|
|
|
|
|
by MichaelRo
729 days ago
|
|
>> Why is it that innovations require heroics to occur in our organization? Why do we immediately assume that innovation = progress? Sure, the things that SURVIVE are useful, but that's just the tip of the iceberg. The vast majority of ideas are just like mutations in evolution more likely to be at best useless and probably damaging in various ways. You see, social constructs are not as dumb as they appear to be to the armchair intellectual. "Why, we should embrace innovation and immediately adopt any idiocy that Mary from accounting is suggesting as our global company policy". I assure you that by natural law, if "random idea from random guy" were profitable on average, we'd have a system that would encourage such ideas. The sad fact is that they aren't and will never be. Friction (named in the article as "Dysfunctional Organization") is an unfortunate but necessary process which ensures "survival of the fittest", even among "innovation". It's as simple as that. |
|