2009年3月28日星期六

NYtimes :是否到了重整商学院的时候了?

March 15, 2009

Is It Time to Retrain B-Schools?

JOHN Thain has one. So do Richard Fuld, Stanley O’Neal and Vikram Pandit. For that matter, so does John Paulson, the hedge fund kingpin.

Yes, all five have fat bank accounts, even now, and all have made their share of headlines. But these current and former giants of finance also are all card-carrying M.B.A.’s.

The master’s of business administration, a gateway credential throughout corporate America, is especially coveted on Wall Street; in recent years, top business schools have routinely sent more than 40 percent of their graduates into the world of finance.

But with the economy in disarray and so many financial firms in free fall, analysts, and even educators themselves, are wondering if the way business students are taught may have contributed to the most serious economic crisis in decades.

“It is so obvious that something big has failed,” said Ángel Cabrera, dean of the Thunderbird School of Global Management in Glendale, Ariz. “We can look the other way, but come on. The C.E.O.’s of those companies, those are people we used to brag about. We cannot say, ‘Well, it wasn’t our fault’ when there is such a systemic, widespread failure of leadership.”

Critics of business education have many complaints. Some say the schools have become too scientific, too detached from real-world issues. Others say students are taught to come up with hasty solutions to complicated problems. Another group contends that schools give students a limited and distorted view of their role — that they graduate with a focus on maximizing shareholder value and only a limited understanding of ethical and social considerations essential to business leadership.

Such shortcomings may have left business school graduates inadequately prepared to make the decisions that, taken together, might have helped mitigate the financial crisis, critics say.

“There are extraordinary things taking place in business education, and a lot that is very promising,” said Judith F. Samuelson, executive director of the Business and Society Program at the Aspen Institute. “But what’s the central theorem of business education? It’s wanting.”

Some employers and recruiters also question the value of an M.B.A., and are telling young people they can get better training on the job than in business school. A growing number are setting up programs to help employees develop skills in-house.

On many campuses, changes are under way in courses and curriculums. Some schools are heightening their focus on long-term thinking or leadership, and many are adding seminars to address the economic crisis.

Jay O. Light, the dean of Harvard Business School, argues that there have been imbalances both on campuses and in the economy. “We lived through an enormous extended period of financial good times, and people became less focused on risks and risk management and more focused on making money,” he said. “We need to move that focus back toward the center.”

BUSINESS SCHOOLS have looked inward before, and some of the current problems may have stemmed from their last major self-examination. In the late 1950s, reports that the Ford and Carnegie foundations commissioned found mediocre faculty, and curriculums narrowly focused on vocational skills.

One of their recommendations was for business schools to become much more analytical and rigorous in their approach. And, over the years, that happened almost everywhere. Doctoral programs are commonplace. Professors conduct independent research and publish often in scholarly journals. Students learn complex models for analyzing competitive strategy, valuing options and more.

But schools may have gone too far in this direction, according to Warren Bennis, a professor of management at the University of Southern California. The schools suffer from “an overemphasis on the rigor and an underemphasis on relevance,” he said. “Business schools have forgotten that they are a professional school.”

Henry Mintzberg, a professor of management studies at McGill University in Montreal, also argues that because students spend so much time developing quick responses to packaged versions of business problems, they do not learn enough about real-world experiences.

For all of the emphasis on analytical rigor in business schools today, another major recommendation of the foundations’ reports from the 1950s — that business become a true profession, with a code of conduct and an ideology about its role in society — got far less traction, said Rakesh Khurana, a professor at Harvard Business School and author of “From Higher Aims to Hired Hands,” a historical analysis of business education.

Business schools, he said, never really taught their students that, like doctors and lawyers, they were part of a profession. And in the 1970s, he said, the idea took hold that a company’s stock price was the primary barometer of success, which changed the schools’ concept of proper management techniques.

Instead of being viewed as long-term economic stewards, he said, managers came to be seen as mainly as the agents of the owners — the shareholders — and responsible for maximizing shareholder wealth.

“A kind of market fundamentalism took hold in business education,” Professor Khurana said. “The new logic of shareholder primacy absolved management of any responsibility for anything other than financial results.”

Outwardly, at least, business schools look robust. For years, they have drawn some of the most talented students, and many top candidates are still applying. In fact, business school applications typically rise as the economy softens because potential students see graduate school as a haven from professional uncertainty.

Employers are making fewer recruiting trips to business schools this year, given the economy, but newly minted M.B.A.’s are still winning highly selective jobs in finance and consulting. A survey last year of M.B.A. candidates worldwide by the Graduate Management Admission Council, which administers the GMAT, found that 29 percent of incoming M.B.A. candidates were working in finance or consulting, and that 53 percent went into those industries upon graduating.

For universities, business education is a kind of cash cow. Business schools are less expensive to operate than graduate schools with elaborate labs and research facilities, and alumni tend to be generous with donations.

Business education is big business, too. Some 146,000 graduate degrees in business were awarded in 2005-06, roughly one-fourth of the 594,000 graduate degrees awarded that school year, according to the Education Department.

Still, there have been signs that all is not well in business education. A study of cheating among graduate students, published in 2006 in the journal Academy of Management Learning & Education, found that 56 percent of all M.B.A. students cheated regularly — more than in any other discipline. The authors attributed that to “perceived peer behavior” — in other words, students believed everyone else was doing it.

Some employers are also questioning the value of an M.B.A. degree. A research project that two Harvard professors released in 2008 found that employers valued graduates’ ability to think through complex business problems, but that something was still lacking.

“There is a need to broaden from the analytical focus of M.B.A. programs for more emphasis on skills and a sense of purpose and identity,” said David A. Garvin, a professor of business administration and one of the project’s authors.

Indeed, students themselves may welcome an emphasis on character skills. In surveys that the Aspen Institute regularly conducts, M.B.A. candidates say they actually become less confident during their time in business school that they will be able to resolve ethical quandaries in the workplace.

Business education “accentuates the simple technical pieces,” said Ms. Samuelson of the Aspen Institute, and “ignores the real complexity and, frankly, the really exciting opportunities business has to be the driver of long-term prosperity.”

