Recent blog post on Bill Matthies’ Business Wisdom got me commenting on creative chaos and productive neatness. And it got me thinking of brainstorming which might look like creative chaos. But when brainstorming is mastered the creative chaos is actually guided by productive neatness.
I’m not that good at it, but here’s the best practice I learned five years ago by watching the video(s) below by Ideo. While watching the video I sketched the process on the right – the “chaos” at Ideo happens neatly within these boundaries.
I have been writing a lot about organizational change from the organizational point of view, but this Nevin Danielson's ChangeThis Manifesto looks at change from the individual's point of view.
He is talking about organizational change, but you can actually apply his thoughts to political change, economical change or other types of major changes happening around you. Nevin examines the options you have for participating in that system. And submits this challenge: Will you flow with it, flee from it or fight it?
Our radar is constantly on, sensing the cues that we’ll synthesize to decide if we’re actually going to be engaged at work. The end result of our synthesis is a feeling, a feeling of whether we’re content within the system. Are you accepting the status quo? If not, what are your alternatives?
The Flow Option
If you work in an optimal organization, you like it and how it allows you to contribute at your best level, then naturally you can flow with it - unless there is room for continuos imprvoment which is a form of slow change, not flowing.
Or are you just comfortable with the system and flow with it because you are less comfortable with the other options - flee or fight.
Nevin's manifesto argues that we should make the deliberate and courageous choice to NOT flow. You owe it to yourself to find true meaning in your effort. Flee if you must, but consider what it looks like if you choose to fight. It may be a watershed event that defines your career.
The Flee Option
In today's labor market you are free to flee the existing system if you want. By flee, Nevin means choosing to leave the system, ostensibly to go to another system more suited to your needs. But there are risks and challenges with this approach - you do not actually know how the other system looks form inside and it will take time for you to earn credibility in the new system.
Fleeing could be the best option when you know the system you are in is too entrenched to change. It will require too much energy from you to see meaningful progress. Shifting your energy to a new system can be valuable for you, the organization you leave and the organization you go to.
This is actually what I did seven years ago, when I had a mismatch of values and did not see any meaningful future for in at the system I worked for at that time - not even after a period of coaching and partly because the coaching made mee see I was not able to fulfill myself at the system I was in. I have never regretted that decision to flee - it opened me a whole new world in a system where I am able to contribute, and where I am allowed to fight for change.
The Fight Option
Fighting is a pretty strong word. Please forgive the alliteration. By fight, Nevin means that you can work to change the system. If you’re in the system and disagree with it but are passionate about the outcome the organization is pursuing, this may be more of an obligation than a choice.
The variables Levin sees in fighting the status quo:
Loud or Quiet? Are you going to state your intentions and go on the offensive? