Yesterday I had a very frustrating day – not one which is totally foreign to my experience but with a slightly new and different twist. After enjoying three days of a long holiday weekend, I had set aside most of the day to create/compose/write my presentation for the American Astronautical Society which I am delivering in a couple days at their Imagine 2009 Conference. The day was virtually “wasted”.
Despite my good intentions and a plethora of ideas and angles and insights, I accomplished very little, until...
Early evening I posted the following comment on my Face Book page: “Some days it just seems impossible to be as productive as I know I am capable of being - why do I get "stuck" like this?”
Literally within minutes I had the following responses from several trusted friends and colleagues, including my daughter.
“Sometimes you just have to allow yourself a break. That can be a very good thing. “
“If I knew, my friend, I would share the answer, gladly.”
“It's called creative incubation. we all need it. :) “
“Productive and 'creative' are different things. Perhaps by being productive you mean 'efficient'. For being effective in what you do, if you are a creative person, you need periods like that. The worst you can do then is to try very hard.”
All of the above comments make sense to me intellectually. They were/are appreciated. But there is nothing that tries my patience more than believing that I SHOULD be able to produce right now, even though I am not. I become very self-critical and undermine my best intentions even more.
When it comes to pacing productivity, sometimes the most significant thing we can do or say is simply to acknowledge, “I’m stuck”. When I did that yesterday, everything changed within a very short span of time. I found myself in a new kind of "flow state" within minutes, though I did little or nothing different, other than state to my virtual friends what was obvious to me by the end of the day.
Sometimes THE most productive thing we can do is ease up on ourselves. I wonder how much creativity and innovation is lost because we fail to realize this in a timely way??
Monday, November 30, 2009
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Burgeoning Connections Produce Relational Commodities
I’ve been perpetually on the move the last six weeks, travelling widely. Was interviewed by a Croatian TV station after speaking at a leadership conference in Zagreb, supported faculty and taught at the African Leadership Academy in Joburg once again, facilitated a 2.5 day offsite for Merck’s Strategy Office in NJ, met with the VP of RD for Heinz Europe in Amsterdam, spoke yesterday on “Managing Connections to Optimize Innovation” at Alcatel-Lucent’s Bell Labs sponsored by the A-L Technical Academy - all exciting and worthwhile!
I have made up-dates in Linkedin, posted comments on Facebook, and even launched some “tweets” into cyberspace. Many engaging conversations and new connections along the way. But, I have not been writing substantially as was my intention, including entries on this blog. What I notice is that yesterday it took only two comments from trusted individuals with whom I have a relationship to draw my attention to both my desire and need to write. They did not scold, chastise, or do anything to “guilt” me. They simply drew me back to my Self.
At Bell Labs I spoke about how connections are fundamentally transactional. When I need a piece of information, a skill, or some advice, I know where to go and how to access it readily. There is an exchange that requires little or no commitment, other than perhaps implied or explicit compensation for value received. A relationship, on the other hand, requires shared values, a measure of mutual commitment, and underlying trust.
Reuters News reported last week on how the business use of Twitter, Facebook, and other social media is exploding. “Just last month… an Internet monitoring firm reported that visits to Twitter, the fourth most popular social networking site, increased by 1,170% in September compared to the year-earlier period. “ This "explosion" is re-aligning our attention, producing relational commodities but not relationships.
I want to be “connected”, most of all to myself! Thanks to Barb and Gordon, each of whom, in their own way, reminded me of that yesterday!
I have made up-dates in Linkedin, posted comments on Facebook, and even launched some “tweets” into cyberspace. Many engaging conversations and new connections along the way. But, I have not been writing substantially as was my intention, including entries on this blog. What I notice is that yesterday it took only two comments from trusted individuals with whom I have a relationship to draw my attention to both my desire and need to write. They did not scold, chastise, or do anything to “guilt” me. They simply drew me back to my Self.
At Bell Labs I spoke about how connections are fundamentally transactional. When I need a piece of information, a skill, or some advice, I know where to go and how to access it readily. There is an exchange that requires little or no commitment, other than perhaps implied or explicit compensation for value received. A relationship, on the other hand, requires shared values, a measure of mutual commitment, and underlying trust.
Reuters News reported last week on how the business use of Twitter, Facebook, and other social media is exploding. “Just last month… an Internet monitoring firm reported that visits to Twitter, the fourth most popular social networking site, increased by 1,170% in September compared to the year-earlier period. “ This "explosion" is re-aligning our attention, producing relational commodities but not relationships.
