagem! Nadar na zona sem pé! Apostar no optimismo não documentado. Ah! "Following the bliss".

E já agora uma leitura de há algumas semanas, "Why Business Strategy Shouldn’t Be “Scientific”":

"Feynman’s point was that we can’t merely mimic behaviors and expect to get results. Yet even today, nearly a half century later, many executives and business strategists have failed to learn that simple lesson by attempting to inject “science” into strategy. The truth is that while strategy can be informed by science, it can never be, and shouldn’t be, truly scientific.
...
We’d like strategy to be scientific, because few leaders like to admit that they are merely betting on an idea. Nobody wants to go to their investors and say, “I have a hunch about something and I’d like to risk significant resources to find out if I’m right.” Yet that’s exactly what successful business do all the time.
.
If strategy was truly scientific, then you would expect management to get better over time, much as, say, cancer treatment or technology performance does. However, just the opposite seems to be the case. The average tenure on the S&P 500 has been shrinking for decades and CEOs get fired more often.
.
The truth is that strategy can never be scientific, because the business context is always evolving. [Moi ici: A crítica que faço aos que acreditam que economia é ciência galilaica/newtoniana] Even if you have the right strategy today, it may not be the right strategy for tomorrow. Changes in technology, consumer behavior and the actions of your competitors make that a near certainty.

So instead of assuming that your strategy is right, a much better course is to assume that it is wrong in at least some aspects. Techniques like pre-mortems and red teams can help you to expose flaws in a strategy and make adjustments to overcome them. The more you assume you are wrong, the better your chances are of being right."