4-3 | The Structure Where Experienced People Are More Likely to Make Wrong Judgments - Experience is 'Local Data', Not a 'Strength' - (3/4)

In the field of business turnaround and organizational reform,
there is something I have consistently felt.
That is,

the most dangerous people are those with experience

.
Of course, this does not mean they have low ability.
Quite the opposite.

The problem lies in the fact that
experience is established in a 'local area', not the 'entire market'
.

Where is experience established?

Experience is always built upon the following conditions:
• Which company they were at
• What the scale was
• What the position was
• What the era was
• What the product was
• What the competitive environment was like

In other words, experience is
a collection of judgments that were only valid in the 'specific place and time' where that person was.
Nevertheless, we treat it unconsciously like this:

'They must understand because they are experienced'
'They succeeded with that before'

This is where the first distortion is born.

The moment experience dulls judgment

Experienced people tend to think like this when making decisions:
• This worked in the past
• This is how this industry is
• That is armchair theory by someone who doesn't know the field

This may look like a shortcut to judgment, but
in reality, it is an omission of thought.

Instead of creating a state where you
'don't have to think',
experience robs you of the opportunity to rethink.

Why does personalization progress?

In organizations centered on experienced people, the following happens:
• Judgment gathers in specific people
• 'You won't know unless you ask that person'
• Success that cannot be reproduced is treated as the correct answer

This is a natural flow.

Because experience is
an individual's memory that has not been verbalized.

As a result,
• Judgment is concentrated on specific individuals
• Work becomes personalized
• Standardization does not progress
• The organization cannot expand

The decisive difference between experience and mechanisms

Experience is 'I did it this way'
A mechanism is 'Whoever does it, if this happens, results will be produced'

This difference is decisive.

Experience depends on people,
while mechanisms depend on structure.

The moment the market changes,
experience is easily invalidated, but
mechanisms can be adjusted.

Do not deny experienced people, but do not depend on them

What is important is
not to deny experienced people.

However,
do not take experience as the absolute correct answer.

What I always do in the field is:
• Break down experience into 'hypotheses'
• Find the causes that lead to results
• Try them out on a small scale
• Verify with numbers
• Make them reproducible

Through this,
• Experience changes from an 'individual weapon' to
• an organizational asset.

Organizations where experienced people thrive, and where they rot

Experienced people who can produce results:
• Even if everyone follows their method
• They continue to build up results there
• They pioneer new experiences (causes)

Conversely, what is dangerous is:
• Denying experience
• Forcing mechanisms onto experienced people
• Excluding only experienced people from management targets

.
Do not deny experienced people, and take KPIs for everyone.
The weakness of experienced people is that they have 'waves'.
There are times when they can get orders, and times when they cannot.
However, there are no waves in mechanism-based sales.
Therefore, once results start coming in consistently,
experienced people will also start adopting the mechanisms themselves.

Learning

• Experience is not omnipotent
• Experience is established in local areas, not the market
• Using experience as-is leads to personalization
• Experience only becomes valuable when broken down and turned into a mechanism

What is truly needed in management and organizations is
not the amount of experience,
but the ability to doubt experience, analyze the behavior of experienced people, and change it into a structure.

In the next installment, I will explain 'The decisive difference between people who can create mechanisms and those who cannot'
- The 'perspective of seeing the forest' that created profitability -
.