A GROWING number of business schools are trying new approaches — and many are finding valuable lessons to draw from the economic crisis.

At the Stern School of Business of New York University — situated in what its dean, Thomas F. Cooley, called “the belly of the beast” in Lower Manhattan — 33 professors recently wrote papers analyzing the crisis and offering policy recommendations that have been combined in a book to be published this month. A course that Stern offered on the book filled up minutes after it was announced, Mr. Cooley said.

Thomas Philippon, an assistant professor of finance at Stern, plans to incorporate the changed world into his class this fall. While he plans to keep discussing basic financial concepts and tools, he also plans to spend more time on concepts like systemic risk.

Professor Philippon also plans to inject a discussion of whether or not the market is always right when it values things. “You would not have had that discussion three years ago,” he said.

Some schools had deep reviews of their curriculums under way even before the economic crisis unfurled.

Last year, Harvard Business School began a review pegged to its centennial, and it’s considering ways to make courses more global. There will probably also be more emphasis on leadership skills, Dean Light said.

“I think we need to redouble our efforts,” he said, “to make sure that even those people we send to financial services are first and foremost leaders who understand situations from a general management perspective.”

More immediately, Harvard is assembling cases based on recent events — issues involving accounting practices, for example, and JPMorgan Chase’s acquisition of Bear Stearns.

In 2006, the Yale School of Management introduced a curriculum offering interdisciplinary perspectives on complex problems. It’s also developing cases based on the financial crisis, and there are plans to devote sessions in the core curriculum to the crisis.

The Aspen Institute, meanwhile, is trying to change business education from the outside. It produces an annual report ranking business schools on how well they integrate social and environmental issues into curriculums. (Not all schools participate in its research, however.)

It has also developed a curriculum in conjunction with the Yale School of Management that is aimed at teaching students how to act upon their values at work. About 55 business schools, including those at Stanford, Northwestern and M.I.T, are using all or part of it in pilot programs.

There are also calls to make management a profession like law or medicine, with a code of conduct, a certification examination and continuing education.

Dean Cabrera of Thunderbird has been working with the United Nations Global Compact, which promotes standards for sustainable business practices, and led a task force in developing a set of “Principles for Responsible Management Education” that follow a similar philosophy. Roughly 200 business schools worldwide, including Thunderbird, have adopted them, though some of the best-known American schools are not on the list.

At the Yale School of Management, the new dean, Sharon M. Oster, has called for a renewed focus on the social value of management. “Business creates value in terms of services and products,” she said. “That’s what business delivers, just like medicine delivers a healthy person.”

PROFESSIONALIZATION is hardly a panacea. No one would argue that lawyers, doctors and accountants are immune from wrongdoing or poor judgment, and they have long been taking certification exams and promising to act ethically. It is also unclear who would monitor continuing education and what kind of certification would be required.

But surveys of business students show that they are starting to focus more on social issues and ethics, and that this could intensify talk of making managers’ obligations to society more explicit.

“The challenge for a lot of business schools is how to develop leaders and not managers,” said James Tran, a candidate for an M.B.A. and a master’s in public administration at Harvard. Many of the top schools are moving in that direction, he said, but “I don’t think they have actually figured out how to do that in the most effective way.”

2009年3月27日星期五

2009年3月24日星期二

IDEO’s Ten Tips For Creating a 21st–Century Classroom Experience

IDEO’s Ten Tips For Creating a 21st–Century Classroom Experience

Posted February 18, 2009

In recent years, IDEO has spent a lot of time and effort thinking about education. The firm’s work with Ormondale Elementary School, in Portola Valley, California, helped pioneer a special “investigative-learning” curriculum that inspires students to be seekers of knowledge. We spoke to Sandy Speicher, who heads the Design for Learning efforts at IDEO. Her insights provide powerful lessons for architects and designers creating the schools of tomorrow:

1. Pull, don’t push.
Create an environment that raises a lot of questions from each of your students, and help them translate that into insight and understanding. Educa­tion is too often seen as the transmission of knowledge. Real learning happens when the student feels the need to reconcile a question he or she is facing—and can’t help but seek out an answer.

2. Create from relevance.
Engage kids in ways that have relevance to them, and you’ll capture their attention and imagination. Allow them to experience the concepts you’re teaching firsthand, and then discuss them (or, better yet, work to address them!) instead of relying on explanation alone.

3. Stop calling them “soft” skills.
Talents such as creativity, collaboration, communication, empathy, and adaptability are not just nice to have; they’re the core capabilities of a 21st-century global economy facing complex challenges.

4. Allow for variation.
Evolve past a one- size-fits-all mentality and permit mass customization, both in the system and the classroom. Too often, equality in education is treated as sameness. The truth is that everyone is starting from a different place and going to a different place.

5. No more sage onstage.
Engaged learning can’t always happen in neat rows. People need to get their hands dirty. They need to feel, experience, and build. In this interactive environment, the role of the teacher is transformed from the expert telling people the answer to an enabler of learning. Step away from the front of the room and find a place to engage with your learners as the “guide on the side.”

6. Teachers are designers.
Let them create. Build an environment where your teachers are actively engaged in learning by doing. Shift the conversation from prescriptive rules to permissive guidance. Even though the resulting environment may be more complicated to manage, the teachers will produce amazing results.

7. Build a learning community.
Learning doesn’t happen in the child’s mind alone. It happens through the social interactions with other kids and teachers, parents, the community, and the world at large. It really does take a village. Schools should find new ways to engage parents and build local and national partnerships. This doesn’t just benefit the child—it brings new resources and knowledge to your institution.

8. Be an anthropologist, not an archaeologist.
An archaeologist seeks to understand the past by investigating its relics and digging for the truth of what was. An anthropologist studies people to understand their values, needs, and desires. If you want to design new solutions for the future, you have to understand what people care about and design for that. Don’t dig for the answer—connect.

9. Incubate the future.
What if our K–12 schools took on the big challenges that we’re facing today? Allow children to see their role in creating this world by studying and creating for topics like global warming, transportation, waste management, health care, poverty, and even education. It’s not about finding the right answer. It’s about being in a place where we learn ambition, involvement, responsibility, not to mention science, math, and literature.

