Work

business & working

The all too real effects of artificial structures

by

Stephen Downes says that teams are a fiction that purport to represent everyone when in fact they reflect only a select subset of opinions [such as the team leader?].

Liong Huai Yu, highlights this quote in his review of Dave Weinberger’s Everything is Miscellaneous – “The world is too diverse for any single classification system to work for everyone in every culture at every time.”

Classification systems, like teams, are artificial structures. Liong goes on to compare Weinberger’s premises with education:

To bring the discussion further from what is discussed in the book, what are the artificial structures and organisational methods have we put in our schools? Artificial subject segregation, timetabling and even teacher-specialisation. As we move forward facing new challenges, fighting regional and global competitions, we may have to re-examine the structures we have in place, as most of the time, these structures were created for a world that was last century. Also, are they benefiting the users (both students and teachers) the way it set out to be.

Any change initiative or attempt at systems improvement has little chance of success if you don’t take the time and effort to really examine the underlying structures. All of our management models and organisational structures are artificial structures and we have the collective intelligence to change them. Usually what is standing in the way are the vested interests of those with power and the all too powerful ingrained culture that we take for granted.

Remembering that it’s all artificial may be a good first step in seeing with new eyes.

Useless industrial artifacts

by

I came across two articles about public education yesterday, one is four years old, the other quite recent.

Here’s a snippet from a long article Why Nerds are Unpopular (2003):

Public school teachers are in much the same position as prison wardens. Wardens’ main concern is to keep the prisoners on the premises. They also need to keep them fed, and as far as possible prevent them from killing one another. Beyond that, they want to have as little to do with the prisoners as possible, so they leave them to create whatever social organization they want. From what I’ve read, the society that the prisoners create is warped, savage, and pervasive, and it is no fun to be at the bottom of it.

The main problem is the system, which creates prison-like conditions, and in the case of this article shows why “nerds” may be so successful in life but are unsuccessful at the school game, and this is what happens:

In almost any group of people you’ll find hierarchy. When groups of adults form in the real world, it’s generally for some common purpose, and the leaders end up being those who are best at it. The problem with most schools is, they have no purpose. But hierarchy there must be. And so the kids make one out of nothing.

We have a phrase to describe what happens when rankings have to be created without any meaningful criteria. We say that the situation degenerates into a popularity contest. And that’s exactly what happens in most American schools. Instead of depending on some real test, one’s rank depends mostly on one’s ability to increase one’s rank. It’s like the court of Louis XIV. There is no external opponent, so the kids become one another’s opponents.

From Mark Federman is this 2007 case of a high-performing student caught in the feudal power of the classroom:

To me, this is another sad case of a burnt-out, small-minded teacher conveying the well-rehearsed lesson that school is the place in which a love of learning and the value of curiosity, discovery and insightful, abstract thought are to be trampled beyond recognition. These are substituted instead by a discipline that enforces compliance, conformity, and intellectual docility, rewarding the mediocre to create a compliant, easily distracted citizenry for the benefit of the elites.

So why is a workplace performance specialist so interested in public school? One reason, of course, is that I have two children in the system, for now. The more important reason is that almost all workers have come through the public school system. If graduates, especially the high performing ones, are already bitter and jaded, how do you think they’ll react to a training program that mirrors what they had in school?

Courses not related to something that they will need to use tomorrow morning on the job show that management has no real interest in employee performance. They’re just going through the motions.

Performance evaluations not based on observable and measurable criteria will be viewed the same way as school report cards; a popularity or a compliance contest.

Perhaps the best way to change the school system is to set the example by divesting our workplaces of all of the useless artifacts of the industrial age. For instance, how would a Results-Oriented Work Environment (ROWE) translate into our education system?

A six-day work week – for students

by

Most people have a five-day work week.  Now, I know that many people work more than the 35, 37 or even 40 hours per week mandated in their contract, and that it’s common to work through breaks and lunch to get the job done.

I would surmise though, that most of us feel that a five-day work week is about enough to be doing your employer’s work.  So why do we give our kids a six-day work week? From September unti June, students spend pretty well one day of the weekend on homework. This is work that “someone else” feels is important. I can see doing some self-directed activities, or perhaps the infrequent project on the weekend, but my observations show that most high school students have a six-day work week. This is on top of 8 to 12 hour work-days, Monday to Friday.

