Empirical evidence suggests that the competencies for entrepreneurial success are many and varied: however, overall, there are probably 10 that appear most regularly:

source: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_ten_competencies_of_an_entrepreneur


1. Integrity - the entrepreneur has a clear sense of values and beliefs that underpin the creative and business decisions that they make; and that influence the actions they take, particularly when in difficult or challenging circumstances 

2. Conceptual Thinking - the entrepreneur is prepared to use fresh approaches; comes up with crazy ideas that may just work, leading to radical change or significant improvements; and takes time to listen to new ideas without pre-judgement 

3. Risk taking - the entrepreneur understands that risk taking means trying something new, and possibly better, in the sense of stretching beyond what has been done in the past; and that the constant challenge is to learn how to assess choices responsibly, weighing the possible outcomes against his/her values and responsibilities 

4. Networking - the entrepreneur understands that networking is a key business activity which can provide access to information, expertise, collaboration and sales; and that careful planning and preparation helps achieve desired results 

5. Strategic Thinking - the entrepreneur understands and values the planning process, thinking and planning over a significant timescale; recognises external trends and opportunities; and is able to think through any complex implications for the business 

6. Commercial Aptitude - the entrepreneur keeps up to date with developments in the sector; seeks out best practice; and identifies and seizes opportunities that are not obvious to others 

7. Decisiveness - the entrepreneur resolves issues as they arise; does not get bogged down in analysis during decision making; and responds flexibly to deal with changing priorities 

8. Optimism - the entrepreneur persists in pursuing goals despite obstacles and setbacks; operates from hope of success rather than from fear of failure; and sees setbacks as due to manageable circumstance rather than a personal flaw 

9. Customer Sensitivity - the entrepreneur builds trust and long term relationships with customers; generates an expectation of high level of customer service; and regularly exceeds customer expectation 

10. People Focus - the entrepreneur creates common purpose with colleagues through shared vision and values; walks the talk; sees and values the best in others; builds the total capability of the immediate and wider team; and always considers the principles of inclusiveness in planning and dealing with others

Note: There are comments associated with this question. See the discussion page to add to the conversation

Posted by Jeonghwan Choi

댓글을 달아 주세요

Top 5 (Online) Magazines for Business Leader & MBA

1. Harvard Business Working Knowledge: Frequently, this is better than HRB. 

2. Knowledge @ Wharton: Practical knowledge, skill, and ability for business people.

3. MIT Sloan Management Review: Best arguments in business world. 

4. Economist: Who can beat this English magazine? 

5. Mckinsey Quarterly: Most powerful opinion leader in business world. 

Top 5 Newspapers for Business Leader & MBA

1. Wall Street Journl: Conservative, but no one can beat this newspaper. 

2. New York Times / Business : U.S. oriented, and very balanced views to business. 

3. Reuters / Finance: Fantastic Finance Information and Stock Query. 

4. Huffington Post / Business: Another opinion? Read this. 

5. Science Daily: Seems awkward. But can you imagine a business without technology? 

Must Follow up Videos:

TED Talks: Best leaders, best talks! 

Posted by Jeonghwan Choi

댓글을 달아 주세요

Talent is a combination of aptitude and attitude. 

(재능이란 능력과 태도의 조합이다.) 

- Jeonghwan Philip Choi, 2010 - 


A talent can be realized only if he/she has both enough competency (frequently accounted for knowledge, skill, ability, and others) for a task and socially acceptable attitude. 

Discrepancy of one from other deter talents realization in a society. 

from wikipedia: 

Talent is generally considered to be an innate, personal gift possessed by relatively few people.[citation needed] In essence, someone with talent has an aptitude to do certain things.

Talent (in the sense of natural ability or giftedness) is not the same asskill, which is a learned process, and one which is enhanced or inhibited by an underlying talent.

