Innovation is the fundamental driving force for economic development. Without innovation, we can only lose our reputation.

Innovation has been proposed for many years, but it is very difficult to actually implement innovation. What we are better at is sticking to past experience.

However, the development of the times always favors innovators. Because the times have different characteristics and needs in different time periods, and the experience we have only represents the needs of a specific era or a specific time period, so we were able to achieve a lot at that time, but we cannot achieve glory again in a changed era.

The ancients said that one leaf knows the autumn. That is to say, through all the analysis at a point, the cause and effect of the whole can be known.

I found that during my long working life, many platforms not only lacked the sense of innovation, but also stifled the sense of innovation and innovative behaviors.

The main reason is that innovation cannot immediately bring visible and beautiful results in a short period of time. Most innovations will stumble and make mistakes at the beginning. But our platform rules do not allow mistakes, and mistakes will be punished. This inhibits the possibility of innovation in the first place. Secondly, innovation requires a lot of costs. For example, when platform employees can achieve results by simply following instructions, your innovation will appear complicated and will not be able to compete with others in the short term. It will be questioned and denied.

I once worked on a certain platform. When the professional manager at that time was in a meeting and we were formulating a development plan, he always hated planning for tomorrow. He just said that planning for today would be enough. For this reason, we had serious differences. Why does he have this understanding? Mainly because his success in the past was achieved in this way, that is, just focus on the day. As for tomorrow, it is unknown. Tomorrow will be planned tomorrow. However, his habit has indeed achieved a lot in the past, but at the current moment, this habit has become outdated.

At the same time, we also have differences in marketing. He believes that marketing can only have one reward point, because having two reward points will distract users from their actions and lead to users not knowing what to do. When I heard his words, I was quite helpless. Since everyone's cognitions cannot be reconciled, let's do our own thing first and see who has the effect.

Facts speak louder than words. After testing, I found that mine was more effective, so mine was adopted.

In many cases, innovation does not appear as a linear relationship, but as a relatively complex system. Therefore, when innovation appears as something systematic or systemic, it is not understood by many people. The first feeling of many people is that it will increase costs? Does this complicate the matter? Can this matter be turned into a 1+1=2 problem?

So when there is a problem with this direction, when the direction is wrongly decided, we will be pulled back from the system aspect to the linear aspect, which is the aspect of simple causality. So under the guidance of this simple theory of cause and effect, any plan we draw up is very simple, and it is a problem of 1+1=2. However, when we practice it, we find that the problems we encounter cannot be solved, or it is difficult to solve them well.

After working part-time for so many years, I found that this is a common problem in the workplace. These are not the only factors that stifle innovation in the workplace. There are many other factors. I will tell you in detail.

If the workplace is more bureaucratic, then the person who holds the most power will be the target of everyone's flattery. So in such an atmosphere, right or wrong no longer seems important. What is important is that you can succeed in flattering and you can be promoted by the superior. Under such an atmosphere and trend, let alone innovation, you don't even have the possibility of improvement. You can only unconditionally and 100% implement a plan or a specific method of action.

My leader once said something like this. Of course, the platform at that time was most likely dominated by bureaucracy. The leader said that no matter what the senior management said is right or wrong, as long as he gives us an order to do this, we must obey and do it 100%, even if it is completely wrong. If it is proven to be wrong, although it causes losses to the company's property, it will give you the opportunity to take the blame. In this case, you will become a confidant of the senior management. After becoming a confidant of the senior management, many opportunities for promotion and reuse will be your turn.

Although I cannot agree with this view, I cannot refute it, because this is the reality of this kind of workplace. As a worker, you may have your great dreams, but the platform cannot accommodate your dreams. Therefore, your part-time job has become a very simple cause and effect, that is, the purpose of working is to make money. In order to make money, you have to let go of the so-called concepts of right and wrong, and you should take corresponding compliance measures in order to make more money.

So, the leader at the time was doing quite well, but I resigned early. This means that when there is a problem with people's ideas, you will definitely do things according to your own ideas. Of course, the platform will not go bankrupt just because someone leaves. After all, a skinny camel is bigger than a horse. For such a powerful platform, even if it cannot achieve great development, the slow development method still exists.

Secondly, innovation may increase costs, because innovation represents a declaration of war on the unknown and an unproven strategy for the unknown. In this case, if you start from scratch or do things empty-handed, the possibility of success is not very high, but you have to invest this cost. In the boss's view, this cost has no certainty of success and is likely to turn into a sunk cost, so he will not simply agree. He will hold many meetings to discuss. Not only will he discuss with you, but he will also hold democratic meetings in the company where everyone will vote and decide. Therefore, the conclusion finally formed in this process is neither the best nor the worst, but a more compromise solution.

If a company does not have strict meaning to the rules, then even if a corresponding plan is formed, the corresponding executor will not implement it well, or even make arbitrary claims during the implementation process, resulting in distortion of the plan and failure to achieve the purpose of the plan. For example, when we visit a farmer, our purpose this time is to reach some consensus at the investment meeting, but some people intend to sell him a bottle for him to do experiments. Think about it, you can only earn 100 yuan at most by selling a bottle to the other party, but it sends the message to the farmer that you have no confidence in your product and you still need me to verify it. Do I still need to buy it again at your investment meeting? That is absolutely impossible!

Why does this happen? The main reason is that this company has never regarded rules as important. Because even the boss openly violated the rules he set. For example, the boss set the price of this product at two yuan. Later, due to other factors, he raised it to three yuan. However, many things happened during the time period when he set the two-yuan range, but the boss refused to acknowledge it for his own benefit. He said that employees needed to make up the money. So it's no surprise that employees throughout the company break the rules because one person is setting the example.