Ron Adner

The value of most frameworks lies not in changing a manager’s initial intuition but in clarifying the issues that arise when managers with different instincts try to debate the right course of action. A structured framework can transform the debate from a battle of guts, ultimately resolved on the basis of reputation, power, and eloquence (often in that order), into a comparison of the assumptions being made about a given situation’s fundamental structure.

A framework presents elements and relationships that provide a grammar for the debate. These debates tend to be productive in that they are fine grained-people can move past areas of agreement, focus on areas of disagreement, and analyze why they hold different beliefs. They either achieve a consensus or make a decision knowing precisely where and why they disagree. In the case of disagreement, the debate will highlight critical assumptions that managers should be particularly mindful of as the venture progresses.

Like this content? Why not share it?
Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterGoogle+Share on LinkedInBuffer this pagePin on PinterestShare on Redditshare on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.