Moving From Me To We BlogMoving From Me To We Blog

What Most Matters to You Now?

To jumpstart your new year in these roiling times, consider this: “When the economy tanks it’s natural to think of yourself first. You have a family to feed and a mortgage to pay. Getting more appears to be the order of business. It turns out that the connected economy doesn’t respect this natural instinct. Instead, we’re rewarded for being generous. Generous with our time and money, but most important generous with our art.” ~ Seth Godin 

Here’s my three-step approach to put that notion into practice in this ever more Connected Age (please tell me what you think):

1. Discover your main talent (Marcus Buckingham) and re-design your work and life to use it more often.

2. Constantly keep an eye out for problems and opportunities in your profession, market  – or in your life.

3. Recruit the mix of people who can collectively seize that opportunity or provide the solution to that problem.

In short: We’ll get better at methods that create more value, working together  – as a satisfying way of helping each other. That may be the most efficient and satisfying way to generate more value for our work and more meaning in our lives.

With the right team we can accomplish something greater with others than you can alone.  

Reminder: To be most helpful when being generous, adopt the Golden Golden Rule: Do unto others, not as you would have done unto you, but rather as they would have done unto them.

Two Predictions: 2010 will be the year of…

 1. Vastly increased collaboration everywhere. We may stumble but we will pick ourselves up, be more daring, supportive of strong partners –  and we will try more often, experimenting until we get it right: Right methods + right team.  Look for Peter Sims’ next bookLittle Bets.

 2. Quickly-formed project teams.  Some teams will bond and seek more projects. Others will go bust, most likely because of the power of the weakest link.  (Motivation to participate dissipates when one person does not pull his weight and Rules of Engagement were not in place, upfront, to include the rule for graciously booting non-performers off the island.)

Oh and you may want to download What Matters Now, Seth’s free 82-page e-book with contributions from some 70 bright contributors, from Wired editor, Chris Anderson to Eat Pray Love author Elizabeth Gilbert and Dan and Chip Heath, authors of Made to Stick. Then learn how to lead online communities (with pithy advice from those who are) in another e-book created by J.C. Hutchins – Nick of Time.

Categories: behavior, collaboration, Collective Memory and tagged , , , , , , , .
Bookmark the permalink.

Post a Comment.

3 Comments

  1. Michael Yanakiev
    Posted January 2, 2010 at 9:07 am | Permalink

    Kare,
    This is an extremely challenging and provocative post! You and your colleagues
    have assembled a splendid collection of great ideas to celebrate the holiday season by creating a mental adventure as an agenda to think about in 2010, dissolving the problems that form the backbone of the “What Matters” project.
    The guiding Gem is what, Margaret Mead prophetically stated as “A small group of
    thoughtful, concerned citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that no one else ever has.” Sounds great, but let us not forget that our
    bank of innovative ideas and best practices is sliding on a rather slippery surface that should not be underestimated under any circumstances. It is a sound idea to be prepared to meet the unexpected ,without thinking about the eventual consequences.
    be underestimated under any circumstances.
    Why the use of best practice can be dangerous and misleading

