“On its current path, American democratic capitalism is, I believe, heading for an ugly fall.” So warns Roger L. Martin in his new book, When More is Not Better: Overcoming…
Abstract
Purpose
“On its current path, American democratic capitalism is, I believe, heading for an ugly fall.” So warns Roger L. Martin in his new book, When More is Not Better: Overcoming America’s Obsession with Economic Efficiency. Professor Martin has been concerned for some time now about the capability of the American capitalistic model in its current guise to deliver continued prosperity for the many and keep the American democratic dream alive.
Design/methodology/approach
Martin sees a serious problem in how the benefits of the American economy and its corporations are distributed; this has been shifting for some time now from a largely Gaussian (widely spread) to an increasingly Pareto (narrowly spread) pattern.
Findings
The shape of this distribution is getting ever more extreme, leading to a situation in which the richest families in the country are reaping a wildly disproportionate share of the benefits of economic growth. This kind of distribution tends to be self-reinforcing and that is not consistent with a well-functioning democratic capitalist system.
Practical implications
The actors within the system will keep adjusting to any change in the rules of engagement, and the tendency for them to keep “gaming” the system should be anticipated as both natural and inevitable and provided for accordingly. Breaking the company into subject-matter siloes has little chance of helping the company prosper. It tends to cause independent pursuits of efficiency that don’t add up to effectiveness.
Originality/value
The author of 11 books, Professor Martin has been ranked at the top of numerous lists of the world’s best strategic thinkers, and is a seminal contributor to the design thinking and integrative thinking movements. In his writings he seeks “to develop a new understanding of the broader public conversation around shared and sustainable prosperity, an essential piece of democratic capitalism.” A long-time consultant to major global firms, he offers insights for corporate executives.
Roger L. Martin, one of the most respected strategists, is questioned by veteran S&L interviewer Brian Leavy. The questions range from the how and why of integrative thinking…
Abstract
Purpose
Roger L. Martin, one of the most respected strategists, is questioned by veteran S&L interviewer Brian Leavy. The questions range from the how and why of integrative thinking methodology to academic arguments over resource-based view of strategy.
Design/methodology/approach
Martin, co-author with Jennifer Riel of the new book Creating Great Choices, shares the insights they have developed while learning how to guide executives through integrative thinking methodolgy.
Findings
The necessary raw materials for an integrative solution are two opposing models. By exposing your model to other models through interaction, together you can utilize pieces of those models to generate a new one.
Practical implications
We see the value of prototyping solutions – expecting to be only partially right with the first prototype and learning a lot from putting the ideas into action, seeing what works and what doesn’t, and improving iteratively.
Originality/value
Martin’s guide to break though thinking shares the insights he has learned from working with brilliant CEOs and others who have sought to find a better solution to a dilemma or paradox than the unsatisfactory solutions confronting them.
Details
Keywords
This paper aims to present an interview carried out by Stephen Denning, who asks Roger L. Martin, the author of the recent explosive book Fixing the Game and Dean of Rotman School…
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to present an interview carried out by Stephen Denning, who asks Roger L. Martin, the author of the recent explosive book Fixing the Game and Dean of Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto, to explain why the private sector's 35‐year addiction to “maximizing shareholder value” has been disastrous for shareholders, for employees, the personal lives of executives, for the economy and for society at large.
Design/methodology/approach
In the interview Martin outlines the forces at work that preserve a dysfunctional system of maximizing the return for shareholders instead of focusing on customer value.
Findings
The paper reveals that there are many special interests that are devoted to maintaining the shareholder value doctrine, even at the risk of the survival of the firm.
Practical implications
Executives who mouth the shareholder value mantra need to realize that they are playing a game they cannot win on behalf of faceless, nameless shareholders who behave unilaterally and capriciously.
Originality/value
The paper reveals Martin's advice for private‐sector leaders who want to get back to doing real business, which is: focus on activities that provide value to customers and stop playing with earnings to hit Wall Street's consensus number.
Details
Keywords
The author argues that the model for the management of the U.S. economy and businesses – one that assumes that they can be run like machines –is producing outcomes that neither…
Abstract
Purpose
The author argues that the model for the management of the U.S. economy and businesses – one that assumes that they can be run like machines –is producing outcomes that neither were anticipated nor are desired.
Design/methodology/approach
The model of a perfectible machine needs to be supplanted by a model of a complex adaptive system in order to turnaround the performance of the economy and its companies.
Findings
In businesses, unrestrained pursuit of efficiency has had an unexpected and unintended effect.
Practical implications
One important way to design for complexity is to adopt multiple internally contradictory proxies for success.
Originality/value
Offers a critical insight for corporate leaders: The U.S. economy is not a perfectible machine: it is a complex adaptive system. Companies are not perfectible machines: they are complex adaptive systems. To produce better outcomes, leaders need to design for each element – complexity, adaptability and systemic nature.
Atul Handa and Kanupriya Vashisht
Traditional paradigms of leadership have celebrated decisive top-down control and analytical decision making. But times are changing. The world is becoming more connected…
Abstract
Traditional paradigms of leadership have celebrated decisive top-down control and analytical decision making. But times are changing. The world is becoming more connected, complex, fluid, and interdependent.
Leading people in this age requires empathy, collaboration, curiosity, and creativity. It’s more about designing elegant solutions than mandating feasible ones. It’s more about becoming optimistic beacons of change than authoritative custodians of the status quo. The leaders of tomorrow are not commanders, they are innovators; and in that, they have a natural ally in designers – the poster children of innovation.
This chapter focuses on how leadership can leverage tools and frameworks usually associated with design to innovate, solve complex problems, motivate teams, inspire people, and nurture the next generation of leaders. It discusses design methodologies – user-focused design, lean, design thinking – as potential approaches to optimizing organizational leadership. We elaborate these ideas through real-world examples.
The chapter also offers actionable tips and techniques that designers use to respond empathetically and elegantly to complex human needs, which are rooted deeply in behaviors and attitudes, governed by complex interactions, and therefore, hard to grapple through a purely analytical approach.
It debunks the myth that leaders need to be creative similar to designers to apply Design Thinking. Applying design approaches and practices to organizational leadership is not just about its leaders becoming more creative. It is definitely not about the person at the top coming up with the grand answer. It is a collaborative effort that brings people from all levels together in pursuit of a common goal.