（原标题：陈春花：组织能力是自我造就的过程） 企业之间的差异，正从"拥有什么"，转向"能够持续形成什么样的能力"；管理的重心，也从外部竞争， 回归到组织自身的成长方式。2026年，将是组织从"消耗战"迈向"能力构建战"的真正转折点。 在我接触的企业中，在组织能力建设上，常常面临不同的困境。 传统企业往往结构僵化、角色依赖，人们习惯于按照已有的角色岗位去思考，去理解承担的责任，并为 了守护住自己的角色，害怕调整，导致组织无法面对外部环境的变化。 新创企业借助于数智技术和创新顾客价值需求，实现倍数增长，甚至成为独角兽。但这些企业在快速成 长过程中，人员增长过快、组织问题层出不穷，组织能力成为瓶颈。 无论是传统企业还是新创企业，如何快速整合不同资源，高效协调配置资源以应对复杂环境，都是无法 回避的核心挑战。因此，打造企业的组织能力，一直是一个挑战性的话题。 一、组织能力的三个维度 对组织能力的理解，大家有很多不同看法：有人认为组织能力就是企业有一支过硬的队伍；有人认为组 织能力是一套机制；还有人认为组织能力是企业所具有的核心能力。 这些看法都有其合理之处。为了帮助大家更好地理解什么是"组织能力"，我引用克里斯坦森的 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the significance of "disruptive innovation" as a key focus in technological development, rooted in Clayton Christensen's theory from nearly 30 years ago, which continues to inspire new thoughts and reflections among businesses and individuals [3][4]. Summary by Sections About the Book - Christensen's book, published in 1997, remains relevant today, as evidenced by a 2019 study in *Nature* that builds on the concept of disruptive innovation. The book analyzes over 30 years of the hard disk industry, arguing that many companies fail not due to poor management or insufficient R&D, but because well-managed companies lose market share [6][8]. Two Types of Innovation - The author distinguishes between two types of innovation: sustaining innovation, which optimizes existing technologies, and disruptive innovation, which creates new markets and ultimately replaces existing products. Established companies typically engage in sustaining innovation, while startups rely on disruptive innovation to capture market share [7][8]. Reasons for Failure - Mature companies struggle with disruptive innovation due to their entrenchment in existing value networks, which prioritize stable, high-margin customers over uncertain, low-margin emerging markets. This leads to missed opportunities, as illustrated by the example of Seagate's failure to capitalize on the 3.5-inch hard drive due to its focus on desktop computer manufacturers [9][11]. How to Overcome the Innovation Dilemma - To avoid the innovation dilemma, mature companies can adopt three strategies: altering the growth rate of emerging markets, entering markets once they reach a certain scale, or establishing independent units for experimentation. The third option is favored, as it allows for more flexibility and innovation without the constraints of established processes and culture [12][13]. Other Possible Implications - The book's insights may extend beyond corporate management to historical studies, such as the decline of empires, suggesting that bureaucratic inertia and corruption can lead to failure. This cross-disciplinary approach could provide new perspectives on both corporate and historical decline [14][16].