I want to be “connected”, most of all to myself! Thanks to Barb and Gordon, each of whom, in their own way, reminded me of that yesterday!
Friday, September 04, 2009
Innovators Break Rules
Last week I was with an R&D group who were lamenting the lack of entrepreneurial spirit in their ranks. This week I am at the African Leadership Academy with students from across the Continent discussing entrepreneurship and the hero’s journey. One student cited the text: “Successful entrepreneurs make bold leaps that break contact with the familiar and leave behind a clutter of obsolete products and processes.” (“The Entrepreneur as Hero”, Candace Allen). She continued by describing her uncle who broke family and tribal norms when he went to China for an engineering education. I am inspired by the readiness of these students to make such bold leaps as they shared who their heroes are.
In today’s corporate environment heroes are more difficult to identify. Why? Failure to break the rules? This is a difficult but essential inquiry as we try to sort out the “rule-breakers” who have violated our trust and squandered millions of dollars from those who are innovators, if not heroes. Daniel Vasella, CEO of Novartis, commented recently (McKinsey Quarterly Conversations with Global Leaders) that he doubts that “tons of new controls will improve the situation. …Innovation is always, 'How do I circumvent certain rules to make more and better returns?' " He comments further on the “trust gap” that must be closed and the integrity that is required to do things differently.
Leaders deviate from the norms. They go where no one has gone before. Innovators do break rules. But they must do so with integrity in an environment where the vision of what could be and the shared values are more powerful than the instinct to comply with rules and processes. Perhaps the lack of entrepreneurial spirit correlates directly with the lack of understanding of the hero’s journey inside the corporate world. The students here in Joburg certainly have prompted me to be thinking about it more this week!
In today’s corporate environment heroes are more difficult to identify. Why? Failure to break the rules? This is a difficult but essential inquiry as we try to sort out the “rule-breakers” who have violated our trust and squandered millions of dollars from those who are innovators, if not heroes. Daniel Vasella, CEO of Novartis, commented recently (McKinsey Quarterly Conversations with Global Leaders) that he doubts that “tons of new controls will improve the situation. …Innovation is always, 'How do I circumvent certain rules to make more and better returns?' " He comments further on the “trust gap” that must be closed and the integrity that is required to do things differently.
Leaders deviate from the norms. They go where no one has gone before. Innovators do break rules. But they must do so with integrity in an environment where the vision of what could be and the shared values are more powerful than the instinct to comply with rules and processes. Perhaps the lack of entrepreneurial spirit correlates directly with the lack of understanding of the hero’s journey inside the corporate world. The students here in Joburg certainly have prompted me to be thinking about it more this week!
Tuesday, August 04, 2009
The Randomness of Insight
The creative process is not linear. Nor is the way I think always linear. Sometimes the randomness of what catches my attention actually gives way to new insight, IF I don't work it too hard! Yet I often paralyze myself with an injunction that I must write tight, logical, sequences of thought or nothing at all.
The following are some thoughts and phrases that landed on me from speakers at TED Global2009 in Oxford which continue to lobby for more attention from me.
“Your train of thought is sacred.”
“How do you observe something you can’t see?”
“democratization of intimacy”
“Nothing is built on stone; everything is built on sand. But we must build as if on stone.”
“Train your heart to see what the world has given you.”
“We are the first society to be living in a world where we don’t worship anything other than ourselves.”
“Obsessions make my life worse and my work better.”
“Make sure our ideas of success are our own.”
“Context is everything.”
Sometimes allowing for some randomness in our work is the most important thing we can do.
The following are some thoughts and phrases that landed on me from speakers at TED Global2009 in Oxford which continue to lobby for more attention from me.
“Your train of thought is sacred.”
“How do you observe something you can’t see?”
“democratization of intimacy”
“Nothing is built on stone; everything is built on sand. But we must build as if on stone.”
“Train your heart to see what the world has given you.”
“We are the first society to be living in a world where we don’t worship anything other than ourselves.”
“Obsessions make my life worse and my work better.”
“Make sure our ideas of success are our own.”
“Context is everything.”
Sometimes allowing for some randomness in our work is the most important thing we can do.
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Greater Incentives, Worse Performance - Really!
