Experimentation Is Not An Event

 

“The most important and visible outcropping of the action bias in the excellent companies is their willingness to try things out, to experiment.  There is absolutely no magic in the experiment.  It is simply a tiny completed action, a manageable test that helps you learn something, just as in high school chemistry.  But our experience has been that most big institutions have forgotten how to test and learn.  They seem to prefer analysis and debate to trying something out, and they are paralyzed by fear of failure, however small.”  -Tom Peters In Search of Excellence

Without experimentation we limit our opportunity to evaluate the value of new ideas and thinking.

Without experimentation we lack space to discover and engage new learning and knowledge.

Without experimentation we fail to have a process that invites innovation.

Without experimentation, we never become true learning organizations.

As Stefan Thomke shares in his work Experimentation Matters, “Experimentation matters because it fuels the discovery and creation of knowledge and thereby leads to the development and improvement of products, processes, systems, and organizations.”

In other words, experimentation allows us the space, the processes, and the opportunity to continually retool and upskill our thinking, our ideas, our processes, our systems, and our organizations.

It allows room for learning.

However, the problem with experimentation for many individuals and organizations begins with how we see experimentation, with our mindset.  Too often we treat experimentation like an event.  Something we do occasionally.

Rather than an iterative and reflective process for continually improving and determine how to get better.

Which means we are going to need to strip away the “event” aura that surrounds our idea and thinking in and about experimentation.  To begin to think of experimentation as something natural, something designed into the everyday processes of our organizations and systems.

To move from event thinking, to natural integration.

If we are going to transform ourselves and our organizations, both incrementally and exponentially, we have to begin to see exploration, experimentation and discovery as everyday processes intertwined and designed into our systems and organizations…not one time events that do little to move us towards that transformation and a mindset of continuous improvement.

Innovation is not determined by a well-defined plan, but discovered through ongoing experimentation, risk-taking, reflection, and feedback.  It is in this process that not only is new learning engaged, but very often, new knowledge is created.

When experimentation is intertwined and designed into an organization’s processes and systems, new learning and ongoing idea flows become a much more natural and open phenomena in and across the organization.

Which is the very foundation of what a learning organization should be.

For far too long, individuals and organizations have limited themselves to becoming initiative implementers, which is the antithesis of the autonomy and learning that is required for organizations to retain relevance in an accelerated world shifting at a volatile and exponential pace.

If we truly intend to become learning individuals and organizations, we have to determine how to work discovery, exploration, experimentation, creativity and innovation back into our individual and organizational DNA.

Divergent Thinking + Creativity = Big Ideas

Big Ideas + Experimentation + Execution = Innovation

Innovation + Technology = Acceleration

Acceleration + Network Learning = Collective Impact

Learning Organization

“Perhaps the attribute most critical to a learning organization is experimentation.”  -via Exponential Organizations

Advertisements

The Future Will Be Very Different (Part 2)

 

In March, responding to Mark Cuban’s comments to how Artificial Intelligence was going to change the workforce, the current Treasury Secretary, when questioned about Cuban’s comments, inferred that, “Artificial intelligence is so far in the future that it’s not even on my radar screen.  We won’t have to worry about how it affects the workforce for 50 to 100 more years.” (per Business Insider)

Which, for many, was a shocking comment, to say the least…

Especially in that it was in direct contrast to what was shared in December of 2016, in which the White House released two reports, Artificial Intelligence, Automation, and the Economy, which was a follow up to the Administration’s previous report from October of 2016, Preparing for the Future of Artificial Intelligence.  A report that indicated that “as many as 47% of all American jobs could be at risk from artificial intelligence in the next two decades.”

The following was shared in regards to these reports…

“Although it is difficult to predict these economic effects precisely, the report suggests that policymakers should prepare for five primary economic effects:

  • Positive contributions to aggregate productivity growth;

  • Changes in skills demanded by the job marked, including greater demand for higher-level technical skills;

  • Uneven distribution of impact, across sectors, wage levels, education levels, job types, and locations;

  • Churning of the job market as some jobs disappear while others are created; and

  • The loss of jobs for some workers in the short-run and possibly longer depending on policy responses.”

To add, in an article shared by Gizmodo, “According to a study by the Center of Business and Economic Research at Ball State University, 5.6 million manufacturing jobs were lost in the U.S. between 2000 and 2010.  An estimated 85% of those jobs were actually attributable to technological change-largely automation.”

