To narrow the search results, you can refine the query by specifying the fields to search on. The list of fields is presented above. For example:

You can search across multiple fields at the same time:

logical operators

The default operator is AND.
Operator AND means that the document must match all the elements in the group:

research development

Operator OR means that the document must match one of the values ​​in the group:

study OR development

Operator NOT excludes documents containing this element:

study NOT development

Search type

When writing a query, you can specify the way in which the phrase will be searched. Four methods are supported: search based on morphology, without morphology, search for a prefix, search for a phrase.
By default, the search is based on morphology.
To search without morphology, it is enough to put the "dollar" sign before the words in the phrase:

$ study $ development

To search for a prefix, you need to put an asterisk after the query:

study *

To search for a phrase, you need to enclose the query in double quotes:

" research and development "

Search by synonyms

To include synonyms of a word in the search results, put a hash mark " # " before a word or before an expression in brackets.
When applied to one word, up to three synonyms will be found for it.
When applied to a parenthesized expression, a synonym will be added to each word if one was found.
Not compatible with no-morphology, prefix, or phrase searches.

# study

grouping

Parentheses are used to group search phrases. This allows you to control the boolean logic of the request.
For example, you need to make a request: find documents whose author is Ivanov or Petrov, and the title contains the words research or development:

Approximate word search

For approximate search you need to put a tilde " ~ " at the end of a word in a phrase. For example:

bromine ~

The search will find words such as "bromine", "rum", "prom", etc.
You can optionally specify the maximum number of possible edits: 0, 1, or 2. For example:

bromine ~1

The default is 2 edits.

Proximity criterion

To search by proximity, you need to put a tilde " ~ " at the end of a phrase. For example, to find documents with the words research and development within 2 words, use the following query:

" research development "~2

Expression relevance

To change the relevance of individual expressions in the search, use the sign " ^ " at the end of an expression, and then indicate the level of relevance of this expression in relation to the others.
The higher the level, the more relevant the given expression.
For example, in this expression, the word "research" is four times more relevant than the word "development":

study ^4 development

By default, the level is 1. Valid values ​​are a positive real number.

Search within an interval

To specify the interval in which the value of some field should be, you should specify the boundary values ​​in brackets, separated by the operator TO.
A lexicographic sort will be performed.

Such a query will return results with the author starting from Ivanov and ending with Petrov, but Ivanov and Petrov will not be included in the result.
To include a value in an interval, use square brackets. Use curly braces to escape a value.

Rosenzweig is a surname. Known speakers: Rosenzweig, Viktor Yulievich (1911-1998) Russian linguist. Rosenzweig Schwannau, Vincent (1791-1865) Austrian orientalist. Rosenzweig, Phil Professor of Business School at IMD, author of the book ... ... Wikipedia

Performances of the Bolshoi Drama Theater- Performances staged at the Bolshoi Drama Theater, now the Russian State Academic Bolshoi Drama Theater named after G. A. Tovstonogov, are presented in chronological order. Contents 1 1919 1922 2 1923 ... ... Wikipedia

Cube 2: Hypercube- This term has other meanings, see Cube (meanings). Cube 2: Hypercube Cube 2: Hypercube ... Wikipedia

ABSOLUTE- absolute [lat. absolutus detached, unlimited, unconditional, irrelevant, perfect, complete], a term of philosophy and theology. The origin of the term has not been established, however, its religious, cult, legal and ... ... Orthodox Encyclopedia

Books

• The halo effect ... and other eight illusions that mislead managers, Rosenzweig F. The way we think about business is largely influenced by illusions - logical errors and false judgments that distort our understanding of the true causes of performance ... Buy for 551 rub
• , Phil Rosenzweig. Rosenzweig claims that the most popular ideas in business, nothing more than soothing platitudes that promise quick success to troubled managers. These "business illusions": ... Buy for 422 rubles
• The Halo Effect...and Eight Other Illusions That Mislead Managers by Phil Rosenzweig. Classic business literature in audio format! Why do some companies thrive and others don't? Phil Rosenzweig claims that the most popular ideas in business have nothing to do with...

