“I know you think you understand what you thought I said but I am not sure you realized that what you heard is not what I meant.”
Oh, Generations have a unique ability to ignore each other’s perspectives. However, for future generations to succeed, each living generation must strive to understand the contributions each generation is making or has made to the world in which we currently live. The generations must understand from whence they came and where they are going. By understanding each other’s reality generations can create a better world for us all.
Generational stubbornness occurs when the distinct generations fail to recognize or understand circumstances as they were inherited or are. Some, unable to hear what another generation has to say, will hush them. Others will shout to drown out the voices, and some will legislate strict adherence to their generation’s standards. Each thinks they have the only solution for the many, forgetting a new generation is in its infancy and will soon be a new member to understand and be understood. Solutions to bring the separate worlds together are found when there is a collective mission to accept the new and discard that which has failed. Graveyards are filled with generations who thought they had the only solution that mattered.
The end is determined when the process begins. Elders must learn to talk WITH not TO juniors. Juniors must listen to not talk AT their elders. As discussions unfold, each must have the other in mind, rather than striving to win. The goal should be to understand and find solutions for everyone not someone. Everyone solution will transcend generations leaving behind a platform for new generations to build their own unique applications for circumstances that are solely theirs. Each must grasp their place in time, knowing that new discoveries will allow other generations to create solutions that will reach beyond the original. Breakthroughs occur because in understanding each other the generations understand they are better off than when not understanding each other.
When collaboration follows this model, younger generations have a picture of today and think about how to improve circumstances for their future. Older generations have a picture of yesterday and see from whence they came with a vision of where they are going. Building collaboration for the best possible solution; for this moment, requires all generations to share their perspectives. Then, move forward knowing a new generation is on the horizon with a new reality of its own.
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
Monday, February 28, 2011
February 2011 Deep Insights
What if the butterfly effect was a person effect? Is it possible that one person could influence others in their company to take action? If so, could that one person begin a chain of events that would allow the company to prosper? Would that person’s influence be limited by position, education, or discipline? Or, would everyone’s actions be encouraged, considered, and challenged for the betterment of the whole? The answer to these questions depends on the environment of the company.
Autocratic governance builds filters which block the free flow of air. The graceful movements of the butterfly’s wings are only visible to those who are near. Adjacent neighbors never see the movement, which is blocked by bureaucratic filters. Although a butterfly can float across bureaucratic filters it can also be blown away in cross currents never to be seen again. What’s more, under autocratic governance, a butterfly can be captured, taken away for only a few to examine with the intent of releasing it anew as a creation of their own. Once released, its ability to fly has been hindered and it is left to float in drafts blown by the adversary incapable of adjusting its path to prosperity.
In contrast, democratic governance is friendly. Gentle winds send the butterfly from one meadow to the next. Its beauty is shared with adjacent neighbors who encourage continued flight. Everyone works together to find a landscape that will be enhanced by the butterfly’s beauty. During its flight it finds friends in those who see its beauty and enemies among those who fear its effect on the landscape. The challenge turns into a dilemma to find a landscape beneficial to the many or, at least one that will accept new beauty without prejudice. While the debate continues, other butterflies appear and chaos erupts causing all to find shelter. No one wants to move forward facing the critics sure to appear.
Lastly, governing by consensus frees the butterfly into warm trade winds that allow travel to and from adjacent neighborhoods. The butterfly isn’t blown about chaotically but it never lands. The landscape changes in response, attempting to entice the butterfly to settle in its meadow. The butterfly seeks members to join it, but soon finds itself in competition with others. The members must now decide who should land and when. Discussions labor long into darkness as the trade winds gently move the butterflies beyond the initial meadow to begin another search. Everyone is pleased nothing happened.
People lost in the winds of governance and left on their own, will not become visible to the world around them. Organizations must protect their people by creating an environment where experimentation is strategy and disruptions are accepted as opportunities. Everyone must be accountable for transparency; experiments must be recognized as initiative and those that succeed must be held high for everyone to admire. People will create the butterfly effect when heard and seen. When they are rewarded for their creative contributions and recognized for participation in the prosperity of the whole.
Autocratic governance builds filters which block the free flow of air. The graceful movements of the butterfly’s wings are only visible to those who are near. Adjacent neighbors never see the movement, which is blocked by bureaucratic filters. Although a butterfly can float across bureaucratic filters it can also be blown away in cross currents never to be seen again. What’s more, under autocratic governance, a butterfly can be captured, taken away for only a few to examine with the intent of releasing it anew as a creation of their own. Once released, its ability to fly has been hindered and it is left to float in drafts blown by the adversary incapable of adjusting its path to prosperity.
