14. The speaker claims that all organizations should include a clear hierarchy of
' t( Q, D' ^" ?$ zaccountability because any other structure would work against human nature and 6 I2 f& o0 \. e$ t; Q- e
therefore prove fruitless in the end. This claim gives rise to complex issues about human
3 e* P: _/ ]" w3 u* b( W9 x( O' _, wnature and the social structures best suited to it. In my view, the claim assumes a
* U; _: K' g( g- c/ v7 wdistortedly narrow view of human nature, ignoring certain aspects of it that are
6 |: ^- v/ J4 j# U; mundermined by hierarchical structure in ways that ultimately hurt the organization.1 T5 w3 k3 e$ x- L, l
First, the organizational structure the speaker recommends undermines the nexus
/ c, j# j' P1 s2 l2 q c6 \between worker and product that facilitates efficiency and productivity. When 2 F3 e8 f3 }. T! k' e6 @ @2 q
employees are responsible for just their small component of work, they can easily lose 5 a! h4 m+ A' }9 F
sight of larger organizational goals and the importance of their role in realizing these
& ^1 H6 w+ L0 c7 W$ o& r* }goals. In turn, workers will feel alienated, unimportant, and unmotivated to do work 9 u' v2 v( K0 @+ i) C
they are proud of. These effects cannot help but damage the organization in the end.9 M3 c, o$ e% B. E
Second, compartmentalizing tasks in a hierarchical structure stifles creativity. An
9 ~) Z' g% o) ?( m. A- Nacquaintance of mine worked for a company that had established a rigid organizational , k9 W+ J8 a# w& v6 L* o" E' u) T+ z
barrier between designers and engineers. The designers often provided the engineers
6 M2 @* }. y) r, Q, awith concepts that were unworkable from an engineering standpoint. Conversely, : T/ c" S4 J: b
whenever an engineer offered a design idea that allowed for easier engineering, the - ~0 ?8 ~8 s( v: r; i( w+ B) R
designers would simply warn the engineer not to interfere. This is a typical case where
. P+ X1 ?; @3 P1 {. worganizational barriers operate against creativity, harming the organization in the end.来源：www.examda.com
2 x& P, F( z/ r% Q/ {5 A Third, strict hierarchy undermines the collegiality and cooperation among
' l3 F8 {" p# }* J0 d2 tcoworkers needed for a sense of common purpose and pride in accomplishment. The
- ?- l. v. U/ i4 d0 Rmessage from the designers to the engineers at my friend's company produced just the $ n- m! m* @: `0 {) Z, ]7 j4 }' V
opposite—resentment between the two departments, low morale among the engineers
% H6 R! `3 n8 ~5 Uwhose creative suggestions were ignored, and ultimate resignation to do inferior work 5 x$ U5 q% o6 D: p' h
with an attitude that developing ideas is a waste of time.
) ?3 i0 y0 ]8 z$ k+ U In sum, the speaker seems to assume that humans are essentially irresponsible and 1 S6 c7 d6 x W6 {, r7 Q
unmotivated, and that they therefore need external motivation by way of a layered
" I8 v6 f* _6 e }' j9 D) ?bureaucratic structure. The speaker misunderstands human nature, which instead
' s. _" O# ^7 c2 \6 Prequires creative exercise and sense of purpose and pride in accomplishment. By stifling
8 b. X: L2 H/ O' hthese needs with organizational barriers, the organization is ultimately worse off. |
发表于 2012-8-15 21:50:16