10. Change the discourse.
If you want to drive new behavior, you have to measure new things. Skills such as creativity and collaboration can’t be measured on a bubble chart. We need to create new assessments that help us understand and talk about the developmental progress of 21st-century skills. This is not just about measuring outcomes, but also measuring process. We need formative assessments that are just as important as numeric ones. And here’s the trick: we can’t just have the measures. We actually have to value them.

2009年3月21日星期六

来自朋友的经验分享

如下准则有助于达成目标,做出选择、解决问题、判别真伪。
Use notions
要利用确定的概念或某个想法
* 使用有事实做依托的大想法
* 明白事情的真正意义
* 简化
* 利用规则并且学会筛选
* 知道我要达成的目标
* 寻找并且考量替代方案
* 了解各种后续情况以及整体结果
* 定量
* 搜寻各种根据,并在此基础上行事
* 能够反向思考
* 记住,要有大的成效,就需要诸多因素的总和
* 评估如果做错了会有什么后果

What is the issue?
问题的解决
* 问题是什么?事情的实质是什么?
* 事情的核心或重点在哪里?相应的主要问题是什么?
* 什么是相关的?什么是可解决的?什么是重要的?什么是可知的?什么是可以适应的(Utility-applicability)?
* 我了解事情的全貌吗?为了使自己对事情有想法,我需要一些相关数据和基本知识储备,否则我就得承认“我不知道”。
* 我的判断比其他人好吗?
* 我必须对什么做出预测?它是可预测的吗?
* 需要做出决定吗?如果我不当机立断,会发生什么?为解决此事,我能做什么?“我”应该去做吗?
* 我对此问题的思考花了多少时间?此刻我思考到了哪一步?处于谁的立场上?
* 简化问题,先解决“不需大脑思索”的大问题,然后从自己的境地开始思考。

Understand what it means
理解背后的含义
* 把语言和各种想法翻译成我明白的方式。我能理解所用的语言和结论的真正含义和暗示吗?它意味着什么?它是否有助于我对未来做出有用的预测吗?
* 我是否了解事情发生和运转的方式和原因?它正在产生什么影响?为什么会有这样的影响?现在的情况如何?怎样及为何会发生如此情况?其结果会是什么(会有什么观察、发现、事件、体验)?


Filters and Rules
过滤和规则
* 利用规则和缺省规则来筛选——我可以如何检测?
* 改变规则,以适应我的心理特征、心理承受能力、心理优势和心理局限。
* 考虑我的价值观和偏好,由此判断事物的轻重缓急,以及希望规避的事情。


What do I specifically and measurable want to achieve and avoid and when and why?
我具体想达成和避免的是什么,什么时候达成,原因为何?
* 就数字而言,我想获得什么样的价值?目标数字是什么?目标效果是什么?所设定的时间范围是什么?
* 假设我已经达到了目标,那么这个目标如何反映在数字和效果上?接下来又需要达到什么?这个目标是否合理?如果从目标逆向回溯到现在,是否可行?
* 我是否有办法衡量目标的完成程度?这个标准的关键指标是什么?
* 如果我达到了目标,随之而来的会是什么?那是我希望得到的吗?
* 我可否把大的目标分成若干有期限的短期目标?
* 我做此事的真正原因何在?是因为我想这样还是因为我不得不这样?我在阐述目标时,是基于内外两方面的现实呢,还是受到了某些心理力量的影响?
* 我能否简短地阐述我的目标,以使人更容易明白我达到此目标的方式?
* 这是不是我真正希望达到的结果?

What is the cause of that?
成因何在?
* 为了达到目标,我必须知道能让我达成目标的各种成因。
* 通过哪些要素的组合可以达成的目标?我如何佐证此公式?
* 什么是我不希望获得的结果?可能促使“非目标”出现的原因是什么?我能如何规避?我必须不做什么,或者必须避免什么?
* 整个系统要运转起来,会受哪些变量的影响?这些关键性变量是什么?主要的未知因素何在?有哪些确定的因素可以帮助我评估和优化这些变量?
* 哪些变量有赖于其他变量(或情形、环境、背景、时机、行为)?哪些变量是独立于其他变量的?
* 什么外力才能促使某一变量出现?这些外力来源于何处?是短期还是长期外力?其相对优势是什么?这些外力之间如何组合、互动,效果会如何?我如何才能让诸多 外力作用于共同的方向?缺乏了哪个外力会毁掉整个系统?这个外力来源于何处?可预测度有多高?这些外力如果出现,会促发什么样的合理结果?哪些外力是暂时 性的,哪些外力是永久的?作用于变量的这些外力若发生变化,整个系统会发生怎样变化?
* 在这些变量和外力发生变化时,系统抵制这些变化的惯性有多强?变量和外力产生变化(上升或者下降)后,可能导致哪些希望的和不希望的短期和长期结果(数字 或效果),如规模、体积、强度、密度、长度、时间维度、环境、参与者等?一组较小的外力如果长期发生作用,会怎样?如果作用于变量的某一外力长期发生作 用,结果会如何?对目标和路径会产生什么影响?如果某一变量保持不变,会如何?我在提高某一变量的同时降低另一变量呢?会有怎样的网络效应?如果一次只改 变一个变量或者外力呢?外部环境中有什么会改变我的处境?如果对其中一个变量进行优化,会产生其他什么优势和劣势?什么才能导致最终结果发生变化?如果我 改变了条件,变量还会成立吗?
* 这一公式会否出现例外,为什么?需要哪些条件才能达成目标?Has my goal different cause short-term and long-term?这个成因是否依赖于时间条件?通过观察效果,我能否追溯其成因?我有否采用不同的角度和立场来审视整个系统?对主题的考量依赖于什么 东西?
* 限制我达成目标的主要力量是什么?


What available alternatives do I have to achieve my goal?
有没有现成的替代方案可以帮助我达成目标?
* 通过目标、主体问题、规则、因果、行为、佐证、反证、资金的机会成本、时间、其他资源、精力、理解力、风险和精神压力等因素,来对其他替代方案进行判断。
* 我有什么依据(包括模式)来判断这些替代方案很有可能帮我达成目标?
* 这些因素有赖于某些特定的时间点或者事件吗?
* 每一个行动可能产生的后果是什么?可能产生什么效用?可能性有多高?你对每个结果的期待值有多高?
* 如果现在采取某些行动,我是否会放弃未来的一些机会?


