評論
打印
Rather than evaluating programs in terms of how happy they make people, how satisfied those people become, programs must be evaluated in terms of the quality of the discontent they engender. For example, if a consultant wants to assess whether or not an organization is healthy, hedoesn't ask, "Is there an absence of complaints?" but rather, "What kinds of complaints are there?"
在評估一個方案的時候，不是看它們會令人們多么高興，不是看人們會變得多么滿足，而要看這些方案引起什么樣的不滿。舉例說，如果一個顧問要估價一個組織是否健康，他不是問，"是不是沒有什么不滿?"而是要問，"有什么不滿?"
Instead of trying to make gradual changes in small increments, make big changes. After all, big changes are relatively easier to make than are small ones. Some people assume that the way to bring about improvement is to make the change small enough so that nobody will notice it. This approach has never worked, and one can't help but wonder why such thinking continues. Everyone knows how to resist small changes; they do it all the time. If, however, the change is big enough, resistance can’t be mobilized against it. Management can make a sweeping organizational change，but just let a manager try to change someone's desk from here to there, and see the great difficulty he encounters. All change is resisted, so the question is how can the changes be made big enough so that they have a chance of succeeding?
不要試圖緩慢地一點點地變革，而要大變革。畢竟，大的變革比小的變革相對來說更容易進行。有些人認為，改進的方法是使變革的步伐小到使人注意不到。這種辦法從來就沒有成功過。真不知道為什么這種思想還在繼續流行。每個人都知道如何抵制小的變革，他們無時無刻不在抵制小的變革。但是，如果變革足夠大的話，要對它進行抵制就不可能了。管理部門能夠大刀闊斧地進行全面的組織變動，但是你讓一個經理把某個人的辦公桌從這兒挪到那兒，看他會遇到多么大的困難。一切變革都會遇到抵制，問題是如何使變革盡量大一些，以使它們有獲得成功的機會。
