I have a confession to make. I'm a business professor whose ambition has been to help people learn to lead. But recently, I've discovered that what many of us think of as great leadership does not work when it comes to leading innovation.
Moram nešto da vam priznam. Ja sam profesor biznisa čija je ambicija da ljude nauči kako da vode. Ali nedavno sam otkrila da ono što mnogi od nas smatraju odličnim vođstvom ne daje rezultate kada je u pitanju vođenje inovacija.
I'm an ethnographer. I use the methods of anthropology to understand the questions in which I'm interested. So along with three co-conspirators, I spent nearly a decade observing up close and personal exceptional leaders of innovation. We studied 16 men and women, located in seven countries across the globe, working in 12 different industries. In total, we spent hundreds of hours on the ground, on-site, watching these leaders in action. We ended up with pages and pages and pages of field notes that we analyzed and looked for patterns in what our leaders did. The bottom line? If we want to build organizations that can innovate time and again, we must unlearn our conventional notions of leadership.
Ja sam etnograf. Koristim metode antropologije da razumem pitanja koja me zanimaju. Tako sam uz troje saučesnika provela gotovo deceniju posmatrajući izbliza i privatno izuzetne vođe u inovacijama. Izučavali smo 16 muškaraca i žena, u sedam zemalja širom sveta, zaposlenih u 17 različitih delatnosti. Proveli smo stotine sati na terenu, na licu mesta, posmatrajući ove lidere na delu. Završili smo sa stranicama i stranicama zapisa sa terena koje smo analizirali i u kojima smo tražili model onoga što su naši lideri činili. Suština? Ukoliko hoćemo da izgradimo organizacije sposobne da iznova daju nešto novo,
Leading innovation is not about creating a vision, and inspiring others to execute it. But what do we mean by innovation? An innovation is anything that is both new and useful. It can be a product or service. It can be a process or a way of organizing. It can be incremental, or it can be breakthrough. We have a pretty inclusive definition.
moramo da zaboravimo konvencionalni pojam liderstva. Voditi inovacije nije kreiranje vizije, i inspirisanje drugih da je sprovode. Ali šta podrazumevamo pod inovacijom? Inovacija je sve što je istovremeno novo i korisno. Ona može biti proizvod ili usluga. Može biti proces ili način organizovanja. Može biti postepeni ili nagli napredak.
How many of you recognize this man? Put your hands up. Keep your hands up, if you know who this is. How about these familiar faces? (Laughter) From your show of hands, it looks like many of you have seen a Pixar movie, but very few of you recognized Ed Catmull, the founder and CEO of Pixar -- one of the companies I had the privilege of studying.
Imamo vrlo uključujuću definiciju. Koliko vas prepoznaje ovog čoveka? Podignite ruku. Držite ruku podignutom ukoliko znate ko je ovo. A ova poznata lica? (Smeh) Po broju podignutih ruku bi se reklo da su mnogi od vas gledali Piksarov film, ali vas je vrlo malo prepoznalo Eda Katmula, osnivača i generalnog direktora Piksara, jedne od kompanija koju sam imala privilegiju da izučavam.
My first visit to Pixar was in 2005, when they were working on "Ratatouille," that provocative movie about a rat becoming a master chef. Computer-generated movies are really mainstream today, but it took Ed and his colleagues nearly 20 years to create the first full-length C.G. movie. In the 20 years hence, they've produced 14 movies. I was recently at Pixar, and I'm here to tell you that number 15 is sure to be a winner.
Moja prva poseta Piksaru je bila 2005. kada su radili na Ratatuiju, tom provokativnom filmu o pacovu koji postaje vrhunski kuvar. Kompjuterski generisani filmovi su danas zaista opšte pristuni, ali je Edu i njegovim kolegama bilo potrebno gotovo 20 godina da naprave prvi dugometražni kompjuterski generisani film. Tokom narednih 20 godina proizveli su 14 filmova. Nedavno sam bila u Piksaru, i mogu da vam kažem da će broj 15 biti sigurni hit.