Come on, there’s more to life than school and we should all start raising a fuss [that’s why I’m raising this issue again]. Do we really want to have kids who know how to do nothing else other than what their teachers tell them to do?

How can they become self-directed learners when they’re too busy being directed by teachers?

Blogging for work

by

Do you enjoy reading this blog? Has it ever helped you out with your work? Do you consider it a dependable source of information?

I’ve been writing this blog for over three years and while many of the benefits are personal, the number of visitors indicates that there’s something of interest for others as well. This site is advertisement-free but I still have to pay the bills, and as you probably know, I’m self-employed.

Times are a bit slow in the consulting business so I’m asking my readership for some help. If you’re so inclined, take a look at my consulting services and see if you know of anyone who could benefit from them. I have a fairly wide array of clients and projects. Pass on my name if you like. I’d also appreciate any advice on how I present my services. Maybe I’m missing something here.

What about sponsorship? Would it bother anyone if I sought a sponsor for this blog? Do you know of any company that would like to sponsor this blog? I can share my stats data if someone is interested.

I’ve had some suggestions about other ways to offer services and I’ll float them here in the next while. This blog, my business and life in general is all a work in progress. I intend to keep on learning through more and better conversations and I’ll keep on blogging for as long as I can.

Business Plans in 2009

by

Three years ago, Seth Godin wrote about what the future might hold in 2009 and I wondered how this would change anyone’s business plan. We’re more than half way there, so are these assumptions coming true?

There is no doubt that hard drive space is getting cheaper, and Gmail’s 2.8 GB of free space is a good indication. It sure is getting harder to sell storage space.

Wi-fi connections are not everywhere but many of us wish they were. Some cities are more advanced than others, but my recent travels to the US and larger Canadian cities found it to be expensive, whereas I can get free wi-fi down the street in our small town.

Yes, it seems that everyone has a digital camera or at least one on their cell phone.

Connection speeds have improved (mine have doubled) but it will be a great leap to be 10 to 100 times faster.

I’m not sure about Wal*Mart’s sales but at least the company is going to opt for compact fluorescent lightbulbs.

Compulsory retirement ages seem to be a thing of the past and I think that they will be gone in a few years,. When I was in the military, the compulsory retirement age was 55 and in 2004 it was raised to 60. There is little doubt that this trend will continue.

As for the assumption that our current professions will be gone or totally different, I believe that change will be uneven. In my own area of experience, I think that Instructional Design as a field will all but disappear.

So what does this mean for business plans?

  1. Don’t try to build another #$%* portal, because people have lots of places to put their stuff and they are getting information from a whole bunch of sources. Think small pieces, loosely joined.
  2. Anywhere can be a hotspot so adding wi-fi just might get some interesting people to gather around you and that’s what’s really important.
  3. All of those digital pictures are looking for a place to be shared. They might even improve your organisation’s learning about itself and its environment.
  4. Remember those folks that you thought would leave with all their knowledge? Well, they’re not leaving, or they’re probably interested in a new relationship, so get them while you can.
  5. Job? What’s a job?

Un-consulting

by

My friend and business colleague, Hal Richman, and I have worked on a couple of projects and have submitted various proposals over the past few years.  We are always looking at how we can do meaningful work but sometimes feel like we’re just submitting one more report that will gather dust.

Hal sent me this explanation of his new work offer, which significantly differs from the traditional “deliver & disappear” consulting strategy. I like it.

Kurt Lewin (1890 – 1947) was a German-born psychologist who earned the title the father of social psychology.

Lewin was one of the first researchers to study group dynamics and organizational development in practical settings. His vision about what people could become in their lives has always impressed me. This vision is threaded in his dense academic writings, as well as his work as a problem solver and founder.

During WWII, Lewin worked with Margaret Mead on the National Research Council’s Committee on Food Habits to determine how the government could prevent hoarding, make rationing work, and feed the Allies during and after the war. Following the war Lewin was involved, along with Dr Jacob Fine at Harvard Medical School, in the psychological rehabilitation of former occupants of displaced persons camps and was requested by the Connecticut State Inter Racial Commission to find an effective way to combat racial and religious prejudices. In 1947 he established the National Training Laboratories in Bethel, Maine.

Lewin had an insatiable curiosity and refused to be pigeon-holed. People came to him with diverse problems because of his diverse background when conventional solutions to problems either do not work or simply did not exist. They didn’t know what to do; however, they did know they needed someone who could look at the problem with a new set of eyes, from several perspectives, and come up with a practical, innovative solution.

Lewin has been one of my most constant role-models for the past 35 years. I haven’t been satisfied to have one career, one challenge in life. And, I’ve found that my diverse background has helped me help myself and others.

Like Lewin, I’ve had many people come to me to solve things, start things, to run things.

Perhaps you are frustrated that the lack of time may mean passing up on a great opportunity. Maybe your firm (or one you have acquired) needs a turn-around, has a great team but can’t get them coordinated or needs a new strategy and direction. Or, maybe you’re temporarily over your head, slogging through a swamp and looking for a way out.

That’s when my company is most welcome. I’ve got some time and I’m an excellent swamp navigator.

A few months ago I was thinking of investing in an ecotourism firm but decided that it needed a turn-around first. As I stood up to leave the table, the owner jumped up from his seat and said “You can’t go,  I need you!” I am now providing hands-on management services for financial planning and control, strategy and metrics, systems selection and implementation and marketing communications.

Tell me about your challenge, your opportunity. Let me jump in with you – not as a disinterested consultant but in the trenches with you – excited, adrenalin pumping, burning the midnight oil.

I have over 20 years of experience as an entrepreneur and a problem solver for small and large organizations. Let me bring a new perspective to a problem, different experiences to bear on the objective.

As a free-agent, this model is viable. You have the option of committing totally to a project or a client without the overhead and billable hours concerns of consulting workshops.

I also know several others who have this perspective, much experience, and are willing to commit. Does this interest you? Need committed help with a thorny problem? Give us a call.

“The life, and death, of Canadian Startups”

by

Got a startup or know of one in Canada? Tell the folks at StartupNorth:

StartupNorth is a project to review Canadian startups and to build a community of users who are passionate about building great companies in Canada.

The community is still in its infancy, but it looks like it could become  a great place for interesting business conversations.  There are only a few companies listed so far, including a previous client of mine, YourTeamOnline.

An alternative to corporatism

by

A while back I said that I believe that the great work to be done at the beginning of this century is to create new organisational models that reflect our humanity. Our current business models don’t serve the people, only a very small group at the top. Corporatism is only helping the rich get richer:

“In 1980, the average corporate CEO earned 42 times as much as the average worker. In 1998, the average corporate CEO earned 419 times as much as the average worker. Today, the average Fortune 500 CEO earns 443 times as much as Hourly workers in their companies.”

The corporation as an entity has outlived its usefulness for humanity, and it’s time to find an alternative. This overview from a study guide for the documentary The Corporation, clearly shows the symptoms of a dysfunctional system:

“If the corporation can be viewed legally as ‘a person’ then why not socially? Actual internationally recognized diagnostic criteria are used to judge the behaviour of corporations and the picture that emerges is one of the corporation as self-interested, inherently amoral, callous and deceitful; it breaches social and legal standards to get its way; it does not suffer from guilt, yet it can mimic the human qualities of empathy, caring and altruism. Four case studies, drawn from a universe of corporate activity, are used to demonstrate harm to workers, human health, animals and the biosphere.”

It’s time to test out alternatives to corporate governance models in the private and public and social sectors. Dave Pollard has written an excellent article on how we can use the natural enterprise model to create sustainable ways of wealth generation, because our current models sure aren’t working:

“The whole capitalist system is a miserable failure, and it’s only the corporatists’ control of the media (and hence their ability to brainwash us into believing the system actually works), that has kept us from rising up and dismantling it.

