尝试、学习、修改：新 IT 领导者的代码
开放式组织

> 
> 随着创新步伐的增加, 长期规划变得越来越困难。让我们重新思考一下我们对变化的反应方式。
> 
> 
> 


![](/data/attachment/album/201808/27/121206f6h6dz66uv7ifhsn.png)


几乎每一天，新的技术发展都可能会动摇那些甚至最复杂、最完善的商业计划。组织经常发现自己需要不断努力适应新的环境，这导致了他们对未来规划的转变。


根据 CompTIA 2017 年的[研究](https://www.cio.com/article/3246027/enterprise-architecture/the-death-of-long-term-it-planning.html?upd=1515780110970)，目前只有 34% 的公司正在制定超过 12 个月的 IT 架构计划。从长期计划转变的一个原因是：商业环境变化如此之快，以至于几乎不可能进一步规划未来。[CIO.com 说道](https://www.cio.com/article/3246027/enterprise-architecture/the-death-of-long-term-it-planning.html?upd=1515780110970)，“如果你的公司正视图制定一项将持续五到十年的计划，那就忘了它。”


我听过来自世界各地无数客户和合作伙伴的类似声明：技术创新正以一种前所未有的速度发生着。


其结果是长期规划已不复存在。如果我们要在这个新世界取得成功，我们需要以不同的方式思考我们运营组织的方式。


### 计划是怎么死的


正如我在《<ruby> 开放式组织 <rt>  The Open Organization </rt></ruby>》中写的那样，传统经营组织针对工业经济进行了优化。他们采用等级结构和严格规定的流程，以实现地位竞争优势。要取得成功，他们必须确定他们想要实现的战略地位。然后，他们必须制定并规划实现目标的计划，并以最有效的方式执行这些计划，通过协调活动和推动合规性。


管理层的职责是优化这一过程：计划、规定、执行。包括：让我们想象一个有竞争力的优势地位；让我们来配置组织以最终达成目标；然后让我们通过确保组织的所有方面都遵守规定来推动执行。这就是我所说的“机械管理”，对于不同时期来说它都是一个出色的解决方案。


在当今动荡不定的世界中，我们预测和定义战略位置的能力正在下降，因为变化的速度，新变量的引入速度正在加速。传统的、长期的、战略性规划和执行不像以前那么有效。


如果长期规划变得如此困难，那么规定必要的行为就更具有挑战性。并且衡量对计划的合规性几乎是不可能的。


这一切都极大地影响了人们的工作方式。与过去传统经营组织中的工人不同，他们为自己能够重复行动而感到自豪，几乎没有变化和舒适的确定性 —— 今天的工人在充满模糊性的环境中运作。他们的工作需要更大的创造力、直觉和批判性判断 —— 更多的需要背离过去的“常规”，以适应当今的新情况。


以这种新方式工作对于价值创造变得更加重要。我们的管理系统必须专注于构建结构，系统和流程，以帮助创建积极主动的工人，他们能够以快速和敏捷的方式进行创新和行动。


我们需要提出一个不同的解决方案来优化组织，以适应不同的经济时代，从自下而上而不是自上而下开始。我们需要替换过去的三步骤 —— 计划、规定、执行，以一种更适应当今动荡天气的方法来取得成功 —— 尝试、学习、修改。


### 尝试、学习、修改


因为环境变化如此之快，而且几乎没有任何预警，并且因为我们需要采取的步骤不再提前计划，我们需要培养鼓励创造性尝试和错误的环境，而不是坚持对五年计划的忠诚。以下是以这种方式开始工作的一些暗示：


* **更短的计划周期（尝试）。** 管理者需要考虑的是他们可以快速尝试的短期实验，而不是在长期战略方向上苦恼。他们应该寻求方法来帮助他们的团队承担计算风险，并利用他们掌握的数据来对最有利的路径做出最好的猜测。他们可以通过降低开销和让团队自由快速尝试新方法来做到这一点。
* **更高的失败容忍度（学习）。** 更多的实验频率意味着更大的失败机会。与传统组织相比，富有创造力和有弹性的组织[对失败的容忍度要高得多](https://opensource.com/open-organization/16/12/building-culture-innovation-your-organization)。管理者应将失败视为学习的机会，在他们的团队正在运行的测试中收集反馈的时刻。
* **更具适应性的结构（修改）。** 能够轻松修改组织结构和战略方向，以及在条件需要时愿意这样做，是确保组织能够根据快速变化的环境条件发展的关键。管理者不能再拘泥于任何想法，因为这个想法证明自己对实现短期目标很有用。


如果长期计划已经消亡，那么就可以进行长期的短期实验。尝试，学习和修改，这是在不确定时期前进的最佳途径。


[订阅我们的每周实事通讯](https://opensource.com/open-organization/resources/newsletter)以了解有关开源组织的更多信息。




---


via: <https://opensource.com/open-organization/18/3/try-learn-modify>


作者：[Jim Whitehurst](https://opensource.com/users/remyd)  
 译者：[MjSeven](https://github.com/MjSeven)  
 校对：[wxy](https://github.com/wxy)


本文由 [LCTT](https://github.com/LCTT/TranslateProject) 原创编译，[Linux中国](https://linux.cn/) 荣誉推出


OK
Just about every day, new technological developments threaten to destabilize even the most intricate and best-laid business plans. Organizations often find themselves scrambling to adapt to new conditions, and that's created a shift in how they plan for the future.

