Showing posts with label management. Show all posts
Showing posts with label management. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 23, 2013

"Profit from the Positive" - Margaret Greenberg & Senia Maymin | Talks at Google


Margaret Greenberg & Senia Maymin stopped by Talks at Google to promote their new book, Profit from the Positive: Proven Leadership Strategies to Boost Productivity and Transform Your Business. Their book translates scientific research on positive psychology into practical tools we can apply to how we manage ourselves, how we lead, and how we influence our colleagues. Sounds interesting.

Margaret Greenberg & Senia Maymin, "Profit from the Positive" | Talks at Google


Published on Oct 21, 2013


Think back to a moment when you got a piece of really good news.

You felt unstoppable, productive, elated.

Now imagine that feeling at work. Imagine bringing that positivity to your teams and unlocking new heights of productivity and satisfaction.

Join us for translation of scientific research on positive psychology into practical tools we can apply to how we manage ourselves, how we lead, and how we influence our colleagues.

Margaret H. Greenberg and Senia Maymin, Ph.D., will discuss their new book, Profit from the Positive: Proven Leadership Strategies to Boost Productivity and Transform Your Business (McGraw-Hill).

In this session, the authors will share memorable tools that are ingeniously fast and simple. You will walk out saying, "Why didn't I know this before?"
  • Introduction by Mary Kate Stimmler of Pi Lab
  • Hosted by Debbie Newhouse and Dolores Bernardo
  • Authors@Google and Google Manager Programs
~ "Greenberg and Maymin--pioneers in the application of Positive Psychology to organizations--have built an exciting and important bridge...." — Adam Grant, Wharton professor and New York Times bestselling author of Give and Take

Saturday, September 15, 2012

Matthew Kálmán Mezey on "Clumsy Leadership," Cultural Theory, and Development



RSA Chief Executive, Matthew Taylor, recently gave his annual lecture (on 12th September) with an accompanying article in RSA Journal. Matthew Kálmán Mezey, the RSA's Online Community Manager, wrote a fairly long and detailed response to the lecture, essentially (this is going for the nutshell summary) asking Taylor if he is serious about creating conditions for people to increase their development (and by this Mezey is generally referring to Robert Kegan's model of cognitive development, which is only one line among many), and if so, how he would envision doing so?

[Let's ignore, for now, the whole thorny issue of "development," such as what it is, does it actually exist, is it an inherent predisposition, as often suggested in integral theory, or is it an evolutionary adaptation to life conditions, and is it morally and ethically right to "develop" people without a full disclosure of the what, why, and how?]

Taylor spoke about Cultural Theory (he calls it the "theory of plural rationality") in his lecture (using the recent example of the Olympics) and the idea that we need "clumsy" leadership to get us through some of the incredibly difficult problems we face, what Keith Grint calls "wicked problems":
A Wicked Problem is more complex, rather than just complicated – that is, it cannot be removed from its environment, solved, and returned without affecting the environment. Moreover, there is no clear relationship between cause and effect. Such problems are often intractable....
Cultural Theory advocates for "clumsy solutions" to these types of problems, since normal solution-focused thinking is no longer useful at this level. A "clumsy" solution involves, by Taylor's account, "the three active rationalities of hierarchy, egalitarianism, and individualism (as well as recognising the fourth, passive, rationality of fatalism)." Furthermore,
Leaders who can be part of developing clumsy solutions to wicked problems are likely to have reached an advanced level of awareness not just of the tasks, context and stakeholders but of themselves and – crucially – of the perspectives of others using different frames of rationality.

But lest this seem merely like an elitist’s call for a new generation of enlightened leaders it is important to recognise that leadership is also about followership.

Mezey suggests that "clumsy" leadership is roughly equivalent to Robert Kegan's self-transforming stage (the highest stage he has identified, which exists in less than 1% of the population). Using Jonathan Haidt as an (flawed, in my opinion) example, he ponders whether the 16 years it took Haidt, by his own account, to move from an intellectual awareness of multiple perspectives to actually living a post-partisan perspective (again, his account - he appears to have a conservative bias when I hear him speak without a script) is a possible norm for "growing" people.

