#WorkingOutLoud on ‘The Experimental Organisation’

This month i have started interviews for a new project, a book of case studies exploring innovative Organisational approaches to unlocking potential and driving change. It’s intended to share a range of practical examples of how diverse global Organisations are seeking and striving to become Socially Dynamic.

My last book introduced the concept of The Socially Dynamic Organisation, and this one, sort of a sequel, will look at various efforts and attempts to build it.

I aim to cover three central aspects: firstly, through interviews, to share a range of Exec perspectives on the varied ways that they perceive the nature of the challenge itself. Secondly, through Case Studies, to explore the mechanisms by which Organisations are attempting to adapt, and thirdly, a consideration of how these varied efforts and perspectives may build into broader social movements of change (*or not!).

For the last few years i’ve been working alongside the Imagine Collaborative Community, where around forty global Organisations are exploring ways to collaborate in creative ways. I hope that the story of Imagine will form a backbone to this work, illustrated by the individual, and Organisational, outcomes and perspectives on the journey.

‘The Experimental Organisation’ is not intended to be a blueprint for collaboration and change, but rather a provocation to it, and a story about the experience of it.

I will #WorkOutLoud as i develop this work and, if it feels strong enough, ultimately publish it next year.

Posted in Socially Dynamic Organisation | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

#FutureWork [Pt 4] – Office into Ecosystem

I am writing a series of essays exploring #FutureWork: these are fragments of thought, not presented and ‘answers’, but rather provocations for conversation. Today i am sharing a piece which considers what work will look like when the Office fully dissolves into a holistic ecosystem.

As a young startup, GRAVITY INC new that it needed to control core costs, whilst developing it’s prototype product, and building market awareness before launch: for founders Jan and James, with their global team of 15, the only saving grace was that they would not need an office. Because the only offices still left were those dioramas that existed in the theme park of Old London.

After decades of centralisation and zoning, in the belief that critical mass of people and resource was necessary for innovation and effectiveness, the marble had finally dropped, and change had been wholesale and fast. Spurred by the rapid proliferation of collaborative technology, and the death of the old town centre ecosystems in the Pandemic of 2020, the new race had been towards dispersal, and repurposing, devolution, and new models of collaboration, at scale.

Essentially the cities had dispersed, and with good cause: housing in cities was cramped and expensive, so one of the first innovations had been the move towards more dispersed populations, living in Garden Houses (houses built to be multi-generational, using local materials, and set in their own green space – houses built to last and be passed on and down generations). Radically connected through ultra fast fibre, the need to travel to work was gone, and whilst people did travel, they took fewer, but longer, trips. The net reduction in pollution was assisted by the automated nature of the busses that proliferated, freeing up ‘travel time’ to be productive, or relaxing, or both! Bus communities themselves became productive ones, with travel schedules arranged not around ‘timetables’, but around ‘conversation schedules’.

Of course, not all work could be remote, so the Team Houses came to be a key perk offered by companies looking to engage the best talent: either individual pads, or shared housing, of extremely high quality, fully catered, and designed to be reconfigurable by project or team. These nexus communities would tackle different projects, but with shared spaces and resources. Kind of co-working on steroids.

Social activity evolves as well: the emergent Guilds would bring their shareholders (every practitioner) into their Hall for networking and development opportunities, and would typically provide accommodation and opportunity to spend time socialising as well. Instead of the old ‘out of town’ cinemas, and the giant theme parks, instead the old city centres were remodelled into media spaces, with street cafes, rides, themes and entertainment, with the only thing missing being traffic.

Co-working spaces proliferate, both distributed through the country, in every village and town, but also at higher density near to specific Guilds, providing skills development sessions, as well as networking.

With the death of the old Universities, the new global versions forsake the campus in favour of a web of spaces and opportunities, typically provided with high levels of small group support, in short form courses, and often in partnership with industry. The old dichotomy of ‘academia’ vs ‘industry’ evaporated when most of the teaching is done by practitioners, and most of the ‘sense making’ by alumni. Pure research is still greatly valued, but frequently carried out by collectives, and cross organisational groups, removing some older aspects of competition and with it the toxic system that rewarded ‘success’ and suppressed validating studies and less glamorous, but highly valuable, work of replicability and refinement.

The emergence of the new Collaboration hubs, alongside Innovation Centres, with a wealth of 3d printing and engineering resources, large scale, cheaply available, reconfigurable, and highly supported, space, makes prototyping and shared testing, commonplace.