Well, actually that’s not the only thing keeping us from overthrowing it: We don’t know what to replace it with. Socialist systems don’t seem to work. Totalitarian fascist systems certainly don’t work. So now we’re indoctrinated into believing that there are no other systems, and that we’re stuck with the capitalist (or more accurately, corporatist) system that is destroying our world (and eliminating the middle class in the process).” – Dave Pollard

Dave proposes three types of public organisations – Directorates, Auditors, and Agencies. Each with its responsibilities, limitations and controls.  This reminds me of the US model of legislative, executive, and judiciary authority or the Canadian version of Crown, Commons, and Senate. Recent events in both countries show that we need to create new models, as the old ones get corrupted over time.

One place to start is at the local level, where we can have greater influence and perhaps see faster development of new models. This includes getting involved in local riding policy-making, testing organisations like a work commons or co-work space, and ensuring that local politicians understand the underlying systemic issues plaguing our society. As Dave says, “We have to do better. The old models don’t work, any of them. It’s time to try something new.“

Emergent complexity from social networks

by

If I was an employee, I’d want to have someone like Ross Mayfield as my boss. He really understands the way that work is changing. I came across this good (but too short) ZD Net interview on Web 2.0 for the enterprise via Jay Cross.

In a panel interview, Ross Mayfield starts by saying that collaborative work tools must be simple to be effective. The real complexity comes out of the emergent social network, not in the software on which it’s based. Over-engineering for complex social (work) environments seems to be counterproductive. Ross also says that automating processes won’t give you any sustainable competitive advantages either, because others will be able to replicate these processes just as well. Where social tools, like wikis, have an impact is in changing the corporate culture. In a more transparent and collaborative work environment, powered by collaborative web-based tools, information hoarding is punished and sharing is rewarded. The workplace changes.

The most memorable line is when Ross shows the disconnect between the new world of work and the old world of education; “These are the people who did their homework on MySpace, and it was called cheating, and then they come to the enterprise and it’s called collaboration”.

The times they are a changin’

Here are Ross Mayfield’s own words, following up from the ZD Net “sound bite”:

Blogs and Wikis are inherently more transparent than email, where 90% of collaboration occurs.  Users are first gaining exposure to these tools as consumers, within consumer culture.  The default in that culture with these tools is transparency and sharing.  Corporate cultures vary. I can say that we see earlier adoption by corporations with healthy cultures and management practices such as 360 degree reviews, and adoption practices matter.  But it should be noted that consumer culture spills over to corporate culture.  And because this culture shift aids practice building, I’d assert that these tools will trend us towards transparency.

Training, for all that ails you

by

“Canadian companies aren’t spending enough on training,” said the announcer on the radio this morning. My first thought was that we would never hear the news that we weren’t spending enough on bandages in our healthcare system. Once again, the mass media and the so-called experts get it wrong. It makes you wonder if there’s a training industry lobby out there.

According to the Conference Board of Canada:

“Canadian organizations are under increasing pressure, due to a tight labour market and competitive demands, to renew and upgrade workers’ skills. Building workers skills through training, learning and development is one way for organizations to compete. Yet, TLD spending in Canada is stagnant,” said Michael Bloom, Vice-President, Organizational Effectiveness and Learning.

Read in its entirety, this makes sense, as TLD is only one way to improve performance. There are many other ways and usually training is the most expensive method. I’ve noticed that many large organisations have a tendency to slap on the training bandaid once any problem has been labelled a human performance issue. It seems that the media and research institutes reinforce this behaviour. However, training that is not directly related to developing specific skills and knowledge wastes time, bores workers and costs money.

This is not the first, nor the second, but the third time that I have heard our national broadcaster report the unfounded notion that training can solve unrelated performance problems. This is the same as prescribing medication without a diagnosis. Of course I don’t really blame the CBC, because it is getting this misinformation from our training and learning “experts”. The snake oil salesmen have jumped on the Conference Board report and are demanding that companies spend more on training. That would be a costly mistake.

I also noticed from the Conference Board’s report that informal learning is actually being mentioned:

Informal learning, which is not well tracked or monitored, may be occurring more frequently. Respondents said 42 per cent of all learning occurs informally.

I get the sinking feeling that informal learning will soon be commoditized by the TLD industry and sold like training currently is – as a solution looking for a problem.

To read the complete report you would have to spend $975 to find out what many of us already know. Training is a means (one of several, not limited to learning & development), while performance is the real goal.