The Chaos Imperative: How Chance and Disruption Increase Innovation, Effectiveness, and Success (Anglais) Relié – 13 août 2013
Les clients ayant acheté cet article ont également acheté
Descriptions du produit
Revue de presse
Présentation de l'éditeur
In The Chaos Imperative, organizational expert and bestselling author Ori Brafman (Sway, The Starfish and the Spider) shows how even the best and most efficient organizations, from Fortune 500 companies to today's US Army, benefit from allowing a little unstructured space and disruption into their planning and decision-making.
Aucun appareil Kindle n'est requis. Téléchargez l'une des applis Kindle gratuites et commencez à lire les livres Kindle sur votre smartphone, tablette ou ordinateur.
Pour obtenir l'appli gratuite, saisissez votre adresse e-mail ou numéro de téléphone mobile.
Détails sur le produit
En savoir plus sur les auteursDécouvrez des livres, informez-vous sur les écrivains, lisez des blogs d'auteurs et bien plus encore.
Dans ce livre(En savoir plus)
Commentaires en ligne
Commentaires client les plus utiles sur Amazon.com (beta)
The prerequisite for contained chaos is "white space." This is never defined in the book and has different meanings in different stories. In the Black Plague, it refers to the death of a quarter of the European population, which cleared out competition so some "unusual suspects" (in the authors' phrase) could thrive. That's a reasonable concept. But in the worldwide dispersion of coconut palms, the white space is the empty ocean that provides a barrier to competition rather than a place for coconuts to grow.
Okay, so you think white space is anything that reduces competition. But in the story of Kary Mullis, the white space is an advisor who shields him not from competition, but from being forced into conventional paths or dismissed from the school. For Fletcher Henderson, it is the racism that denied him a career as a chemist and forced him into music. That was no protection, no emptiness, no removal of competition. White space also refers to what your brain does when you're not concentrating on something, the lack of preconception that outsiders bring to a problem, what you start with if you ignore conventional assumptions, government money (I think because it removes the pressure to fund yourself), and any lack of regimentation or any freedom. Tellingly, white space is also refusal to subject your methods to objective validation, something that proves very handy for one of the authors when the Army tries to determine the effectiveness of his consulting project.
My best guess at a definition is white space is any negative force or removed constraint or emptiness that helps someone or something succeed in an unconventional way. Nassim Taleb calls this via negativa, "So knowledge grows by subtraction much more than by addition--given that what we know today might turn out to be wrong but what we know to be wrong cannot turn out to be right, at least not easily." While I think there is a lot of insight in this view, you won't get it from this book. The definitions are so imprecise that any story can be fit into the mold, meaning that the stories add nothing to the argument.
Separately, the stories are not very accurate on their own. The asteroid impact at the Cretaceous-Paleogene boundary did not increase biodiversity, as the authors claim, but reduced it dramatically. The story that the bubonic plague caused nobles to leave their wealth to universities instead of the church, resulting in university-trained priests overthrowing medieval dogmatism and sparking 150 years of philosophical and technological progress in Europe is silly (the plague certainly changed a lot of things, some of which were important precursors to the Renaissance, but this particular vector is wrong, and no one has any idea how history would have been written without the plague). Kary Mullis is an unconventional character, but his PCR work was done in a conventional way, and cannot be credibly linked to academic protection offered 15 years earlier. Anyway, it's not so much that the stories are factually incorrect, it's that they're much too shallow to be useful illustrating the white space concept. The one thread that runs through the book, the Army consulting project, is just random bits and pieces, it never goes anywhere.
The advice in the last chapter is the opposite of what I expected. Only the first rule is subtractive, avoid data and measurements. Even this one is not chaotic in principle, data and measurement have often overturned conventional wisdom, without them it's hard to see how you get people to change anything. Also, I'm skeptical of people who recommend this, in my experience it means data and measurement don't favor their ideas.
The other four rules are all addition, no subtraction, and it is all containment to limit chaos. Rule 2 is "Remember it's called organized chaos." It consists of admonitions to make sure there's plenty of organization and constraints, so small amounts of chaos can spark their magic. As far as I'm concerned, that is to chaos what breeding is to evolution, the attempt to direct a process that depends essentially on randomness.
Rule 3 urges us to make our white space productive, which means it's no longer white space. Rule 4 is another positive admonition, embrace unusual suspects. That may sound as if it adds to chaos, but the details tell you to avoid the really unusual people and find a comfortable mildly eccentric suspect close to home. Rule 5, organize serendipity, is like rule 3 in that it destroys what it purports to seek.
There are a lot of words in this 224-page book, but if you boiled it down to the clear and useful information, it would consist almost entirely of white space.
The main thrust of the book is the author's work concluding with the U.S. Army on the topic of leadership. This is then interspersed with anecdotes of similar occurrences from all sort of other fields and place.
So what does the author tell us to look for, "White Space" now if this were a dissertation I would have to deduct points because there is no real definition or theory of what white space is and how to use it. Maybe that is the chaos inherent in the book, and we have to figure it out?
From what I could gather, "white space" is allowing room for a sort of semi-controlled chaos; a place where the unusual and unlikely can be allowed to exist and experiment without standard repercussions and measurements of success. There are several different stories that refer to some form of this "White Space" but it at felt like they were just interesting stories of unusual success being brought together.
You know, now that I think of it, this book kind of reminds me of a Malcolm Gladwell book, but without a strong central theme, nor quite as interesting to read.
So yeah, I think that sums it up. A book about leadership written in a Gladwell-esque style. That would be my best description. I personally did not get much out of this book. But maybe I was interpreting it wrong, could be. For a long time I just thought Green Eggs & Ham was about eating breakfast.
If you have any questions about the book feel free to leave a comment below and I will be happy to try and answer.
The concept is simple. The authors list three conditions for stimulating creativity and innovation. The one condition that most readers will most benefit from is what is called "white space". This term is clearly defined time and time again as space and time in which the individual can think and act freely without supervision. We are given many examples in which notable ideas have been born. One of the most notable pointed out is how students as a whole perform better when there's a fair amount of free time scheduled.
My only complaint is that the simple concept is repeated over and over again through numerous examples. However, I very much enjoyed reading the entire book, so that complaint of mine isn't a big deal. Very highly recommended.
Believe what you will but I don't think think book made its case.