Talent management refers to the process of developing and integrating new workers, developing and retaining current workers, and attracting highly skilled workers to work for a company. Talent management[1] in this context does not refer to the management ofentertainers. The term was coined by David Watkins of Softscape[2] published in an article in 1998[3]. The process of attracting and retaining profitable employees, as it is increasingly more competitive between firms and of strategic importance, has come to be known as "the war for talent."

Posted by Jeonghwan Choi

댓글을 달아 주세요

All over the world people agree that entrepreneurs are job creators and that they develop new products and services which benefit the whole society. Yet, the image of entrepreneurs has declined in the past two years. 54% of all Europeans believe that entrepreneurs only think about their own wallet and 49% believe that entrepreneurs exploit other peoples work. In 2007, the figures  were clearly lower (45% and 42%).

The status of entrepreneurs varies greatly between different countries. In the Scandinavian countries it is very positive (e.g. 83% of Danes and 78% of Finns had a favourable opinion about entrepreneurs) whereas in Eastern Europe the entrepreneurs' reputation is generally lower (only 26% of Hungarians and 33% of Poles have a favourable opinion about them). Yet, in comparison with other professions, entrepreneurs are considered in a rather positive way: 49% of all Europeans declare having a good opinion about entrepreneurs. Only the liberal professions (lawyers, doctors, architects etc.) enjoyed greater esteem (58%). Significantly lower is the regard for civil servants (35%), top-managers (28%), bankers (25%) or politicians (12%).


Posted by Jeonghwan Choi

댓글을 달아 주세요

Talent is a public good, not private good. 
(재능은 공공재 이다.) 


Is Education a Public Good?

Higher Education for the Public Good: Emerging Voices from a National Movement (Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education) 

Is Education a Public Good? If So, How Should It Be Funded?

Public Goods: 
In economics, a public good is a good that is non-rivalrous and non-excludable. Non-rivalry means that consumption of the good by one individual does not reduce availability of the good for consumption by others; and non-excludability that no one can be effectively excluded from using the good.[1] In the real world, there may be no such thing as an absolutely non-rivaled and non-excludable good; but economists think that some goods approximate the concept closely enough for the analysis to be economically useful 

Talent development: 

Part of human resource development, is the process of changing an organization, its employees, its stakeholders, and groups of people within it, using planned and unplanned learning, in order to achieve and maintain a competitive advantage for the organization. Rothwell notes that the name may well be a term in search of a meaning, like so much in management, and suggests that it be thought of as selective attention paid to the top 10% of employees, either by potential or performance.[1][2]

While talent development is reserved for the top management it is becoming increasingly clear that career development is necessary for the retention of any employee, no matter what their level in the company. Research has shown that some type of career path is necessary for job satisfaction and hence job retention. Perhaps organizations need to include this area in their overview of employee satisfaction.


On the Sources of Entrepreneurial Talent: Tacit vs. Codified Knowledge

Daniela Federici, University of Cassino - Department of Economics

Francesco Ferrante, University of Cassino - Faculty of Economics - Department of Economics (DIPSE)

Domenico Vistocco, University of Cassino



Posted by Jeonghwan Choi

댓글을 달아 주세요

  1. jisu 2011.12.18 01:07  댓글주소  수정/삭제  댓글쓰기

    좋은말 덕분에 많이 배워가네요. 감사합니다

The Antonym of "Capitalism" is "Democracy" not "Socialism"

(자본주의의 반대말은 "사회주의"가 아니라 "민주주의" 입니다.) 

Michael Moore, 2010. 

source: http://www.michaelmoore.com/


Roosevelt's January 11, 1944 State of the Union speech is available at the FDR Library website.