    Best practices are a ridiculous way of learning about the world because their rote application is similar to sympathetic magic. It’s like building a model of something, building a doll that has a likeness of something else, and hoping that the effects will transfer.
    Reproducing similar types of interventions in a different contexts is dangerous and naive unless you have an understanding of what the context was, how the intervention interacted with it, and why the effect occurred.
    The notion that one can directly apply interventions to reproduce outcome phenomena without an understanding of the underlying mechanism is ignorant unless you’re dealing with a deterministic physical or chemical system. Most of the interactions that matter in our lives aren’t deterministic however (some of the really important ones aren’t even probabilistic), so it’s time we stopped behaving like they were. To be effective we need to start to moving away from “best practice” models and towards what Dave Snowden calls “theory driven practice”.
    The “T word”
    A lot of my experience in corporate and government consulting is that there is an anti-intellectual relationship to true understanding. Most big organisations, be they private or public, have a very uncomfortable relationship to theory.
    This is why people want practice; best practice. “Just show me something that works.” Unfortunately our social and organizational lives take place in domains that are complex, dynamic and interactive. Simply reproducing something that works in one place and re-applying it somewhere else can be a naive and dangerous thing to do.
    Even in the same organization, if one were to try to re-apply an intervention that worked once at a different time, it would produce different results because the component parts and the relationships which constitute it have changed. Furthermore, the relationship between the organization and its environment will have changed as well. So the imposition of the intervention is not only likely to fail, but likely to produce entirely unpredictable and surprising results.
    This is probably one reason why so many change efforts fail in large organization. Many “change efforts” are lead by the big consulting firms, who take “best practice” examples from a few textbook cases or from other clients and then re-purpose them from one company to another, ad infinite, at a healthy profit.
    This would work fine if organizations were like machines – machines for which we had the blueprints – and if changing one lever would produce the same effect every time you pulled it.
    The reality is that our most important interactions take place in social and ecological systems for which we don’t have blueprints. And not only do we not have blueprints, even if we did, they would be changing over time and space and the very act of our looking at them would alter them.
    This is bad news for the anti-intellectuals (and the football captain consultants). It means that if you really want to produce an outcome effect, you have to understand the underlying mechanisms and systems of which it is a part. In other words, you have to understand the theory.
    Theory-driven practice, in practice, equals awareness?
    Once one engages with the concept of theory-driven practice, however – as soon as one understands that you have to actually understand the underlying dynamics and interactions to understand why actions produce certain outcomes – the situation becomes even more sticky.
    Why? Because we live in one giant complex adaptive system, with many different interacting actors with different levels of awareness, connectedness and influence, pursuing different agendas at different times, resulting in a constantly evolving landscape of interaction and causality.
    Taken literally, this means that sometimes there actually isn’t a direct relationship between cause and effect in many of the cases that matter most to us. Most big events in the social world are mutually causal, which means that they cannot be predicted. The landscape is constantly evolving, which means they cannot be repeated, and we labor under structurally uncertain, which means we cannot predict the effects of our actions. This is what the term co-evolution really means.
    All this means that our governments, companies and organizations really aren’t like big machines, and that the theory required to interact with them effectively requires a fundamental re-assessment of the very notion of concepts such as “best practice”. The only responsible thing that one can do when operating in this domain is to test, sense, interpret, theorize, test, sense, interpret, theorize, etc., all the while producing highly specific and temporally contingent local results (again, hat tip to Snowden and the sense-making guys for this terminology).
    From a consulting or management standpoint, this means that every single case is unique, every single case is different, and the process of interaction, exploration and co-creation has to be undertaken at every step, with every client and at every stage, in a unique and bespoke manner.
    That is why it is important to take a theory-driven approach, drawing from the evidence and theories of complex adaptive systems, to any social or organizational change effort. That is why it is important to use tools which recognize structural uncertainty and works best in dynamic environments. And that is why best practices can be dangerous and deceptive, and why theory-driven practice is the only responsible philosophy which a manager should follow.

  2. Michael Yanakiev
    Posted January 2, 2010 at 9:07 am | Permalink

    Kare,
    This is an extremely challenging and provocative post! You and your colleagues
    have assembled a splendid collection of great ideas to celebrate the holiday season by creating a mental adventure as an agenda to think about in 2010, dissolving the problems that form the backbone of the “What Matters” project.
    The guiding Gem is what, Margaret Mead prophetically stated as “A small group of
    thoughtful, concerned citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that no one else ever has.” Sounds great, but let us not forget that our
    bank of innovative ideas and best practices is sliding on a rather slippery surface that should not be underestimated under any circumstances. It is a sound idea to be prepared to meet the unexpected ,without thinking about the eventual consequences.
    be underestimated under any circumstances.
    Why the use of best practice can be dangerous and misleading

