The choice of business life and death: changing the Pass

"I can really change!" "Anyone would say that, sadly, most companies don't." A survey shows that in the face of difficulties, the ratio of changes to unchanged is 1:9.　　As competition intensifies in the global marketplace, we urgently need to break the existing rules of the game that are not applicable. The key to improving IBM's business is the shift in focus from selling computer hardware to providing "services" that help customers build and run their own information technology operations. This requires a major cultural shift to support – if it is in the interests of the client, IBM employees must recommend customers to buy from competitors.　　But this radical change has been effective: providing services has become IBM's core business and the key to its success. Changing people's behaviour without making changes is the most important challenge facing business groups in a turbulent world of survival. "strategy, structure, culture or systems have never been a priority, and the core of things is always about changes in people's behavior," said John Cotte, a Harvard Business School professor who studied dozens of companies experiencing upheaval. "Those people may have to deal with the upheaval in the turbulent market environment, such as the emergence of a new global competitor, from a regulated environment to a free environment, or a reorganization, merger of the company ... And we may want to change the way we work, such as how to guide subordinates and how to face criticism.　　However, we often do not want to change, but do not. CEOs are supposed to be the main agents of corporate change, but they often refuse to change, and even tend to regress, like others. Eisner is the most notorious recent example. When he died of a heart attack, he finally obeyed his wife's advice and promoted Michael Owitz to be a second executive to ease his pressure to manage the Walt Disney Company.　　However, the Eisner still did not see through this truth, never give an Olympian any substantive rights. Traditional experience argues that crises can effectively cause change.　　But a serious heart attack is already the most serious personal crisis, and it does not inspire people to change consciousness-at least not enough. Why is it so hard for people to change? Is the structure of the brain related to our stubborn refusal to change?　　Why resist if we know that this is good for us? "In most cases, the act of moving makes a difference," Kurt hit the nail, "this is for those who focus on analysis, digital measurement companies and those who think they are as smart as an MBA, it can help people see the essence of the problem, find a solution." "In the the 1990s, Gerstner, who succeeded in getting IBM back to the dead, also recognized the important role of love moving." As a CEO, Gerstner focused on what he learned when he was a consultant at McKinsey: A sober analysis and strategy. He thinks he can improve the company by selling assets and cutting costs, butHe soon found that these were not enough, and he had to change the entrenched corporate culture that had become rigid and bureaucratic, changing the attitudes and behaviour of hundreds of employees. Gerstner wrote in his Notepad that he realized that he had to make his employees have a strong emotional appeal, "to get them out of a state of lethargy and to remind themselves that you are IBM employees"!　　Instead of just sitting in the corner of the office negotiating business and analyzing spreadsheets, he has to keep and deliver high enthusiasm for thousands of hours on different occasions. Although Gerstner is hard to get along with, he has done the transition brilliantly. When he was revamping a large number of employees, he showed his side as a charming, affectionate orator.　　[Page] "I can really change!" "Anyone would say that, sadly, most companies don't." A survey shows that in the face of difficulties, the ratio of changes to unchanged is 1:9.　　As competition intensifies in the global marketplace, we urgently need to break the existing rules of the game that are not applicable. The key to improving IBM's business is the shift in focus from selling computer hardware to providing "services" that help customers build and run their own information technology operations. This requires a major cultural shift to support – if it is in the interests of the client, IBM employees must recommend customers to buy from competitors.　　But this radical change has been effective: providing services has become IBM's core business and the key to its success. Changing people's behaviour without making changes is the most important challenge facing business groups in a turbulent world of survival. "strategy, structure, culture or systems have never been a priority, and the core of things is always about changes in people's behavior," said John Cotte, a Harvard Business School professor who studied dozens of companies experiencing upheaval. "Those people may have to deal with the upheaval in the turbulent market environment, such as the emergence of a new global competitor, from a regulated environment to a free environment, or a reorganization, merger of the company ... And we may want to change the way we work, such as how to guide subordinates and how to face criticism.　　However, we often do not want to change, but do not. CEOs are supposed to be the main agents of corporate change, but they often refuse to change, and even tend to regress, like others. Eisner is the most notorious recent example. When he died of a heart attack, he finally obeyed his wife's advice and promoted Michael Owitz to be a second executive to ease his pressure to manage the Walt Disney Company.　　However, the Eisner still did not see through this truth, never give an Olympian any substantive rights. Traditional experience argues that crises can effectively cause change.　　But a serious heart attack is already the most serious personal crisis, and it does not inspire people to change consciousness-at least not enough. WhyIs it so hard for people to change? Is the structure of the brain related to our stubborn refusal to change?　　Why resist if we know that this is good for us? "In most cases, the act of moving makes a difference," Kurt hit the nail, "this is for those who focus on analysis, digital measurement companies and those who think they are as smart as an MBA, it can help people see the essence of the problem, find a solution." "In the the 1990s, Gerstner, who succeeded in getting IBM back to the dead, also recognized the important role of love moving." As a CEO, Gerstner focused on what he learned when he was a consultant at McKinsey: A sober analysis and strategy.　　