In particular, the values of "openness" and "merit" play a very important role in guiding Hanover to develop the way of managing mental models. Openness "is seen as overcoming the reluctance of people to say what they really think in meetings." "Substantive contribution" refers to making decisions based on the highest efficiency of the organization, which is an antidote to the Hanover bureaucratic culture of claiming credit, pursuing promotion and seeking fame and position. When openness and substantive contribution become the dominant values, a deep conviction is formed that the metamorphosis of the decision-making process is possible if people become more able to open their minds to different points of view and discuss them effectively. But if these two concepts can play such a big role, why are so few people practicing them? In the mid-1970s, Argyris and his colleagues began to provide answers. In action science, they developed a set of theories and methods for "reflection" and "inyuiry" into the reasons behind actions. And design a series of tools so that they can be effectively applied to the organization to deal with organizational problems. Argyris and his colleagues say that we fall into our own trap, the "defensive routine,industrial racking systems," which prevents us from examining our own mental models, thus developing "skilled incompetence."; Argyris uses this to describe the majority of adult learners who "have highly skilled skills to protect themselves from the pain and threat of learning", but thus fail to learn how to create the results they want. Reflection in action Despite reading a lot of Argyris, when I first saw Argyris use his method at an informal gathering with six members of the MIT research team,drive in racking system, I wasn't sure what I would learn. Argyris gave a fascinating demonstration of what action scientists call "reflection in action.". Argyris asks each person to detail conflicts with clients, colleagues, or family members. What we must recall is not only what we have said to these people before, but also what we wanted to say but did not say at that time. When Argyris begins to comment on these cases, we immediately see a blind spot in our thinking: the superficial and general ideas we make about other people's words and deeds determine the words and deeds we respond to. However, we never put forward these general ideas to communicate with others. I may have thought, warehouse storage racks ,shuttle rack system, "Jack doesn't believe I'm a capable person," but I never asked Jack directly about it. I just keep trying to make myself look worthy of Jack's respect according to my own ideas. Or I think: "Manager Wang (my boss) is impatient and likes simple solutions that work immediately." So I followed my own ideas and provided Manager Wang with some simple and quick solutions that I thought could not touch the core of the problem. In just a few minutes, I saw the group become much more alert to reflect and speak; not because of Argyris' charisma, but because of his skill at capturing those general ideas. The theme that followed in the afternoon was to guide participants to look at the imperceptible reasoning patterns behind individual behavior and how those patterns constantly get us into trouble. I have never been so exposed to the mental models behind my words and actions. But more importantly, I find that with proper training, I am more aware of my mental models and how they work. This is an exciting thing. Later I learned that O'Brien of Hanover and his governing body had used the Argyris method ten years earlier. "Argyris made us realize that although we all want to discuss important issues in an open and constructive way, we still have a long way to go," O'Byrne said. In some cases, the Argyris approach is a painful revelation of the self-defense game that all of us are predisposed to. Argyris demands a very high standard of true openness and reflection. But he didn't just ask for everything to be told. He demonstrated a technique of cutting into difficult subjects so that everyone could learn from them. If we want to realize the two core values of openness and substantive contribution, this is obviously an important new topic. Actual contribution, openness, decentralization Hanover, in collaboration with Lee bolman, a colleague of argyris from Harvard university, has developed a three-day management workshop called "practical contribution, openness, decentralization," which aims to give all Hanover managers hands-on experience with the basic concepts and practices of action science. Over the past decade, all of Hanover's upper and middle management have participated in such seminars. The basic purpose of the workshop is to teach the skills and strategies needed to practice these three core values. As Paul stimson, who is now managing the workshop, puts it: "our first job is to get people to understand what it means to make real contributions, to be open, to decentralize in a learning organization.". In traditional organizations,wire mesh decking, contribution means doing what the boss wants, openness means telling the boss what he wants to hear, and decentralization means dealing with the details that the boss doesn't want to do. There is still a long way to go before people have a certain degree of new understanding in this respect. 。 jracking.com