While CNBC shares, “The White House Council of Economic Advisors (CEA) ranked occupations by wages and found that 83% of jobs making less than $20 per hour would come under pressure from automation, as compared to 31% of jobs making between $20 and $40 per hour and 4% of jobs making above $40 per hour.”

And it isn’t only the threat of automation and artificial intelligence that is changing work.

According to a recent article from World Economic Forum, “The days of working for 40 years and retiring with a good pension are gone.  Now the average time in a single job is 4.2 years, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.  What’s more, 35% of the skills workers need – regardless of industry – will have changed by 2020.”

To add to that, on the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics webpage, “Individuals born in latter years of the baby boom (1957-1964) held an average of 11.9 jobs from age 18-50.”

The World Economic Forum Future of Jobs of Survey adds that, “On average, by 2020, more than a third of the desired core skill sets of most occupations will be comprised of skills that are not yet considered crucial to the job today, according to our respondents.”

To say we live in very interesting times would be an understatement.  While some find this new world exciting and filled with possibilities for change, others see it as tumultuous, chaotic, and even a bit scary.  But one thing we can say, is that after years of incremental change, we now stand on the cusp of some very steep and disruptive shifts.  Our individuals, our organizations, our systems, our governments, and even our societies are facing some very unsteady and uncertain winds created by the pace and acceleration of change in today’s world.

Winds that are heightening our awareness of the vast unknowns emerging from this future.

And awareness of what is emerging is vital to our ability to design a better future.  Otherwise, we will continue to create larger gaps and ongoing disconnects for individuals, organizations and our systems.  We can ill afford to be overcome by the urgency and plethora of technical problems, while barely sensing, let alone keeping up with the a whole new set of adaptive challenges that are arising.

We can ill afford to face this new and emerging future overwhelmed, unequipped and unprepared.

We can ill afford to…

  • Have a lack of awareness
  • A lack of vision
  • A lack of clarity
  • A lack of communication

We can be certain that content knowledge is no longer enough for success in a world and workforce that has shifted exponentially.  A world and workforce that is facing an uncertain future from what automation and artificial intelligence might do, might create, and the affects it may have on us, our organizations, our systems, our governments and our societies.

We can ill afford to wait for these uncertainties to become certainties.  We have to determine those “unknown” skills and abilities that will help prepare our generations to come for those “unknowns” and the “jobs that are yet to exist.”

Skills that Singularity Hub share as; critical thinking and problem solving, collaboration across networks and leading by influence, agility and adaptability, initiative and entrepreneurship, effective oral and written communication, assessing and analyzing information, and curiosity and imagination.

Or as CareerBuilder would add as; adaptability, self-motivation, networking, self-awareness, and computer coding.

And the Institute for the Future’s 10 Skills for the Future Work of 2020; sense-making, social intelligence, novel and adaptive thinking, cross-cultural competency, computational thinking, new media literacy, transdisciplinary, design mindset, cognitive load management, and virtual collaboration.

“According to a 2016 Pew Research Center survey, The State of American Jobs, found that 87% of workers believe it will be essential for them to get training and develop new job skills throughout their work life in order to keep up with changes in the workplace.”

Which gives an entirely new meaning to the idea of lifelong learner…

Creative, innovative, imaginative thinking will always be valued, but we are finding that its value is expanding in an age of increasing automation and artificial intelligence.

Engaging and infusing skills and abilities into the educational world of content, better prepares our next generation for a world that is shifting and emerging through a fog of uncertainty and unknowns.  While we can never predict the future, greater awareness does allow us to forecast and better prepare for whatever is to emerge…

“However much change you saw over the last 10 years with the iPhone, over the last 20 years with the Internet, over the last 30 years with with PC’s, that is nothing.  Nothing!  Things are getting faster, processing is getting faster, machines are starting to think, and either you make them think for you or they will take your place and do the thinking for you.  That could be problematic for many people.”  -Mark Cuban via CNBC

Building Adaptive Capacity

 

“When people look to authorities for easy answers to adaptive challenges, they end up with dysfunction.  They expect the person in charge to know what to do, and under the weight of that responsibility, those in authority frequently end up faking it or disappointing people, or they get spit out of the system in the belief that a new “leader” will solve the problem.”  