He thinks he can improve the company by selling assets and cutting costs, but he soon found that this was not enough and he had to change the entrenched corporate culture that had become rigid and bureaucratic, changing the attitudes and behaviour of hundreds of employees. Gerstner wrote in his Notepad that he realized that he had to make his employees have a strong emotional appeal, "to get them out of a state of lethargy and to remind themselves that you are IBM employees"!　　Instead of just sitting in the corner of the office negotiating business and analyzing spreadsheets, he has to keep and deliver high enthusiasm for thousands of hours on different occasions. Although Gerstner is hard to get along with, he has done the transition brilliantly. When he was revamping a large number of employees, he showed his side as a charming, affectionate orator. [Page] work out a structural framework Dr. Dian Eugnis, a professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, who, like Kurt, realizes the importance of not being bound by the superficial facts. "It's very important to tell patients about their health, but it's often not enough to make a difference, and we need to draw on the often overlooked psychological, emotional and spiritual aspects of things."　　"The overall plan, designed to be vegetarian and fat-calorie-less than 10%, can fundamentally cure heart disease without surgery or medication," ornish. In 1993, Ornish persuaded the Omaha Insurance company to invest in the experiment. The researchers found 333 patients with severe arterial occlusion as subjects to help them quit smoking and eat according to Ornish's diet. The patient participates in two weekly, psychologist-directed mutual aid meetings, as well as courses in meditation, relaxation, yoga, aerobic exercise, etc. The study found that 3 years later, 77% of patients were able to persist in their lifestyle changes without undergoing heart bypass surgery.　　As a result, the Omaha insurance company saved about 30,000 dollars per patient. Why does the traditional method have a low success rate and Ornish's plan succeeds? Ornish that doctors have been using patients ' fear of death to motivate them to change their desires, and that's not going to work. Death is too frightening, the patient will appear rejection psychology, and return to the original way of life. Ornish notTo stimulate them with "fear of death", but to ask questions again-"live happily" so that they believe that they can live longer and live better. The story of Apple CEO Steve Jobs's use of a redesign of the company's image to turn Apple back on is simple, full of positive, and moving. After a long period of unemployment, he returned to the company again.　　At that time, Apple's image in the minds of its employees and consumers a defeated and marginalized competitor in the battle for market share, he redefined the company's image to make it a small but enviable home for the elite: innovative innovators who dared to "think differently". Similarly, it is a good example of how the New York Times President and the publisher, Asser Salzberg, have done to rescue the newspaper from the crisis. The former editor-in-chief Hauer Reins alienated most of the staff in the editorial department, preferring several of them, thereby undermining the original team spirit. Raines also stepped down after a celebrity journalist he was defending had been exposed to making false news.　　The scandal has been a serious blow to the reputation of the famous newspaper. Saltzberg said: "We are a very good newspaper, but temporarily misguided, the price is almost lost the creation of this outstanding work environment team spirit."　　As long as we admit mistakes, ensure that no longer occur, and more self-examination, we can maintain our excellent performance and regain team spirit. To achieve these goals, Saltzberg the new editor-in-chief, Keller (a respected veteran who embodies the lost team culture of the newspaper) instead of Raines, and designated a "popular editor" to criticize the newspaper in a column.　　Sure enough, the New York Times news coverage is back on track soon. A radical change. A few years ago, when Xerox was in crisis, managers came up with a new way to change the way salespeople have been working. "All the salespeople in their entire career, are doing the same thing," says James Felstone, president of Xerox North America (5400 people who work for him), "they will come to see the copier and then say how old it is and buy a new one. They know what to do. "The procedures are predictable, so they can work out daily, weekly, and even yearly plans," he said.　　That's a good thing, but it's no longer valid. According to the new way of working, salespeople should really put themselves in the shoes of the user and promote other products like scanners and printers in due course. Maybe they'll find that customers don't really need that much more full-featured machine. Understanding the needs of the customer means that the reps have to spend more time talking to more people. This breaks the predictable predictability of their day-to-day work.　　Firestone recalls that sales reps become very worried. Xerox has been slow to provide them with the requiredSupport, exacerbating the worries of employees. It usually takes two months for the salesperson to be trained to accept the new method. After two years, the company changed its original compensation incentive system to better adapt to the new model. Because, in this mode, the sales reps have to spend more time and energy to make the sale.　　Still, employees who are trying to sell more products end up making Xerox free from bankruptcy and return to profitability. "People have to be confident that these processes will form a whole within the company," Firestone said. "The reform of big companies often defeats this point." "Even if reform starts at the top of the corporate pyramid, it can easily fail in the middle of the process," he said.　　That explains why Xerox now retains a "joint seminar": Let mid-level managers (those who carry out these steps) expose and generalize how the company's system resists its change agenda. Bain Management consulting firm has studied 21 recent corporate reforms, most have been "fully completed" in just two years or less, and no company has been reformed for more than 3 years, and the tools are radical--in almost all cases, CEOs have replaced most of the top executives.　　And companies are almost always able to get quick and tangible results, and in the process of revival, their share prices are growing at an average rate of 250% a year. Of course, it is not always possible to make a radical change in a business environment. Nevertheless, it is important to identify and accomplish a number of goals and to celebrate some of the quick positive results, as they can greatly boost morale and overcome the resistance to change.