"There's a mismatch between what science knows and business does," Dan Pink persuasively asserted as he made his case at TED for re-examining the use of contingent motivators. His TED talk hit my “sweet spot” in terms of professional concerns more than any other. The evidence from experimental tasks using little more than a candle and a box of tacks is compelling. Extrinsic rewards work well with simple tasks and narrow focus. Beyond a certain point, greater incentives actually lead to worse performance.
The most urgent agendas of the 21st century will be repeatedly undermined if we think we can motivate by incrementally increasing promised rewards for those who tackle them. “If, then, rewards don’t work! It makes me crazy!” Pink exclaimed. Yet we persist in trying to motivate our top talent in business today in ways that seem merely to increase stress and kill passion.
The failure of Encarta, Microsoft’s attempt to launch a virtual encyclopedia, contrasted with the massively expanding phenomenon of Wikipedia, is but one example Pink used to document his case beyond the behavioral experiments. “The building blocks for an entirely new operating system for our economy are: (1)autonomy; (2) mastery; and (3) purpose, “ Dan continued.
I resonate deeply with these principles. From the outside looking in on more than one corporate R&D function, it seems nearly impossible to find ways to free highly talented, once passionate scientists and engineers, from “processes on steroids”. I just completed writing a paper on "Gaining Employee Committment in Tough Times, Performance and Potential in R&D Today". Now that I think about it, in the afterglow of TED, we are positioning some practices with clients that are well aligned with what I heard Dan saying from the TED stage.
"Science knows what our heart confirms." No wonder I thought this was one of the best talks of the week.
The most urgent agendas of the 21st century will be repeatedly undermined if we think we can motivate by incrementally increasing promised rewards for those who tackle them. “If, then, rewards don’t work! It makes me crazy!” Pink exclaimed. Yet we persist in trying to motivate our top talent in business today in ways that seem merely to increase stress and kill passion.
The failure of Encarta, Microsoft’s attempt to launch a virtual encyclopedia, contrasted with the massively expanding phenomenon of Wikipedia, is but one example Pink used to document his case beyond the behavioral experiments. “The building blocks for an entirely new operating system for our economy are: (1)autonomy; (2) mastery; and (3) purpose, “ Dan continued.
I resonate deeply with these principles. From the outside looking in on more than one corporate R&D function, it seems nearly impossible to find ways to free highly talented, once passionate scientists and engineers, from “processes on steroids”. I just completed writing a paper on "Gaining Employee Committment in Tough Times, Performance and Potential in R&D Today". Now that I think about it, in the afterglow of TED, we are positioning some practices with clients that are well aligned with what I heard Dan saying from the TED stage.
"Science knows what our heart confirms." No wonder I thought this was one of the best talks of the week.
Monday, July 27, 2009
Learning with Constrast and Differences - TEDGlobal 2009
The TEDGlobal 2009 Conference which concluded Friday afternoon in Oxford was unquestionably THE most stimulating and engaging professional conference I have ever been privileged to experience. Most notable to me was the diversity of talent, stories, projects, people, from all over the world. Immediate affirmation was everywhere of the power of contrast and differences to stimulate learning and deepen global understanding. I was working at spanning and bridging ideas in my mind all week long! Exhausting! And wonderful…
Orphaned hip hop artist, Emmanuel Jal's story of surviving the Sudanese civil wars celebrated in exploding rhythms the difference just one person can make, i.e. Emma McCune, the aid worker who rescued him (and has subsequently died – details were not able to be shared). V.K. Madhavan, the Executive Director, Central Himalayan Rural Action Group, a group specializing in rural agricultural development is also a TED Fellow. In a soft-spoken way, each time I spoke with Madhavan during the week, he conveyed his dedication to empowering women who work in agriculture in rural India. With just a few comments, his passion and commitment were not only evident but inspiring!
The stage was occupied (never more than 18 minutes) by the prominent ( e.g. Gordon Brown, Prime Minister of Britain) and the not so well-known or even obscure ( Jason Soll, a student at Claremont McKenna College who “flourished” cards for 3 minutes while energizing all of us with how learning can flourish). Michael Naylor, Director, Canopy Capital, London and a fellow participant, spoke with me as we walked to Oxford’s Natural History Museum to view the movie, "Home" . Each time we subsequently met during the course of the week, I realized a new depth of concern and care for the intricate systems of the planet we inhabit.
Many TED talks are available on-line - more in time from Global2009 Conference, most from previous conferences. IF you want to keep your mind alert and your learning at the edge, I strongly encourage viewing a TED talk from time to time. It only takes 18 minutes OR LESS.