Organisations that historically owned prestigious towers, and carried their pride in buildings now do the opposite, and share one beautiful Exec tower, surrounded by Corporate gardens and schools, which compete for prestige by providing accessible community utility and beauty. They create a beautiful and broad set of spaces for the enjoyment of all, grounding themselves within community.

One of the most prized spaces is a rehearsal one, where teams can turn learning, from collaboration and prototyping, into action, in safe spaces.

For GRAVITY INC it is this dispersed ecosystem that enables them to attract global talent, to rapidly develop product and market awareness, and to become effective, without becoming bloated and unresponsive. Jan and James are able to grow an Organisation that gives both them, and their employees, a high quality of life, coming together when needed, but thriving in wide open spaces, and with access to the highest quality development when they need it.

What Just Happened?

This view of ‘Office into Ecosystem’ imagines what would happen if we disposed of the idea of offices being central hubs, places we commute into, held within towns and cities that hold their infrastructure and support.

Key aspects of this view of #FutureWork are as follows:

  • The physical structure of society mirrors the organisation of work – but in this view is dispersed, not centralised, and built to be sustainable, accountable, and fair.
  • Instead of our physical environment reflecting the centralisation of resource and labour, it represents the emergent structures of expertise and collaboration, the new economy.
  • Instead of an office ecosystem, with concurrent centralisation and cost, the new ecosystem is dispersed and cheap, but gives significantly greater space and quality of life to everyone, no longer crowded into high density cities (which themselves foster inequality of health and education outcomes.
  • The idea that Organisations wear their pride through buildings and scale, is replaced by them supporting education and the greening of the landscape, pride through beauty and responsibility.

This is one of a series of disparate and imperfect essays exploring how work, and the society that it takes place within, may evolve. Not an answer, but a space for a conversation.

Office into Ecosystem – work as defined by a formal place, evolves into many social places where work is realised as an outcome. This will see the transformation of our built environment, a general distribution of labour, a wealth of richly networked third spaces, and the emergence of self organising specialist units of labour that contract into multiple organisations, including education and healthcare.

Posted in Community, Future | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

#FutureWork [Pt 3] – Qualifications into Capability

Jo enjoyed talking to grandad about the old days, when he had a career, although she was secretly glad not to have had one herself. The idea of doing all your education at the start without really knowing what ‘work’ was like, and the notion of being beholden to one Organisation to keep you safe sounded extremely risky to her.

Jo doesn’t have a career: she has a series of opportunities, following on from her formal education. Opportunities give her space to do two things: to discover an area of work, and to discover a network that surrounds it. If there is a fit, she can be guided into a role, and provided with structured development and further opportunity based around that role. Some of this development is granular, self directed, and short, whilst other parts are long term and taught, introduced by mentors and community members (contextually according to what is needed), or even introduced by SAGE (the AI led system that determines need based on a meta analysis of the job role or talk).

In some areas, Jo find that she has rocketed ahead of her fellow graduates: she already sits on the D&I Board, despite only being 28 years old, a position she earned by contributing time to a research collective, where she demonstrated the ability to tell data led stories, and to forge politically powerful connections.

In other areas, she lags behind: having not yet had the opportunity to build project management skills, she relies on others in her network for that. Historically this would have been seen as a barrier to promotion, so she considers herself lucky that in her company, there is no promotion, because the hierarchy is dynamic, and contextual.

Still, keen to build a more rounded capability (as suggested to her both by her mentor, and by SAGE), she is considering several bids that have come in asking for her time in other companies: both are in her sector, and both are bidding for one day a week for her to help them with a year long Opportunity. Either of these bids would work well, incorporating some formal training, but more importantly, some access to a global expert in her chosen field. The Opportunity includes monthly expert clinics with this person, a prize that money alone cannot buy.

Whilst marvelling at the arcane nature of her grandads ‘career’, and the lack of opportunity he was given, she does harbour some concern that it is the extroverts who are enabled in her system, and also that opportunity is not equal (her friend with a two year old daughter misses out on some of these things). However, she is optimistic that the ways that salary is weighted heavily in favour of caregivers (rather than an old model that paid people who worked in big cities more). Essentially, whilst they do not both have the same opportunity, they both earn the same money, even though they do different hours. It seems a fair way to work, which is lucky, because when considering her next Opportunity, the Fairness Quotient is always a key factor in her decision.

For now, Jo is enjoying work, and allowing some distant corner of her mind to consider idly what she will study when she finally gets to 70 years old, and retires, to do her degree in the subject she has learnt the most about.

