Why are so few companies truly innovative?
为什么没有多少公司真正具有创造力?
Innovation is key to business survival, and companies put substantial resources into inspiring employees to develop new ideas. There are, nevertheless, people working in luxurious, state-of-the-art centres designed to stimulate innovation who find that their environment doesn’t make them feel at all creative. And there are those who don’t have a budget, or much space, but who innovate successfully.
创新是企业生存的核心，公司投入大量资源鼓励员工产生新想法。一些工作重心被设计的奢华，设施先进，专门用作激发创新的地点，然而在其中工作的人却发现，这种环境并没有让他们感到任何创新性。还有一些人没有预算，没有大的空间，却在创新方面很成功。
For Robert B. Cialdini, Professor of Psychology at Arizona State University, one reason that companies don’t succeed as often as they should is that innovation starts with recruitment. Research shows that the fit between an employee’s values and a company’s values makes a difference to what contribution they make and whether, two years after they join, they’re still at the company. Studies at Harvard Business School show that, although some individuals may be more creative than others, almost every individual can be creative in the right circumstances.
亚利桑那大学的心理学教授Rober B.Cialdini认为，公司没有获得应有的成功，其中一个原因是创新始于招聘。研究表明，员工价值观与公司价值观之间的相符程度影响他们做出何种贡献，以及两年后他们是否依然在公司。哈佛商学院的研究表明，尽管一些人或许比其他人更具创造力，但在正确的环境下，几乎每个人都能成为具有创造性的个体。
One of the most famous photographs in the story of rock’n’roll emphasises Cialdini’s news. The 1956 picture of singers Elvis Presley, Carl Perkins, Johnny Cash and Jerry Lee Lewis jamming at a piano in Sun Studios in Memphis tells a hidden story. Sun’s ‘million-dollar quartet’ could have been a quintet. Missing from the picture is Roy Orbison, a greater natural singer than Lewis, Perkins or Cash. Sam Phillips, who owned Sun, wanted to revolutionise popular music with songs that fused black and white music, and country and blues. Presley, Cash, Perkins and Lewis instinctively understood Phillips’s ambition and believed in it. Orbison wasn’t inspired by the goal, and only ever achieved one hit with the Sun label.
摇滚乐历史中最著名的照片之一证实了Cialdini的观点。1956年的一张照片中，在孟菲斯的太阳工作室里，歌手Elvis Presley, CarlPerkins, Jonny Cash和Jerry Lee Lewis在钢琴前陷入困扰。这幅照片呈现了一副不为人知的故事。太阳工作室的"million-dollar quartet"本可以是五重奏。没有出现在照片上的事Roy Orbison，他是一名比Lewis, Perkins或者Cash更加伟大的天生歌者。太阳工作室的拥有者Sam Phillips想通过融合黑人及白人音乐，乡村音乐以及布鲁斯的音乐形式来改革流行乐。Presley, Cash, Perkins和Lewis本能地理解Phillips,的抱负并切相信他。Orbison并没有被这一目标所鼓舞，只在唱片公司进行了一次演出。
The value fit matters, says Cialdini, because innovation is, in part, a process of change, and under that pressure we, as a species, behave differently, ‘When things change, we are hard-wired to play it safe.’ Managers should therefore adopt an approach that appears counter-intuitive – they should explain what stands to be lost if the company fails to seize a particular opportunity. Studies show that we invariably take more gambles when threatened with a loss than when offered a reward.
Cialdini说，价值观契合非常重要，因为在某种程度上，创新是一种改变的过程，并且在那种压力下，我们作为同一群体，会有不同的行为。“当事情发生变化时，我们本能的谨慎行事。”因此管理者们应当采取一种看上去非直觉性的方法——他们要解释如果公司没能抓住某一特定机会，会蒙受怎样的损失。研究表明，相比获得奖励，我们总是在被威胁会蒙受损失时更乐于冒险。
Managing innovation is a delicate art. It’s easy for a company to be pulled in conflicting directions as the marketing, product development, and finance departments each get different feedback from different sets of people. And without a system which ensures collaborative exchanges within the company, it’s also easy for small ‘pockets of innovation’ to disappear. Innovation is a contact sport. You can’t brief people just by saying, ‘We’re going in this direction and I’m going to take you with me.
管理创新是一门微妙的艺术。当市场，产品开发以及财务部门分别在不同人群中获得不同的反馈时，公司很容易陷入一种互相矛盾的境地缺少公司内部的协作交换机制，也很容易让小的创新项目消失。创新是一项有接触的活动仅仅通过说“我们要往这个方向走，你们要跟随我”，你无法获得他人的信赖。
Cialdini believes that this ‘follow-the-leader syndrome’ is dangerous, not least because it encourages bosses to go it alone. ‘It’s been scientifically proven that three people will be better than one at solving problems, even if that one person is the smartest person in the field.’ To prove his point, Cialdini cites an interview with molecular biologist James Watson. Watson, together with Francis Crick, discovered the structure of DNA, the genetic information carrier of all living organisms. ‘When asked how they had cracked the code ahead of an array of highly accomplished rival investigators, he said something that stunned me. He said he and Crick had succeeded because they were aware that they weren’t the most intelligent of the scientists pursuing the answer. The smartest scientist was called Rosalind Franklin who, Watson said, “was so intelligent she rarely sought advice”.’
