The chaos and the reason of Internet thinking

The chaos and the reason of Internet thinking

Since the concept of Internet thinking has been proposed, the controversy surrounding it has never ceased. According to the attitude of the Internet thinking people roughly divided into two groups: one is a force, one is negative.

There are shanyou and creative learning clubs in the public eye, and Xiaonian, Yang and so on. The force of the basic think that the internet thinking is a new thing, will be the existing product operation mode, such as a complete subversion; ignoring the faction that this is basically a lie to the end, the internet is just a new tool. In the negative faction, Xu's view of the most representative, he said: "Internet thinking is a very absurd formulation, I am not too (recognition)." The internet is one of the many innovations in human history, the first major innovation is the steam engine, but I have not heard of a steam engine thinking, followed by railways, electronics, also did not mention thinking, there is no internet thinking abroad, we often cheat others also put themselves into.

Further force is also a lot of opinions, many say that the internet thinking five words lack a clear definition of boundaries, but only a simple description of the phenomenon, although there are many golden sentences and a flash, but the weight is really not enough.

Of course, this is just one corner of the iceberg, where similar rivalries are ubiquitous in various private gatherings. The breadth and depth of this debate is quite rare. How many people who want to do something today have never heard the word or considered it?

This kind of war-like reality may be related to the origin of the concept, this concept is not from academia, not even to the methodological experts, but from a lot of doers, shanyou to promote the concept of a little academic color. But Pianqiao this is not a simple concept, but it will reconstruct the social existence of a kind of thing, incomparable huge, extremely complex, its influence scope is far more than commercial. The extreme is that most of the people who talk about Internet thinking do not have the corresponding knowledge reserves to talk about such a complex thing. Lei has the ability to describe his phenomenon and practise it, but in fact it has no ability to define it and excavate it. This is the difference between a thinker and a doer.

That may be a bit abstract, but we can do a little analogy. Ma recently saw the internet as the third industrial revolution, and recognized this person relatively more. Then we can extract the magnitude of the third industrial revolution, and see that those people are the ones who dominate the idea of this magnitude of social change. The earliest human productivity leap should be the agricultural revolution, this time to consider people and people, the relationship between people and production in China is the pre-Qin thinkers; it was Adam Smith who took this matter into account during the first industrial Revolution. The system considered this when the second industry was Marx, and in Management was Taylor, Drucker and so on.

If the internet is indeed an industrial revolution, it must reconstruct many things, including the relationship between people and people, the relationship between the company and the company. This will inevitably be the emergence of a giant of thought to re-examine the reality of thinking about the future. Who now has the height and pattern of these people?

From this point of view, the debate is limited to what the company should do, the story is just beginning, the thinking and investment in the Internet is not enough. The lack of input leads to a lack of research, which leads to the lack of logic and the lack of logic, which leads to misunderstandings and noises, or even a real discussion. This may be related to the domestic atmosphere, the doer does not necessarily understand the methodology, but the simple success or failure of the hero must let everyone take for granted that the doer is right. But actually the doer is more suitable to speak the experience, the thinker is more suitable grasps the essence to rule. Experience relies on detail, cannot be duplicated, can be intuitively referenced, but rules are based on nature, so they can be studied and studied.

If you think deeply, the Internet tool theory is not contradictory to the Internet thinking that most of the present advocates. The Internet is clearly a tool, but when the changes brought about by this tool are enough to change the social form, then the corresponding ideas are derived from the tool. It is not difficult to understand that the tactics of using broadsword spears are not the same as the tactical thought of using muskets, but for humans, machetes and muskets are indeed tools.

The most surprising thing to me in the negative is Xu's annual, as a scholar his views did not reflect a suitable academic spirit.

The rapid success of millet and Ali and other Internet companies can not be a A-share listing in fact provide strong enough external stimulus, in this case ignore or in the old paper heap to find the answer is a bit like the Qing Dynasty fogies.

Imagine, Ali is undoubtedly a good enterprise, but this kind of enterprise is not compatible with domestic listing standards, what does that mean? This indicates that the defined value standard is incompatible with an Internet enterprise such as Ali. So why does this incompatibility occur? Because the internet resets the definition of a value of two words. Is this huge change not enough to support a new mode of thinking? It was too late to know. So the internet thinking is a kind of refactoring people and people, people and companies, companies and companies, people and social relations of a thing, even if only limited to the enterprise scope, it is a product development operation model, Personnel management mode, and even the financial system has a great impact on things.

In the West, Alchemy has spawned chemistry, but there is no doubt that when chemistry is still in alchemy, it must be more questionable, which should be the status quo of Internet thinking.

