????公司的變革從來都不是件容易的事，但以前更加簡單一點。五十年前的企業遵循一種基本的做法。他們擁有英雄般的領導者（CEO和由精英組成的頂級管理層），這些領導者掌握著龐大的權力，所有重要的決策都出自他們之手。當他們想作出改變時會設定方向，自上而下在全公司推行。

????不過，今非昔比。由于企業更多地在速度、靈活性和創新方面展開競爭，決策權必須下放。不錯，仍然有些公司因循守舊，完全依賴于自上而下的領導方式，但在越來越多的公司里，領導權力由公司上下共同分享，而且常常是以團隊為單位。命令和控制讓位于協作和配合。

????這些都是積極的變化，但它們不會使公司改革更加容易取得成功。管理者的關鍵是要建立一個環境，讓團隊和個人（甚至是公司低層員工）擁有提出和嘗試新想法的自由與權力，無論這個新想法是新的環保計劃、新的技術，還是在不同市場領域抓住新機遇的方法。目標是使公司上上下下各個層級的員工都擁有企業家素質。下面就是實現這個目標的幾個方法：

????思維要超越正式的職銜

????管理者往往會根據員工在公司組織圖上的位置把他們放進嚴整的小框框里。這些框框使公司里級別較低的員工難以在沒有正式頭銜的情況下去研究和嘗試新想法。“我們需要一位正式的管理人員去做這件事。”這種態度隨處可見。在分配項目時，為了防止這種傾向，請仔細想想誰有做好這件事所需要的那種熱情、知識和人際關系，而不要去顧及那個人的職銜。如果這種做法在公司政策層面行不通，那么可以考慮成立雙人團隊或小團體，把擁有必要技能的人囊括進去。

????

????Organizational change has never been easy, but in the past it was a little more straightforward. Fifty years ago, companies followed a basic blueprint. They had heroic leaders -- a CEO and an elite top layer of management -- who had tremendous authority and made all the important decisions. When they wanted to make a change, they set a direction and it cascaded down through the firm.

????Today things are different. As companies compete more on speed, agility, and innovation, decision-making needs to get pushed down. Sure, there remain some old-school companies that rely solely on top-down leadership. But in an increasing number of firms, leadership is shared across the organization, often in teams. Command and control is out; collaboration and teamwork are in.

????These are positive developments, but they don't make organizational change any easier to pull off. The key for managers is to create an environment where teams and individuals -- even those lower in the organization -- have the latitude and autonomy to recommend and try out new ideas, be it a new environmental initiative, a new technology, or a way to seize some new opportunity in a different market. The goal is an entrepreneurial workforce at all levels of the company. Here are some ways to achieve that:

????Think beyond the official job title.

????Managers tend to put employees into neat little boxes according to their place on the corporate organizational chart. But these boxes make it hard for someone lower down in the organization, without an official title, to vet and test a new idea. There's a prevailing attitude of: "We need a formal manager to do that." To combat that tendency when assigning people to projects, consider who has the passion, knowledge, and networks to succeed -- independent of that person's title. If this is not politically possible, then think about creating two-person teams or small groups that include people with the necessary expertise.

????