“In fact, there’s a proportionate relationship between risk and adaptive change: The deeper the change and the greater the amount of new learning required, the more resistance there will be and, thus, the greater the danger to those who lead.  For this reason, people often try to avoid the dangers, either consciously or subconsciously, by treating an adaptive challenge as if it were a technical one.  This is why we see so much more routine management than leadership in our society.”  -Heifetz and Linsky Leadership on the Line: Staying Alive through the Dangers of Leading

Which is one of the greatest challenges that stands before our educational organizations and leaders at this very moment in time…

The understanding that we have made a radical shift from technical problems to the amount of adaptive challenges and dilemmas that we now and will face.

For this reason, it will be in our ability to create greater organizational and individual capacity that we will be better equipped to face and come to terms with these rising adaptive challenges and dilemmas that are coming at us.

However, before moving any farther forward, let’s take a moment for Heifetz and Linsky to create a deeper understanding around what separates, or serves as the main difference between what is seen as a technical problem from which we view an adaptive challenge and/or dilemma.

“What makes a problem technical is not that it is trivial; but simply that its solution already lies within the organization’s repertoire.  In contrast, adaptive pressures force the organization to change, lest it decline.” 

To add, what separates a “technical problem” from an “adaptive challenge” is that there are no absolute answers to adaptive challenges and/or dilemmas.  Whereas, while a technical issue may be difficult, we answers to those problems.  Answers exist, be that from internally or externally of our organization.

Whereas, with adaptive challenges, there are often no set answers to solving the dilemma.  Very often, they require deeper questions and the willingness of individuals and the organization to grapple their way forward.  Or as Heifetz and Linsky add in Leadership on the Line, “We call these adaptive challenges because they require experiments, new discoveries, and adjustments from numerous places in the organization or community.  Without learning new ways-changing attitudes, values, and behaviors-people cannot make the adaptive leap necessary to thrive in the new environment.  The sustainability of change depends on having the people with the problem internalize the change itself.”

Facing our adaptive challenges and dilemmas require our ability to constantly create and build up our adaptive capacity.  Which means that new and ongoing learning, as well as engaging greater agility and adaptability, has to be built up across and at all levels of the organization.  Which means…

“Just tell me what to do” can no longer be an unwritten motto that sweeps across the entirety of our organizations.  

Instead, learning has to become the new constant, with a focus on deeper questions, not easy answers.

We have to learn to become more agile and adaptable, both as individuals and organizations.  And we have to be able to stand longer under the weight of big questions.  In other words, we have to learn how to grapple…

We have to learn to be able to grapple in the face of uncertainty, in the face of accelerated change, in the face of unknowns, in the face of the adaptive challenges and dilemmas we now face, as well as those in the future.

Unfortunately, as Heifetz and Linsky share in Leadership on the Line“In the face of adaptive pressures, people don’t want questions; they want answers.  They don’t want to be told that they will have to sustain losses; rather, they want to know how you’re going to protect the from the pains of change.”

Which means that leading adaptive work, leading people through adaptive challenges and dilemmas, and creating adaptive capacity, will be both the greatest and most difficult work that any leader and organization will ever embark upon.

Creating adaptive capacity to face the challenges and dilemmas of today’s modern world is difficult work, to say the least.  It means going against the norm of most leadership.

We hire leaders to provide a sense of stability, a sense of safety.  Whereas, the work of building up the adaptive capacity of an organization requires provoking that safety, of pulling people out of the comfortable, of unentrenching them from the status quo ways of doing and being that they come to know; which can mean difficult days ahead, and very often spell disaster for any leader.

But that is what is required, if adaptive capacity is to become both the individual and organizational objective.

This is deep work.  It forces individuals and organizations to move past a veneer way of working.  It requires depth of trust, depth of relationships, and a depth of understanding around their values and vision.  It takes a willingness to be vulnerable.  It takes a willingness to face loss.  It takes a willingness to become and stay a learner.  And it takes a willingness and want to get better…each and every day.

It is in that space, in that willingness to grapple both as individuals and organizations, that adaptive capacity is created and sustained.

I will leave you with these words from Heifetz and Linsky from Leadership on the Line and a question…

“Generally, people will not authorize someone to make them face what they do not want to face.  Instead, people hire someone to provide protection and ensure stability, someone with solutions that require a minimum of disruption.  But adaptive work creates risk, conflict, and instability because addressing the issues underlying adaptive problems may involve upending deep and entrenched norms.  Thus, leadership requires disturbing people-but at a rate they can absorb.”

What are you willing to disturb?