Orphaned hip hop artist, Emmanuel Jal's story of surviving the Sudanese civil wars celebrated in exploding rhythms the difference just one person can make, i.e. Emma McCune, the aid worker who rescued him (and has subsequently died – details were not able to be shared). V.K. Madhavan, the Executive Director, Central Himalayan Rural Action Group, a group specializing in rural agricultural development is also a TED Fellow. In a soft-spoken way, each time I spoke with Madhavan during the week, he conveyed his dedication to empowering women who work in agriculture in rural India. With just a few comments, his passion and commitment were not only evident but inspiring!
The stage was occupied (never more than 18 minutes) by the prominent ( e.g. Gordon Brown, Prime Minister of Britain) and the not so well-known or even obscure ( Jason Soll, a student at Claremont McKenna College who “flourished” cards for 3 minutes while energizing all of us with how learning can flourish). Michael Naylor, Director, Canopy Capital, London and a fellow participant, spoke with me as we walked to Oxford’s Natural History Museum to view the movie, "Home" . Each time we subsequently met during the course of the week, I realized a new depth of concern and care for the intricate systems of the planet we inhabit.
Many TED talks are available on-line - more in time from Global2009 Conference, most from previous conferences. IF you want to keep your mind alert and your learning at the edge, I strongly encourage viewing a TED talk from time to time. It only takes 18 minutes OR LESS.
Monday, July 20, 2009
The Substance of Things Not Seen
I am at Oxford University today for the launch of the TEDGlobal 2009 Conference. There is a palpable energy permeating the quad of Keble College this morning as momentum is building for what I anticipate is going to be an extraordinary week of conversation, learning, new relationships, and more.
The theme of the conference, "The Substance of Things Not Seen," draws me to a realm of experience I have always been aware of and has been an important part of my life's work. Just a few weeks ago a Sr. R&D Leader spoke to her organization in the aftermath of yet another down-sizing and re-organization. She stated in a demeanor that was congruent with her words: "I believe our character, convictions, and the culture of this organization will have much more to do with our success than our structure or processes." She knows something of the "substance of things not seen" as she went on to discuss with the employees gathered the importance of qualitative as well as quantitative assessment. I talked with some of the technical professionals that work for her afterwards. They were inspired!
ROII (Return on Investment in Interactions) is a new way to think about value. "Productivity in a Networked Era: Not Your Father's ROI." an article in the current issue of Chief Learning Officer magazine, makes a compelling argument for "value creation migrating from what we can see (physical assets) to intangibles (ideas). Look at Google and Cisco." Participating in TED this week represents for me the quintessential challenge of finding value in expanding global networks, both real and virtual.
Speaking of fathers, last week before departing for TED I spent an evening with my 85 year old father at our family's cabin in Northern Minnesota. In the midst of our reminiscing and talking about the end of life (my mom died a year ago), my Dad commented about "the most well-documented description of heaven" he had ever read - a book he wants to share with my father- and mother-in-law who are also facing the end of life. Here is a curious but deeply felt reference to his connection to the "substance of things not seen". Scriptural allusions to this topic are many and remain prominent in the lives of those who have influenced me.
I bring my awareness of all this and more to my dialogue and exploration of this week. There is no question in my kind that the difference between value and success lies in a domain that is often intangible and frequently cannot be seen.
The theme of the conference, "The Substance of Things Not Seen," draws me to a realm of experience I have always been aware of and has been an important part of my life's work. Just a few weeks ago a Sr. R&D Leader spoke to her organization in the aftermath of yet another down-sizing and re-organization. She stated in a demeanor that was congruent with her words: "I believe our character, convictions, and the culture of this organization will have much more to do with our success than our structure or processes." She knows something of the "substance of things not seen" as she went on to discuss with the employees gathered the importance of qualitative as well as quantitative assessment. I talked with some of the technical professionals that work for her afterwards. They were inspired!
ROII (Return on Investment in Interactions) is a new way to think about value. "Productivity in a Networked Era: Not Your Father's ROI." an article in the current issue of Chief Learning Officer magazine, makes a compelling argument for "value creation migrating from what we can see (physical assets) to intangibles (ideas). Look at Google and Cisco." Participating in TED this week represents for me the quintessential challenge of finding value in expanding global networks, both real and virtual.