What are the consequences?
结果是什么?
* 通过对结果的预估,寻找最可能帮助我达成目标的替代方案。
* 如果我做出了一个选择,什么将随之发生,什么又不会发生?
* 每个替代方案(逻辑上)可能产生的想要的结果或者不想要(或不希望)的结果是什么(定性并定量)?结果之后的次生结果(短期内或者长期内产生的)会是什么?
* 会产生什么样不同的情形和结果?在这样的依据下,会产生什么长期或短期的效应?
* 什么可以帮助我预测事情的结果或其真伪?
* 为了达到目标,什么事情必须发生?必要事件发生以及发生在我身上的可能性分别有多高?如果我逆向而行,会有什么后果?
* 什么不确定因素会极大影响到结果?重复出现的效应或者复杂因素会产生什么不希望的结果?
* 错误的选择和正确的选择分别会产生什么后果?
* 我是否从不同的角度全面考虑了整个系统?我有否考虑过其社会、财务、生理和情感上的结果?别人可能会怎么做?依照我的经验和以前的行为,我会怎么应对?如果别人也照我这样做,会产生什么样的结果?


Bias
偏见
* 个人兴趣或者心理原因带来的会导致我产生误判的偏见,有何原因可以解释吗?
* 我所做出的结论或者选择的事实中,是否存在偏见?事实判断和价值判断分别是什么? — 他有多可靠?他有足够的能力做出判断吗?如何加以证明?他做此判断的目的是什么?他有没有撒谎的动机?他如何判断正误?


The hypothesis
假设
* 假设需要基于我想要达成的目标,并用此假设去检验我关于结果的预估。
* 对每个替代方案都要问:这个替代方案可能达成我的目标吗?对每个观点都要问:这个想法是对的吗?
* 我如何检验某个表述的真伪?在证实之前,我能否先证伪?
* 要检验这一表述,我需要知道些什么?首先,我必须知道什么公式能够让我的表述成立,然后我才能知道,对于判断未来的真正结果,什么才是最重要的。其次,我要知道能够支撑和推翻这一表述成立的证据。哪些表述是需要论证的?
* 最简单的假设是什么?


Look for evidence and judge the evidence
寻找依据,判断依据
* (促发目标、非目标和意见的)主要成因出现的可能性有多高?
* 对判断做出真伪评判时,去寻找其意义、动力、成因、后果和正反依据
* 如果判断是正确的,那么后果将意味着什么?后果会不会超乎逻辑或者不可思议?其中有任何可预测之?β穑?
* 我怎样并且从哪里才能找到支持某一判断的代表性证据?已知的有哪些?哪些东西是毋庸置疑的?若反复加以检验或用其他方式的考量,会出现相同的结果吗?我能 否对结果进行检验?这些依据都是基于已知因素吗?我是否正确理解了各项数据?依据在哪里?反面依据呢?我认可依据的理由是什么?这一依据的权重是多 少?What is the quality of the evidence?可信度有多高?是否紧密依赖于外部环境?样本是否太少?结论跟手中的依据相符吗?有没有违反科学法则或自然法则?
* 我有什么代表性的信息?对其加以观察会出现发生什么?我能够通过实验来证实我的猜测吗?
* 对于将会发生什么(可行还是不可行),有没有相关的过往纪录(案例评估、变异性、平均率、随机程度、自身经历、环境、伙伴与对手,以及其他相关的因素)?有什么理由相信这些纪录对未来会发生的事情并不具有代表性?什么能让未来与以往大不相同?什么是恒在的,什么不是?
* 这能持续多久?现在的主要成因是什么?什么外力能让其持续、能带来改变、或者造成阻碍,为什么?可能性有多高?
* 如果我拿到了能够推翻我之前信念的依据,我必须自问:为什么会这样?现在是什么情况?我拿到的是什么样的依据?我接受这一依据的理由是什么?


Disprove my (or others) conclusion by thinking like a prosecutor
像检察官一样对我(或其他人)的结论提出反驳
* 思考会导致误判的原因
* 如何检验和证明我的结论是错误的?我可能犯错的理由是什么?从哪里可以找到证明我错误的依据?这个依据可信吗?有没有什么事实和依据与我的结论/观点不符?
* 我做的分析基于哪些主要假设?是基于真实情况吗?假设的结果符合逻辑吗?有人证明过我的假设是正确的吗?如果我的想法和假设是错误的,结果会是什么?
* 我有否忽视了什么?有没有更好的选择?我是否忽视了某些依据?当有人力介入时,我是否考虑到了其局限性?什么因素是不确定的,为什么?我是否只考虑到了目 前的趋势?我有否误解了什么?我使用了正确的定义吗?我是否综合考虑了所有相关的因素?我采用了合适的衡量标准吗?我有否混淆了成因和相关性?如果我的目 标是基于某个我认为正确但其实是错误的理念,会如何?其中会有随机性的或者系统性的错误吗?对于我所得到的结果,有没有其他原因可以解释?我有否考虑过, 整个系统或者某些互动环节的可能会出现我不希望发生的变化?
* 我的想法是否存在偏见?在做出一个极具智慧的决定时,我的自我是否过于膨胀?我真的会创造历史纪录吗?我有否看到可能产生的反作用?
* 我没看到的是什么?其重要之处是什么?如果逆转我的假设,会否得到极度不合逻辑的结果?这个可能性是不是更高?有没有反例?什么依据可以证明我是错的(或 者证明我无法达成目标)?实验(或者经验、观察)得出的证据中,有哪些是错误的?有更多支持性的证据吗?这些错误是如何导致的?
* 意义何在?我能否向人们证明正确假设所得到的结果是不可能出现的?如果我用数学的方式准确描述出来,其隐含的影响是什么?相反的方向是不是更有可能?如果是,那么现在的想法就是错误的。
* 负面影响表现在什么地方?
* 我会因何受到伤害?什么可能向错误的方向发展?什么会让事情走偏?如果这样,结果如何?
* 事情出错的频率如何?会否有意料之外的因素?什么事情发生后会极大改变整体结果?
* 可能发生的最坏的境况是什么?发生的可能性有多大?如果不幸发生了,我该怎么做?如果事情继续恶化,后果会是什么?这个后果的后果又会是什么?
* 如果我受到多种外力的阻碍,结果会如何?哪种有效效应是危害最低的?
* 执行中会面临什么风险?
* 我最不希望出现的是什么?我最不确定的是什么?
* 一个看上去是优势的因素有没有可能让我得到不希望的结果?我会怎样失去某个优势?
* 怎样构建系统才能将负面影响降到最低?有修正办法吗?发生了意想不到的事情,我有没有备选方案?我能加以修正吗?设定什么样的规则可以帮助我达成目标而规避不希望的结果?有没有内在的安全隐患?