When many of us think about innovation, though, we think about an Einstein having an 'Aha!' moment. But we all know that's a myth. Innovation is not about solo genius, it's about collective genius. Let's think for a minute about what it takes to make a Pixar movie: No solo genius, no flash of inspiration produces one of those movies. On the contrary, it takes about 250 people four to five years, to make one of those movies.
Ipak, kada većina od nas misli o inovaciji misli o Ajnštajnu tokom "Eureka!" momenta. Ali svi znamo da je to mit. Inovaciju ne donosi jedan genije, ona je proizvod kolektivnog genija. Hajde da na trenutak razmislimo o tome šta je potrebno da se napravi Piksarov film: nijedan genije niti nalet inspiracije ne proizvodi takve filmove. Naprotiv, potrebno je 250 ljudi i četiri do pet godina, da se napravi jedan od tih filmova.
To help us understand the process, an individual in the studio drew a version of this picture. He did so reluctantly, because it suggested that the process was a neat series of steps done by discrete groups. Even with all those arrows, he thought it failed to really tell you just how iterative, interrelated and, frankly, messy their process was.
Kako bismo razumeli proces, jedna osoba iz studija nam je nacrtala varijantu ove slike. To je učinio oklevajući, jer slika sugeriše da je proces niz jasnih koraka koje čine različite grupe ljudi. Čak i sa svim tim strelicama, on je mislio da nam ne dočarava koliko u njemu ima ponavljanja, koliko je međusobno povezan
Throughout the making of a movie at Pixar, the story evolves.
i zapravo zbrkan taj proces.
So think about it. Some shots go through quickly. They don't all go through in order. It depends on how vexing the challenges are that they come up with when they are working on a particular scene. So if you think about that scene in "Up" where the boy hands the piece of chocolate to the bird, that 10 seconds took one animator almost six months to perfect.
U Piksaru se priča razvija tokom snimanja filma. Razmislite o tome. Neki kadrovi se brzo završavaju. Ne završavaju se svi po redu. To zavisi od toga koliko su zahtevni izazovi koje susreću tokom rada na određenoj sceni. Setite se scene iz filma "Do neba" kada dečak daje parče čokolade ptici, za usavršavanje tih 10 sekundi je animatoru bilo potrebno šest meseci.
The other thing about a Pixar movie is that no part of the movie is considered finished until the entire movie wraps. Partway through one production, an animator drew a character with an arched eyebrow that suggested a mischievous side. When the director saw that drawing, he thought it was great. It was beautiful, but he said, "You've got to lose it; it doesn't fit the character." Two weeks later, the director came back and said, "Let's put in those few seconds of film." Because that animator was allowed to share what we referred to as his slice of genius, he was able to help that director reconceive the character in a subtle but important way that really improved the story.
Druga stvar u vezi sa Piksarovim filmom je da se ni jedan deo filma ne smatra gotovim sve dok ne sklope ceo film. Na pola jedne produkcije, animator je nacrtao lik sa zakrivljenom obrvom koja je sugerisala nestašnost. Režiseru se ovaj crtež jako dopao. Bio je prelep, ali je rekao: "Ne možemo da ga koristimo; ne uklapa se u lik" Dve nedelje kasnije, režiser se vratio i rekao: "Hajde da ubacimo tih nekoliko sekundi filma". Pošto je animatoru bilo dopušteno da podeli ono što smo nazvali njegovim parčetom genijalnosti, uspeo je da pomogne režiseru da ponovo osmisli lik na suptilan ali značajan način koji je zaista unapredio priču.
What we know is, at the heart of innovation is a paradox. You have to unleash the talents and passions of many people and you have to harness them into a work that is actually useful. Innovation is a journey. It's a type of collaborative problem solving, usually among people who have different expertise and different points of view.
Ono što znamo, je da je u središtu inovacije paradoks. Morate da oslobodite talente i strasti mnogih ljudi i morate da ih uposlite tako da njihov rad bude koristan. Inovacija je put. To je vrsta zajedničkog rešavanja problema, najčešće među ljudima različitih struka i različitih tački gledišta.
Innovations rarely get created full-blown. As many of you know, they're the result, usually, of trial and error. Lots of false starts, missteps and mistakes. Innovative work can be very exhilarating, but it also can be really downright scary. So when we look at why it is that Pixar is able to do what it does, we have to ask ourselves, what's going on here?