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the Nation;

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

The right of every family to a decent home;

The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

Posted by Jeonghwan Choi

댓글을 달아 주세요

1. I don't know anything, thus I can do anything. 

2. I learned from conventional bank system, and I did it exactly opposite. 

3. Does micro credit is good for only entrepreneurial poor? No. there is no difference among people!

4. Who create poverty? It's not made by individuals, but system and history. 

5. Human is not just money making machine, human is multi-dimensional creature. We also can think and care others.  

6. Social enterprises are 'redesigning', 're-conceptualizing', and 're-visioning' of issues. 

7. Let's establish a "Poverty Museum" which will reflect our current poverty. Let's dream a dream that our children will come to the museum to reflect our current efforts to vanish poverty from the world.
From Dr. Yunus's lecture on Mar. 01 2010 at UIUC. 
Photo source: wikipedia.org

Posted by Jeonghwan Choi

댓글을 달아 주세요

Some key remarks of prominent entrepreneurship (education) researchers in the U.S. 

Vesper & Gartner (1997): Measuring Progress in Entrepreneurship Eduction
Over the last 20 years of surveys of entrepreneurship courses (Vesper, 1974, 1976, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1985, 1990, 1993), a growing number of business schools have developed a series of courses in entrepreneurship, variously labeled as either a program, concentration, or major in entrepreneurship. 

From thus base of 16 universities and colleges offering entrepreneurship courses in 1970, the number of (business) schools offering entrepreneurship courses had grown to over 400 by 1995. 

Katz (2003): A chronology and intellectual trajectory of American entrepreneurship education 1876-1999
(1) The field (entrepreneurship education in business school) reached maturity in the U.S.A.  
(2) Growth is likely outside business schools and outside the U.S.A. 
(3) A narrowing focus on top-tier publications, potential American stagnation and a shortage of faculty overall exacerbated by a shortage of PhD program. 

1) Maturity in business school

In a field more than 50 years old, it is safe to say that the life cycle of entrepreneurship education in United States business schools is at the threshold of the maturity stage. This arguably is characterized by:

Two widely recognized and consistent approaches: entrepreneurship (wealth-creation focussed courses) and small business (form-creation focussed courses); 294 J.A. Katz / Journal of Business Venturing 18 (2003) 283–300

For each approach, there is considerable standardization across the industry (notably the reliance on the number, type and teaching approach to courses) (Plaschka and Welsch,1990; Solomon et al., 1994);

The presence of the service in the major venues, notably nearly all AACSB accredited business schools, as well as more than 1000 nonaccredited ones (Solomon et al., 1994);

A complete educational infrastructure, consisting of more than 300 endowed positions, more than 100 centers, more than 40 refereed academic journals and more than a dozen professional organizations in the United States alone (Katz, 1994); 

An emerging segmentation of the discipline marked by the growth of specialized professional groups and publishing venues in economics, economic development, finance and high-technology; and

Legitimization by various external sources, including 
National rankings of entrepreneurship programs in the mainstream media (US News and World Report, Business Week) and  
Inclusion of four top-tier entrepreneurship journals in the Social Science Citation Index (Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, Journal of Business Venturing, Journal of Small Business Management, Small Business Economics).

2) Growth outside of business schools

Entrepreneurship offerings continue to grow in schools of agriculture, engineering, the learned professions, and arts and science, usually with minimal or no involvement by business school entrepreneurship faculty (cf. examples such as Carnegie-Mellon, Colorado, Cornell, Iowa, Laval, Minnesota, Missouri at Kansas City). If new approaches are developed there, business schools are not likely to know, much less benefit. The real risk to business schools would be if a new paradigm of entrepreneurship education emerged from these new sources, supplanting the model developed in American business schools and refined over the last 50 years. The 21st century entrepreneurship education would be certain to look nothing like its 20th century predecessor.

4.2.3. Avoiding stagnation

Can American entrepreneurship education cope with maturity? The big problem is avoiding stagnation. 

This is particularly possible where the internal business school ‘‘market’’ is rich—with abundant financial resources, publication outlets, students and programs to absorb faculty time. Entrepreneurs are warned about the danger success brings—getting ‘‘complacent with success’’ and forgetting about the energy, innovation and market orientation that originally made them successful.