Facing Your “Napster” Moment (Relevance vs Irrelevance)

 

“To counter complacency, you must exhibit insatiability.” “You need to go where the opportunity will be next, not where it is.” -Jeremy Gutsche Exploiting Chaos

There is this very interesting documentary on the rise and fall of Tower Records called All Things Must Pass which, in a very subtle way, documents the digital disruption that today’s organizations are ALL facing.

There were two very telling moments towards the end of the documentary, where the following two sentences were played across a stark screen, demonstrating the suddenness of the demise and the overall disruption of what had become an American icon…

“In 1999, Tower Records had sales of over one billion dollars”

“Five years later they filed for bankruptcy”

As David Geffen shared in the documentary, “The industry as a whole didn’t respond appropriately.”

And it wasn’t just that they didn’t respond appropriately, in many ways they didn’t see it coming.  Or if they did see it coming, they didn’t want to accept the reality of what they were facing.  Which was, for Tower Records…their Napster Moment.

Too often, it is our successes, not our failures, that keep us entrenched in the status quo, insulating us from the volatility of change and very often, the disruptive forces we are facing in the present and future.  Shielding us from facing our own Napster Moment.

As was shared in All Things Must Pass, “Everything that you did worked, and then it just stopped.”

 

Which means we have to begin to think different.  We have to begin to do different.  And we have to be willing to scrutinize how our current successes and mental models that trap and entrench us in status quo ways of doing and being.

As Jeremy Gutsche pushes forward in his work Exploiting Chaos, you have to continually look to find the opportunity in the midst of chaos.  Especially in today’s VUCA World where change is accelerating, often at an exponential clip.

As Gutsche shares…

Be curious.
Be willing to destroy.
Be insatiable.

Change in today’s world requires facing many more unknowns, many more new frontiers.  Which means we can little afford to entrench ourselves and our organizations in our successes of the present and past.  We can’t let those successes insulate us from knowing and perceiving when a pivot or shift is necessary or needed, even when that pivot provokes uncertainty and moves us out of our comfort of the known.  We can’t let current and past successes impede future progress and relevance.

And determining relevance is going to be vital in today’s accelerated and constantly shifting world…

As Peter Drucker put forth, “The right questions don’t change as often as the answers do.”  And we can ill afford to be providing the right answers to the wrong questions in today’s world.  Or, as Jeremy Gutsche shares in Exploiting Chaos, you end up as “Smith-Corona The BEST typewriter company in the world a title they still keep today.”  For which he adds, “Accomplishment blinds us to the urgency of reinvention. Don’t be seduced by complacency. When the world became chaotic, Smith-Corona did what most organizations do: they retreated to their comfort zone. Smith-Corona became a victim of rational decision-making. Don’t let complacency be the architecture of your downfall.”

 

Too often, success becomes a key indicator for future stasis and stagnation.  Once you feel you’ve arrived, there is no demand or urgency to progress.  Much of today’s innovation gets lost on a focus on polishing our past successes.  We have to evolve forward, we can’t pivot if we are entrenched in the past.

If requirements (skill-sets) for success in the future have change, and the system that prepares people for those skill-sets hasn’t, we have misalignment.  Misalignment for the future.  Just as what we see as necessary for students and what society is saying is vital for success in a shifting world, aren’t always aligned.

In many ways, we have to tap into more exponential, “around the corner” if we are going to better prepare our people, our children, for the future.

Too often, our mental models shield us from that “different” thinking…blinding us from seeing the coming of our own organizational Napster Moments.

“Success depends on intuition, on seeing what afterwards proves true but cannot be established at the moment.”  -J.Schumpter

“Success requires an organization to let go of its current playbook and rethink the way it sees the world…”  -via Scaling Edges

 

Preparing Our Students For The Future

 

In a world fueled by unknowns, how do we prepare our students, our people and our organizations for the volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity (VUCA) of a world that is changing and shifting in an accelerated and often exponential ways?

What kind of knowledge and learning will be necessary and needed to traverse the future?

What types of requisite skills and abilities will be deemed valuable for the knowledge economy, amidst exponential times?

What competencies, capacities and capabilities will prove to be relevant in a world driven by accelerated obsolescence?

And the answer is…

We don’t know.

We are neither soothsayers, oracles, psychics or fortune tellers.  We cannot predict the future, and for that matter, those who have tried have shown themselves to have a pretty poor track record for being correct.

However, that does not mean that we should not be much more attentive to and aware of the signals in the chaos.