Inovacije retko nastaju odmah u potpunosti. Kao što mnogi od vas znaju, one su rezultat ponovnih pokušaja. Mnogo pogrešnih početaka, pogrešnih koraka i grešaka. Inovativan posao može biti veoma uzbudljiv ali i potpuno zastrašujući. I kada pogledamo zašto Piksar može da radi to što radi, moramo se zapitati: šta se to tamo događa?
For sure, history and certainly Hollywood, is full of star-studded teams that have failed. Most of those failures are attributed to too many stars or too many cooks, if you will, in the kitchen. So why is it that Pixar, with all of its cooks, is able to be so successful time and time again? When we studied an Islamic Bank in Dubai, or a luxury brand in Korea, or a social enterprise in Africa, we found that innovative organizations are communities that have three capabilities: creative abrasion, creative agility and creative resolution. Creative abrasion is about being able to create a marketplace of ideas through debate and discourse. In innovative organizations, they amplify differences, they don't minimize them. Creative abrasion is not about brainstorming, where people suspend their judgment. No, they know how to have very heated but constructive arguments to create a portfolio of alternatives.
Istorija, a naročito Holivud puna je neuspešnih timova krcatih zvezdama. Mnogi od ovih neuspeha pripisivani su prevelikom broju zvezda, ili, da tako kažem, prevelikom broju babica. Pa zašto je onda Piksar, sa svim svojim babicama, uvek iznova tako uspešan? Kada smo izučavali Islamsku banku u Dubaiju, ili luksuznu marku u Koreji, ili socijalno preduzeće u Africi, ustanovili smo da su inovativne organzacije zajednice koje imaju tri sposobnosti: kreativno trenje, kreativnu budnost i kreativnu odluku. Kreativno trenje je sposobnost kreiranja tržišta ideja kroz raspravu i razgovor. U inovativnim organizacijama različitosti se razvijaju, oni ih ne umanjuju. Kreativno trenje nije diskusija o idejama, tokom koje ljudi ne iznose svoj sud. Ne, oni znaju kako da vode vrlo žustre ali konstruktivne rasprave kako bi stvorili portfolio alternativa.
Individuals in innovative organizations learn how to inquire, they learn how to actively listen, but guess what? They also learn how to advocate for their point of view. They understand that innovation rarely happens unless you have both diversity and conflict. Creative agility is about being able to test and refine that portfolio of ideas through quick pursuit, reflection and adjustment. It's about discovery-driven learning where you act, as opposed to plan, your way to the future. It's about design thinking where you have that interesting combination of the scientific method and the artistic process. It's about running a series of experiments, and not a series of pilots.
Pojedinci u inovativnim organizacijama uče kako da istražuju, kako da aktivno slušaju, ali znate šta? Oni uče i kako da se zalažu za svoj ugao gledanja. Oni znaju da se inovacija retko događa ukoliko nije prisutna različitost i konflikt. Kreativna agilnost je sposobnost testiranja i oplemenjivanja ideja kroz njihovo kratko sprovođenje, promišljanje i prilagođavanje. Ona je učenje pokretano otkrićem tokom kojeg pravite, suprotno planiranju, vaš put u budućnost. Ona je stvaralačko mišljenje u kojem postoji ta interesantna kombinacija naučnog metoda i umetničkog procesa. Ona je vođenje niza eksperimenata, a ne niza pilot istraživanja.
Experiments are usually about learning. When you get a negative outcome, you're still really learning something that you need to know. Pilots are often about being right. When they don't work, someone or something is to blame. The final capability is creative resolution. This is about doing decision making in a way that you can actually combine even opposing ideas to reconfigure them in new combinations to produce a solution that is new and useful. When you look at innovative organizations, they never go along to get along. They don't compromise. They don't let one group or one individual dominate, even if it's the boss, even if it's the expert. Instead, they have developed a rather patient and more inclusive decision making process that allows for both/and solutions to arise and not simply either/or solutions. These three capabilities are why we see that Pixar is able to do what it does.