The maturity of the field noted above, when contrasted with the explosive demand for entrepreneurship training and education outside of business schools and outside America,suggest America has reached a ‘‘complacent with success’’ phase. Historically, eager 296 J.A. Katz / Journal of Business Venturing 18 (2003) 283–300 entrepreneurship faculty, on the prowl for mindshare that could turn into endowments, have
emphasized innovation. Entrepreneurship was one of the first disciplines to have students consult (Gundry and Buchko, 1996) or to formally organize the use of adjunct faculty (e.g.,the Price-Babson Fellows Program or Katz, 1995). Today, however, collegiate entrepreneurship education has institutionalized its original model for growth, creating a new orthodoxy. If the American business schools are going to generate a new generation of frame-breaking paradigms, they must once again consider embracing the ‘‘lean and hungry’’ mindset of their earlier stages.

Kuratko (2005): The Emergence of Entrepreneurship Education: Development, Trends, and Challenges

Definition of Entrepreneurship: 

Entrepreneurship is a dynamic process of vision, change, and creation. It requires an application of energy and passion towards the creation and implementation of new ideas and creative solutions. Essential ingredients include the willingness to take calculated risks-in terms of time, equity, or career; the ability to formulate an effective venture team; the creative skill to marshall needed resources; the fundamental skill of building a solid business plan; and , finally, the vision to recognize opportunity where others see chaos, contradiction, and confusion. (Kuratko & Hodgetts, 2004, p. 30) 


The maturity/Complacency/Stagnation Trap

Katz (2003) argues that the presence of entrepreneurship courses in all Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business as well as over 1,000 nonaccredited schools points to a maturing of the entrepreneurship field. He adds the infrastructure numbers of 300 endowed positions, 100 centers, 44 academic journals, and the "legitimization" of the field by the mainstream media (Business Week and U.S. News & World Report). This is all true and I agree that it points to legitimization, but I respectfully disagree about maturity. 

The skirmishes and small battles are being won in business schools because of the sheer power of the already mentioned numbers and the tenacity and passion of individual faculty members. However, the "real war" continues to wage for complete respectability and leadership. 

How many full departments of entrepreneurship exist? 
How many young faculties are being granted tenure purely for their research and teaching in entrepreneurship? 
How many deans are rising from the ranks of entrepreneurship faculty?
How many business schools are ranking the pure entrepreneurship journals on their "A" list?

A partial legitimacy - yes; maturity - no! This is the time for all of those questions to be answered in the positive. 

Real maturity and complete academic legitimacy of the entrepreneurship field have yet to be experienced. 

Katz (2003) contends that because the field has matured, there is now a danger of being "complacent with success." He argues that as entrepreneurship educators, we may be forgetting our earlier "lean and mean" mid-set that helped fuel the tremendous growth of our field. There is truth here but I am not so sure there was ever a "lean and mean" mind-set. I believe there was a "pioneering passion" in some and aa "survival" mentality in others. It was an age of fighting for a cause. It was our crusade! Today ,as I mentioned earlier, the war is still waging at the highest levels. Because today it is about Leadership! We need to ignite the young entrepreneurship faculty. Out collective leadership must inspire the next generation of entrepreneurship faculty to take our discipline to the next plateau. The entrepreneurship's rightful place in business schools of the 21st century will be one of leadership-curriculum, research, faculty, and funding. We stand at the cusp of this monumental step. Faculty-young and old-must bind together to climb the next plateau and move entrepreneurship into its leadership position. 

The Faculty Pipeline Shortage

There are two simultaneous problems here. First is the shortage of entrepreneurship faculty at every academic rank, and second is the lack of doctor of philosophy (Ph.D.) programs to provide pure entrepreneurship faculty. 