Haidt is a poor example for another reason - his life is that of an academic and author. Such a life offers much greater opportunity for growth, and time for speculation, than that of a government official or a corporate CEO. Nor do the rest of us who work for a living have the freedom Haidt likely enjoys.

Anyway. There are links to a lot of good articles and books in this article, and I highly recommend it (although, it assumes some working knowledge of leadership, integral theory (especially Robert Kegan, but also some Spiral Dynamics), and Cultural Theory (the links to Matthew Taylor's article provide a good foundation).

Finally, Mezey offers a variety of options for engaging programs that may stimulate growth in people, and solutions are what we need. Among his suggestions are the following:
  • Launch a research project to uncover how commonplace the Self-transforming/Clumsy mind actually is. 
Eg across the UK, in organisations, in different professions, in Government depts, in No. 10 Downing Street, in the RSA...
  • Undertake a literature review/metanalysis of all interventions which have fostered positive adult growth (towards 'Clumsiness').
How many have successfully fostered development to the Socialised (traditional) stage, how many to the Self-authoring (modern) stage, how many to the Self-transforming - Clumsy - stage? Which ones appear valid and replicable? Could we help any to become widespread?
  • Produce a template to help active citizens create ‘Clumsy’ solutions
A toolkit to help active citizens to uncover how each of the three Cultural Theory rationalities would view any issue, followed by guidance on how to mesh them together to build a powerful and sustainable ‘Clumsy’ solution. (NB Cultural Theory sometimes adds in Fatalism and the Hermit as additional rationalities).
  • Start testing out the collaborative/organisational approaches - such as ‘Future Search’ - that Cultural Theory has assessed as being most ‘Clumsy’
An excellent - though, of course, challengeable - Cultural Theory paper by Steven Ney and Marco Verweij is titled Messy Institutions for Wicked Problems: How to Generate Clumsy Solutions. It looks at a number of approaches to collaboration, strategising and decision-making in organisations to see which ones are most ‘Clumsy’/’Messy’(ie does it honour the 4 or 5 Cultural Theory lenses?).

Candidate approaches researched include Open Space, Soft Systems Methodology, Citizen’s Juries, Bohm Dialogues, Future Search, Wisdom Circles and the Learning Organisation. (It assesses 19 in all).

The most Clumsy/Messy - and potentially Self-transforming - is Future Search, with others like Design Thinking and 21st Century Town Meetings coming close too. Bohm Dialogue, Learning Organisation and Open Space are some of the approaches that only honour one of the rationalities, and so are far from integrative and ‘Clumsy’. (I’m not the only one who might quibble with some of this - but it’s a great step forward to scan the current tools being used in organisations, from NGOs to corporations, and to analyse which are most integrative/Clumsy).
  • Begin to assess government policy proposals to see whether they are integrative and ‘clumsy’, or not.
Use Ney and Verweij’s assessment approach - above - but apply it to proposed Government policies.

Another angle on this might be to undertake a before and after adult developmental stage assessment, to see if policies are fostering the growth of ‘Self-authoring’ minds (as the OECD said was so important in the 21st century - see Beyond the Big Society) or Self-transforming minds.
  • A booklet featuring the key proponents of the different models of plural rationalities outlining how their approach has successfully dealt with - or could deal with - a particular ‘wicked’ issue.
An edited collection of short articles could showcase approaches such as:
- Cultural Theory’s plural rationalities
- Jonathan Haidt’s moral matrices
- Prof Robert Kegan’s ways of knowing
- Prof Clare Graves/Spiral Dynamics’ ‘Value memes’
- Mark Williams’ ‘10 Lenses’ (actually there are really 11, as he has a clumsy/integrative one too).
- Pat Dade’s 12 ‘Values Modes’ (with its three Maslowian top-level categories of ‘Sustenance Driven’, ‘Outer Directed’ and ‘Inner Directed’)
- Torbert/Loevinger/Cook-Greuter ‘Action Logics’/Ego stages
- Lawrence Kohlberg’s moral stages
- Ken Wilber’s integral approach (though this is an integration, rather than a single model)

(And potentially many others too: Michael Commons, William Perry, Belenky et al, Hall-Tonna, Richard Barrett, King and Kitchener, Marcia Baxter Magolda etc).

I don’t think any publication like this has been attempted before - and it could be very helpful indeed to policy-makers - offering some really fresh thinking on ‘Wicked’ issues.

  • Support ‘Clumsy’ leaders, help them to stay - and grow - inside their organisations
A new ‘Clumsy’ leaders network might help, and I’m sure Jennifer Garvey Berger isn’t the only person who’s thought about how to support Self-transforming/clumsy individuals so that they don’t leave their organisations - where their input could be unique and valuable. (This might make a good topic for a research project). The idea that organisational culture often acts as a sorting mechanism to drive away the very people who might be able to succeed with ‘Wicked’ issues is pretty troubling.

Another place to look for ways to turn organisations into supportive and deliberately transformational institutions might be in the work on schools by Eleanor Drago-Severson. Her wonderful 2009 book
Leading Adult Learning: Supporting Adult Development in Our Schools is a pioneering look at how school leaders can foster the adult development of their staff by understanding developmental diversity, in order that their schools be the most effective for their students.

Ellie describes 4 practices that schools - and any other organisation - can use to support adult transformation and growth:

- Teaming
- Providing Leadership Roles
- Collegial inquiry
- Mentoring

Of course, it may even turn out that the late Elliot Jaques was right all along with his rather prescriptive and hierarchical vision of a ‘Requisite Organisation’ that is designed to reflect, engage and support the different stages of cognitive complexity of staff. (Part of the problem might be that Jaquesians have never properly reworked his model for the world of knowledge-based work?)

  • From Alpha Course… to Genesis Course - spreading transformation across the UK and beyond
The RSA’s Beyond the Big Society report called for ‘transformational learning hubs which run training exercises for community leaders’.
 
One way I envisage to do this would be to create a secularised, transformational equivalent of the Alpha Course, complete with shared meals - and an active citizenship focus.

The Alpha Course has proven hugely popular with its 'opportunity to explore the meaning of life': it has attracted 3 million participants in the UK, and 15 million worldwide. I think some don’t - initially - even fully realise its Christian basis. It now runs in churches, homes, workplaces, prisons, universities and elsewhere.


Could there be a way fuse citizens’ skills, self-development, effectiveness and community engagement (and ‘Social Brain’ reflexivity) into a deliberately transformational 10-week course, that could spread across the 100 countries that have RSA Fellows?
I particularly like the idea of "wicked problems" pamphlets with solutions offered by many or most of the folks Mezey identifies above. These white papers could be very influential if given enough publicity and put in the hands of sympathetic leaders in various fields.


I also like the idea of generating a template for local leaders or organizers to generate clumsy solutions for wicked problems at the local level, which maybe then can be scaled up to the next bigger level, and so on. Bottom-up approaches, at least in the U.S., tend to work very well (witness the highly organized GOP takeover of school boards, local government, state government, and then for much of the last 45 years, the White House).



One idea I would like to see is some way to identify those people with the most power to create change and cultural shifts, however many that may be - from 10 or 15 to possibly 500. Then create an assessment that could easily identify their stage according to Kegan's model, with the goal of identifying those who may be already in position, developmentally, to implement these "clumsy solutions" so that they can be given information and a meta-framework for understanding these ideas.


My sense is that there are thousands of people in powerful positions who, if they could be shown the importance of greater depth and wider span in their leadership methods, would already be in position to generate considerable change very quickly.


But I am, strangely, an optimist.


For more information

These are some of the links offered in the body of the article:

Monday, August 13, 2012

Dylan Evans - Risk Intelligence: How to live with uncertainty


Dylan Evens is an expert in "risk intelligence," a kind of intelligence that is not correlated with IQ and is often difficult to identify because those who possess it are working in fields as diverse as weather-forecasting, professional poker players, and hedge-fund managers. According to Evans, "Many people in positions which require high risk intelligence - doctors, financial regulators and bankers - seem unable to navigate doubt and uncertainty."

Evans (along with Benjamin Jakobus) is the founder of Projection Point, a team of consultants based in the US, Europe, and Australia "who help a wide variety of organizations to manage and sustain risk intelligence." He is the author of Risk Intelligence: How to Live with Uncertainty.

