A Blue Ocean Strategy (Redux)
The other day, I was asked, "So what do you think of so-and-so's 'blue ocean strategy' thing? He seems quite hot on it and he's wasted many hours telling us about it so that we can tell the Imperial Assessors about it too!"
Well, as a former eunuch of the Forbidden City (haha, the process is reversible, you know) I can say what I think. I am 99% sure that there are a few of my former colleagues who think it is a silly idea for that kind of institution, but who don't dare to comment on it simply because the axeman might come for them. I am 99% sure that there are also a few who don't know what is implied by a 'blue ocean' strategy. The reason I have used a 99% confidence level is that I am 100% certain that there is a 1% chance that you would be unable to prove either point definitively for 'a few' people.
I remember that I once asked, "Do we have any strategy that is based on our own principles exclusively and rationally?"
The reply was, "Why spend so much time to reinvent the wheel? We can adapt any strategy to our situation."
It is a 'lazy innovator' strategy. This isn't to say that 'lazy innovation' is a bad thing; it saves energy and effort when you stand on the shoulders of giants. However, if you don't rise above that level, then it actually wastes energy and effort. Think about it: you spend a lot of time and energy climbing up there on someone else's account but go no higher than you would have gone on your own... how sad!
This is what I predict for the fabled and fabulous 'blue ocean strategy': I predict that it will sink like a stone once the Imperial Assessors have walked away. A Grand Canal is not a blue ocean; and in this day and age, as I've said before, it is very hard indeed to find blue oceans anywhere.
Note (1): The 'lazy innovator' strategy is not a very well-known concept. However, you can think of it as a strategy in which an innovator deliberately and with forethought attempts to make the smallest possible innovation that will give the greatest possible useful strategic development (as opposed to tactical development or instrumental change) in the existing situation. This is unlike most 'continuous innovation' strategies in which the object is to maximize yield or improve things without looking at the 'doing almost nothing, zen-master style' possibility or the 'climb up on shoulders of giants' possibility and such. The problem in this case was that the old fellow was not deliberately applying the strategy; he was using it without thinking!
Note (2): Actually, it was instructive to listen to the old fellow tonight at the Parliament of Wyverns. It was amazing how much he was not telling. There is obviously a strategic brain in there, but it is almost totally engaged in self-preservation and not institutional progress. (Updated at 20:00.)
Well, as a former eunuch of the Forbidden City (haha, the process is reversible, you know) I can say what I think. I am 99% sure that there are a few of my former colleagues who think it is a silly idea for that kind of institution, but who don't dare to comment on it simply because the axeman might come for them. I am 99% sure that there are also a few who don't know what is implied by a 'blue ocean' strategy. The reason I have used a 99% confidence level is that I am 100% certain that there is a 1% chance that you would be unable to prove either point definitively for 'a few' people.
I remember that I once asked, "Do we have any strategy that is based on our own principles exclusively and rationally?"
The reply was, "Why spend so much time to reinvent the wheel? We can adapt any strategy to our situation."
It is a 'lazy innovator' strategy. This isn't to say that 'lazy innovation' is a bad thing; it saves energy and effort when you stand on the shoulders of giants. However, if you don't rise above that level, then it actually wastes energy and effort. Think about it: you spend a lot of time and energy climbing up there on someone else's account but go no higher than you would have gone on your own... how sad!
This is what I predict for the fabled and fabulous 'blue ocean strategy': I predict that it will sink like a stone once the Imperial Assessors have walked away. A Grand Canal is not a blue ocean; and in this day and age, as I've said before, it is very hard indeed to find blue oceans anywhere.
Note (1): The 'lazy innovator' strategy is not a very well-known concept. However, you can think of it as a strategy in which an innovator deliberately and with forethought attempts to make the smallest possible innovation that will give the greatest possible useful strategic development (as opposed to tactical development or instrumental change) in the existing situation. This is unlike most 'continuous innovation' strategies in which the object is to maximize yield or improve things without looking at the 'doing almost nothing, zen-master style' possibility or the 'climb up on shoulders of giants' possibility and such. The problem in this case was that the old fellow was not deliberately applying the strategy; he was using it without thinking!
Note (2): Actually, it was instructive to listen to the old fellow tonight at the Parliament of Wyverns. It was amazing how much he was not telling. There is obviously a strategic brain in there, but it is almost totally engaged in self-preservation and not institutional progress. (Updated at 20:00.)
Labels: Innovation, Management, Strategic Thinking
etched with acid at 11:21:00 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home