It is true that we need more business schools to develop sound PhD programs in entrepreneurship. Taking the lead from Indiana University, Colorado University, Syracuse University, University of Georgia, and Case Western Reserve University, more of our leading business schools need to establish programs. However, until more programs develop, faculty can be trained ("retreaded") if we make an effort. For years, Babson College has produced the Symposium for Entrepreneurship Educators program to develop faculty. Syracuse University has developed and promoted an "experiential classroom" for entrepreneurship education. It has produced remarkable results in helping faculty move into this field. These programs must be continued, supported, and enhanced. Organizations such as USASBE, NCEC, and the Academy of Management's Entrepreneurship Division, along with the Coleman Foundation and the Kauffman Foundation, need to support this effort as part of their mission. If the business schools will not develop the PhD programs, then the entrepreneurship faculty must develop the needed education themselves. We have pioneered an entire academic field that has exponentially grown in 30 years. why should we stop short now? 
The other issue, however, is the lack of faculty at every rank. This challenge relates back to the respectability of entrepreneurship research and journals in our business schools. Resolve that issue and more entrepreneurship faculty will receive tenure and promotion. Thus, the ranks will grow in number rather than shrink. Once again, entrepreneurship is legitimized but no respected. It is time for the entrepreneurship field to move into a leadership position within our business schools. 

Solomon (2002): An examination of entrepreneurship education in the United States

Scholars and researchers in entrepreneurship education in the United States have reported that small business management and entrepreneurship course at both the two- and four-year college and university levels have grown in both the number and diversity of course offerings from 1990-2005. This expansion of educational offerings has been fueled in part by dissatisfaction with the traditional Fortune 500 focus of business education voiced by students and accreditation bodies (Solomon and Fernald, 1991). 

Historical perspective
Entrepreneurship education has experienced remarkable growth in the past 50 years (1955-2005) from a single course offering to a diverse range of educational opportunities available at more than 1,500 colleges and universities around the world. (Charney and Libecap, 2000). The early prediction that “ . . . the number of course offerings should increase at an expanding rate over the next few years” (Vesper, 1985) held true. In 1985, 253 colleges or universities offered courses in small business management or entrepreneurship, and in 1993, 441 entrepreneurship courses were available to interested students (Gartner and Vesper, 1994). Fourteen years later, Foote (1999) reported student enrollment in entrepreneurship classes at five top American business schools increased 92 percent from 1996 to 1999 (from a total of 3,078 to 5,913), and the number of entrepreneurship classes offered increased 74 percent. A recent estimate suggests that entrepreneurship and small business education may now be offered in as many as 1,200 post secondary institutions in the United States alone (Solomon et al., 2002) with educational experiences ranging from traditional course work to integrative curricula that includes marketing, finance, new product development and technology (Charney and Libecap, 2000).

The Technology Challenge

Solomon et al. (2002) found a negative trend with regards to technology in their national survey on entrepreneurship education. " A surprising trend emerged from the data regarding entrepreneurship education and the use of technology only, 21% of the respondents indicated they use distance-learning technologies in their entrepreneurship education course or concentrations." Entrepreneurship cannot be a field that succumbs to stagnation. It must recognize and apply technologies in the educational setting. In many respects, entrepreneurship education may actually transform the educational setting. For example, some universities, such as George Washington University, are applying unique technological application. They developed a software tool entitled, "Prometheus." Other examples include Ball State University's MBA in Entrepreneurship via television (Kuratko, 1996) where the entrepreneurship classes are taught in a state-of-the-art television studio. Another example is Indiana University's Keeley School of Business on-line MBA entitled "Kelley Direct," where the entire MBA degree is accessed through the Internet. There is no question that this mode of delivering entrepreneurship education will continue to expand in the 21st century. 

Posted by Jeonghwan Choi

댓글을 달아 주세요

A New Role of 21C Education is "Educating Job Creators, not Job Seekers"

21세기 교육의 새로운 역할은 "구직자를 교육하는 것이 아니라, 새로운 직업을 만들어 내는 사람들을 교육하는 것이다." 