"In the world of business, not everything is in order with thinking"

interview with Phil Rosenzweig

Material associated with pages:

Dmitry Lisitsyn , The Secret of the Firm magazine, No. 41, 2008

Perception is constantly playing tricks on people. "He's so handsome, so smart," the girl thinks of her new boyfriend. After a couple of weeks, it turns out that the guy is a blockhead. Since the phone has an excellent design, then it is of high quality - a gadget lover decides. Six months later, the phone breaks down. The jury passes a lenient sentence on the "good" criminal, and a year later he is caught again. In these cases, the so-called halo effect is triggered - based on the general impression, people make judgments about particulars. IMD business school professor Phil Rosenzweig believes that this property of the psyche also harms business. The halo effect affects "business gurus" who fool themselves and us.

"SECRET OF THE FIRM": You call the method of Tom Peters and Jim Collins "the science of fairy tales", and the authors themselves - "self-proclaimed titans of thought." What was not shared?

PHILIP ROSENZWEIG: The problem is that business bestsellers claim to be scientific. People think they are good books. I ask: "And where did you get it?" “Well, the authors have done such a job, the sample of studies is impressive,” they answer. But what is the use of the amount of information if the data is initially corrupted? "Gurus" work like this: they take successful companies and try to find out from their managers the reason for success. But a person is prone to rationalization: if there is no explanation, he invents it. When profits rise, people say, "Bay, the company has a great strategy, a visionary leader, motivated people, it sticks to customers." When she falls into decline: “We became lazy, became arrogant, turned away from buyers.” This is a psychological phenomenon: the results of a company determine how we perceive it. It turns out that the "formulas of success" in fact have nothing to do with success. These are just people's opinions! Alas, we love beautiful fairy tales.

SF: Are the gurus deliberately fooling us?

FR: Peters set the fashion - he was the first to compare successful companies with each other and deduced the formula. Soon, the companies in his sample began to regress. But, to his credit, he did not try to pass off his work as an accurate study. But Collins made statements about the scientific significance of his work. Which, of course, is completely absurd. Is Collins himself aware that something is wrong in his books and hiding it, or is he simply unaware? Don't know. I gave him my book through a mutual friend. His position is: "Too busy, didn't read." I understand him. It's hard to prove me wrong. And to admit that I'm right is very painful.

SF: Was it worth contacting? Do you think anyone seriously follows the advice of a guru?

FR: Since millions are reading, then someone is following. Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is said to have taken inspiration from Good to Great. Now he is probably dissatisfied - the results have worsened. However, according to Collins, the path to the great is 15 years, the book appeared only in 2001, so Ballmer still has a lot of time. But seriously, you don't have to wait. Just ask yourself the question: “Can the halo recipe for success work?”

SF: Is it possible to find a formula if you do the research correctly?

FR: No. Business success is not a physical law. It is not absolute, but relative, that is, it matters in the context of competition, and not in itself. If you and I follow the same instructions, we will both fail to succeed.

SF: What about the “strategy blue ocean”, whose authors found a formula for success without competition?

FR: They made a classic mistake. They chose companies that created their own "blue oceans", but did not say anything about those who tried to avoid competition and died. And there are many of them! Perhaps, in some blue oceans it is impossible to live: there is no food and oxygen there. “When a competitor starts breathing down the back of his head, should you run into the blue ocean, or, having entered the fight, paint the waters with blood?” This is a question managers ask every day. There is no answer to it, since no one has tried to compare those who tried to stay with those who tried to leave.

SF: So, you need to trust fate?

FR: No need to flip a coin or pray to the gods. Success is not guaranteed, but it is not accidental either. He's in the middle. Management is "doing," a set of choices made under uncertainty in order to increase the likelihood of success. This is managerial wisdom.

SF: Which leaders are wise?

FR: Andy Grove (former head of Intel.-SF), ex-CEO of Vodafone Arun Sarin... In the late 1990s, Vodafone skimmed the cream off the growing mobile phone market. By 2003, when Sarin came in, the competition had intensified and the company was starting to lose ground. Many said: "Arun is a bad leader - the results are falling." But he made good choices several times in a difficult economic environment: Vodafone went into fixed-broadband, entered the Turkish and Indian markets. Of course, Arun's results are more modest than those of his predecessor, but that's the market.

SF: Are you creating a halo over Sarin and Grove?

FR: They are truly role models. If you adopt their approach to analyzing information and making decisions, you will increase the likelihood of success. But to repeat their results will not work - I do not have a recipe. You know, one person read my book and asked: "Where is the formula?" I replied, "If you're still looking for it, read the book a second time."

