????《輕松摘取的果實：提高生產力和利潤的77種新方式》（Low-Hanging Fruit: 77 Eye-Opening Ways to Improve Productivity and Profits）的合著者杰里米?艾登和特瑞?龍在開篇之初就援引了沃倫?巴菲特的話：“我不指望能夠跳過7英尺高的圍欄。我四處尋找那些我抬腳就可以邁過的只有1英尺高的圍欄。”

????這兩位作者主張，這些提高效率與利潤的小步伐就是任何公司都可以輕松摘取的果實。他們寫道：“很多經理深信，經過多年的壓縮成本之后，他們很早就已經摘光了那些容易摘到的果實。”遺憾的是，通常情況并非如此：“壓縮成本通常漏掉了那些容易摘取的果實，相反，它只是裁枝剪杈，完全不管樹上留下了些什么。

????曾任麥肯錫（McKinsey）顧問的艾登和曾任銀行客戶服務高管的特瑞?龍現擔任芝加哥咨詢公司Harvest Earnings Group的聯席CEO。過去二十年中，他們一直在服務《財富》（Fortune）美國100強公司客戶，這本鮮活的著作就是他們對這些公司成功經驗的濃縮和提煉。他們推翻了一些不容質疑的清規戒律。

????比方說，這兩位作者就認為標桿學習“完全是浪費時間”，因為就算兩家公司的業務看起來完全一樣，將其中一家公司與另外一家公司做比較更多情況下也是“在為現狀辯護”，而不是促進改變或創新。

????艾登和龍指出的另一個錯誤觀念是，在一個問題投入更多技術，問題總能得到解決。他們提供咨詢服務的一家公用事業公司曾經準備上馬一款價格不菲的軟件，為公司修剪電力線周邊樹枝的團隊安排時間表。而一名線路主管建議了一種“簡單且無需技術”的解決方案：直接讓現場員工在需要剪枝時進行匯報，因為（他們）能比那些軟件程序更好地評判狀況。“取消安裝軟件和只在需要時派遣樹木修剪人員所產生的直接節約就達：100,000美元。

????兩位作者寫到，這樣的解決方案不太可能來自于會議商討。實際上，他們建議，公司讓那些最接近問題的人們探討那些你很可能都不知道的問題，然后設定截止日期，找出解決方案。

????舉例來說，PNC Financial不只是鼓勵提建議，還要求員工尋找和解決效率低下的問題。結果是，他們取得了2,400項小改進，綜合起來每年新增4億美元的利潤。2008年，PNC與National City合并后，兩家公司對合并后的新實體實施了“相同的、建立在事實基礎上的高速響應，又實現了另外20億美元的運營效率——約為銀行分析師預計值的兩倍。

????矛盾的是，有些時候，人們應對這些每天面對的低效行為方式太習慣于“一直以來的老規矩”，沒有注意到就在我們眼前的那些容易摘到的果實。應對這種慣例的一種新方法是：要求人力資源部門提供最近12個月新聘用人員的名單，“包括從大老板到收發室人員的每個人”，然后讓這些新人指出，他們注意到任何可以做得更聰明、更迅速或成本更低的方式。

????供應商也是通常被忽視的可以提供深入見解的資源。因為，他們通常通盤了解你所處的行業——包括你的競爭對手可能比你做得更為高效——供應商通常是“完美的外部觀察員大軍”。

????想讓員工放松自在地指出需要改進的方面嗎？請注意你的身體語言。艾登和龍發現，一些經理在時間壓力下無意之間發出了明顯的信號，抑制了好主意的提出。“第一條規則是注意姿態、轉動眼球、（和）明顯的漫不經心，”他們寫道。“員工們通常會留心潛臺詞，肢體語言跟大家嘴里說的話一樣重要。”（財富中文網）

????Early on in Low-Hanging Fruit: 77 Eye-Opening Ways to Improve Productivity and Profits, co-authors Jeremy Eden and Terri Long quote Warren Buffett: "I don't look to jump over 7-foot bars. I look around for 1-foot bars that I can step over."

????Those small steps to greater efficiency, and fatter profits, are low-hanging fruit that any company can pluck, the authors argue. "Many managers are convinced that, after years of cost cutting, they picked their low-hanging fruit long ago," they write. Alas, that's often not the case: "Cost cutting often leaves the low-hanging fruit and instead lops off branches without regard to what is left of the tree."

????Eden, an erstwhile McKinsey consultant, and former bank customer-service executive Long are now co-CEOs of Chicago consulting firm Harvest Earnings Group. Their lively book distills what has worked for their Fortune 100 clients over the past 20 years. They knock over a few sacred cows along the way.

????Take, for example, benchmarking, which the authors contend is "a complete waste of time," since comparing one company to any other, even in what may look like the exact same business, is more often used to "justify the status quo" than to spark change or innovation.

????Another wrongheaded notion, by Eden and Long's lights, is that throwing more technology at a problem will always solve it. One utility company they had advised was ready to put in a pricey software program to schedule teams to trim tree branches away from power lines. Instead, a line supervisor suggested a "simple, no-tech solution: Have crews in the field report when trimming is necessary, because [they] are better at assessing the situation than software programs are." Immediate savings from skipping the software and dispatching tree-trimmers only when needed: $100,000.

????Fixes like that are unlikely to spring from getting people together in a room and asking them to come up with problem-solving ideas, the authors write. Instead, they suggest that companies get the people closest to the work to talk about problems you probably don't even know about, and then following up by setting a deadline for solutions.

????PNC Financial, for instance, didn't just encourage suggestions but required employees to find and fix inefficiencies. The result: about 2,400 small improvements in the way things were done that added up to $400 million a year in extra profits. After PNC merged with National City in 2008, the companies applied "the same fact-based high-speed rigor" to the new entity, which gave rise to another $2 billion in operating efficiencies -- about double what bank analysts predicted.

????Sometimes, of course, the people dealing with small inefficiencies every day are, paradoxically, too accustomed to "the way we've always done it" to spot the low-hanging fruit that's right in front of them. One way to get a fresh take on long-established habits: Ask human resources for a list of everybody who's been hired in the past 12 months, "anyone from the corner office to the mail room," and then ask those newcomers to point out anything they've noticed that you could be doing smarter, faster, or cheaper.

????Vendors are another frequently overlooked source of insight. Because they usually know your industry inside out -- including what your competition may be doing more efficiently than you are -- vendors are often "the perfect army of outside observers."

????Want to make sure your employees feel comfortable pointing out areas of improvement? Watch your body language. Eden and Long have observed that some managers, pressed for time, inadvertently send not-so-subtle signals that squelch good ideas. "The first rule is to be careful about gestures, eye-rolling, [and] apparent inattention," they write. "Employees are often looking to read the tea leaves, and body language becomes just as important as the words that are said."