By Jeonghwan Choi, 

Founder of Integral Leadership Center, 
Entrepreneurship Education Researcher, 
Ph.D. student at UIUC. 
(Mar. 01, 2009) 

Posted by Jeonghwan Choi

댓글을 달아 주세요

"Let it Be"

by Beatles. 

Posted by Jeonghwan Choi

댓글을 달아 주세요

When heaven is going to give a great responsibility to someone, it first makes his/her mind endure suffering. 

an ancient Chinese Philosopher

:: Kao Tzu (B) - Chapter 15

Mencius said, "Shun rose up from the grain fields; Fu Yüeh was found as a construction laborer, Chieh Ko was pulled up from his fish and salt; Sun Shu Ao from the sea, and Pai Li Hsi from the marketplace.
"Thus, when Heaven is going to give a great responsibility to someone, it first makes his mind endure suffering. It makes his sinews and bones experience toil, and his body to suffer hunger. It inflicts him with poverty and knocks down everything he tries to build.
"In this way Heaven stimulates his mind, stabilizes his temper and develops his weak points. People will always err, but it is only after making mistakes that they can correct themselves. Only when you have been mentally constricted can you become creative. It will show in your face and be heard in your voice, such that you will affect others.
"In your own state, if you don't have legal specialists and impartial advisors, and outside your state, you don't have enemy states to harass you, your own state will certainly fall to ruin.
"From this we can know that life is stimulated from adversity and anxiety, and death results from relaxation and pleasure."

「고자」 하 15 :

孟子曰 舜發於畎畝之中 傅說 擧於版築之間 膠격 擧於魚鹽之中 管夷吾 擧於士 孫叔敖 擧於海 百里奚 擧於市

故天將降大任於是人也 必先苦其心志 勞其筋骨 餓其體膚 空乏其身 行拂亂其所爲 所以動心忍性 曾益其所不能

人恒過 然後能改 困於心 衡於慮 然後作. 徵於色 發於聲 而後喩


<번역> 맹자가 말했다.

순 임금은 밭 가운데서 나왔고, 부열은 공사판의 사이에서 등용되었고, 교격은 물고기-소금 장수 가운데서 등용되었고, 관중은 선비에서 등용되었고, 손숙오는 바닷가에서 등용되었고, 백리해는 저자거리에서 등용되었다.

그러므로 하늘이 장차 사람에게 큰 임무를 맡기려 할 때에는 반드시 먼저 그 마음과 뜻을 괴롭게 하고, 그 뼈와 살을 수고롭게 만들고, 그 몸과 피부를 굶주리게 하며, 그 몸을 궁핍하게 만든다. 행위함에 그 하는 바를 어그러뜨리고 혼란시키는 것은, “마음을 흔들고 본성을 가혹하게 해서(動心忍性)”, 그가 잘 하지 못 하는 것을 (잘 하게) 늘려 보태 주려는 것이다.사람은 늘 잘못한 뒤에 고칠 수 있다. 마음에서 곤란하고 생각에서 부디친 뒤에 행위한다. 낯빛에서 희미하게 나타나고, 소리에서 드러난 뒤에라야 깨우친다.


1. http://hantoma.hani.co.kr/board/view.html?board_id=ht_politics:001001&uid=278088

2. http://www.dubest.net/men/6B15.html (원문에 대한 권리는 Dubest에 있습니다.) 

Posted by Jeonghwan Choi

댓글을 달아 주세요

1. Browbeating (윽박 지르기)

2. Treating too well (너무 잘 해주기)

3. Treating too cold (무관심하기) 

4. Being Poor (가련하게 굴기)

1. Jame Redfield (1993), The Celestine Prophecy. "The Fourth Insight: The struggle for power." 

  • The Fourth Insight... The Struggle For Power

To gain energy, we tend to manipulate or force others to give us attention and thus energy. When we successfully dominate others in this way, we feel more powerful, but they are left weakened and often fight back. Competition for scarce human energy is the cause of all conflict between people.