What Just Happened?

This is the second on my #FutureWork series, and considers an evolution where the backbone of employment is no longer ‘Qualifications’ and career, but rather ‘Opportunities’, within a more portfolio based experience.

In this context, we see key changes:

  • No longer do you do your formal study, and then work till you retire.
  • In this model, you may choose to study, or may choose (or bid for, or be approached for) opportunities.
  • These may be projects, or contracts, task based or time based.
  • Some of these include vocational training, some include mentoring or coaching, some include structured network access, and some include credits that can count towards eventual formal study.
  • There is much greater permeability, so an individual will typically take Opportunities across multiple Organisations, and some Opportunities are structured in this way.
  • Indeed, sometimes competitors create shared baseline capabilities which are targeted at what would historically have been graduate level, recognising the shared skills they all need.
  • Formal educational routes are still an option, and in some fields are essential, but financial reward is linked less to formal qualification, and more into demonstrated capability, which is built through more diverse routes.

 

This is the third of my #FutureWork stories. These are deliberately imperfect, and i am making no effort to ensure they are consistent or aligned. These are fragments of thought that may root or take hold.

 

Posted in Culture, Learning | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments

#WorkingOutLoud on the #FutureWork series

I’m publishing a short series of essays that explore alternative future models of work, and designs for the Organisations and structures of education and reward that sit behind it. These are shared as fragments of thought, not a complete picture, intended as a spur for discussion, not a prediction or an answer.

Today i am working on the second of these pieces, which will explore ‘Qualifications into Capability’, which is really an alternative view of how we structure our work, education and career. It presents a model where ‘career’ is superseded by ‘opportunity’, away from a linear model, into a networked one, where the quality of your leaders and mentors, community, and guides, takes precedence over more formal structures of career.

The central idea is that great leaders, and strong organisations, will present a series of opportunities, with both self directed, and fully supported, development opportunity, probably short form and highly modular, alongside formalised recognition (probably blockchain based) of experience.

I aim to publish this full piece tomorrow.

Posted in Knowledge, Leadership, Learning | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

#WorkingOutLoud on Gentle Leadership

I’m building out a short programme and writing around ‘Gentle Leadership’ (or Quiet Leadership – i have not decided yet). It’s centred around the notion of ‘leadership without heroes’, instead focussed on the small actions of the everyday, and the ways that Social Leaders help the system to find balance.

There are four central areas it will explore: the notion of humility, the role of kindness, the need for fairness, and achieving grace in our action. All four of these are highly subjective, ill defined, and more a matter of speculation and reflection than measurement. But all are also highly valued, and a something judged more in execution than aspiration or statement.

This is the second in a series of short form programmes that i’m playing with, each of which are designed to be delivered at scale. Each of which consists of both taught, and ‘sense making’ sessions, and are intended more as a landscape to explore than a set of answers in their own right.

Social Leadership Harmony

This particular work grows out of the experimental work i did last year around the ‘Forest of Social Leadership’, and it will be based around that forest imagery as i develop it: i love the idea here of the Organisation as ecosystem, and the ways that we each enhance and degrade that system through out actions, every day.

I will share the full content as part of #WorkingOutLoud as it comes together.

Posted in Leadership | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

#FutureWork Stories [Pt 2] – ‘Management into Marketplace’

Anna is a member of the small Strategy Tribe in her Organisation: she comes out of a weekly meeting, held in the reconfigurable Hub, and meets Neharika for coffee. Virtual coffee. She shares the story of strategy that her Tribe have spent the morning shaping, and Neharika bids for the work to turn that into a project. The price she negotiates is not in money, but rather opportunity for the Apprentices in her Guild.

Neharika is a member of the Project Management Guild, which long ago divorced itself from any particular Organisation, and now inhabits a shared space between the top 100 Organisations globally. Alongside a Cyber Security Guild, emergent and fluid teams self organise to structure and translate Strategy into projects, sometimes for money, sometimes for other currencies. These negotiations can include Sabbatical opportunities, where members are loaned between Tribes and Guilds for extended periods, partly to build capability, but also to ensure a strong social fabric and shared understanding.

Anna chose Neharika for this negotiation because, although they have never collaborated before, they are both members of a Coin Network: a blockchain based currency of trust, this particular one of which holds quantified reputation. Neharika’s strong work in the past has been captured in a reputation that she can trade within a gated community.

