At first, I thought it was a matter of methodology. I read a lot of books, and every time I read a good book, I get a treasure, thinking that with the methodology in the book, I can walk all the way and get rid of my illness. However, it was later found that most of the methodologies were attributed after the event, and the arguments that were conducive to argumentation were written in detail, while the authors of arguments that were not conducive to argumentation would selectively avoid talking about them. In addition, methodology is one-sided and one-dimensional attribution. For example, marketing methodology will attribute success or failure to marketing, human resources will attribute success or failure to management, and products will attribute success or failure to user experience. . . Everyone's methodology sounds reasonable, but you may not get obvious results when you use it.

Later, I thought creative thinking was more important. Because methodology is not difficult to learn, predecessors have summarized it for you. It only takes you a little time and a week or two to learn the essence that a clever predecessor spent years or even decades summing up. Many people stay at this level and are complacent after reading a few books and articles. But one mistake that these people are prone to make is that they think that the methodology of famous artists must be right. They despise smart people who pat their heads, think that they are standing on the shoulders of giants, and like to apply methodology in a gourd painting. People with creative thinking will be much better. They will draw inferences from others, create new ideas and do things from 0 to 1. Few people have such creative thinking. Most people are ignorant and do things by cleverness. Some people are willing to read some fragmented methodological articles and consider themselves experts. A few people are willing to study methodology systematically, but they will only be porters of methodology. Very few people have creative thinking and multidimensional methodology. There are two difficulties: they need a multi-dimensional overall view, do not believe in one-dimensional methodology, and need both the strategic ability of Yangchun Baixue and the execution of Xialiba people. If you have strategic thinking, you may become an armchair strategist and only keep your feet on the ground. It is possible for Balinese to work hard but get twice the result with half the effort, and it is difficult to become an atmosphere. It is rare to have both.

Now, I think experience is particularly valuable. Because although there are few creative ideas, most of the good ideas we think are wonderful will find many difficulties or little effect in practice, which is far from our expectations. There are many ways to teach people success in this world, but few people share the experience of failure, so there seems to be no other way to learn from those failed experiences except personal experience and paying enough tuition. But unfortunately, people who have failed will increasingly lack the opportunity to try again. Successful experience can be copied, and failed experience can avoid the pit, but who knows whether the next attempt will be successful or failed again? You know, most enterprises will be destroyed if they can't tolerate several opportunities for trial and error. I used to think that creative thinking is the key to success or failure, but later I found that one or two highlights of creative thinking are difficult to achieve, and may be swollen and fat in the implementation stage. After a dozen or even dozens of good ideas, it is possible to try out the real right path. It is unrealistic to want to know the three points of the world before we are young. None of us has God's perspective. No matter how many books we read, we are all creative. We are more like rats in a maze, with electricity everywhere. What we need to do is to find the right exit before being electrocuted. As a guide, the old white mouse that has been electrocuted many times can help us to receive less electricity. Of course, the old mouse may not know where the right exit is. He is just more down-to-earth than we are. Maybe he has given up looking for an exit.

Regarding "doing the right thing" and "doing the right thing", I was deeply impressed by a passage by Ridario, the boss of Qiaoshui Company, in the Principles. He said that when I was young, I always thought, I am right. How can I convince others that I am right? Now I always think, am I right? How can I prove that I am right? When I was young, I was easy to be confident and felt that my judgment was right. With rich experience, I became more cautious and stopped jumping to conclusions easily. But boldly assume, constantly verify, and dare not say what is right before there is sufficient evidence. This change is worth learning.

"Methodology+creative thinking" is far less reliable than "resources+experience". People without resources and experience often misjudge the value of these four items. For the unproductive stage without resource inheritance, the easy mode of "resource+experience" is impossible. And if you want to succeed from scratch, reading thousands of books+taking Wan Li Road+independent thinking ability, I'm afraid they are all indispensable, really hard mode.

The ability to design a product and a business model can be scored as 10.

Products that can overcome many difficulties and make ideas under the condition of insufficient resources can score 30 points.

Can find the key points in the process of product operation and ask questions, you can score 35 points.

Ability and experience to give solutions to problems and give correct solutions, you can score 50 points.

If you have the resources and execution, you can solve the problem effectively. You can score 100.