    Best practices are a ridiculous way of learning about the world because their rote application is similar to sympathetic magic. It’s like building a model of something, building a doll that has a likeness of something else, and hoping that the effects will transfer.
    Reproducing similar types of interventions in a different contexts is dangerous and naive unless you have an understanding of what the context was, how the intervention interacted with it, and why the effect occurred.
    The notion that one can directly apply interventions to reproduce outcome phenomena without an understanding of the underlying mechanism is ignorant unless you’re dealing with a deterministic physical or chemical system. Most of the interactions that matter in our lives aren’t deterministic however (some of the really important ones aren’t even probabilistic), so it’s time we stopped behaving like they were. To be effective we need to start to moving away from “best practice” models and towards what Dave Snowden calls “theory driven practice”.
    The “T word”
    A lot of my experience in corporate and government consulting is that there is an anti-intellectual relationship to true understanding. Most big organisations, be they private or public, have a very uncomfortable relationship to theory.
    This is why people want practice; best practice. “Just show me something that works.” Unfortunately our social and organizational lives take place in domains that are complex, dynamic and interactive. Simply reproducing something that works in one place and re-applying it somewhere else can be a naive and dangerous thing to do.
    Even in the same organization, if one were to try to re-apply an intervention that worked once at a different time, it would produce different results because the component parts and the relationships which constitute it have changed. Furthermore, the relationship between the organization and its environment will have changed as well. So the imposition of the intervention is not only likely to fail, but likely to produce entirely unpredictable and surprising results.
    This is probably one reason why so many change efforts fail in large organization. Many “change efforts” are lead by the big consulting firms, who take “best practice” examples from a few textbook cases or from other clients and then re-purpose them from one company to another, ad infinite, at a healthy profit.
    This would work fine if organizations were like machines – machines for which we had the blueprints – and if changing one lever would produce the same effect every time you pulled it.
    The reality is that our most important interactions take place in social and ecological systems for which we don’t have blueprints. And not only do we not have blueprints, even if we did, they would be changing over time and space and the very act of our looking at them would alter them.
    This is bad news for the anti-intellectuals (and the football captain consultants). It means that if you really want to produce an outcome effect, you have to understand the underlying mechanisms and systems of which it is a part. In other words, you have to understand the theory.
    Theory-driven practice, in practice, equals awareness?
    Once one engages with the concept of theory-driven practice, however – as soon as one understands that you have to actually understand the underlying dynamics and interactions to understand why actions produce certain outcomes – the situation becomes even more sticky.
    Why? Because we live in one giant complex adaptive system, with many different interacting actors with different levels of awareness, connectedness and influence, pursuing different agendas at different times, resulting in a constantly evolving landscape of interaction and causality.
    Taken literally, this means that sometimes there actually isn’t a direct relationship between cause and effect in many of the cases that matter most to us. Most big events in the social world are mutually causal, which means that they cannot be predicted. The landscape is constantly evolving, which means they cannot be repeated, and we labor under structurally uncertain, which means we cannot predict the effects of our actions. This is what the term co-evolution really means.
    All this means that our governments, companies and organizations really aren’t like big machines, and that the theory required to interact with them effectively requires a fundamental re-assessment of the very notion of concepts such as “best practice”. The only responsible thing that one can do when operating in this domain is to test, sense, interpret, theorize, test, sense, interpret, theorize, etc., all the while producing highly specific and temporally contingent local results (again, hat tip to Snowden and the sense-making guys for this terminology).
    From a consulting or management standpoint, this means that every single case is unique, every single case is different, and the process of interaction, exploration and co-creation has to be undertaken at every step, with every client and at every stage, in a unique and bespoke manner.
    That is why it is important to take a theory-driven approach, drawing from the evidence and theories of complex adaptive systems, to any social or organizational change effort. That is why it is important to use tools which recognize structural uncertainty and works best in dynamic environments. And that is why best practices can be dangerous and deceptive, and why theory-driven practice is the only responsible philosophy which a manager should follow.

  3. Michael Yanakiev
    Posted January 2, 2010 at 9:07 am | Permalink

    Kare,
    This is an extremely challenging and provocative post! You and your colleagues
    have assembled a splendid collection of great ideas to celebrate the holiday season by creating a mental adventure as an agenda to think about in 2010, dissolving the problems that form the backbone of the “What Matters” project.
    The guiding Gem is what, Margaret Mead prophetically stated as “A small group of
    thoughtful, concerned citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that no one else ever has.” Sounds great, but let us not forget that our
    bank of innovative ideas and best practices is sliding on a rather slippery surface that should not be underestimated under any circumstances. It is a sound idea to be prepared to meet the unexpected ,without thinking about the eventual consequences.
    be underestimated under any circumstances.
    Why the use of best practice can be dangerous and misleading