Neharika determines that they will need a set of assets for this project to succeed: some physical assets, and access to some IP. She shares this with Anna, who recognises a problem.

Don, who controls the IP required, and she have a longstanding dispute. Don controls the IP because he earned equity in it by challenging a previous product owner: he presented his evidence and solution to a committee of IP alumni and was awarded a controlling stake as his challenge was deemed fair, and likely to increase overall value to the community.

Anna recognises that Don will not give her access unless they can somehow quantify their differences, so they agree to contract Selena, a Social Storyteller, to help them: their role is an evolution of the Coach, but who typically works in conflicted spaces to write stories that capture exactly what people disagree on. This mechanism of storytelling can allow teams in fragmented cultures to agree contested space, and also space of limited cooperation. Sometimes they choose to contract currencies of disagreement, essentially codified favours for the future, options to be repaid against future work.

With strategy aligned to resources, and a truce with Don, Anna is able to deliver on her commitment to her Tribe, generating market share and significant profit.

Everyone is happy: shareholders receive a dividend, which reflects a bonus paid because the project had a high social component (the apprentices got valuable experience). Anna, Don, and Neharika’s teams and tribes each received both monetary payment for their time, but also determined, and allocated, social currencies.

Anna minted a coin of recognition for Don, which she coded with ‘gratitude’. Don minted a coin of recognition which he coded with ‘respect’ for Anna, in recognition of her work to help write their Story of Difference. Neharika traded her coin for a dollar bonus, as her Guild required cash for conference and already carried high value in social currencies, recognised in the blockchain networks. Their judgement was that for now, money was more important.

Selena carries their story forward: both the Story of Difference, but also their Story of Success, to their monthly Campfire. At this virtual event, the story is shared, and awarded both ‘challenge’, and ‘recognition’ by the global teams. The project is then debated, to ‘sense make’ it, and lessons are captured in a Wiki. Mistakes are explored, and analysed, then memorialised, so that they are not carried forward. The Organisation hosts a Museum of Failure, where these memorialised stories are lodged, and anyone can visit, to explore.

What Just Happened?

This is the first of my #FutureWork stories. These are deliberately imperfect, and i am making no effort to ensure they are consistent or aligned. These are fragments of thought that may root or take hold.

This Organisation has evolved in key ways:

  • It inhabits a marketplace, where both capability and resource are permeable beyond it’s ownership or control.
  • It keeps key things internal, but in a much smaller group, and contracts widely.
  • It trades in both financial and social currencies.
  • It used blockchain technologies to qualify reputation, and other previously subjective forces.
  • It has expended significant energy, time, and money, to build the ‘interconnecting’ group of Social Storytellers, that help it to find wisdom, not simply within tribes, but between them.

This type of Organisation exists where managers cease to own and deploy, and move to scope, enable, and trade.

This story is not intended to be your answer: it is intended to inspire answers. If we are afraid to change, we will fail.

“Management into Marketplace – we come from a place where managers, within hierarchies, organise and allocate resources (human, intellectual, and material) to achieve known mechanisms of production. The evolution will be into the Organisation as a marketplace, where leaders may bid for teams, where self organising teams or Guilds will own their own development and where productivity may be more creative, but also more consensual, with rewards negotiated according to success or urgency.”

Posted in Future, Learning | Tagged , , , , , , | 3 Comments

#FutureWork – a Series of Imperfect Essays

This week i’m sharing a short series of imperfect essays exploring aspects of the evolution of work, and the Organisations that it takes place within.

Specifically, i am not trying to make this a coherent and congruent view: there may be inconsistencies and disagreement between the views. I am using this as a space for ideas, and fragments of thought that may take root, or blow away in the breeze.

The initial pieces will explore the organising principles of work, and in particular i will try to challenge my own established frames of ‘how things just are’. My aim is to keep these disparate essays in a short and common format, intending to create spaces for conversation more so than ‘answers’.

Initial ideas i will explore include the following:

Management into Marketplace – we come from a place where managers, within hierarchies, organise and allocate resources (human, intellectual, and material) to achieve known mechanisms of production. The evolution will be into the Organisation as a marketplace, where leaders may bid for teams, where self organising teams or Guilds will own their own development and where productivity may be more creative, but also more consensual, with rewards negotiated according to success or urgency.

Qualifications into Capability – exploring an Organisation that values evidenced capability (defined at the application of diverse skills to effect productive means) above formal qualification or specific job role.