Speaking of fathers, last week before departing for TED I spent an evening with my 85 year old father at our family's cabin in Northern Minnesota. In the midst of our reminiscing and talking about the end of life (my mom died a year ago), my Dad commented about "the most well-documented description of heaven" he had ever read - a book he wants to share with my father- and mother-in-law who are also facing the end of life. Here is a curious but deeply felt reference to his connection to the "substance of things not seen". Scriptural allusions to this topic are many and remain prominent in the lives of those who have influenced me.
I bring my awareness of all this and more to my dialogue and exploration of this week. There is no question in my kind that the difference between value and success lies in a domain that is often intangible and frequently cannot be seen.
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Thomas Edison Re-Considered
Managers motivate. Leaders inspire. One without the other is incomplete when striving for sustainable performance. AND, no matter how powerful or forceful one might be, a leader cannot force you to commit nor compel you to create.
When times are tough, the need for the spirit to be sustained and nurtured does not vanish. Both “perspire” and “inspire” as well as “expire” for that matter are rooted in the Latin “spiritus” which means “to breathe in new life, to animate or energize”. Innovation requires inspiration as well as perspiration!
The earnest manager sometimes cites Thomas Edison when it comes to working harder. “Success is 10% inspiration and 90% perspiration.” Edison’s statement describes what is required to move a creative idea forward to an invention, and then perhaps an innovation, where real socio-economic value has been established. He is not addressing what is required to invite and sustain a creative work environment which is animated and inspired, even when times are tough. People who are managed by others need more than admonitions to do more, faster, with less.
When times are tough, the need for the spirit to be sustained and nurtured does not vanish. Both “perspire” and “inspire” as well as “expire” for that matter are rooted in the Latin “spiritus” which means “to breathe in new life, to animate or energize”. Innovation requires inspiration as well as perspiration!
The earnest manager sometimes cites Thomas Edison when it comes to working harder. “Success is 10% inspiration and 90% perspiration.” Edison’s statement describes what is required to move a creative idea forward to an invention, and then perhaps an innovation, where real socio-economic value has been established. He is not addressing what is required to invite and sustain a creative work environment which is animated and inspired, even when times are tough. People who are managed by others need more than admonitions to do more, faster, with less.
Wednesday, July 08, 2009
Leaders Inspire by the Way They Inquire
" 'Search' has made us all drive-by scholars," writes Gregory Rodriguez last week in his column in the Los Angeles Times entitled, "Answers Can Be Found in Questions" . He addresses the fundamental value of inquiry, a skill that is waining in our society, as he points out.
He cites a newly published book by Andrea Batista Schlesinger entitled, The Death of "Why?", The Decline of Questioning and the Future of Democracy. Batista Schlesinger writes: "The way we interact with information reveals the priority we place on trivia over investigation, consumption over explanation, speed over reflection..."
Coincidentally, just this week I finished writing a paper with my colleagues that addresses the value of skilled inquiry when seeking to engage employees in tough times. We look at some of the "political" issues related to how the questions of performance and potential are framed in R&D organizations. We review four ways our clients have validated success with skillful inquiry:(1) listening posts; (2) cascading conversations; (3) skip-level meetings; and (4) barrier-busting by managers.
In our experience the "political" nature of any inquiry about performance and potential in the R&D space, both organizational and individual, will either deepen employee commitment through this economic downturn or perpetuate more cynicism and distrust.
As Rodriguez' column highlights, the value and power of inquiry is being compromised with consequences we may not realize in the immediacy of our "search".
Leaders inspire by the way they inquire!
He cites a newly published book by Andrea Batista Schlesinger entitled, The Death of "Why?", The Decline of Questioning and the Future of Democracy. Batista Schlesinger writes: "The way we interact with information reveals the priority we place on trivia over investigation, consumption over explanation, speed over reflection..."
Coincidentally, just this week I finished writing a paper with my colleagues that addresses the value of skilled inquiry when seeking to engage employees in tough times. We look at some of the "political" issues related to how the questions of performance and potential are framed in R&D organizations. We review four ways our clients have validated success with skillful inquiry:(1) listening posts; (2) cascading conversations; (3) skip-level meetings; and (4) barrier-busting by managers.
In our experience the "political" nature of any inquiry about performance and potential in the R&D space, both organizational and individual, will either deepen employee commitment through this economic downturn or perpetuate more cynicism and distrust.
As Rodriguez' column highlights, the value and power of inquiry is being compromised with consequences we may not realize in the immediacy of our "search".
Leaders inspire by the way they inquire!