SF: Is your book also a model?

FR: I want to help people think more critically. So that they ask themselves: “Wait a minute, is this data correct or not? Are the conclusions correct or not? In the world of business, not everything is in order with thinking. People believe what others tell them. The practice managers I work with at IMD are smart and honest guys who want to succeed. But many of them do not know how to think with their own heads. I see engineers, sales managers or finance people who are unable to evaluate the information they receive. And it upsets me. Management is not rocket science, it's not that hard. There are basics that each of us must think about.

“You take a small, humble firm, preferably from some Old Testament industry, show how, through perseverance and conscientiousness, it grows into a beautiful swan, and we get Good to Great.” Collins did not have to look far in search of a proven archetype, in where our hidden hopes would come true. Even the title "From Good to Great" looks like an imitation of "From Rags to Riches". Phil Rosenzweig, Halo Effect, St. Petersburg; Bes: Business Books, 2008

Phil Rosenzweig(Phil Rosenzweig) is a professor at IMD in Lausanne, Switzerland, where he collaborates with leading companies on strategy and organization. He received his PhD from the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania and taught at Harvard Business School for six years. A native of northern California. Author of The Halo Effect and the Eight Other Illusions That Mislead Managers.

This book has not been much noticed by our reading community, and quite in vain, because it talks about things that often mislead us (people in general, as well as members of the community who read business literature and reviews on it, in particular) astray.

Reading business literature (especially all sorts of success stories) should start with The Halo Effect. Having read and comprehended this book, I am more than sure of it. Because a lot of the things that business literature talks about are misrepresented. halo effect is when, for example, you look at some successful company and think, “Why are they so successful? Let's see, we'll see... Yeah, everything is clear - they use KPI. They also have a lot of innovation, and at the same time they pay a lot of attention to their employees.” Opa - the business recipe for success is ready - people and innovations are our everything!

The problem is that these “reasons” are nothing more than circles in the water.

A couple of years go by the market is coming decline (or something else happens - something happens all the time!), and we notice that the same company is in the ass - losses, loss of market share, etc. etc. “Ai-yay-yay!”, We exclaim, “What is the problem? Let's see, let's see... Yeah, everything is clear! Innovating, they have moved too far from their roots, chasing new profits, and the bulk of consumers have turned away from them! Voila - another recipe for business is ready - we must be who we are and not change our essence!

As you may have guessed, this time we behaved in exactly the same way - the same circles on the water - we still do not see the true reasons. The trees are swaying, the wind is blowing.

The world around us, as well as its narrower segment - the world of business - is a very complex dynamic system with non-linear laws. Applying linear laws to it, we run the risk of hitting the sky with our finger. Not only that, we do it regularly.

My favorite Tom Peters and Robert Waterman hit the sky with their book “In Search of Excellence”. After spending the financial analysis performance of the 35 "perfect" companies in this book, we find that five years after the book's release, total shareholder return (change in market price shares plus any reinvested dividends) 12 of them still outperformed the Snadard & Poor 500 and 23 were under the S&P 500. Ten years later, 13 companies outperformed the market and 18 underperformed. The rate of return also changed. Five years before the Peters and Waterman studies, and five years after, 30 of the 35 "perfect" companies saw their profits decline (compared to the year the studies were conducted). (For those who are interested in the details, the book provides comparative tables for these data.)

The situation is similar with the visionary companies of Collins and Porras from the books Good to Great and Built to Last. And the thing is, notes Phil Rosenzweig, that these studies were carried out statistically incorrectly, and also considered the business system as linear. Data on companies was taken from publications in the media, which work on the principle of "the dog barks, the wind blows" and is also extremely susceptible to halo effect - the ability to judge details by the overall impression.

If the company is successful this moment time), then all its components are successful - management, strategy, approach to working with personnel, etc. Similarly, if a company suffers losses, then its business components are not successful (at the same time, everyone forgets that these are the same components - nothing has changed :).