Eksperiment je učenje. Kada dobijete negativan rezultat, i dalje učite nešto što treba da saznate. Pilot istraživanja se tiču toga šta je tačno. Kada ne daju rezultat, nešto ili neko je kriv. Konačna sposobnost je kreativna odluka. Ona je donošenje odluka na način koji zapravo spaja čak i suprotne ideje kako bi ih prespojila u nove kombinacije koje dovode do novog i korisnog rešenja. Kada posmatrate inovativne organizacije, njihov cilj nije da se slože. One ne čine kompromise. One ne dopuštaju da jedna grupa ili pojedinac dominira, čak i kada je to šef, čak i kada je to stručnjak. Naprotiv, one su razvile prilično strpljiv i više uključujući proces donošenja odluka koji dopušta i "i/ili" rešenja ne samo "ili" rešenja. Ove tri sposobnosti su razlog zbog kojeg Piksar može da čini to što čini.
Let me give you another example, and that example is the infrastructure group of Google. The infrastructure group of Google is the group that has to keep the website up and running 24/7. So when Google was about to introduce Gmail and YouTube, they knew that their data storage system wasn't adequate. The head of the engineering group and the infrastructure group at that time was a man named Bill Coughran. Bill and his leadership team, who he referred to as his brain trust, had to figure out what to do about this situation. They thought about it for a while. Instead of creating a group to tackle this task, they decided to allow groups to emerge spontaneously around different alternatives.
Hajde da vam dam još jedan primer, a taj primer je grupa infrastrukture Gugla Grupa zadužena za infrastrukturu je grupa koja održava vebsajt 24 sata 7 dana u nedelji. Kada je Gugl trebalo da uvede Gmail i Jutjub, znali su da njihovo skladištenje podataka nije bilo odgovarajuće. Vođa grupe za inženjering i grupe za infrastrukturu je u to vreme bio Bil Kogran. Bil i njegov liderski tim, koji on naziva trustom mozgova trebali su da smisle šta da se čini u toj situaciji. Razmišljali su o tome neko vreme. Umesto da formiraju grupu koja će se baviti ovim zadatkom, odlučili su da dozvole da se grupe formiraju spontanto oko različitih alternativa.
Two groups coalesced. One became known as Big Table, the other became known as Build It From Scratch. Big Table proposed that they build on the current system. Build It From Scratch proposed that it was time for a whole new system. Separately, these two teams were allowed to work full-time on their particular approach. In engineering reviews, Bill described his role as, "Injecting honesty into the process by driving debate."
Izdvojile su se dve grupe. Jedna je postala poznata kao Veliki sto, drugu su nazvali Napravi od nule. Veliki sto je predložio da grade na već postojećem sistemu. Napravi od nule je predložio da je došlo vreme za potpuno novi sistem. Ovim timovima je bilo dozvoljeno da odvojeno rade puno radno vreme na svom konkretnom prilazu. Bil je u pregledu inženjeringa opisao svoju ulogu kao "ubacivanje iskrenosti u proces pokretanjem rasprave".
Early on, the teams were encouraged to build prototypes so that they could "bump them up against reality and discover for themselves the strengths and weaknesses of their particular approach." When Build It From Scratch shared their prototype with the group whose beepers would have to go off in the middle of the night if something went wrong with the website, they heard loud and clear about the limitations of their particular design. As the need for a solution became more urgent and as the data, or the evidence, began to come in, it became pretty clear that the Big Table solution was the right one for the moment. So they selected that one.
Timovi su vrlo rano ohrabrivani da prave prototipove kako bi se "sudarili sa realnošću i sami otkrili snage i slabosti sopstvenog pristupa." Kada je Izgradi od nule prikazao svoj prototip grupi čiji bi telefoni zvonili u pola noći ukoliko nešto pođe po zlu sa vebsajtom, jasno su im predstavljeni nedostaci njihovog konkretnog dizajna. Kako je potreba za rešenjem bivala sve hitnija i kako su činjenice ili dokazi pristizali, postalo je prilično jasno da je rešenje Velikog stola bilo odgovarajuće u tom trenutku. Tako da su izabrali to rešenje.