Office into Ecosystem – work as defined by a formal place, evolves into many social places where work is realised as an outcome. This will see the transformation of our built environment, a general distribution of labour, a wealth of richly networked third spaces, and the emergence of self organising specialist units of labour that contract into multiple organisations, including education and healthcare.

Separation into Curation – this piece will take a more holistic view about how ‘work’ evolves from something we do, into a central part of who we are, but but that the nature of engagement shifts into a structure that is curated on an individual basis. ‘Work’ in this context will become a series of connected communities and capabilities that we move between over time. Boundaries will be less formal, and the nature of engagement more fluid. ‘Work’ defined by a formal view of separate domains evolves into ‘capability’ as curated by leaders or individuals

Codification into Co-Creation – the idea that the Organisation itself is formally defined as something you join, evolves into the idea of the Organisation as a belief system where everyone has a voice and chooses to believe. Purpose becomes more fluid, accountable, and co-created.

Contract into Fairness – the idea that your primary alignment to an Organisation is legal, evolves into the idea that the primary engagement is based upon fairness (both to you, and to broader society). Notions of social accountability and social justice become core recruitment enablers, and accountability of the organisation leads to a focus on nett contribution to local culture, rather than global unification or homogeneity.

Centralisation into Virtualisation – the idea that we bring people, materials, ideas etc together centrally devolves into connected networks of capability and arms length production. This piece considers specific skills and capabilities, and the mechanisms by which they are learnt.

Money into Mobility – a far future view of an Organisation beyond money, where opportunity and a blockchain based reputation economy takes prominence.

Posted in Change, Worldview, Writing | Tagged , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

5 Broken Things in the New Normal

Amidst much hype of a ‘New Normal’, some things may well have actually changed for good. The Pandemic carries with it two fundamental truths which have finally fractured some dominant narratives of the past.

Firstly, real change happened fast, imposed upon us by circumstance and enforced action before any antibody effects could kick in. A wave of fearful social compliance and lack of organised resistance moved established behaviours fast. And secondly, there has been a protracted period for us to experience something new as a result. The change has been normalised, and if the current arrangements are not permanent, at the very least the old ones are fractured or broken.

Does this mean that things won’t snap back? No, but it may test the elasticity of the system, and some things are almost certainly broken beyond repair. Let’s consider five of them.

Space as Control: for decades Organisations have experimented with virtual work, but clearly it has taken a Pandemic to shift the experience onto the majority. That in itself is not the thing that i would call broken, but the notion of ‘space as control’ is.

The office, even when full of bean bags and dry-wipe walls, is a formal space, governed by formal rules, and under formal control. And ‘remote’ has always been at the discretion, or under the control of, that dominant view. We ‘negotiated’ remote. But that changed as everyone went remote, and a return to ‘normal’ became subject to mysterious ‘COVID Secure’ practices. In other words, to continue as we are requires little effort, but to return to the office requires new rituals, artefacts and behaviours, none of which are readily defined, rehearsed, or intuitive.

Organisations accrete hierarchy, and that hierarchy nests within physical spaces, but deprived of those spaces, a new balance emerges. Of necessity things have been done without negotiation, and for many Organisations, it’s worked remarkably well. Local, tribal, tacit, problem solving, coupled with pragmatic and largely consequence free rapid rehearsal spaces, have led to a new system establishing fast, but one where the Organisation was not central, but devolved.

To attempt to reimpose formal control on this system, especially as we are already seeing by reimposing the need to be in the office, is highly likely to backfire, because it’s imposed upon a largely invested system.

We will go back to the office, but it will be under a model of rebalanced power, and into less utilitarian space.

Teams as Tribes: coupled to the change in space, we have found that formal teams have evolved into social tribes, in a way that simply did not happen when the shared space was formal.

We know that shared experience helps people to bond, and the bonding of the rout to remote has led to evolved behaviours, and a new sense of belonging. Not universally, and not globally, but for many it is local (to team) and persistent, partly shaped by the ways that we are now often ‘sharing’ our family and social spaces and realities with people who previously did not know we had children or guitars.

Teams evolving to encompass an additional layer of social bonding may be a double edged sword for the Organisations that they inhabit: whilst providing what appears to be quite resilient performance during the crisis, they will likely be more unified against any imposed change that does not permit invested ideas, and indeed the co-creation of that future state.

Again, this speaks to the rebalanced power: a socially stronger Organisation, more tribal, is likely to respond better to negotiated change, than imposed.