In contrast, democratic governance is friendly. Gentle winds send the butterfly from one meadow to the next. Its beauty is shared with adjacent neighbors who encourage continued flight. Everyone works together to find a landscape that will be enhanced by the butterfly’s beauty. During its flight it finds friends in those who see its beauty and enemies among those who fear its effect on the landscape. The challenge turns into a dilemma to find a landscape beneficial to the many or, at least one that will accept new beauty without prejudice. While the debate continues, other butterflies appear and chaos erupts causing all to find shelter. No one wants to move forward facing the critics sure to appear.
Lastly, governing by consensus frees the butterfly into warm trade winds that allow travel to and from adjacent neighborhoods. The butterfly isn’t blown about chaotically but it never lands. The landscape changes in response, attempting to entice the butterfly to settle in its meadow. The butterfly seeks members to join it, but soon finds itself in competition with others. The members must now decide who should land and when. Discussions labor long into darkness as the trade winds gently move the butterflies beyond the initial meadow to begin another search. Everyone is pleased nothing happened.
People lost in the winds of governance and left on their own, will not become visible to the world around them. Organizations must protect their people by creating an environment where experimentation is strategy and disruptions are accepted as opportunities. Everyone must be accountable for transparency; experiments must be recognized as initiative and those that succeed must be held high for everyone to admire. People will create the butterfly effect when heard and seen. When they are rewarded for their creative contributions and recognized for participation in the prosperity of the whole.
Monday, January 24, 2011
January 2010 Deep Insights
Walking, running, sprinting, or racing to your new year’s strategy execution will provide many unthought-of challenges that may distract from your original goal. Some organizations will slide back into using day to day fixes and others will hollow out their strategy to meet a lesser goal. A few will keep focus on the strategy’s contribution to their whole. This last group has a DNA structure permeating the minds of its entire population that is expressed in a commitment to using people’s strengths, not focusing on their or its weaknesses.
These organizations have learned that strengths, not weaknesses, within their people drive successful ideas and connect adjacent possibilities never before seen. They do so by mating ideas and possibilities that create mutations which drive new ideas not achievable until their inception. They consistently seek out current ecological modifications that may be disruptive to their strategy and make immediate adjustments. They set the bar for all others to reach by adapting before crisis sets in. They capture their ideas and events in a repository for all to share and digest. These organizations know that mating only occurs when collaboration flourishes in the entire organization. They meet frequently in open forums to discuss alternative activities that will enhance their contribution to the whole. Their commitment is to arrive ahead of schedule with more value than originally thought attainable. They accept the reality of non-linear execution. They expect to enhance their success with daily initiatives that improve their ability to deliver what was heretofore thought unrealistic.
The DNA successful organizations engineer mates peoples strengths forming mutations that drive innovations, creativity, and participation to enhance the whole. Recognition for success is everyone not someone, it is supported with inspiration not supervision, it respects an individual’s right to exist in their space, and it rewards performance of the whole not its parts.
These organizations have learned that strengths, not weaknesses, within their people drive successful ideas and connect adjacent possibilities never before seen. They do so by mating ideas and possibilities that create mutations which drive new ideas not achievable until their inception. They consistently seek out current ecological modifications that may be disruptive to their strategy and make immediate adjustments. They set the bar for all others to reach by adapting before crisis sets in. They capture their ideas and events in a repository for all to share and digest. These organizations know that mating only occurs when collaboration flourishes in the entire organization. They meet frequently in open forums to discuss alternative activities that will enhance their contribution to the whole. Their commitment is to arrive ahead of schedule with more value than originally thought attainable. They accept the reality of non-linear execution. They expect to enhance their success with daily initiatives that improve their ability to deliver what was heretofore thought unrealistic.
The DNA successful organizations engineer mates peoples strengths forming mutations that drive innovations, creativity, and participation to enhance the whole. Recognition for success is everyone not someone, it is supported with inspiration not supervision, it respects an individual’s right to exist in their space, and it rewards performance of the whole not its parts.
Sunday, November 28, 2010
November 2010 Deep Insights
Connecting the unconnected is a challenge faced by all generations. Each has its own idea of right and wrong. Each believes it has the answer and each thinks all others, well, “just don’t get it.” Breakthroughs occur when the different generations come out of isolation to seek understanding of the whole, beyond their limited generational knowledge.
Members of separate generations can begin by seeking common ground where there is little if any disagreement. Starting with agreement creates a climate that permits ideas to mate and allows their offspring to prepare the way for innovations which in turn generate broader solutions to issues facing the whole. The offspring of each idea engenders new questions for analysis stimulating an environment where all generations contribute from a vantage point in their life’s journey. In this playful milieu new connections are uncovered giving dawn to unique thoughts that generate innovative ideas. The goal is that each innovative idea will grow in influence, without coercion or fear of rejection. The most cohesive innovative ideas will emerge at the forefront forming a consensus from which all generations will act.
