Hack:
A Reasonably Oppositional Mechanism for Innovations

The reasonably oppositional mechanisms for innovations (ROMFI)

Opposition or confrontation is most widely existed in all aspects of nature and human society like wars, sports competition, political struggle, marketing challenge facing businesses, biological evolution by natural selection，and so on. Regardless of its manifestations, the vast majority of opposition in human society will objectively bring more or less beneficial effect on the progress of human civilization. For instance, military exercises, in which different units perform confrontation training under conditions that approximate actual combat, can improve commanders’ commanding and rapid-reaction capability, and be beneficial to military innovation studies.

Though irrational, destructive and even brutal oppositions are still terrible, we can give a limitation of rationalities to them, make them being complied with norms, being fairness to everyone, and being beneficial for company development, then, such oppositions will be happily accepted by modern companies.

Normalization (namely, being complied with norms) is to use a complete set of strict logical rule and procedure to restraint manners and criteria of oppositions.

Fairness (namely, being fairness to everyone) is to be open and fair in instituting rule and procedure, and evaluating right or wrong, and win or failure between both parties involved in oppositions.

Benefit (namely, being beneficial for company development) is to follow such a principle that can facilitate company development from instituting rule and procedure to determining contents of oppositions.

The reasonably oppositional mechanisms for innovations (ROMFI) can be expressed as follows: for enhancing innovation capability, businesses should assign an opponent for every middle manager to perform duties of finding wrong, innovating, and challenging in game of opposition or confrontation. Such an opponent is not middle manager’s a deputy, does not belong to the list of executives, and does not possess day-to-day management functions, but as possessing his or her own special tasks as ordinary employees. He or she only can spend off-duty hours to be engaged in finding wrong, innovating, challenging, and so forth.

However, those opponents are, after all, different from ordinary employees. Their culture degree, professional skills, and enterprising spirit are relatively more than the others. They are superior among employees. Thus, in addition to enjoying the basic material benefits, they also possess some of rights necessary for performing the oppositional duties, for example, to access to internal information, to attend conference relevant to their duties.

Specifically, the opponent’s duties in participating in confronting include ① that is responsible for finding and enumerating those defects and faults being contained in rules and regulations, standard quota, operating instructions, process planning, research and development, technological transformation, product design in daily operations management within specific departments or workshop. ②  conceiving improvement program to respond to these deficiencies above by independent thinking, positive innovation based on investigating and studying seriously, soliciting views from colleagues. ③ participating regular running for middle manager with the incumbent by taking his or her own new ideas and programs.

There are a lot of ways to achieve candidates for opposition or confrontation, not to stick to one pattern, mainly including self recommendation, recommended by others, and discovering from frequent collecting for rationalization proposals, or tender in technology market within companies. But no matter what form, only after going through strict assess can the candidates formally become opponents.

For both to maintain the stability and sustainability of the corporate middle managers and the opponents and to make true opposition rather than to be mere a formality, companies must carry out stringent systems to eliminate the inferior among those candidate selected. Generally speaking, such a annual proportion eliminating the inferior should not be less than 30%. As for middle managers, homologous rate should be 20%.

It is worthy to emphasize that this reasonable opposition is significantly different from the general sense of competition. The former is more intense and challenging than the latter, especially on its duty for finding wrong to opposite side. Consequently, transplanting the reasonable opposition into company’s mechanisms for innovations will certainly bring four very important values as following:

First, the reasonably oppositional mechanism for innovations (ROMFI) is a catalyst for companies to destroy the old and establish the new. As everyone knows, there is always a lot of inertia in human thinking. As influenced by inertia of thinking, middle managers frequently consciously or unconsciously entrench themselves into some invisible frames to become the obstacle in innovating. In this way, establishing opponents for innovations to find wrong of middle managers is to become very necessary. Having opponents only for finding wrong, all kinds of hidden trouble and faults in daily operations and managements will easily be discovered. In other word, only when trying to look for deficiencies in specific departments and workshop can opponents acquire their own subsistent values. Meanwhile, while facing opponents’ picking faults day in and day out, middle managers have to examine, anatomize and correct themselves’ wrongs to unlimitedly approach perfection. Obviously, this coercing from oppositional mechanism to self-examination is much more reliable than the pure subjective consciousness.

Second, the reasonably oppositional mechanism for innovations (ROMFI) is an excavator for companies to develop employee potential in innovating. Because the reasonable opposition, at the same time, can bring opponents and middle managers sizeable pressure to survive, if marketing manager involved in confronting does not engage in careful market research, analyze troubles in developing market and feedback from users, and apply medicine according to indications to constantly improve the market share, he or she will be defeated by his or her opponent. Also, if opponent can not accurately understand the weak links within market management, has any new fining, ideas and programs, he or she will be flintily eliminated by market manager. This kind of opposition is ruthless and keen, thereby, who has more robust innovation ability and can persuade through reasoning is who will win initiative and challenge. To face so much pressure to survive, who will not come up with their own special skills, and do her or his best to exert maximum innovation potential? The relationship in opposing between market manager and opponent is as mentioned above. Also, the relationship in opposing between others section manager, such as human resources manager, purchasing manager, finance manager, manufacturing, research and development, and so on, and opponent is the same as market. As the innovation becomes the root for promotion and selecting, those middle managers who is bad in innovating will be removed from management positions. Like this, the reasonable opposition produce pressure, then pressure stimulates energy, and then energy creates innovation and vitality.

Third, the reasonably oppositional mechanism for innovations (ROMFI) is incubator for companies to gestate culture of innovation. Here a highlight for ROMFI is to take innovation and challenge as a duty that the two opposite sides must fulfill. Companies should make a rule that the term for a middle manager served in the same position can not be more than four years. During this term he or she either get promoted or step down through participating running for, that is, if a middle manager has not a good record in innovating, then he will be eliminated, innovating is not only the obligation, but the mission. With this reasonable oppositional rule as safeguard, innovation will easily be accepted and understood within companies. Participator, whether middle managers or opponents, can take in oppositions or confrontations with a healthy sense. Over time, a good atmosphere for understanding and regarding and striving for innovation will gradually form.

Fourth, the reasonably oppositional mechanism for innovations (ROMFI) is a midwife for companies to hasten the delivery of innovation experts. An innovation expert is usually a pusher who plays a role of organizer and leader in corporate innovation process. Cultivating and fostering a team of innovation expert is an endless source of corporation innovation. Because the essence of reasonable opposition is the innovation race, the science does not allow the least bit false, and innovation can not tolerate the slightest flippant and impetuous, a middle manager or technical staff has to make genuine innovation while wanting to stay ahead in innovation race. As a result, they must positively learn from books and through experience at work, think independently, bravely explore, not stick to old ways and be self-complacent. Having built an open non-discriminatory strict set of rule of game as lever, seniority and an unsound interpersonal relationship will become meaningless in opposing. The most touching, compelling and important things for winning are the most valuable fruits of innovation. Everyone can not make a living on anything but their capability. No matter who is he or she, as long as possesses excellent capability in innovation, a dream about getting substantial reward and higher status will come real. The need for self-realization is the highest human needs, said Maslow. The reasonably oppositional mechanism for innovations (ROMFI) just provides a sound external condition for a person with noble aspirations to meet this need. Here they rapidly stand out as the winner, continuously grow up and achieve self-actualization by participating reasonable opposition.

Some people may generate such worry as sharpening contradictions, influencing cooperation, causing internal dissension, weakening cohesion rooted in the reasonable opposition to get into wrong track. In my opinion, it is unnecessary completely to have this worry above due to the following two reasons.

First, there is the reasonable restriction in front of the opposition itself. Not only has the reasonable opposition established a complete set of fair and transparent rules to effectively constraint the game between participators, but also the judgment to opposition is canonical and impartial, and that whole opposition must hold being beneficial for enterprise innovation and enhancing economic efficiency up as principles. To a great extent companies can suppress the emergence of unfair competition and unsound interpersonal relationship. If no true useful innovations, those people with evil intentions or unsound interpersonal relationship is still useless.

Second, the qualified participators all come from middle managers and those exceptional individuals among employees, and possess relative high quality, so, they usually can treat oppositions with a healthy sense. Middle managers are the tie to connect top executives with first-line managers or ordinary employees, forming a connecting link between the high and the low or bottom. Certainly, introducing the reasonably oppositional mechanism for innovations (ROMFI) among middle managers is extremely useful for improving their management skills and technical level.

Of course, the reasonably oppositional mechanism for innovations (ROMFI) is not flawless yet, or even at no disadvantage at all. I can not absolutely rule out the possibility that duties of finding wrong, innovating, and challenging will cause some negative conflicts between the two sides of participating oppositions.

Whereas if this negative conflict can be reduced the minimum levels by controlling of a set of fair and transparent rules, generally speaking, such oppositional mechanism (ROMFI) does more good than harm and is practical to enterprises development.

The reasonably oppositional mechanism for innovations (ROMFI) is a branch of the enterprise management mechanism as a whole. Therefore, as divorced from evaluation, incentives, training mechanism, it is impossibility for to flourish and beautiful alone. Without really effective evaluation, reward and punishment mechanism to support, the ROMFL will only produce those flowers having no any fruits. Without really effective training mechanism to boost, the ROMFI will be the simple repeat at low levels.

Match the mechanisms for appraising and eliminating the inferior with the reasonably oppositional mechanisms for innovations (ROMFI).

The mechanisms for appraising and eliminating the inferior that is adaptive to the ROMFI should include four aspects:

The first is how to screen and evaluate opponents? In principle, all employees, regardless of the level of qualifications and posts, should be given the equal right and opportunity to participate opposition when he or she possesses good innovation ability. But due to limited numbers of opponents, it is impossible for everyone who wants to take part in opposition to be allowed. So, through correlative screening and evaluating of candidates, picking out those exceptional individuals to enhance the grade of opposition just becomes necessary. The screening and evaluating should adhere to the three open principles, that is, open standard, overt assessment, and declared result. Standards should be detailed, specific and clear as far as possible, being understood at a glance and easily overseen by employees.

The second is how to assess innovative proposals and fruits of innovation? The specialized evaluation committee presides over all assessment activities, also, setting up different innovation evaluation panels under it. The majority of Judges are interior experts having both wealth of practical experience and higher level of theory. There is a relationship of full equality and the majority rule among members of evaluation committee or evaluation panels. All judges mush fully respect opponents’ say and encourage rejoinder, after all, the more the truth is debated, the clearer it becomes.

The third is how to select middle managers? This selection not only is the comprehensive, but also grasps the key points. The comprehensive is to integrate self-assessment, superior assessment, subordinates assessment, and peer assessment into a whole, and take into consideration both performance appraisal and leadership assessment as well. Grasping the key points is about focusing on innovation ability and organizational and managerial capacity.

The fourth is how to conduct the rule of eliminating those inferior middle managers and opponents. In a word, only in this way that mediocre person (including both middle managers and opponents) has to step down, dose all participators have a sense of crisis, then produce strong motive force for innovations.

Match the mechanisms for training with the reasonably oppositional mechanisms for innovations (ROMFI).

Determining if an employee’s achievement in innovating mainly is good or bad relies on two basic factors: first is whether having the enthusiasm for innovation? Second is whether having innovation ability? If companies do not have an appropriate incentives mechanism for innovation, if those employees who are brave and adept in innovation can not be promoted and rewarded heavily, if good innovation can not give innovator real benefits, employees’ enthusiasm for innovation will be greatly reduced. In this case, it will not be overstated no matter how to emphasize the importance of the mechanisms for innovation. Having a sound innovative mechanism in which creative talents can come to the fore, however, is not equal to easily obtain a large number of useful innovations because innovation is a complex and dynamic human thinking process. This situation is the same as a machine made up of inferior materials in which it is difficult to reach its maximum level of efficacy even if it has advanced design. A superior mechanism merely provides a possibility for companies to obtain desired innovations. Ultimately, whether this possibility can transform into the reality also relies on those people with anti-traditional spirit and ability of logic analysis and combining theory with practice. So strengthening employee training, increasing creativity & innovation awareness of employees, developing innovative potential of employees, and updating employee knowledge will be essential, that is, companies do need a sound mechanisms for training to constantly raise the level of opposition or confrontation.