Technology as King: the third aspect of Organisations has creaked for a while, but may have now broken, which is the idea that technology, as owned by the Organisation itself, is King. As our teams became remote tribes, and as they found their performance fast, it often involved connection, radical connection, through multiple and often emergent and social technologies.

Two years ago my own research showed that NHS teams typically used multiple social technologies in favour of the formally controlled ones, even when specifically not permitted to do so, because they ‘just worked’, but now we have seen this behaviour at much greater scale.

The enduring change will likely be a recognition that only certain systems need to be centrally owned, and fully controlled. More pragmatism around diverse ecosystems of technology will be the most robust route forward which may not be as bad as some may fear.

Technology keeps Organisations safe in one way, but real safety is a cultural phenomena more than a technical one.

Leaders as Managers: this is a more speculative sense of something that has broken, and it’s the ratio of ‘managers’ who allocate work, with ‘leaders’ who perhaps are more invested in culture. It’s an arbitrary and contested definition, but broadly i suspect that we have seen a rise in leadership behaviours of care and connection, and concurrently a diminishing of oversight and direct talk knowledge, largely because you cannot look over someone’s shoulder so easily. And the wheels have not fallen off.

Perhaps this one is just a hope rather than an observation, but i do think that at the individual leadership level we will have seen enduring changes in behaviour, although with the caveat that we will doubtless also have seen emergent inequality and some people more disenfranchised by the current context than are enabled by it.

Knowledge as Business: this one is again somewhat speculative, and i think represents an acceleration of something that was already in flow. Potentially a shift from ‘knowledge as business’ to ‘knowledge as network’. Arguably, we have already moved, or are moving, towards leadership as a collective and highly networked capability, necessitating an evolved mindset towards capability, knowledge, and skills, but the Pandemic may have accelerated this, with more knowledge and actual capability seeping into networks more so than into codified Organisations systems and doctrine.

Essentially it’s because the rapid evolution was not scripted and planned, but largely emergent and co-written, meaning that much information has overflowed traditional (imposed) boundaries, and may reside more locally.

As i say, this is half thought though, but it’s worth remembering that we have already seen a shift from a manufacturing, to a knowledge economy: there is no defining reason why we will stick at this point. Perhaps we stand at the start of the network economy. Post industrial, post knowledge, post control, distributed, devolved, democratised… who knows. The only thing we can be sure of is that it is the innocuous traces of change that are often overlooked as indicators of a paradigm shift.

This is a time of risk, and opportunity, but the opportunity will most likely be held or seized, by those who can reframe their own understanding, and to recognise that change, even change where things are broken, is not the same as loss.

Posted in Change | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Diagnostic to Mechanistic

When we seek to understand something, there is great value in frameworks or tools that can let us observe, categorise, quantify, and assess. Our quest for knowledge leads us to take things apart as we learn how they operate: anything from an engine to the functioning of a market, or the behaviours of leadership.

But during this process, we can slip into mechanistic understanding: our emerging knowledge can gently slide us into a space where we believe we can intervene, where we can effect change, by pressing things and pulling levers.

There is a chasm between learning how something works, and building that capability elsewhere. It’s not a behaviour driven by hubris, but rather by desire: the desire to drive change.

Often it is the journey that is most important, a realisation that may inform how we intervene. Instead of trying to ‘do’ something to a system, we can create the space and support for a system to evolve.

A lighter tough, and carefully nurturing of emergent behaviour, may be more effective than any number of gears and any amount of power.

Posted in Change | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Curiosity – My 1st 100 Days – Day 9 – Where is your Wonder?

My ‘First 100 Days’ books ask you to take 3-5 minutes a day to explore a subject. This is a draft activity exploring ‘Curiosity’.

Take 60 seconds to consider where your wonder lies, where it may take you?

  1. Do you find beauty in discovery?
  2. Does your satisfaction lie in synthesising something discovered into what you already know?
  3. Is your fascination is taking others on a journey?

What do you find wonderful?

  1. Is it the lives of others, and seeing what they achieve and how?
  2. Is it the discovery of the mechanics of a thing: how something works, or the principles behind it?
  3. Is it the pure joy of something that makes you go ‘ah!’

Try to understand where you wonder lies: then compare that view with what you see from your window.

Does your job, your environment, your leadership, permit and enable you to explore this? Are you in balance?

If you were on a spaceship, what would you see through the window: feel free to deface the book to capture this thought.

Posted in Curiosity | Tagged , , | Leave a comment