新浪尚文

　　埃及国内政治危机的蔓延引发新的思考，是背景雄厚手段强硬的穆巴拉克总统力挽狂澜呢，还是该扶植新的政治领袖登台执政？就拿商界来说，即便再根深蒂固的领袖人物遭到抵制，想力挽狂澜改变局势都非常困难，成功者寥寥无几，大多数的例子都是失败的，在这点上，政界和商界都是相通的。

    “威胁-僵化效应”：

　　原因？无论从心理学角度还是管理学角度都能找到理由。如管理学上常说的“威胁-僵化效应”：当人们身处威胁之中时，他们的反应通常是较为僵硬的，至少是处在不易于接受新事物或新方法的状态下的，习惯性思维支配着他们的行为动作。就好比人体组织关闭了一小会儿，拒绝接受外界信息，行动依赖于习惯性的思维方式。在这种状态下，试图改变他们效果适得其反。

　　“失势和失控”：领导一个组织机构或一个国家开辟新的方向，需要拆解开现有的组织架构和政治体系。一旦现有的政体解体，领导人身边的支持者们必然失势，缺少了继续提供支持的动力。政权改革的过程中需要用到一些不够成熟完善的技巧和手段，这很容易将领袖放置在一个腹背受敌，易于遭受攻击的位置上，这恰恰是大多数领袖都想回避的过程。

　　“开弓没有回头箭”：如果人们曾经生活在一个使他们倍感压抑的政治体系下，失业率居高不下，情感总被压抑得不到宣泄的话，矛盾日积月累越发尖锐直到彻底爆发，到时候再想用塞子堵住瓶口就非常困难了。社会矛盾的爆发还会如病毒一般迅速传染扩散，通过科技手段广泛传播开来，加入到反政府活动中的人们越来越多，领导人再想挽回局势已经不可能。

　　“守旧势力的代表”：即便领导人有意愿和能力去完成改革，可因为他早已被认定是保守派的标志性人物，他所倡导的改革也很难得到支持和拥护。新的领导者和管理层通常更容易被认为是改革派的代表，意味着旧时代结束和新时代的来临。

　　当然，如果领导人真的有决心给这个国家带来新气象的话，上述这4点阻碍也有可能全都被克服掉，但至少现在我们还没从穆巴拉克总统身上看到这些迹象。需要提醒埃及的革命党人们高度重视的是，成功建立起一个新政权，往往比推翻一个旧政权要难得多。(正朗)

　　Four obstacles for Mubarak

　　Question: Egypt's unfolding political crisis raises a broader question: Can an entrenched, powerful leader, one who has resisted change, successfully lead a country or an organization in a different direction if circumstances suddenly demand it? Or is it necessary to bring in new leadership?

　　If lessons can be learned from the business world, then an entrenched powerful leader who has resisted change can seldom lead an organization in a different direction. While there is the occasional leader who can do this, most often they cannot. Why? There are a number of reasons ranging from the psychological to systemic。

　　Threat-rigidity: When people are faced with a threatening situation, they often respond with rigidity. Rather than being open to innovation and new ways of coping, inertia ensues and old patterns become dominant. The human system simply closes down a bit, keeping new information at bay and relying on habitual moves. In this mode, shifting gears is not an option。

　　Loss of power and control: To lead an organization, or a country, in a new direction requires unraveling existing structures and systems. As these systems begin to fall, existing support for the leader can wither away and power erode. Since change also requires using new skills that have not been perfected, revolutionary change puts a leader in a vulnerable position--a position that most leaders want to avoid。

　　The cork is out of the bottle: If there is a system where people have been repressed, unemployment is high and emotions have been smoldering, then the pressure builds; and when the cork is pulled out, it is very hard to put it back in. Add to the explosion a touch of social contagion, fueled through technology, with people influencing others to join the cause, and there is no going back。

　　Symbol of the old: Even if a leader is able to change and wants to lead in a new direction, he or she has already moved beyond being just a person to being a symbol of the old system. As such, change often involves new leadership as a pivotal signal that the old way is gone and change is coming。

　　Of course, perhaps even these obstacles can be overcome if there is a true desire to shift direction, but Mubarak has certainly not signaled such an aspiration. Yet revolutionaries beware--taking a regime apart is a lot easier than putting a new one in place。