A further reflection on Internet thinking

Even the man who opposes Marx admits that his basic logic is in fact impeccable. If the marginal efficiency of a production organization continues to decline, that organizational approach will inevitably collapse and be replaced by a more marginal and efficient organization.

One way to win a new organization is because it can dramatically increase productivity, and a significant increase in productivity depends on the power of technology and the way it is organized. To make the problem look a little bit, we can abstract an organization into a giant of people, so that we can find four things that must be clear to it:

1. Why do I need to exist? There is a mission issue behind this.

2, where is the direction I want to go? There is a strategic problem behind it.

3. How to make the greatest strength after aggregation? Behind this is the question of efficiency.

4. How to deal with the relationship with other organizations? Behind this is the public relations problem.

Shanyou has recently been quite innovative in explaining Internet thinking with products, communities, and self-organizing things. This explanation basically covers the first, second and third, but not much on mission issues, in fact self-organization, product, community must be an organic whole, and in a certain spirit, this spirit is like self-organization, product, community soul. This is not tall things, often said the tune, Millet stressed that the fever is actually this thing.

In the end, the power that the giant can erupt depends on such factors as personal ability, personal will and degree of internal friction, and it is clear that self-organization and other organizational forms have an absolute advantage over the degree of personal desire and internal friction. In the production line, the personal will is not critical, people attached to the machine and process, is a part of the machine and process, that is, often said alienation. When the importance of intellectual capital exceeds the capital, the malady of this kind of organization appears, because his intention is to use man's physical strength and his hands, which leads to the deviation of people's will from the organization's will, which leads to the recessive confrontation between the individual and the organization, and the result is the entropy increase. Self-organization is the fundamental solution to this problem, he let the organization's goals and personal goals to become harmonious, so that the spirit of the same people come together.

Self-organization may bring the result is extremely subversive, the image of the representative organization of the giant in the agricultural era is to take broadsword, in the industrial era is the gun, and in the self-organization of the time is the missile. On the microscopic level this means that as long as you find the right point to establish this model (meaning from the organization, product, community), the industry can be subversive. But as with the birth of new things always have to undergo a lot of hardships to mature, the new model does face some new difficulties. While cheering for this new model, let us not forget that we are at the beginning, not the end.

Some of the common issues that can be immediately thought of are:

1, the organization of the application of the question.

2. Decision-making issues. If the McKinsey approach is not enough to help make decisions in a state of chaos, how do companies judge the basic direction? It should be inappropriate to return to intuition thoroughly.

3, in the individual work can not be a clear amount of self-organization mode, how to distribute the benefits to achieve the recognition of fairness? This problem can be solved as a chronic poison, to poison itself. The reality of the best self-organizing should be the open source community, but the open source community does not have the money, so there is no problem.

。。。 。。。

At the same time, different industries will face some problems which belong to themselves alone.

For the 2C field, you need to answer a slightly counterintuitive question, bat including 360 can be considered Internet thinking? The answer is very common sense, if the Internet thinking defined as in a spirit of self-organization, product, and community of the organic whole to explore the market thinking way, that bat,360 actually no internet thinking. According to my observation, they may attach importance to the product, but not in the community and self-organization out too far. One obvious fact is that you don't really have to say where their fans are and how they interact with their fans to maintain the group. If so, the next question is how the new paradigm based on internet thinking can be used in the fields that bat occupies? This is bound to be possible, but the difficulty in the 2C field is that everyone is already offering free products, how should the efficiency advantages of the new model be reflected?

For the 2B domain, the difficulty lies in the organization of the community. Personal choice of products will be concerned about such functions such as feelings and other things, but organizations and organizations are often direct interest relations, in theory, business-to-business business occurs, the introduction of personal preference is in fact dereliction of life, it is therefore there will be no eternal friendship between countries, only the eternal interests of such a statement. It is more difficult to build a community simply on the basis of benefits, which requires further discussion.

For the O2O field, the difficulty may lie in self-organization. An obvious prerequisite for self-organization is that people must have a higher level of demand. But in the O2O field, once the need to involve a large number of staff groups, which will lead to some employees need to use the traditional hierarchical structure, and some people need to use self-organizing mode, this mix requires a high level of skill. This means that companies with internet thinking and doing O2O are easy to eat in places where traditional companies are good at doing things.

Concluding

Internet thinking is actually a new world, but its veil but only a little bit, the new world has infinite wealth, but there are viruses and indigenous to create problems for you. You have to take care of these things in order to settle down in the new world better. From this point of view on the Internet thinking and debate is really just the beginning.