Signals of opportunity, signals of change, signals of coming shifts.  

We need to not only be much more aware of our own “point of view” of the future, we should also be searching to determine the signals amidst the noise not to predict, but to better forecast the future.  Seeing the importance of those signals, especially in a world that is unfolding in much less linear and predictable ways, better allows us to forecast and prepare for what may come.

A world where gradually quickly turns into suddenly.

However, in the midst of today’s fake news and exponential changes, it is becoming more and more difficult to determine who and what to believe?  It is becoming much harder to see the signals for the noise.

For, are we facing an uncertain future where machines have taken the majority of our jobs?  Or are we just in the midst of another industrial (digital) revolution which will just require some time for adjustment?

On the one side, technologists profess staggering upheaval, even a possible dystopian future with the possibility of millions of jobs being lost to automation and artificial intelligence.  Whereas, economists ride the other side of the wave, saying that this time is not like any other major change or shift of the past where new jobs will be created over time and push us through this disruption positively.  While others profess less of a race against the machines and a race with the machines, as the automation and artificial intelligence will eventually take over work that is considered deadly, dirty, dangerous, and or rote and boring, while augmenting our capacity to do our work more efficiently and effectively.

But whatever side you fall towards, we still must say that it is difficult to believe that everything is going to be as it was, especially when several countries and a plethora of leaders across the world are expounding the need for a basic universal income (BUI) just to counter the current decoupling of productivity from employment as a strategy to avoid future economical collapse.

So while we can’t predict how this will play out in the future, the more aware we are, the more agile and adaptive we can become in forecasting and facing whatever changes which may spring from this current disruption.

The best thing we can do for our students, our people, and our organizations is to increase our awareness, search out those signals in the chaos, and look to better prepare ourselves for a much different future.

We can begin by looking at how the very idea of work is changing, and what impact will those changes have on education?  

Let’s begin with creating a greater awareness of the types of jobs that currently exist both now and in the very near future.  Consider some of these… 3D Platform Technical Evangelist, Data Scientist, Neuro-Implant Technicians, 3D Software Engineer-Scene Layers, Virtual Reality Experience Designer, Urban Farmers, just to name a few.  The greater awareness we have of the types of jobs that exist, the better able we are to prepare our students for the opportunities that lie beyond graduation and our academic walls as they look to pursue their passions and success for the future.

And it’s not just job titles that are changing, but the skills and abilities required by some knowledge economy organizations, which includes but not limited to: knowledge of HTML, CSS, JavaScript, C++, Python, 3D tools such as Maya, Revit, AutoCAD, experience with SCRUM, as well as knowledge of Agile development methodologies, are just a few of the skills being requested in entry level job posting by those knowledge economy organizations.

While the Institute For the Future shares a variety of other skills for the future that they see as being important, which would include: sense making, social intelligence, novel and adaptive thinking, cross-cultural competencies, computational thinking, new media literacy, transdisciplinarity, design mindset, cognitive load management, and virtual collaboration.

And it doesn’t stop there, alongside those skills, consider these capacities and competencies requested on entry level positions from such organizations as ESRI, CA Technologies or READYTALK: “ability to work in a fast-paced team environment that sparks ingenuity and encourages innovative ideas,” “work within agile processes for short cycle, fast-paced delivery,” “take on complex goals that push the boundary of the possible,” “solve and articulate complex problems through application design, development, and exemplary user experiences,” “support continuous learning and continuous team improvement,” “coach other leaders and managers on the role of a servant leadership within the Agile organization,” “strong interpersonal, written, and oral communication skills,” as well as the “ability to effectively prioritize and execute tasks in a high-pressure environment.”

So as we talk of lesson design, room design, even system design in education, the previous statements of workforce requirements inform us (signals in the chaos), that we are going to have to begin to have a much deeper discussion around environment design.  Today’s work environments are requiring much different skills-sets, capacities and competencies than what we tend to engage and create in our classrooms and schools.

So we must begin to ask ourselves, do our classrooms and schools prepare students for that type of environment?

While awareness doesn’t change everything we do, just as it doesn’t allow us to predict the future…it does allow us to not only forecast what is to come in a much more adept manner, it allows us to better determine the skills, capacities and competencies, as well as environments necessary and needed to better prepare our students, our people and our organizations for this digital disruption and the future.

In the end, it begins by understanding what does change, what doesn’t change, what remains, and what transforms.  This is not an either/or proposition, it is a matter of embracing AND.