But to make sure that they did not lose the learning of the Build it From Scratch team, Bill asked two members of that team to join a new team that was emerging to work on the next-generation system. This whole process took nearly two years, but I was told that they were all working at breakneck speed.
Ali kako bi bili sigurni da neće izgubiti ono što su naučili od tima Izgradi od nule, Bil je zamolio dva člana tog tima da se priključe novom timu koji je počinjao da radi na sistemu nove generacije. Ceo ovaj proces je trajao gotovo dve godine,
Early in that process, one of the engineers had gone to Bill and said, "We're all too busy for this inefficient system of running parallel experiments." But as the process unfolded, he began to understand the wisdom of allowing talented people to play out their passions. He admitted, "If you had forced us to all be on one team, we might have focused on proving who was right, and winning, and not on learning and discovering what was the best answer for Google."
ali mi je rečeno da su svi radili strahovito brzo. Rano tokom ovog procesa, jedan inženjer je otišao kod Bila i rekao mu: "Mi smo suviše zauzeti da bismo sprovodili ovaj neefikasni sistem sprovođenja paralelnih eksperimenata." Ali kako se proces razvijao, počeo je da razumeva mudrost koja je ležala u dopuštanju talentovanim ljudima da razigravaju svoje strasti. Priznao je: "Da ste nas naterali da svi budemo u jednom timu, možda bismo se fokusirali na dokazivanje ko je u pravu, i pobeđivanje,
Why is it that Pixar and Google are able to innovate time and again? It's because they've mastered the capabilities required for that. They know how to do collaborative problem solving, they know how to do discovery-driven learning and they know how to do integrated decision making.
a ne na učenje i otrkivanje najboljeg rešenja za Gugl." Zašto su Piksar i Gugl sposobni da uvek iznova unose inovacije? To je zato što su usavršili za to neophodne sposobnosti. Oni znaju kako da zajednički rešavaju probleme, oni znaju kako da uče podstaknuti otkrićem
Some of you may be sitting there and saying to yourselves right now, "We don't know how to do those things in my organization. So why do they know how to do those things at Pixar, and why do they know how to do those things at Google?" When many of the people that worked for Bill told us, in their opinion, that Bill was one of the finest leaders in Silicon Valley, we completely agreed; the man is a genius.
i oni znaju kako da integrisano donose odluke. Neki od vas sada možda sede i misle: "Mi ne znamo kako da to radimo u mojoj organizaciji. Pa zašto onda to umeju u Piksaru, i zašto to znaju u Guglu?" Kada nam je mnogo ljudi koji su radili za Bila reklo da je on jedan od najboljih lidera u Silicijumskoj dolini, mi smo se sa njima u potpunosti složili; čovek je genije.
Leadership is the secret sauce. But it's a different kind of leadership, not the kind many of us think about when we think about great leadership. One of the leaders I met with early on said to me, "Linda, I don't read books on leadership. All they do is make me feel bad." (Laughter) "In the first chapter they say I'm supposed to create a vision. But if I'm trying to do something that's truly new, I have no answers. I don't know what direction we're going in and I'm not even sure I know how to figure out how to get there." For sure, there are times when visionary leadership is exactly what is needed.
Liderstvo je tajno oružje. Ali to je drugačija vrsta liderstva, ne ona na koju većina od nas pomisli kada mislimo o izuzetnom liderstvu. Jedan od lidera kojeg sam srela mi je na samom početku rekao: "Linda, ja ne čitam knjige o liderstvu. One čine da se loše osećam." (Smeh) "U prvom poglavlju kažu kako ja treba da kreiram viziju. Ali ja nemam odgovore ukoliko pokušavam da uradim nešto istinski novo. Ne znam u kom pravcu idemo i čak nisam ni siguran da mogu da smislim kako da tamo stignemo." Sigurno je da je ponekad vizionarsko liderstvo upravo ono što nam treba.
But if we want to build organizations that can innovate time and again, we must recast our understanding of what leadership is about. Leading innovation is about creating the space where people are willing and able to do the hard work of innovative problem solving.