The halo effect is an easily observed psychological illusion. In addition to it, the author describes eight more illusions that business is subject to:

• halo effect- the ability to judge the details by the overall impression.
• Correlation and causality— is not the same thing.
• The fragmentation of single explanations- the systems are non-linear.
• The illusion of solid victories- everything is changing.
• The illusion of painstaking research- tons of processed information are presented as proof of the scientific nature of the study (even if this information is taken from the media :).
• The illusion of continued success- it is impossible.
• Illusion of absolute result- consider the company's activities outside the context of the market (a company can show profit growth and, nevertheless, be in a deep ass, because other companies in this market show growth many times greater).
• Illusion of Misunderstanding- an explanation that is true for a certain set of options is presented as universal, for example - the top ten companies are highly customer-oriented, therefore, in order to become the best, a company must be customer-oriented.
• The organizational physics fallacy— there are no permanent laws, or they are difficult to formalize — there are no universal laws and rules in business.

To one degree or another, many business bestsellers fall prey to one or more of these illusions.

Conclusions? Business is too complex a system to try to apply linear laws to it - if we want to get a really meaningful result, we must consider business as a dynamic system with complex relationships - like a fractal, and not like a figure from Euclidean geometry, the laws of quantum physics, not Newtonian.

In general, to perceive the world linearly is a big mistake not only for business gurus, but also for many modern scientists from other fields of knowledge (which is, for example, the treatment of diseases with pills, when a symptom is treated with drugs, but multiple side effects come out), politicians, parents, teachers and other people. As far as I know, there are attempts to describe the world with more complex than linear models, for example, The Theory of Everything, but it is not yet possible to use them in practice. So, it remains only to rely on common sense.

The book not only contains extremely important and useful information for all of us, makes you think, but is also very easy and interesting to read, written in good language, contains many (sometimes funny) practical examples.

Phil Rosenzweig, "The Halo Effect...and Eight Other Illusions That Mislead Managers", 2008, BestBusinessBooks, ISBN 978-5-91171-009-5.

P.S. Thanks a lot to BestBusinessBooks publishing house and personally to Margarita Adaeva-Datskaya for providing the book.

Column "new book sales" newspaper "Vedomosti".
The column leader is Andrey Kuzmichev, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor of the State Higher School of Economics.

Phil Rosenzweig "The halo effect...and eight other illusions that mislead managers"
St. Petersburg: BESTBUSINESSBOOKS, 2008. 250 p.

Every day, top managers discuss numerous "variations on the most burning question of all time: what actions lead to high results?". "This is the quintessence of questions in the business world," Professor Phil Rosenzweig drily notes and furiously, with knowledge of the matter, smashes those who, under the guise of serious research, promote themselves and customers.

Among them were such luminaries of management as Tom Peters, Bob Waterman, Jim Crollins and Jerry Porras (a detailed analysis of their mistakes is contained in the appendix to the book). Michael Porter and Anita McGahan also got credit for a study where they "set out to determine the extent to which a company's profitability depends on the industry in which it operates, the corporation to which it belongs, and the methods it uses."

Rosenzweig notes that the researchers labeled the latter category as “segment-specific impact,” which included customer orientation, culture, HR, social responsibility etc. As a result, "the authors found that 32% of the company's results can be attributed to" specifics ". But after all, its authors did not understand inside, and in fact, as Rosenzweig writes, as a result, the observed "effects were superimposed on each other, explaining the same 32%".

Why do thousands of researchers build the Tower of Babel out of pseudo-labor and try, sometimes quite successfully, to trade their ideas? The reason for this, according to Rosenzweig, is the halo effect - our desire to "create an idea about a subject that is too far from you, often simply inaccessible to direct judgment, in order to bring it closer and evaluate", the human tendency "to grasp at information that is at first glance significant, concrete, which gives the impression of being objective, and projecting it onto objects that are abstract and ambiguous."

In the world of books, there is the same ambiguity. Rosenzweig cites Stanford University's James March and Robert Sutton as saying that "organizational research exists in two very different worlds." “The first one is addressed to practicing managers and is full of reflections on how to improve results,” the professors say. “Here we find research whose goal is to inspire and reassure. The second requires following strict criteria for knowledge and encourages it. Here the supremacy of science, not history ".

Why among the bestsellers are mostly books from the first world, explains illusion number 9: "the fallacy of organizational physics." Its essence is that for most researchers, all companies are "made of the same atoms." As a result, many "like to think that some higher order rules the world of business according to strict rules, making it infallible and predictable."