Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the differences between "grassroots teams" and "regular armies" in business, emphasizing the importance of strategic thinking, structured management, and data-driven decision-making to avoid chaos and inefficiency in organizations [10][12][54]. Group 1: Characteristics of Grassroots Teams vs. Regular Armies - Grassroots teams rely on ideas rather than models for strategy, leading to inconsistent and reactive decision-making [12][14]. - Management in grassroots teams is task-oriented, while regular armies focus on achieving specific goals [48][54]. - Goals in grassroots teams are often based on wishes rather than organizational structure, whereas regular armies utilize structured planning [55][58]. Group 2: Decision-Making Processes - Grassroots teams make decisions based on intuition, while regular armies depend on data to inform their choices [84][97]. - The reliance on intuition can lead to inconsistent outcomes, whereas data-driven decisions provide a clearer path to success [85][88]. Group 3: Performance Evaluation and Accountability - In grassroots teams, performance assessments are often based on appearances and subjective evaluations, while regular armies implement structured rules for evaluation [98][110]. - A well-defined evaluation system connects organizational goals with employee incentives, ensuring accountability and fairness [110][116]. Group 4: Strategic Planning Models - The article introduces the "5-3-1" model for strategic planning, which involves looking five years ahead, planning for three years, and executing for one year [22][38]. - The "PEST+I" model is recommended for analyzing macro trends and industry dynamics over a five-year horizon [27][28]. - The "Strategic Six Variables" model helps organizations identify competitive advantages and areas for improvement over a three-year period [30][37]. Group 5: Importance of Structured Management - Structured management practices, such as regular meetings and clear goal-setting, are essential for executing strategies effectively [66][80]. - The article emphasizes that successful organizations must evolve from informal, chaotic structures to more organized and systematic approaches to sustain growth [141][142].

以下文章来源于陈知行 ，作者陈知行 陈知行 . 心理和管理学双背景，组织领域深度探究者。基于专业和实践有独家方法论沉淀，助力个体和组织能力的系统跃升及协同发展。一对一咨询：5,000元/小 时 2015年，李想力排众议，要开始造车。他费尽心思组建了一个制造团队要造SEV，在投入几个亿之后，由于国家政策项目不得不中止；彼时，理想的账面资金只 容许他们再做最后一次尝试： 也就是后来让理想起死回生的增程车项目理想ONE。 时间到了2018 年，理想ONE项⽬关键时期： -业务复杂，包含整⻋研发、智能系统研发、⾃动驾驶研发、⽣产制造、供应链、汽⻋经销、售后服务、市场营销、⾦融等等； 2-信息传递：通过透明化解决内部的信息垄断问题 3-目标管理：引入在谷歌成功实践的OKR工具 -企业⼈数过千：员⼯来⾃不同公司，⼤都有成型的⼯作经验，协作很困难； -企业的外部⽣存环境险峻（投资⼈：智能电动⻋还是⼀个好的赛道吗？）。 为此，理想汽车采取了以下的应对之道： 1-组织形态：从深井型组织转向网状协作的组织 2018 年底- 2019 年年初，李想因病在家休养数⽉，阅读了《这就是 OKR 》 彻底改变了 OKR 在理想汽⻋的命运。 ...