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
The Prevalence of Blind Spots
When it comes to vision, most animals care very little for the substance of things. Their eyes are oriented to movement. No so for human beings. Our eyes are continually filling the field of vision with content, even when it’s not there. The anatomical structure of the human eye causes a blind spot which is filled by the surrounding environment in a way that we may never notice. A simple visual exercise confirms it.
"We spend about one-tenth of our waking hours completely blind." (A Natural History of Seeing, Simon Ings)
Cultural biases and organizational norms cause blind spots as well. “Taboos” exist which we cannot address because we don’t know they are there. We can’t “see” them, above all, in our own daily environment. The consequences, though often not apparent in the short term, have enduring impact over the course of time and history.
One way to increase our awareness and uncover blind spots is by comparison and contrast. Examining the differences between a microbiology lab and a high energy physics lab (ethnographic study) helps scientific and technical leaders uncover their blind spots. The patterns and practices for generating new knowledge are very different in these labs, for those who have eyes to see.
Just as an ophthalmologist tests visual fields of the eyes, it is possible to check periodically for blind spots of leaders. Paradoxical as it may seem, successful leaders know how to look for their own blind spots as well as those of their organization. Leaders can develop and practice skills to make visible what is invisible. As a result new fields of awareness emerge.
Awareness precedes choice. Energy follows attention
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Profitability and True Value
Several important people in my life, including my son, urged me to read David Brooks op ed column in the New York Times several weeks back now. I only recently got to it. Alas, "In Praise of Dullness" challenges much of what I hold important in my life and work. Brooks asserts that recent research proves that “warm, flexible, team-oriented and empathetic people are less likely to thrive as C.E.O.’s. Organized, dogged, anal-retentive and slightly boring people are more likely to thrive.” He even cites Jim Collin’s seminal work, Good to Great in support of his argument.
As one reaches the conclusion of his column, the “political” nature of his argument becomes blatantly apparent. It reinforces the need to test underlying assumptions (which are frequently very political in nature) and examine common practices for sustainable value. For example, Brooks equates political talent (ala Washington D.C. in any case ) with “charisma, charm and personal skills”. If politics is indeed about the inevitable exercise of power and struggle for control, then political skills are much more about persuasive influence and effective management than Brooks leads the reader to believe. And such political skills are important to successful leaders, regardless of position.
The current economic climate does not speak well of the “success” of American businesses, including the leadership of many CEOS. If innovation is indeed required to maintain or regain competitive strength, the human all too human factors in the work environment, including the need for trust and some measure of personal fulfillment, are essential.
Insufficient criteria for success are confused with generating sustainable true value. Paradoxically, “breaking the rules “ of what many have deemed “profitable” may be what is required.
As one reaches the conclusion of his column, the “political” nature of his argument becomes blatantly apparent. It reinforces the need to test underlying assumptions (which are frequently very political in nature) and examine common practices for sustainable value. For example, Brooks equates political talent (ala Washington D.C. in any case ) with “charisma, charm and personal skills”. If politics is indeed about the inevitable exercise of power and struggle for control, then political skills are much more about persuasive influence and effective management than Brooks leads the reader to believe. And such political skills are important to successful leaders, regardless of position.
The current economic climate does not speak well of the “success” of American businesses, including the leadership of many CEOS. If innovation is indeed required to maintain or regain competitive strength, the human all too human factors in the work environment, including the need for trust and some measure of personal fulfillment, are essential.
Insufficient criteria for success are confused with generating sustainable true value. Paradoxically, “breaking the rules “ of what many have deemed “profitable” may be what is required.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
The Bad Rap of "Politics"
Over twenty years ago, Peter Block published a book entitled The Empowered Manager, Positive Political Skills at Work. It is one of the few references I have found that acknowledges the inevitable reality of politics as well as the possibility of redeeming the meaning of the word itself. Max Weber defined politics as “the struggle for power”. (The word “politics” originally comes from the Greek word polis meaning city or state.) The struggle for power is a reality day after day, wherever people gather.
Block writes: “The process of organizational politics as we know it works against people… We empower ourselves by finding a positive way of being political. The line between positive and negative politics is a tightrope we have to walk. We must be powerful advocates… in a way that does not alienate those around and above us.”
SFB Associates is launching our Politics of Creativity™ Assessment this week. It is very simply five propositions and twenty normative statements which we believe will help R&D functions in particular find positive ways of being political. Proposition # 1: Innovators break rules. This is not necessarily bad, but it is almost inevitably political. Our purpose is to break down the barriers that give politics a bad rap in organizations – naming it for what it is – “a struggle for power” which is real and needs to be more effectively addressed if we want more innovative break-throughs.