What are the consequences if I am wrong?
如果我错了,后果会怎样?
* 我把赌注押在哪些关键要素上?我是否拿对我重要的东西去冒险,换取的有可能是对我效用相对较低的东西?
* 与现有的次优机会相比,我的正确决定所带来的益处和价值是什么,错误决定的成本(金钱、时间、精神压力等)是多少?
* 我这样做是因为我坚信其结果能最好地实现我的利益;或者我相信能符合我利益,但后来证明我错了;或者它根本就不符合我的利益。上述三个可能性给我的目标带来的短期和长期的后果会是什么(实际损失和机会成本)?我能否加以应对和/或还原?
* 我不这样做是因为我坚信其结果不能最好地实现我的利益;?
* 如果我因为认为不必要而此刻不采取任何行动,但时候证明我错了,这给我的目标带来的短期和长期的后果是什么?我能否加以应对和/或还原?

What is the value?

价值是什么?
* 对我来说,每一个替代方案的实际效用和优势是什么?哪个方案最有利于我达到目标?它是否真的比其他选择更有吸引力?
* 我用什么标准来判断替代方案之间的优劣?
* 通过对每个替代方案的特点进行打分,我最看好的是哪一个?
* 这个选择能不能让我脱颖而出?能不能造成一定的影响?我是否愿意接受某种特定的结果?

What yardstick can be used to measure progress or to measure things against?
采用什么标杆来衡量事情的进展?
* 我采用了哪些标杆?用作决策依据的标杆是哪些?
* 我怎样才能容易地评估我向目标推进的程度?有哪些指标可供我对照?
* 我所构建的系统能否激励人们按照最有利于达成目标的方式去行动?或者,这个系统是否会阻碍目标的完成?


How act now?
现在如何行动?
* 我可以执行吗?我现在必须开始采取的特定行动是什么?首先需要做的是什么?
* 谁做什么,什么时候做,在哪里做,为什么做,以及如何做?
* 我知道决定性的点(时间和效果)在哪里吗?
* 我是否设置了一定的控制体系和规则?为什么这些规则是合适的?如果我不设置这些规则(或者不改变我做事的方式),结果会如何?这个规则要求我必须采取哪些 管理和实践的举措?要遵循这个规则,会花费多少时间?我能否决定自己如何遵循这些规则?我可以设置一个有时间限定的规则吗?这些规则在哪些地方会失效?

Have I made an active decision?
我所做的是一个灵活的决定吗?
* 我是否准备好了改变决定,以适应新的信息和新的判断?
* 如某一特定事件发生,是否需要做出新的决定?如此问题今天就存在,我有否对其进行过评估?支持此决定的理性思考现在是否存在?有什么新的证据证明这个可能 性能可以得到改变?我衡量进展的标准,是否能让我判断之后将要发生的事情?哪些事件是相关的,哪些是不相关的?我的目标会否因此发生改变(若不考虑时间长 度)?


Post mortem or learning from mistakes
死后反思还是边学习边成长?
* 事情进展的情况有多好或者有多不好?我有否采取什么行动?我说到做到了吗?当时我是怎么考虑的?初衷和现实的出入在哪里?
* 为什么我会犯错?犯错的过程是什么?在哪里犯错了?机会成本有多大?
* 我如何判断现状是否会照此继续下去?我对错误有没有采取行动?如何才能不重演错误?我该做却未做的是什么?我应该把精力集中在哪里?我必须提高和学习的地方在哪?

What exactly is the problem?
问题的本质在哪?
* 我想达到的是什么?为什么我没有达成目标?发生了什么?怎么发生的?在哪里发生的?什么时候发生的?谁被影响了?
* 我的目标因何而达成?能够促使我达到目标的因素会受到什么干扰?这些因素是标还是本?对我达成目标构成限制的因素中最重要的是哪一个?我把目标建立在什么 原则和假设上?如果这些原则和假设有误的话,结果会如何?假若不存在任何限制,最好的行为链是什么?其他可能的结果是什么?


WHAT ARE THE LIKELY CONSEQUENCES CONSIDERING HUMAN BEHAVIOR?
人类行为纳入考量后的结果

What is causing me to do this?
什么促使我这样去做?
目前我所处的环境和我的心理状态如何?如果避免了痛苦,我能获得什么好处?我如何判定什么是结果?它们让我难受还是愉悦?哪种心理趋向会影响我?这些因素会导致我做出误判吗?

What is the context?
内容是什么?
环境和参与者(包括其规模)是什么状况?谁是决策者,他做决策的标准是什么?谁获益,谁买单?谁为结果负责?参与者对现实结果的看法会受什么影响?

Can I judge him?
我能对他做出正确的判断吗?
我能判断他的角色是什么吗?他的经历如何?哪些临时性或者永久性的特征在影响着他(如年龄、文化背景、健康情况或者心情)?什么环境(内部或者外部的)或者处境会影响他?他是否意图向我出售什么?

What is in his self-interest to do?
他的个人利益在哪里?
什么会符合他的逻辑?他如果避免痛苦,可以获得什么益处?他将什么视为痛苦?他害怕什么,为什么?他想多得到一些什么,不想失去什么?什么“资源”会带给他动力?是他的健康、工作、家?


What are the psychological tendencies and shortcuts that influence him and can cause misjudgment?
什么心理取向或缺陷会导致他做出误判?
什么偏见会影响他得出的结论?有什么外在原因可能会影响他?哪些诱惑会符合他的个人利益?什么会激发他去行动?