So in closing, consider these words from study by The Economist Intelligence Unit (supported by Google) on Preparing Students for the Future…

“It is no longer sufficient-if it ever was-that teachers are well versed in their subject.  They must recognize that the skills a student acquires through learning are as important, if not more so, than the content, and be able to incorporate opportunities for the development of problem solving, collaborative, creative and communication skills into their teaching.  These skills cannot be taught in isolation but must be present across the curriculum, embedded in the fabric of how teachers teach.”

Positive Deviance: Scaling Internal Innovation

 

“The faraway stick does not kill the snake.”  “Positive deviants in your midst are the stick close at hand – readily accessible and successfully employed by people just like us.  No need for outside experts or best-practice remedies that may work over there but won’t work here.  No need for deep systemic analysis or a resource-intensive assault on root causes.  Just discover the closest stick and use it.”  -via Pascale, Sternin and Sternin The Power of Positive Deviance: How Unlikely Innovators Solve the World’s Toughest Problems

We have this strange fascination and fixation with and on external expertise…

Going to have a conference?  We need an outside speaker.

Have a tough problem to solve?  We need an outside consultant.

We continually act in our organizations, institutions and systems as if the best thinking, ideas and answers lay outside of our walls.  We work on this unconscious belief and bias that to gain the best knowledge, we have to move beyond our own organizational walls.  Even when those external “experts” have only a very veneer understanding of the context, obstacles and barriers for the adaptive challenges that your organization, institution or system is facing and the problems they are trying solve.

Whereas, Richard Pascale, author of Surfing the Edge of Chaos and Positive Deviance would believe that we need to act and respond much differently, as organizations, institutions and systems.  We need to taken an entirely different approach if we are scale up our creative and innovative efforts to attending to the adaptive challenges we face.  Pascale would declare, “Exploit positive deviance.  Don’t begin with imported ideas from the outside or even from above.  Try to find what’s cooking within the system.”  

As Pascale shares in a Fast Company article on positive deviance, “Real change begins from the inside…”

So, if what Pascale says is true, and that this concept of positive deviance is a better path to scaling the creativity and innovation that already exists in our organizations, institutions, and organizations, then it just may be important for us to determine what positive deviance exactly is?

In his work, The Power of Positive Deviance: How Unlikely Innovators Solve the World’s Toughest Problems, Pascale communicates that “Positive deviance is founded on the premise that at least one person in a community, working with the same resources as everyone else, has already licked the problems that confounds others.  This individual is an outlier in the statistical sense – an exception, someone whose outcome deviates in a positive way from the norm.  In most cases this person does not know he or she is doing anything unusual.  Yet once the unique solution is discovered and understood, it can be adopted by the wider community and transform many lives.”  For which Pascale adds, “From the positive deviance perspective, individual difference is regarded as a community resource.”

Which is a very different mode of operating for most organizations, institutions and systems, which have tended to focus much more on efficiency, standardization, and when needed, external expertise.  Instead of pushing outliers to the fringes or diminishing their success, positive deviance seeks out these outliers and looks to learn from them, to determine why they have exceeded the status quo while only having access to the same resources and facing the same obstacles and barriers as everyone else.

One problem is that too often, instead of trying to learn from these positive deviants and determine why they have been so much more successful, as well as what could effectively be scaled from that learning, we tend to remain unaware, uninterested, or unwilling to give credence to how they are overcoming obstacles and barriers.  Instead of pulling the outliers into the core, organizations continue to push them to the fringe, failing to learn from or scale what these bright spots could contribute to and for the organization, institution or system.

As they say, sometimes we can’t see the forest for the trees…well, in some cases, being caught up in the underbrush keeps us from seeing how tall some trees have grown.

For these bright spots to not only be noticed, but engaged in a positive and transparent way, will take leaders with greater organizational understanding, empathy, engagement and transparency.  Especially, as Pascale adds, these positive deviants are “Invisible in plain sight.  Invisible positive deviants often “don’t know what they know” (i.e., don’t realize they are doing anything unusual or noteworthy).  Living alongside peers, they flourish while others struggle.  Also invisible in plain sight is the community’s latent potential to self-organize, tap its own wisdom, and address problems long regarded with fatalistic acceptance.”