Block writes: “The process of organizational politics as we know it works against people… We empower ourselves by finding a positive way of being political. The line between positive and negative politics is a tightrope we have to walk. We must be powerful advocates… in a way that does not alienate those around and above us.”
SFB Associates is launching our Politics of Creativity™ Assessment this week. It is very simply five propositions and twenty normative statements which we believe will help R&D functions in particular find positive ways of being political. Proposition # 1: Innovators break rules. This is not necessarily bad, but it is almost inevitably political. Our purpose is to break down the barriers that give politics a bad rap in organizations – naming it for what it is – “a struggle for power” which is real and needs to be more effectively addressed if we want more innovative break-throughs.
Wednesday, April 01, 2009
Tapping the Full Potential of Top Talent
More than one of our clients in the last year has asked the question: “Are we maximizing the contribution or optimizing the potential of our technical employees?” “How do we know if the performance of our R&D pipeline indeed reflects the full potential of the top talent in our labs?”
While looking for a response to that question may be useful, any answer to it is inherently “political”. Why? First, because the criteria for “performance” are not widely understood and accepted the deeper one goes in most R&D organizations. There is often substantial disagreement about how “performance” is recognized and rewarded (and not much dialogue about what performance really means to the professional at the bench). Secondly, human potential cannot be captured by any metric. There is always more potential.
The answer will always be political; the inquiry, however, is essential.
When asked about employee potential, THE most frequent indicator that management points to is the “engagement survey” conducted by corporate HR or global shared services. I was recently sitting in a break-out group with a 10-12 scientists from the R&D function. We were asked to work on the low scores on an "engagement survey" related to “working with the customer”. The entire 90 minutes was spent debating what “customer” means for the R&D group. The group virtually discounted the value of the entire survey because of lack of shared understanding - not just related to ”customer” but other aspects as well for those completing it.
Trying to decode corporate surveys is no substitute for being engaged oneself.
While looking for a response to that question may be useful, any answer to it is inherently “political”. Why? First, because the criteria for “performance” are not widely understood and accepted the deeper one goes in most R&D organizations. There is often substantial disagreement about how “performance” is recognized and rewarded (and not much dialogue about what performance really means to the professional at the bench). Secondly, human potential cannot be captured by any metric. There is always more potential.
The answer will always be political; the inquiry, however, is essential.
When asked about employee potential, THE most frequent indicator that management points to is the “engagement survey” conducted by corporate HR or global shared services. I was recently sitting in a break-out group with a 10-12 scientists from the R&D function. We were asked to work on the low scores on an "engagement survey" related to “working with the customer”. The entire 90 minutes was spent debating what “customer” means for the R&D group. The group virtually discounted the value of the entire survey because of lack of shared understanding - not just related to ”customer” but other aspects as well for those completing it.
Trying to decode corporate surveys is no substitute for being engaged oneself.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
The Power of Perfection
“If you become widely successful because you do everything right, you’re doomed.”
So said Clayton Christensen, academic, author, and authority on “disruptive innovation” whom I heard speak last week on the state of healthcare in our nation. While I indeed share many of his concerns about our healthcare system, the above comment at the beginning of his presentation was what loomed in my mind at the time and ever since.
Our drive to “get it right” is fueled by a confusion between excellence and perfection. I can’t tell you how many times I hear talented and highly trained PhD professionals working at the lab bench comment on the potential value of an 80/20% solution. Yet seldom is that deemed adequate, either by research professionals or management. Despite the rhetoric, the “line” doesn’t play. Why?
As individuals we're reluctant to attend to a root cause – the need we acquired as individuals, somewhere along the way, to be “perfect” in order to be accepted, recognized, loved. I can “hear” clients thinking, “Don’t go psychological on me!” However, such personality traits, multiplied many times over in a given organization, become embedded in the culture. We are more productive when we don't undermine ourselves and our projects with the unrecognized power of perfection. At least I am.
To know the difference between excellence and perfection is to understand what it means to be human.
So said Clayton Christensen, academic, author, and authority on “disruptive innovation” whom I heard speak last week on the state of healthcare in our nation. While I indeed share many of his concerns about our healthcare system, the above comment at the beginning of his presentation was what loomed in my mind at the time and ever since.