Ali ukoliko želimo da izgradimo organizacije koje mogu da uvek iznova inoviraju, moramo da preoblikujemo sopstveno razumevanje liderstva. Voditi inovaciju znači stvarati prostor u kome su ljudi voljni i sposobni da naporno rade
At this point, some of you may be wondering, "What does that leadership really look like?" At Pixar, they understand that innovation takes a village. The leaders focus on building a sense of community and building those three capabilities. How do they define leadership? They say leadership is about creating a world to which people want to belong. What kind of world do people want to belong in at Pixar? A world where you're living at the frontier. What do they focus their time on? Not on creating a vision. Instead they spend their time thinking about, "How do we design a studio that has the sensibility of a public square so that people will interact? Let's put in a policy that anyone, no matter what their level or role, is allowed to give notes to the director about how they feel about a particular film. What can we do to make sure that all the disruptors, all the minority voices in this organization, speak up and are heard? And, finally, let's bestow credit in a very generous way." I don't know if you've ever looked at the credits of a Pixar movie, but the babies born during a production are listed there. (Laughter)
na inovativnom rešavanju problema. Sada se neki od vas možda pitaju: "Kako takvo liderstvo zapravo izgleda?" U Piksaru shvataju da je za inovaciju potrebno celo selo. Lideri se fokusiraju na izgradnju osećaja zajedništva i izgradnju one tri sposobnosti. Kako definišu liderstvo? Kažu da je liderstvo izgradnja sveta kojem ljudi žele da pripadaju. Kakvom svetu ljudi u Piksaru žele da pripadaju? Svetu u kojem živite na granici. Za šta koriste svoje vreme? Ne na kreiranje vizije. Umesto toga oni provode vreme razmišljajući: "Kako da dizajniramo studio koji pruža osećaj trga kako bi ljudi međusobno saobraćali? Hajde da uvedemo kao pravilo da je svakome, bez obzira na ulogu i mesto, dozvoljeno da režiseru daje beleške o tome šta misli o određenom filmu. Kako da obezbedimo da svi koji su u manjini u organizaciji kažu svoje mišljenje i da se ono čuje? I, na kraju, hajde da ih nagradimo na vrlo velikodušan način." Ne znam da li ste ikada pogledali odjavnu špicu u Piksarovom filmu, tamo su nabrojane čak i bebe rođene tokom izrade filma.
How did Bill think about what his role was? Bill said, "I lead a volunteer organization. Talented people don't want to follow me anywhere. They want to cocreate with me the future. My job is to nurture the bottom-up and not let it degenerate into chaos." How did he see his role? "I'm a role model, I'm a human glue, I'm a connector, I'm an aggregator of viewpoints. I'm never a dictator of viewpoints." Advice about how you exercise the role? Hire people who argue with you. And, guess what? Sometimes it's best to be deliberately fuzzy and vague.
(Smeh) Šta Bil misli da je bila njegova uloga? Bil je rekao: "Ja vodim organizaciju volontera. Talentovani ljudi ne žele da me prate bilo kuda. Oni žele da zajedno sa mnom stvaraju budućnost. Moj posao je da negujem od dna do vrha i ne dopustim da preraste u haos." Kako on vidi sopstvenu ulogu? "Ja sam model, ljudski lepak, ja sam povezivač, agregator različitih pogleda. Nikada ne diktiram način gledanja." Jedan savet o tome kako da sprovedete tu ulogu? Zaposlite ljude koji će se sa vama raspravljati. I znate šta? Nekada je najbolje da namerno budete nejasni i neodređeni.
Some of you may be wondering now, what are these people thinking? They're thinking, "I'm not the visionary, I'm the social architect. I'm creating the space where people are willing and able to share and combine their talents and passions." If some of you are worrying now that you don't work at a Pixar, or you don't work at a Google, I want to tell you there's still hope. We've studied many organizations that were really not organizations you'd think of as ones where a lot of innovation happens.
Neki od vas se sada možda pitaju šta ti ljudi misle? Oni misle: "Ja nisam vizionar, ja sam društveni arhitekta, ja kreiram prostor u kojem su ljudi voljni i sposobni da dele i ujedinjuju svoje talente i strasti. Ako se neki od vas sada brinu što ne rade u Piksaru ili u Guglu, hoću da vam kažem da ima nade. Izučavali smo mnoge organizacije o kojima zaista ne biste mislili kao o organizacijama sa puno inovacija.