We not only get stuck in our ruts determined by our own behaviors, we allow our mindset and mental models to continue to drive those behaviors forward, long after they  have used up their effectiveness, which is a big factor in pushing our unwillingness to accept the “expertise” that exists internally in our organizations, institutions and systems.  It is those same mindsets and mental models that remain a feature in why many of our biggest problems and adaptive challenges seem to plague our organizational communities consistently and continually.

As Pascale adds, “Once the community has discovered and leveraged existing solutions by drawing on its own resources, adaptive capacity extends beyond addressing the initial problem at hand, it enables those involved to take control of their destiny and address future challenges.”

So, not only does engaging the positive deviance that resides in organizations, institutions and systems help us in attending to and solving the problems and challenges we are currently facing, it also allows us to scale up the learning from those bright spots in ways that better supports solving future problems with internal capacity, rather than relying on external expertise.

Positive deviance is not just about scaling up those bright spots who are succeeding, it is showing the organizational community that the capacity to solve their own problems exists within, and at this very moment someone within the organizational community is providing solutions to those very problems and challenges that we are struggling to solve.  It is this mindset, this reframing of our mental models, that allows the organizational community to move past this ongoing fascination with external supports and expertise that continually diminishes the internal capacity and commitment that exists within.

Once we allow our organizations, institutions and systems to fully realize the potential that resides within, to understand that we have the tools and the internal “expertise” to better solve our own problems and challenges, we will not only move away from trying to outsource our solutions to an external parade of professional problem-solvers, we will begin to create the capacity and commitment to find our way forward in a much more meaningful, impactful and relevant manner.

As Pascale puts forth…

“The solution is just waiting to be uncovered and amplified.”

 

Cognitive Homogeneity: The Churn And Spread Of “Same” Thinking

 

“Biological systems have evolved to cope with a multitude of threats such as proliferating pathogens, autoimmunity, escalating arms races, deception, and mimicry.  One design strategy that helps biological systems achieve robustness to these threats is diversity – genetic diversity in a species, species diversity in an ecosystem, and molecular diversity in an immune system.”

“By contrast, the computer industry specializes in homogeneity: churning out near-infinite quantities of identical pieces of hardware and software. The result is that an agent that can wreak havoc in one host – read: computer, or increasingly, any number of the objects joining the Internet of Things – can as easily infect any number of those copies.”  -via Joi Ito and Jeff Howe Whiplash: How to Survive Our Faster Future

We live in an ultra, hyper-connected world…

One that is expanding and accelerating, in both frightening and awe-inspiring, exponential ways.

And it is no longer just people that are connected, there are worldwide forecasts that more than 8,000,000 “things” will be connected to the Internet of Things before the end of 2017, ranging from Smart Dust to entire cities.

We also live in a time of incredible emergence.

And it is in this emergence, of connection, complexity, and accelerated change, that we find previously detectable next steps and solutions, often camouflaged in chaos and disruption; creating new patterns, new dynamics and new forces that are both evolving and or devolving our ecosystems in unforeseen and unfathomable ways.

So, in much the same manner that today’s ultra, hyper-connected world is connecting us and “things” – individuals, organizations and systems will all need to invest deeply in and gain greater capacity in adaptability, agility and diversity, to keep pace.

Adaptability.  Agility.  Diversity. (and shifting mindsets)

So, as we move deeper and farther into this volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous (VUCA) world, we are going to need to be much more careful and reflective that we don’t equate the hyper-connectedness of this ecosystem with enhanced cognitive diversity, with expanding and increasing new thinking, new ideas, and new knowledge flows.

The accelerated speed of information in a hyper-connected world can often provide the pretense of and parade itself as the “new” – but, without intentionally searching out cognitive diversity of thinking, we can easily move from new knowledge flows to streams of sameness.

Without intentionally searching out cognitive diversity, we allow conformity of sameness to not only parade itself as the “new” – but enforce uniformity and push lack of variety into going viral, across our platforms and networks.

As we consider this ultra, hyper-connected world and the opportunities for the “new” that it extends, we must remain vigilant towards engaging greater opportunities for cognitive diversity, if we are to keep “sameness” from becoming a viral churn across our connected platforms and networks.

“Society and institutions in general tend to lean toward order and away from chaos.  In the process this stifles disobedience.  It can also stifle creativity, flexibility, and productive change, and in the long run, society’s health and sustainability.  This is true across the board, from academia, to corporations, to governments, to our communities.”  -via Joi Ito and Jeff Howe Whiplash: How to Survive Our Faster Future