Cialdini认为这种“追随领导综合症”是危险的，尤其是这鼓励了老板们独断专行。“科学研究已经表明，在解决问题方面，三个人比一个人更好，即使那一个人是该领域中最聪明的。”为了证明其观点，Cialdini引用了与分子生物学家James Watson的访谈。DNA是一切生命遗传信息的载体，Watson与Francis Crick一同发现了其结构“当问到他是如何在一些极具才华而立场不同的调查者之前破解密码时，他的回答令我很吃惊。他说他和Crick能够成功是因为意识到他们在寻找答案的科学家中并不是最聪明的。Watson说，最聪明的科学家叫Rosalind Franklin,'她非常机智，向来不寻求他人的建议。'”
Teamwork taps into one of the basic drivers of human behavior. ‘The principle of social proof is so pervasive that we don’t even recognise it,’ says Cialdini. ‘if your project is being resisted, for example, by a group of veteran employees, asked another old-timer to speak up for it.’ Cialdini is not alone in advocating this strategy. Research shows that peer power, used horizontally not vertically, is much more powerful than any boss’s speech.
合作是人类行为的基本驱动力之一。“社会认同的原则如此普遍，甚至于不会被我们发现，”Cjaldini说。“例如，如果你的项目被一些资深的员工拒绝，那就争取到一个资历更老的人的支持。”Cialdini并不是唯一宜扬这一策略的人。研究表明，横向而非纵向使用伙伴力量，要比任何老板的话语更加有力。
Writing, visualizing and prototyping can stimulate the flow of new ideas. Cialdini cites scores of research papers and historical events that prove that even something as simple as writing deepens every individual’s engagement in the project. It is, he says, the reason why all those competitions on breakfast cereal packets encouraged us to write in saying, in no more than 10 words: ‘I like Kellogg’s Corn Flakes because… .’ The very act of writing makes us more likely to believe it.
写作、想象和原型描述都可以激发新的想法。Cialdini引用大量研究论文和历史事件来证明，即使写作也会加深每一个体在项目中的参与度。他说，这就是为什么那些早餐麦片的竟争商家都会鼓励我们以不超过10个字写出“我喜欢凯洛格玉米片因为……”这一写作行为使我们更可能相信它。
Authority doesn’t have to inhibit innovation but it often does. The wrong kind of leadership will lead to what Cialdini calls ‘captainitis, the regrettable tendency of team members to opt out of team responsibilities that are properly theirs’. He calls it captainitis because, he says, ‘crew members of multipilot aircraft exhibit a sometimes deadly passivity when the flight captain makes a clearly wrong-headed decision’. This behavior is not, he says, unique to air travel, but can happen in any workplace where the leader is overbearing.
权威并不是抑制创新，但实际上却经常如此。错误的领导方式会导致一种现象，Cialdini称之为“机长症候群，即团队成员令人遗憾地倾向于选择不承担本应属于他们的团队责任。”他说自己将其称为机长症侯群是因为”当机长做出错误的决定时，多飞行员驾驶的飞机的机组成员有时会表现出一种致命的被动性。”他说，这种行为并非只在航空业出现，当管理者过于专制时，这种情况可以在任何工作情境中发生。
At the other end of the scale is the 1980s Memphis design collective, a group of young designers for whom ‘the only rule was that there were no rules’. This environment encouraged a free interchange of ideas, which led to more creativity with form, function, colour and materials that revolutionised attitudes to furniture design.
完全相反情况的是20世纪80年代孟菲斯的设计团队，他们是一群年轻的设计师，对他们而言“唯一的规则就是没有规则”。这种环境鼓励思想的自由交换，激发了在形式、功能、颜色以及材料方面更多的创造性，这种刨造性颠覆了家具设计的理念。
Many theorists believe the ideal boss should lead from behind, taking pride in collective accomplishment and giving credit where it is due. Cialdini says: ‘Leaders should encourage everyone to contribute and simultaneously assure all concerned that every recommendation is important to making the right decision and will be given full attention.’ The frustrating thing about innovation is that there are many approaches, but no magic formula. However, a manager who wants to create a truly innovative culture can make their job a lot easier by recognising these psychological realities.
许多理论家认为，理想的老板应当在幕后进行领导，为团队成就感到自豪并在情当时给予赞扬。Cialdini说：“领导者应当鼓励每一个人做出贡献，同时向每位成员确保：每一个建议对于做出正确决策都是重要的，会得到充分的关注。”令人沮丧的是，创新有许多种方法，但并不存在神奇的公式。但是，通过认识到这些心理层面的真相，希望创立真正创新文化的管理者就可以使自己的工作更为轻松。
