Read on Twitter
Just listened to an episode of @TKPPodcast with @RogerLMartin, the former Dean of the Rotman School of Management.
The episode was packed with interesting ideas so I decided to compile some of my highlights from the episode.
A Thread
The episode was packed with interesting ideas so I decided to compile some of my highlights from the episode.
A Thread
1. Roger loves integrated thinking. It's a solution to the kind of narrow thinking taught in business school, where you learn a bunch of highly specific, disconnected models and find the best one to apply to a given problem.
MBA = model matching.
MBA = model matching.
Case studies are one way that this narrow thinking is enforced. Case studies are written to showcase a specific, narrow use-case of a tool. The tool is made to look generally applicable but isn't.
Narrow thinking creates blindness.
Enter integrated thinking
Narrow thinking creates blindness.
Enter integrated thinking
What is integrated thinking? Imagine you're faced with a tough, either-or decision. Each choice has its benefits. What if this is a false dichotomy. This is an opportunity to use integrated thinking. Think of how you can integrate the best aspects of each system.
2. School teaches us we can apply a narrow perspective on an issue and come to the only logical conclusion. Then when someone applies a different perspective to come to a different conclusion, we assume that they're stupid or evil.
But consider, what would have to be true in the world for this perspective to make sense? Often we're just not seeing what they're seeing. Even if we don't agree with their conclusion, we can gain useful insights. Being completely right or wrong is often a myth
3. Business school teaches you should prioritize efficiency at all costs. You can take margins of safety and turn them into money.
However, in a world where no one can accurately predict the future, margins of safety are important so you can win no matter what the future holds
However, in a world where no one can accurately predict the future, margins of safety are important so you can win no matter what the future holds
One problem? If you plan for multiple futures, then you're inherently going to be less efficient than someone who's only planning for one future. Shane: "in the short run we're always looking like we're behind but in the long run we always win"
4. Before the global financial crisis, people were giving certain bonds triple-A ratings. They were saying that there was a near-zero chance of default. But then a huge percentage of these bonds did default. So how did they get it so wrong?
Think about who's rating bonds. If someone was good at rating bonds, they could use that skill to trade bonds and make money. But they weren't. They were rating bonds. So inherently, the people rating bonds are worse at judging bonds than the people actually trading them.
5. The previous story leads to a broader lesson. If you want a certain type of person to fill a position, consider what incentives need to exist to attract that person. The position of bond rater fails this test.
If this sounds interesting, give the full episode a listen. There's so much more that can't fit into one thread including:
-the qualities that all good leaders have
-applications of integrated thinking
-teaching integrated thinking to young kids
...and much more
-the qualities that all good leaders have
-applications of integrated thinking
-teaching integrated thinking to young kids
...and much more