    Best practices are a ridiculous way of learning about the world because their rote application is similar to sympathetic magic. It’s like building a model of something, building a doll that has a likeness of something else, and hoping that the effects will transfer.
    Reproducing similar types of interventions in a different contexts is dangerous and naive unless you have an understanding of what the context was, how the intervention interacted with it, and why the effect occurred.
    The notion that one can directly apply interventions to reproduce outcome phenomena without an understanding of the underlying mechanism is ignorant unless you’re dealing with a deterministic physical or chemical system. Most of the interactions that matter in our lives aren’t deterministic however (some of the really important ones aren’t even probabilistic), so it’s time we stopped behaving like they were. To be effective we need to start to moving away from “best practice” models and towards what Dave Snowden calls “theory driven practice”.
    The “T word”
    A lot of my experience in corporate and government consulting is that there is an anti-intellectual relationship to true understanding. Most big organisations, be they private or public, have a very uncomfortable relationship to theory.
    This is why people want practice; best practice. “Just show me something that works.” Unfortunately our social and organizational lives take place in domains that are complex, dynamic and interactive. Simply reproducing something that works in one place and re-applying it somewhere else can be a naive and dangerous thing to do.
    Even in the same organization, if one were to try to re-apply an intervention that worked once at a different time, it would produce different results because the component parts and the relationships which constitute it have changed. Furthermore, the relationship between the organization and its environment will have changed as well. So the imposition of the intervention is not only likely to fail, but likely to produce entirely unpredictable and surprising results.
    This is probably one reason why so many change efforts fail in large organization. Many “change efforts” are lead by the big consulting firms, who take “best practice” examples from a few textbook cases or from other clients and then re-purpose them from one company to another, ad infinite, at a healthy profit.
    This would work fine if organizations were like machines – machines for which we had the blueprints – and if changing one lever would produce the same effect every time you pulled it.
    The reality is that our most important interactions take place in social and ecological systems for which we don’t have blueprints. And not only do we not have blueprints, even if we did, they would be changing over time and space and the very act of our looking at them would alter them.
    This is bad news for the anti-intellectuals (and the football captain consultants). It means that if you really want to produce an outcome effect, you have to understand the underlying mechanisms and systems of which it is a part. In other words, you have to understand the theory.
    Theory-driven practice, in practice, equals awareness?
    Once one engages with the concept of theory-driven practice, however – as soon as one understands that you have to actually understand the underlying dynamics and interactions to understand why actions produce certain outcomes – the situation becomes even more sticky.
    Why? Because we live in one giant complex adaptive system, with many different interacting actors with different levels of awareness, connectedness and influence, pursuing different agendas at different times, resulting in a constantly evolving landscape of interaction and causality.
    Taken literally, this means that sometimes there actually isn’t a direct relationship between cause and effect in many of the cases that matter most to us. Most big events in the social world are mutually causal, which means that they cannot be predicted. The landscape is constantly evolving, which means they cannot be repeated, and we labor under structurally uncertain, which means we cannot predict the effects of our actions. This is what the term co-evolution really means.
    All this means that our governments, companies and organizations really aren’t like big machines, and that the theory required to interact with them effectively requires a fundamental re-assessment of the very notion of concepts such as “best practice”. The only responsible thing that one can do when operating in this domain is to test, sense, interpret, theorize, test, sense, interpret, theorize, etc., all the while producing highly specific and temporally contingent local results (again, hat tip to Snowden and the sense-making guys for this terminology).
    From a consulting or management standpoint, this means that every single case is unique, every single case is different, and the process of interaction, exploration and co-creation has to be undertaken at every step, with every client and at every stage, in a unique and bespoke manner.
    That is why it is important to take a theory-driven approach, drawing from the evidence and theories of complex adaptive systems, to any social or organizational change effort. That is why it is important to use tools which recognize structural uncertainty and works best in dynamic environments. And that is why best practices can be dangerous and deceptive, and why theory-driven practice is the only responsible philosophy which a manager should follow.

Post a Comment

Your email is kept private. Required fields are marked (required)

(required)
(required)
(required)
(required)

moving from me to we

FREE DOWNLOAD

Sign up here to download Kare's guide:
"34 Ways to be More Widely Quoted and Deeply Connected." 

Congratulations! You will now receive an e-mail with the link to download this valuable PDF guide!