Our drive to “get it right” is fueled by a confusion between excellence and perfection. I can’t tell you how many times I hear talented and highly trained PhD professionals working at the lab bench comment on the potential value of an 80/20% solution. Yet seldom is that deemed adequate, either by research professionals or management. Despite the rhetoric, the “line” doesn’t play. Why?
As individuals we're reluctant to attend to a root cause – the need we acquired as individuals, somewhere along the way, to be “perfect” in order to be accepted, recognized, loved. I can “hear” clients thinking, “Don’t go psychological on me!” However, such personality traits, multiplied many times over in a given organization, become embedded in the culture. We are more productive when we don't undermine ourselves and our projects with the unrecognized power of perfection. At least I am.
To know the difference between excellence and perfection is to understand what it means to be human.
Wednesday, January 07, 2009
Imagine leaving your job!
A respected and very talented client was recently recruited for a new leadership role with another company. Having made plans to accept the new senior R&D position, he found himself speaking up and taking risks in new ways, reflecting his untapped vision and continuing passion for his current work. Given he was leaving his present position, any lack of support or endorsement of his work at this point by senior management would have nominal impact, if any, on his career.
As he made plans for his transition to the new employer, the economy tanked and the offer was rescinded. He found himself continuing with his current position.
I recently spoke with him. He commented without hesitation that he had significant concern about the affect of some of the "edgy" initiative he exercised in recent months, in anticipation of leaving. However, to his surprise, there was far more receptivity, even momentum, to work which he was previously cautious about leading. He became acutely aware of his limiting beliefs about what was possible, until he thought he was leaving.
Imagine what we might do if we knew there was always some place else to go, something else to do, a calling that is bigger and greater, than the current role we fulfill. This is difficult for most people, if not impossible, when economic instability and job security is very much on our minds. But such courage is essential if we are to realize our full creative potential, not merely for our own sake, but for the innovative, productive prosperity of the organizations we serve.
As he made plans for his transition to the new employer, the economy tanked and the offer was rescinded. He found himself continuing with his current position.
I recently spoke with him. He commented without hesitation that he had significant concern about the affect of some of the "edgy" initiative he exercised in recent months, in anticipation of leaving. However, to his surprise, there was far more receptivity, even momentum, to work which he was previously cautious about leading. He became acutely aware of his limiting beliefs about what was possible, until he thought he was leaving.
Imagine what we might do if we knew there was always some place else to go, something else to do, a calling that is bigger and greater, than the current role we fulfill. This is difficult for most people, if not impossible, when economic instability and job security is very much on our minds. But such courage is essential if we are to realize our full creative potential, not merely for our own sake, but for the innovative, productive prosperity of the organizations we serve.
Thursday, January 01, 2009
Chronos, Kairos, and Creativity
International authorities responsible for keeping time precise announced that today, the first day of yet another New Year, we were given an extra second of time. How often we hear in our work that there is simply not enough time! Yet time hangs heavy for many these days - the uncertainty of a failing economy is more than a passing moment.
The ancient Greeks had multiple words for "time". Chronos refers to chronological time - the quantitative nature of time as before and after, time which is always scarce. Kairos on the other hand refers to a qualitative attentiveness, time as significant rather than dimensional. Kairos is a passing instant when an opening appears, offering a unique transformational moment for those who see it.
Too often we gauge our productivity in terms of "chronos" rather than training ourselves to be attentive to "kairos". Recently published research, "Time and Organizational Improvisation" argues that improvisation is an ideal basis for a synthesis of chronos and kairos, "blending conflicting concepts such as planning and acting, discipline and freedom, control and spontaneity."
Focusing on time solely as chronos distracts from the creative power of kairos. I look forward to discovering the kairos of 2009 in ways we have not yet imagined.
Happy New Year!
The ancient Greeks had multiple words for "time". Chronos refers to chronological time - the quantitative nature of time as before and after, time which is always scarce. Kairos on the other hand refers to a qualitative attentiveness, time as significant rather than dimensional. Kairos is a passing instant when an opening appears, offering a unique transformational moment for those who see it.
Too often we gauge our productivity in terms of "chronos" rather than training ourselves to be attentive to "kairos". Recently published research, "Time and Organizational Improvisation" argues that improvisation is an ideal basis for a synthesis of chronos and kairos, "blending conflicting concepts such as planning and acting, discipline and freedom, control and spontaneity."
Focusing on time solely as chronos distracts from the creative power of kairos. I look forward to discovering the kairos of 2009 in ways we have not yet imagined.
Happy New Year!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