We studied a general counsel in a pharmaceutical company who had to figure out how to get the outside lawyers, 19 competitors, to collaborate and innovate. We studied the head of marketing at a German automaker where, fundamentally, they believed that it was the design engineers, not the marketeers, who were allowed to be innovative. We also studied Vineet Nayar at HCL Technologies, an Indian outsourcing company. When we met Vineet, his company was about, in his words, to become irrelevant. We watched as he turned that company into a global dynamo of I.T. innovation. At HCL technologies, like at many companies, the leaders had learned to see their role as setting direction and making sure that no one deviated from it. What he did is tell them it was time for them to think about rethinking what they were supposed to do. Because what was happening is that everybody was looking up and you weren't seeing the kind of bottom-up innovation we saw at Pixar or Google. So they began to work on that.
Posmatrali smo glavnog pravnika u farmaceutskom preduzeću koji je trebalo da osmisli način na koji će privoleti pravnike van firme, 19 konkurenata, da sarađuju i inoviraju. Posmatrali smo direktora marketinga nemačkog proizvođača automobila gde su duboko verovali da je inženjerima dizajna, ne ljudima iz marketinga, dozvoljeno da budu inovativni. Posmatrali smo i Vinita Nejera iz HCL Tehnologija, indijskog preduzeća za autsorsing. Kada smo upoznali Vinita njegovo preuzeće je bilo, po njegovim rečima, na rubu beznačajnosti. Posmatrali smo kako je to preduzeće pretvorio u pokretačku snagu IT inovacija. U HCL Tehnologijama, kao i u mnogim preduzećima lideri su morali da nauče da svoju ulogu vide u određivanju pravca i obezbeđivanju da od njega niko ne odstupi. On im je rekao da je došlo vreme da ponovo razmisle o sopstvenoj ulozi. Jer su svi gledali na gore i nije bilo inovacija od dna ka vrhu, kakvu smo videli u Piksaru i Guglu. Tako da su počeli da rade na tome.
They stopped giving answers, they stopped trying to provide solutions. Instead, what they did is they began to see the people at the bottom of the pyramid, the young sparks, the people who were closest to the customers, as the source of innovation. They began to transfer the organization's growth to that level. In Vineet's language, this was about inverting the pyramid so that you could unleash the power of the many by loosening the stranglehold of the few, and increase the quality and the speed of innovation that was happening every day.
Prestali su da daju odgovore, nisu više pokušavali da pruže rešenja. Ono što su umesto toga počeli da primećuju bili su ljudi sa dna piramide, mlade iskre, ljude najbliže klijentima kao izvor inovacija. Počeli su da rast organizacije prebacuju na taj nivo. Vinitovim rečnikom, ovde se radilo o obrtanju piramide kako bi se oslobodila moć mnogih popuštanjem stiska nekolicine i povećanju kvaliteta i brzine inovacija na svakodnevnom nivou.
For sure, Vineet and all the other leaders that we studied were in fact visionaries. For sure, they understood that that was not their role. So I don't think it is accidental that many of you did not recognize Ed. Because Ed, like Vineet, understands that our role as leaders is to set the stage, not perform on it. If we want to invent a better future, and I suspect that's why many of us are here, then we need to reimagine our task. Our task is to create the space where everybody's slices of genius can be unleashed and harnessed, and turned into works of collective genius.
Sigurno je da su i Vinit i svi drugi lideri koje smo posmatrali zapravo vizionari. Sigurno je da su razumeli da to nije bila njihova uloga. Mislim da nije slučajno to što mnogi od vas nisu prepoznali Eda. Jer Ed, baš kao i Vinit, shvata da je uloga lidera da postavi scenu, ne da na njoj nastupa. Ukoliko želimo da osmislimo bolju budućnost, a verujem da je to razlog što su mnogi od vas ovde, moramo da iznova osmislimo sopstvenu ulogu. Naš zadatak je kreiranje prostora u kojem svačiji komad genijalnosti može biti oslobođen i uposlen i pretvoren u delo kolektivnog genija.
Thank you.
Hvala.
(Applause)
(Aplauz)