  • The Sixth Insight... Clearing the Past

The more we stay connected, the more we are acutely aware of those times when we lose connection, usually when we are under stress. In these times, we can see our own particular way of stealing energy from others. Once our manipulations are brought to personal awareness, our connection becomes more constant and we can discover our own evolutionary path in life, and our spiritual mission, which is the personal way we can contribute to the World.

Here the four main "control dramas"—the Interrogator, the Intimidator, the Aloof and the Poor Me—are discussed. Each person unconsciously prefers one of these four to suck energy out of others (as described in the Fourth Insight). A way of getting these under control is disclosed.

2. 임경택, 숨쉬는 이야기. 
Posted by Jeonghwan Choi

댓글을 달아 주세요

The best way to predict the future is to invent it.
미래를 예측하는 가장 좋은 방법은, 미래를 만드는 것이다. 

by Alan Kay
  • Early meeting in 1971 of PARC, Palo Alto Research Center, folks and the Xerox planners

It is easier to invent the future than to predict it,

Posted by Jeonghwan Choi

댓글을 달아 주세요

If you feel you're tied too much with your organization or work..., 

Don't believe, Don't fear, Don't ask.  
(Не верь, не бойся, не проси)

"믿지 마라, 겁내지 마라, 구걸하지 마라" (Не верь, не бойся, не проси)

by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Posted by Jeonghwan Choi

댓글을 달아 주세요

In the universe the difficult things are done as if they are easy.
In the universe great acts are made up of small deeds.
The sage does not attempt anything very big,
And thus achieves greatness.

source: Tao Te Ching, Chapter 63.

천하의 어려운 일은 반드시 쉬운 곳에서 시작하고 천하의 큰일은 반드시 세밀한 데서 비롯된다
(天下難事 必作於易 天下大事 必作於細

노자(老子) 63장(章)

爲無爲事無事 味無味 大小多少 報怨以德 圖難於其易 爲大於其細.
天下難事必作於易 天下大事必作於細 是以聖人 終不爲大 故能成其大.
夫輕諾 必寡信 多易必有難 是以聖人猶難之 故終無難

하는 것 없이 하고, 일 없음으로 일을 삼고, 맛없음을 맛으로 삼고, 작은 것을 크게 여기고, 적은 것을 많게 여기며. 원한(怨恨)을 덕(德)으로써 갚는다.
어려운 일은 그 쉬운 데서 꾀하고, 큰일은 그 작은 데서 해야 하나니, 세상의 어려운 일은 반드시 쉬운 데서 비롯되고, 세상의 큰일은 반드시 작은 데서 시작되기 때문이다.

이런 까닭에 지혜로운 사람은 결코 큰일을 벌이지(만들지) 않으니 그래서(어려움이 없이) 큰일을 이루게 되는 것이다.
대저 쉽게 하는 승낙은 믿기 어렵고, 너무 쉽게 보면 반드시 많은 어려움에 처하게 된다. 이런 까닭에 지혜로운 사람은 (쉬운 일이라도)오히려 어렵게 여기는지라, 그래서 끝내 어려움을 겪지 않는다.

Source: http://www.nodongnews.or.kr/%28S%28dkuyev55nwqeaxmscyqp5s45%29A%28XrljX32kygEkAAAAMDk5NjAxOTYtMGE4NC00NzJhLWFhYmQtNWI2Mjg1NTcyODcx8Q9vi9pFbPv5LpkHuq1tAwumXc01%29%29/News/View.aspx?pdsid=4883&page=5&type=serial&totalid=7413&keyword=&keyfield=&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1

Posted by Jeonghwan Choi

댓글을 달아 주세요

  1. Favicon of https://leadershipcenter.tistory.com BlogIcon Jeonghwan Choi 2010.09.09 14:47 신고  댓글주소  수정/삭제  댓글쓰기

    아하...그런 더 깊은 뜻이 있군요. 부엌데기 마리님 감사합니다.