What are the consequences?
结果是什么?
我最终的结果是什么?能达到我的目标吗?有利于他的 东西是否也有利于我?我们建立的系统是否能让相关参与者的利益与我的目标相一致?他的错误决定是否会由这个系统来买单?他是否知道他的行为的结果?对他来 说,短期或长期的结果是什么?责任链是什么?他对结果是否负有责任?如果换一个人也做同样的事情,会如何?


What system would I like to have if the roles were reversed?
如果交换角色,我希望构建什么样的体系?
如果将我的角色调换,我希望怎样被对待?什么会促使我去做我希望他做的事情?我能通过什么行为取向来影响他的行为?如果我执意要达成“非目标”,我需要怎么做?把角色转换回来后,我能够避免以上事情发生吗?


Is this the right system?
系统正确否?
我可以满足他的个人利益吗?我能否消除他对失去声名、金 钱、地位,以及家庭的恐惧?我可以改变他对痛苦的看法吗?怎样架构体系才能使某些影响最小化?我有否告诉过他我的期望是什么?我有否检查过已经完成的事 情?对于成功完成的事情,我是否给出了鼓励与支持?他掌握必需的技能、知识和相关的信息吗?他知道自己肩负的期望吗?他是否明白无误地知道目标是什么,如 何达到,以及为何这是最优途径?他会评估自己的进度吗?这与他的日常行为有关吗?他是否负有责任并获得了授权?他所能得到的奖励是否和目标一致?我可以设 定什么样的规则来应对人类共有的局限性?设置一个相反的规定会怎样?哪些改变是必须发生的?谁对此负有责任?发生改变的可能性会有多大?他的价值观是什 么?他的目标?他会将什么视为结果?如果他如我们所希望的那样去做,他会如何看待结果?如果他不照我们希望的那样去做呢?

BUSINESS EVALUATION
业务评估


Filter 1 - Can I understand the business - predictability?
过滤器1:我能理解业务吗——可预测性
* 需求的原因——我有多确定(并且能解释为何如此确定)人们将来仍会继续购买这类产品或服务?过去的情况是什么,未来可能发生什么?需求是否呈周期性?生产能力与需求的对比是什么样子?
* 回报能力——产业和公司的回报能力,以及其过去10年的发展状况是什么?
* 产业结构——竞争者的数字和规模?谁在该产业中拥有发言权?要在该产业中获利,什么因素是必须的?公司在产业中的地位如何?我是否知道谁会在这个市场上获利,为什么?
* 真正的消费者——谁对购买行为有决定权?其决定的标准是什么?

Filter 2 - Does it look like the business has some kind of sustainable competitive advantage?
过滤器2:此业务是否有足够的竞争优势?
* 竞争优势——我有多确定(并且能解释为何如此确定)别人会购买我公司的产品或服务而不是其他人的?其中的原因是否10年来几无变化?在下一个10年会不会改变?
* 价值——我们的优势能有多强大和可持续?这些优势在若干年后会更强大更具持久性吗?什么会破坏或减少这些优势?市场进入壁垒?品牌忠诚度?受需求或价格变 化的影响程度?是否容易复制?产品生命周期是否很长?客户改变供货商的成本和动机为何?每年能够抵御机竞争的价格差异(Annual cost differential against competition)?需要多大的资本投入?议价能力如何?产品过时的风险?客户新的替代选择是什么?购买习惯或购买力会有何改变?若成本结构相同, 竞争对手会有多大的降价空间?需要做什么才能保持稳固的竞争优势?还有成长空间吗?市场对此产品的需求有上升的可能吗?定价能力如何?
* 盈利能力。竞争优势能否转化成利润,并且如何才能做到?公司怎样盈利?要实现收入增长,需要多少资本?财务特征:资本回报率(营业利润率和投入产出比)、毛利率、销售额增长、成本/资本结构及其使用效率?正常情况下的现金流是多少?有无规模优势?有无决定性的因素?
* 财政特征。资本回报(操作成本的富余和资本转化),毛利润,销售增长,成本和资本结构的效用率?正常的现金流?规模优势?

Filter 3 - Able and honest management?
过滤器3:能干且诚信的管理层?
组成管理团队的,是能力出众、诚实可信,并且理解和全力去创造价值的人吗?

Filter 4 - Is the price right?
过滤器4:价格正确否?
我能够以比其他选择有更好回报的价格买下这个产品么?需要有事实和数据为依据。


Filter 5 – Disprove
过滤器5:反证
生意会怎样被毁掉?如果公司要彻底将一个竞争对手置于死地,这个对 手会是谁?为什么?如果公司继续运营下去,5年之后谁会是竞争对手,为什么?公司业务抵抗不利因素的能力如何?如果公司花光了所有的股权投资,它还会不会 有价值?会否出现某人获得大量资金和人才,在竞争中胜过公司?如果竞争对手并不在乎回报,他可以对公司产生多大的破坏?公司对经济衰退的敏感程度如何?执 行时所面临的风险有多大?新技术会有益还是有害?

Filter 6 - What are the consequences if I'm wrong?
过滤器6:如果我错了,结果会如何?

2009年3月19日星期四

政府需诚恳落实大学生就业政策(南方都市报)

  教育部日前发布《国家促进普通高校毕业生就业政策公告》。国家对到基层、到中西部地区、到中小企业就业、应征入伍、参加重大科研项目以及家庭困 难的五类大学毕业生将分别给予各种优惠政策。这些优惠政策涉及很多方面,包括由政府补偿学费,代偿助学贷款,考研考公务员可加分,取消户口限制,登记失业 并自主创业的,如自筹资金不足,可申请五万元小额担保贷款等。


  教育部的最新政策非常具体,呼应了国务院1月份出台的促进大学生就业的通知。从政策制订的频率看,大学生就业已成为政府部门亟待解决的 重大问题。而从现有的政策立场分析,国家解决问题的方向大概有二:一是承诺财政投入,扩大体制内接纳大学毕业生的规模;二是答应给予贷款支持,用社会化手 段鼓励大学生自行就业。不管哪种思路,政策导向就业的思路均十分明显。