This evolution allows each generation to participate and learn from the other. It requires constant dialogue to help others “get it” without proclaiming winners or losers. It is a path destined to lead the whole organization to new beginnings because everyone has had a voice in the process. With this process firmly in place, the whole will move quickly to execute and be prepared to act collaboratively if hurdles arise. A new paradigm has been created crossing all generations.
Members of separate generations can begin by seeking common ground where there is little if any disagreement. Starting with agreement creates a climate that permits ideas to mate and allows their offspring to prepare the way for innovations which in turn generate broader solutions to issues facing the whole. The offspring of each idea engenders new questions for analysis stimulating an environment where all generations contribute from a vantage point in their life’s journey. In this playful milieu new connections are uncovered giving dawn to unique thoughts that generate innovative ideas. The goal is that each innovative idea will grow in influence, without coercion or fear of rejection. The most cohesive innovative ideas will emerge at the forefront forming a consensus from which all generations will act.
This evolution allows each generation to participate and learn from the other. It requires constant dialogue to help others “get it” without proclaiming winners or losers. It is a path destined to lead the whole organization to new beginnings because everyone has had a voice in the process. With this process firmly in place, the whole will move quickly to execute and be prepared to act collaboratively if hurdles arise. A new paradigm has been created crossing all generations.
Sunday, October 31, 2010
October 2010 Deep Insights
In today’s world, organizational performance is measured in a variety of ways: by the public, by Stockholders, vendors, executives, Wall Street, international market evaluators and financial institutions; by employees; by governments and the list continues to grow. What was once a simple metric has become a complex algorithm with input from constituencies far and wide. Organizational report cards are no longer controlled by the organization’s annual report or its PR releases. Report card opinions are published second by second through obscure internet sources dedicated to their purpose not the organizations.
Issues no longer remain local. They are rapidly reported to national, international, and global constituents. Pictures and videos instantly go viral spiraling into the inboxes of unknown observers worldwide. Performance has become transparent. Bad news travels at the speed of the “internet” while good news is destined to drown; hindered by mankind’s inability to accept good news without first authenticating it. The quest for organizations is to develop trust with their audience, who will then spread good news at a frequency that yields its own authenticity.
Trust begins with local entries of good news, substantiated by people who live and work together in the same organization and community; those who know the truth. They can spread the word through a viral attack of their own, develop a culture of sharing truths not rumors; and become a voice for good news. Their efforts will be monitored by those same unknown web observers who will now be silenced by the good news travelling at “internet speed.” Local reporting is the spark which will drive organization’s reality: it is the beginning of global perceptions. Remaining voiceless gives permission to others to set report card parameters that are not in line with organizational mission truths. Therefore, organizations must place themselves online in a way that will encourage locals who use Facebook, Twitter, and/or Youtube to verify the organizations unique image and its stellar performance.
Social Media is the new voice of positive and negative information about an organization. Don’t leave your image to the naysayers. Positive voices must be heard becoming inspiration for constructive activities securing future benefits for everyone.
Issues no longer remain local. They are rapidly reported to national, international, and global constituents. Pictures and videos instantly go viral spiraling into the inboxes of unknown observers worldwide. Performance has become transparent. Bad news travels at the speed of the “internet” while good news is destined to drown; hindered by mankind’s inability to accept good news without first authenticating it. The quest for organizations is to develop trust with their audience, who will then spread good news at a frequency that yields its own authenticity.
Trust begins with local entries of good news, substantiated by people who live and work together in the same organization and community; those who know the truth. They can spread the word through a viral attack of their own, develop a culture of sharing truths not rumors; and become a voice for good news. Their efforts will be monitored by those same unknown web observers who will now be silenced by the good news travelling at “internet speed.” Local reporting is the spark which will drive organization’s reality: it is the beginning of global perceptions. Remaining voiceless gives permission to others to set report card parameters that are not in line with organizational mission truths. Therefore, organizations must place themselves online in a way that will encourage locals who use Facebook, Twitter, and/or Youtube to verify the organizations unique image and its stellar performance.
Social Media is the new voice of positive and negative information about an organization. Don’t leave your image to the naysayers. Positive voices must be heard becoming inspiration for constructive activities securing future benefits for everyone.
September 2010 Deep Insights
Many organizations develop strategy in an executive vacuum. Tactics are structured by managers who are removed from day to day responsibilities and activities. Execution is dictated to front line personnel through meetings, memos or directives. They are to do, not ask why; not point out flaws or make suggestions to enhance or change tactics or strategy; they are confronted with compliance. They are “CHOICELESS DOERS.”