According to a 2017 [study](https://www.cio.com/article/3246027/enterprise-architecture/the-death-of-long-term-it-planning.html?upd=1515780110970) by CompTIA, only 34% of companies are currently developing IT architecture plans that extend beyond 12 months. One reason for that shift away from a longer-term plan is that business contexts are changing so quickly that planning any further into the future is nearly impossible. "If your company is trying to set a plan that will last five to 10 years down the road," [CIO.com writes](https://www.cio.com/article/3246027/enterprise-architecture/the-death-of-long-term-it-planning.html?upd=1515780110970), "forget it."


I've heard similar statements from countless customers and partners around the world. Technological innovations are occurring at an unprecedented pace.

The result is that long-term planning is dead. We need to be thinking differently about the way we run our organizations if we're going to succeed in this new world.

## How planning died

As I wrote in *The Open Organization*, traditionally-run organizations are optimized for industrial economies. They embrace hierarchical structures and rigidly prescribed processes as they work to achieve positional competitive advantage. To be successful, they have to define the strategic positions they want to achieve. Then they have to formulate and dictate plans for getting there, and execute on those plans in the most efficient ways possible—by coordinating activities and driving compliance.

Management's role is to optimize this process: *plan, prescribe, execute*. It consists of saying: Let's think of a competitively advantaged position; let's configure our organization to ultimately get there; and then let's drive execution by making sure all aspects of the organization comply. It's what I'll call "mechanical management," and it's a brilliant solution for a different time.

In today's volatile and uncertain world, our ability to predict and define strategic positions is diminishing—because the pace of change, the rate of introduction of new variables, is accelerating. Classic, long-term, strategic planning and execution isn't as effective as it used to be.

If long-term planning has become so difficult, then prescribing necessary behaviors is even *more* challenging. And measuring compliance against a plan is next to impossible.

All this dramatically affects the way people work. Unlike workers in the traditionally-run organizations of the past—who prided themselves on being able to act repetitively, with little variation and comfortable certainty—today's workers operate in contexts of abundant ambiguity. Their work requires greater creativity, intuition, and critical judgment—there is a greater demand to deviate from yesterday's "normal" and adjust to today's new conditions.

Working in this new way has become more critical to value creation. Our management systems must focus on building structures, systems, and processes that help create engaged, motivated workers—people who are enabled to innovate and act with speed and agility.

We need to come up with a different solution for optimizing organizations for a very different economic era, one that works from the *bottom up* rather than the *top down*. We need to replace that old three-step formula for success—*plan, prescribe, execute*—with one much better suited to today's tumultuous climate: *try, learn, modify*.

## Try, learn, modify

Because conditions can change so rapidly and with so little warning—and because the steps we need to take next are no longer planned in advance—we need to cultivate environments that encourage creative trial and error, not unyielding allegiance to a five-year schedule. Here are just a few implications of beginning to work this way:

**Shorter planning cycles (try).**Rather than agonize over long-term strategic directions, managers need to be thinking of short-term experiments they can try quickly. They should be seeking ways to help their teams take calculated risks and leverage the data at their disposal to make best guesses about the most beneficial paths forward. They can do this by lowering overhead and giving teams the freedom to try new approaches quickly.**Higher tolerance for failure (learn).**Greater frequency of experimentation means greater opportunity for failure. Creative and resilient organizations have a[significantly higher tolerance for failure](https://opensource.com/open-organization/16/12/building-culture-innovation-your-organization)than traditional organizations do. Managers should treat failures as learning opportunities—moments to gather feedback on the tests their teams are running.**More adaptable structures (modify).**An ability to easily modify organizational structures and strategic directions—and the*willingness*to do it when conditions necessitate—is the key to ensuring that organizations can evolve in line with rapidly changing environmental conditions. Managers can't be wedded to any*idea*any longer than that idea proves itself to be useful for accomplishing a short-term goal.

If long-term planning is dead, then long live shorter-term experimentation. Try, learn, and modify—that's the best path forward during uncertain times.

[Subscribe to our weekly newsletter](https://opensource.com/open-organization/resources/newsletter) to learn more about open organizations.

## 3 Comments