  既然采取政策带动就业的办法,无法回避的疑问是:看起来很美的政策能否落实?那么多美好的承诺能否真正让毕业生受惠?而在一个较长时期 内,这些就业政策能否具备效用?以及,在政策予以宽容的范围内,执行部门能否守住公平底线?政府部门千万不要认为只要出台政策,那些对应的社会问题就迎刃 而解。政策化为实际行动,并成为求职者稳固的凭依才是正道。


  然而来自一线的调研表明,大学生就业政策在执行环节推动艰难,大有被架空悬置的态势。近日来自广东省教育厅关于高校毕业生就业工作的调 研报告显示,大多数鼓励政策都面临执行难,比如参加“三支一扶(支教、支医、支农和扶贫)”,到基层工作两年的毕业生仍需要自己换助学贷款,报考公务员及 考研的加分政策未体现,对大学生技能培训的补贴政策没有兑现。而对大学生创业,职能机构在贷款及扶持等系列服务上积极性很低。


  上述现象绝非广东独有,在全国其他省份都已显现。如此,教育部就业新政的前景令人担心。问题不仅在于政策本身缺乏配套措施,可行性较 差,更在于单凭教育部一家并不可能让愿望成真。政策涉及的其他部门的协调也可以决定成败。由于每个政策都需财政同步支持,一旦财政接济不力或意愿薄弱,政 策即沦为水月镜花。现有政策引领在前,政府财政支出的结构调整成了关键。


  因应教育部新政,广东教育主管机构细化了缓解大学生就业压力的建议,比如重点关注贫困毕业生和专科毕业生,倡议提高下基层的人数和补贴 标准,并提请拟定省市县财政支出比例,甚至建立学士后流动站等大胆设想。目的很直接,就是为财政倾斜的量化提供明确参照。国家在经济刺激方案中表达了用政 府投资扩大农民工就业的意图,现在也该是用财政“购买”毕业生就业岗位的时候。


  政策导向型就业除了要敦促执行,还要警惕另外一个弊端,那就是防止产生对毕业生的歧视。日前广东高校毕业生到农村从教供需见面会上,某 位专科毕业生痛陈招聘单位的歧见,揭示了政策温情之外的另一种痛苦。守住政策救济的公平底线,同样决定政策落实的质量。尽管毕业生仍要通过竞争获得政策配 额,但政府有责任净化竞争氛围,制止变相收窄政策施惠人群的做法,铲除暗箱操作、权钱交易的空间。


  大学生就业政策几乎全体现为政府许诺,隐含着需要一一付诸实际的行政责任。近年来,类似的政策没有断过,它们重复宣告毕业生就业难的困 境;而从源自高校和毕业生的反馈看,政策离政策落实存有很大差距,职能部门缺乏动力,践行诺言的表现无法令人满意。经济不景气造成大学生就业雪上加霜,但 也为政府调整财政投向、重振社会信心创造了理由,因为这正是弥补社会安全网的紧急关头。

2009年3月16日星期一

近期工作

凯洛格
邱天,伍滨 (推荐的 Michelle Wu 吴明娴)
汇佳
社会企业家访谈
网站维护更新分工
城市实践平台设立
课程事实形式路径
小企业参与模式(例子,公平贸易)
和英国使馆长期合作社会企业家技能培训作为平行链条(支持我们的公益价值链)

2009年3月10日星期二

以人为本!

虽然我们说了许多次以人为本的核心,但是因为与英国使馆文化处合作的培训项目没有能够审核细节的策划和安排,仍旧是没能够真正把住以人为本的核心。对我们重要的不仅仅是最终能够选上来培训的学员,更加包括所有看到我们通知的、向我们提交报名信息的所有人。

朋友的意义,共同的兴趣、交往互助,尊重、维护,
Friendship is a term used to denote co-operative and supportive behavior between two or more people. In this sense, the term connotes a relationship which involves mutual knowledge, esteem, and affection and respect along with a degree of rendering service to friends in times of need or crisis. Friends will welcome each other's company and exhibit loyalty towards each other, often to the point of altruism. Their tastes will usually be similar and may converge, and they will share enjoyable activities. They will also engage in mutually helping behavior, such as exchange of advice and the sharing of hardship. A friend is someone who may often demonstrate reciprocating and reflective behaviors. Yet for many, friendship is nothing more than the trust that someone or something will not harm them.

Value that is found in friendships is often the result of a friend demonstrating the following on a consistent basis:

2009年3月9日星期一

连接多种不同的问题,综合治理组织化解决,
采访,培训之前和之后的对比,以及主要需求

2009年3月2日星期一

Top 10 social entrepreneurship trends for 2009 (from SSE)

Top 10 social entrepreneurship trends for 2009

Crystalball There are, of course, a whole host of posts and articles predicting what we can expect in the year ahead: check out Nat's take on Change.org for one. But repeating others has never stopped me before, so here’s my take (partially cribbed from other people’s posts) on what we might see in the next 12 months in the world of social entrepreneurship and enterprise. Who knows, we might even make this an annual thing to see if we were anywhere close to being right.....

1) Resilience: new favourite term of funders and policy-makers alike; the concept of resilient communities, as promulgated by Transition Towns, has only gained more credence in the current climate, and I think we’ll see it bandied around a fair bit. Rightly so, too, I reckon.

2) Partnership, collaboration and merger: where partnerships over the past five years have, at times, been partnerships of convenience put together simply to apply for a particular piece of funding, the recession will mean partnerships of necessity will be the order of the day.

3) Bang for buck: again, economically (and social impact-wise), it’s all going to be about value for money, particularly in public sector contracts; so added value will most likely need to be put into pound signs where possible (hello Mr SROI). To coin a phrase, the revolution will be monetised.

4) The Obama effect: while his grassroots web 2.0 movement building stuff will be the inspiration for a UK version (or twelve; who knows, one might take off), it may be that a U.S. Office for Social Innovation or a Social Entrepreneur agency (as touted in various documents and proposals) might be the more substantive influence on the sector.

5) Internationalisation: something which has grown in the last couple of years, with initiatives like the Social Enterprise World Forum and countless visits and exchanges; this will move from a network-y, sharing information, “you’re great, no you’re great” phase to more practical delivery partnerships and collaborative working.