Organizational research statistics gathered throughout the decades have established that more strategies fail than succeed. To understand this failure rate one must look to the structural dynamics of the strategy, tactics and implementation architecture used by organizations. Executives who create strategy represent 10% of the organization’s population and do not structure tactics. Managers or organizational staff personnel, who make up 20% of the organization, create tactics but are removed from those who are held accountable for execution. Those who are accountable for successful strategy and tactical execution represent 70% of the organization’s population. Consequently 30% of the population sets the criteria by which 70% of the population’s execution and strategy implementation, success or failure will be judged; 30% of the population demands compliance and can blame poor strategy or tactics on the 70% for non compliance. “CHOICELESS DOERS” are invisible.
Organizations that convert “CHOICELESS DOERS” to research analysts, active strategy evaluators and tactical testers raise their potential for successful implementation, beyond compliance to commitment. They encourage “CHOICELESS DOERS” to learn while executing. They are taught to make corrections and to analyze tactics, not place blame. They are given resources and coaching when struggling with failure. They are challenged to take risks. They are given a voice and responsibility with authority to alter unsuccessful tactics which inhibit strategic progress. They are recognized for their contribution to successfully implemented tactics for strategic goals. They become “EXPERT DOERS.”
Organizational research statistics gathered throughout the decades have established that more strategies fail than succeed. To understand this failure rate one must look to the structural dynamics of the strategy, tactics and implementation architecture used by organizations. Executives who create strategy represent 10% of the organization’s population and do not structure tactics. Managers or organizational staff personnel, who make up 20% of the organization, create tactics but are removed from those who are held accountable for execution. Those who are accountable for successful strategy and tactical execution represent 70% of the organization’s population. Consequently 30% of the population sets the criteria by which 70% of the population’s execution and strategy implementation, success or failure will be judged; 30% of the population demands compliance and can blame poor strategy or tactics on the 70% for non compliance. “CHOICELESS DOERS” are invisible.
Organizations that convert “CHOICELESS DOERS” to research analysts, active strategy evaluators and tactical testers raise their potential for successful implementation, beyond compliance to commitment. They encourage “CHOICELESS DOERS” to learn while executing. They are taught to make corrections and to analyze tactics, not place blame. They are given resources and coaching when struggling with failure. They are challenged to take risks. They are given a voice and responsibility with authority to alter unsuccessful tactics which inhibit strategic progress. They are recognized for their contribution to successfully implemented tactics for strategic goals. They become “EXPERT DOERS.”
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
August 2010 Deep Insights
Guesstimates used as measurements are founded in subjectivity; framed through anecdotal evidence filtered by individual biases. They lead to excuses, long overdrawn meetings, continued misguided effort and always add additional burdens for everyone to carry.
The uses of guesstimates are a signal for organizations to dissect the issue at hand until hard objective measurements become visible. The process of dissection requires critical path definition and analysis, compartmentalization of the critical path value added activities, a division of the parts within each compartment, and the resolve of participants not to accept anecdotal analysis. Each compartment must be studied to determine its exact contribution to the whole and where its order falls on the critical path. When order is established, individual parts within a compartment can be more closely inspected to understand their contribution to the compartments participation in the whole. Compartment contributions must lead to successfully transferring finished quality products to the critical path for next steps. With dissection, statistical data can be collected building measurements to alert everyone that a crisis is brewing. It is not enough to know when a crisis occurs, measurements should forecast and sound an alarm, creating an environment, not of solving crisis but of forestalling.
Guesstimates will never allow forestalling activities to occur. Organizations must create a culture of forestalling activities with measurements that will forecast crisis, not report a historical event, their future success is at stake.
The uses of guesstimates are a signal for organizations to dissect the issue at hand until hard objective measurements become visible. The process of dissection requires critical path definition and analysis, compartmentalization of the critical path value added activities, a division of the parts within each compartment, and the resolve of participants not to accept anecdotal analysis. Each compartment must be studied to determine its exact contribution to the whole and where its order falls on the critical path. When order is established, individual parts within a compartment can be more closely inspected to understand their contribution to the compartments participation in the whole. Compartment contributions must lead to successfully transferring finished quality products to the critical path for next steps. With dissection, statistical data can be collected building measurements to alert everyone that a crisis is brewing. It is not enough to know when a crisis occurs, measurements should forecast and sound an alarm, creating an environment, not of solving crisis but of forestalling.
Guesstimates will never allow forestalling activities to occur. Organizations must create a culture of forestalling activities with measurements that will forecast crisis, not report a historical event, their future success is at stake.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)