Risk Intelligence: How to live with uncertainty

5th Jul 2012

Listen to the audio

(full recording including audience Q&A) - Please right-click link and choose "Save Link As..." to download audio file onto your computer.

Watch the video (edited highlights)

RSA Thursday

In an age of global uncertainty it has become increasingly difficult to work out what exactly should be done next.

There is a special kind of intelligence for dealing with risk and uncertainty. It doesn't correlate with IQ and most psychologists fail to spot it because it is found in such a disparate, rag-tag group of people such as weather-forecasters, professional gamblers and hedge-fund managers. Many people in positions which require high risk intelligence - doctors, financial regulators and bankers - seem unable to navigate doubt and uncertainty.

Risk intelligence expert Dylan Evans visits the RSA to provide a traveller's guide to the twilight zone of probabilities and speculation, arguing that we can all learn a lot from expert gamblers, not just about money,  but in areas as diverse as dealing with climate change to combating terrorism.

Speaker: Dylan Evans, founder, Projection Point, a global leader in risk intelligence solutions.

Chair: Julian Thompson, director of enterprise, RSA.

See what people said on Twitter: #RSArisk

Get the latest RSA Audio

Subscribe to RSA Audio iTunes Podcast iTunes | RSA Audio RSS Feed RSS | RSA Mixcloud page Mixcloud

Thursday, April 07, 2011

Peter Kruse Has Developed a Tool to Tap into the Intuitive Beliefs that Drive Social Change

This interesting article comes from Think Quarterly - a periodic (quarterly, it seems) book project by Google for its partners and advertisers. This first issue, or Book #1, is called Think Data - and it has an interesting assortment of articles.

Like most companies, Google regularly communicates with our business customers via email newsletters, updates on our official blogs, and printed materials.

On this occasion, we've sent a short book about data, called Think Quarterly, to a small number of our UK partners and advertisers. You're now on the companion website, thinkquarterly.co.uk (also available at m.thinkquarterly.co.uk, if you're on the move).

We're flattered by the positive reaction but have no plans to start selling copies! Although Think Quarterly remains firmly aimed at Google's partners and advertisers, if you're interested in the subject of data then please feel free to read on...

Get Think Quarterly 01 for eReaders and other devices:
Download EPUB version or Download PDF version

In addition to this piece by Peter Kruse, there is also an interesting article by Hans Rosling: A Data State of Mind.

Soft Values, Hard Facts

Peter Kruse has developed a tool that can tap into the intuitive beliefs that drive social change. By accessing the parts other data can’t reach, it offers you the most valuable insight of all: what’s coming next.

peter-kruse

Words by Ulrike Reinhard
Photography by Jonnek Jonnekson

Professor Peter Kruse is the founder and CEO of nextpractice, based in Bremen, Germany. Alongside a team of psychologists, economists, sociologists, computer scientists and designers, he develops customised management tools to support entrepreneurial decision-making and empower collective intelligence. Using the ‘nextexpertizer’ tool, Kruse is able to access the collective intuition of groups, revealing the hidden value patterns underpinning social change. The data that emerges enables us to answer the question: what’s next?

We produce so much data every day that it is becoming difficult to generate genuine insights. How can we use these data streams more efficiently?

The biggest challenge is to reduce complexity by detecting meaningful patterns. Otherwise the risk of sudden and dangerous breakdowns – like the financial crisis we’ve just recovered from – is far too high.

So the question is how to get the right data. Using customers, citizens and other experts as detectors for relevant information maximises complexity reduction in data analysis. This is where the nextexpertizer method comes in.

The mantra of nextpractice is ‘A Matter of Fact in a World of Values’. What does this mean?

In established methods of collecting data, like standardised questionnaires and predefined scales, people give their judgments on the basis of hopefully intelligent questions and simple categories like ‘yes’ and ‘no’, multiple choice, ranking, etc. The respondent can only add value when the intentions of the interviewer are decoded correctly.

But language is a very tricky phenomenon, so the first difficulty to be tackled is the problem of semantics, which adds a lot of noise to every measurement. The second problem is a direct consequence of the first. Interpretation of language is a mainly conscious process that isn’t well connected with a person’s intuitive knowledge and unconscious valuations, which are crucial for complexity reduction.