6) Jobs and skills: with unemployment set to rise significantly (some are predicting over 3 million), an emphasis on job creation, skills for employment, and micro-entrepreneurship (aka self-employment) will come from government and trusts/foundations. Social entrepreneurship and social enterprise needs to place itself firmly and credibly in this space, because everyone else, from universities to private sector agencies, will be as well.

7) Mobiles: if last year (and the year before) was the year of the social network, we also started to see mobile phones (via twitter, qik et al) begin to impact. This could well be the year when “mobile apps for charity” is a phrase we see... or the year when Stephen Bubb starts to tweet. Which can only be a good thing.

8) Niches: the trend where we see expertise pulled in as a sub-contractor / deliverer for relatively small areas of work, or niche jobs; particularly relevant for start-up social entrepreneurs who should seek out those opportunities / unmet needs / markets.

9) Realism: the emphasis will be SMART, and the R will be the most important: realistic; from business plans to applications, from tenders to proposals, investors and funders will be looking for the credible, reliable and proven. Overblowing the trumpet not advised.

10) Investment (ready or not): two prongs to this point; the first is that there is much talk of ‘investment-readiness’ in the social entrepreneur world (or lack of therein), and 2009 will see agencies start to enter that space with vigour; the other aspect is that pressure will be put on trusts and foundations to maintain levels of investment even as their endowments go down, given the preceding decade of prosperity. We’ll see forward-thinking trusts do so.

--------------------

Top 5 (social entrepreneurship) books of the year

OK, so one list is never enough (and there's more to follow!). Here's my top 5 reads of the year, bearing some relation to social entrepreneurship...usually.

LynseyHanley 1) Estates by Lynsey Hanley. You can read my full take on this but all I'll say here is that this is the book that's stayed with me most, influenced my thinking (about our work and more generally), and carried both intellectual and emotional force.




Fiasco 2) Fiasco by Thomas Ricks. Again, full review here, but this was the 'I thought I knew all about this, but turns out I didn't really' book of the year for me. And I never thought that reading a book about the US miliitary invasion of Iraq would have me reflecting on strategic planning and organisational learning. Go figure....



Mawsonbook
3) The Social Entrepreneur by Andrew Mawson. Not the best written book I've read this year, and not short of ego at times, but this was still a great, inspiring read with heavy dollops of truth and insight thrown in for good measure. And easily readable in a bitesize style as well.



Forces 4) Forces for Good by Leslie Crutchfield & Heather McLeod Grant. The hackles were raised in advance for this; my presumption was that it would be very American, very "scale, scale, scale", very business school etc. Some of that was true, but it also emphasised the importance of a network mindset, of leadership that lasts, of the importance of advocacy, of adaptability, and of appropriate scaling (in different sizes and speeds) etc. Worth weaving through the jargon for the insights (full review to follow in Soc Ent Magazine next year).

MadeToStick

5) Made to Stick by Chip and Dan Heath. Fuller review in this post
but I loved this; very good commute reading, and full of useful, usable tips...particularly as I'd just moved into a job with 'communications' in the title. As 'sticky' as the ideas it talks about in its own way.

And a final couple of notes: I've just read Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell, which is really interesting on the nature of success and how it comes about (culture, timing, hours...as well as talent). More on that next year no doubt.

Also, I would have included Craig Dearden-Phillips's Your Chance to Change the World, if it wasn't endorsed / affiliated to us. I still think it's the best practical guide for budding social entrepreneurs out there....indeed, at an event where an SSE Fellow and I were speaking recently, he unprompted pulled out a copy and started recommending it to all present. After I pointed out that we'd endorsed it, and that many SSE Fellows had given advice / tips to Craig, said Fellow mentioned he had no idea we had anything to do with it but had found it by far the best guide he'd found. Nuff said, methinks.

2009年3月1日星期日

另外一个比较具体的我们靠态度能保持的优势是我们对社会创新和社会企业家精神持久的推动,我们的行为要坚守可持续的、目标长远的、负责任的、扎实的、有耐 力的特点,现在很多比赛和培训等等活动项目最大弱点之一就是没有后续跟进、仅仅图一时的热闹和闪光(容易吧知名度和真正培养促进实际效果的目标本末倒 置),而我们的社会创新要真正能够保证对参与者/团队的后续跟进支持 以及真正建立互动的网络、并且收集吸取经验。

因为我在国外每天不断接触到有关社会创新和社会企业家的很多包括中国在内的新的活动、项目、行动新闻等等,在受到启发的同时,有时候也会让我心急,因为觉 得我们好像差得不少,或者是有太多的事情想去一下子实现。但后来我慢慢能够更加清晰我们的定位和特点。我们是在扎扎实实地建立基础,为中国的社会创新和社 会企业家精神搭建系统平台,也许很多独立的小项目会一时声音更响亮、更耀眼,但我们做的是一个长久的工程。


其实归根结底社会创新是一种教育,是理论实践结合的公民教育,其中产生的社会企业家是领军者,高素质高责任感的公民力量是坚实的基础。就好像我们常说教育 不是为了学校和文凭一样,社会创新也不是为了比赛和活动本身。所以我们一定坚守“以人为本”的原则,也就是说我们核心服务对象是培育的这些人才。(我想, 如果其他组织的活动也能坚守对人的培育,肯定不会图昙花一现的亮点,而是更扎实地服务与这些人才成长的需求。正因为如此,我们更加要明确这个原则)

有强烈责任感、高素质、创新、有企业家精神的人才是我们的成果,我们提供的核心价值通过课程、知识案例库和交流互动平台提供的机会(实习、论坛)来传输。这些培育出得社会创新者会自然参与到我们核心价值得持续完善更新当中,形成我们成果产出与核心价值得互动循环。

友成的社会创新的形象和态度应该同时坚固“经典”和“创新”,单独强调“经典”容易变得封闭并且难以动员新生力量的参与,而单独强调“创新”容易走飘变成一时的潮流。坚固经典和创新是同时坚固立足长远和开放学习,使创新在经典的支持下不断超越、经典在创新中不断升华。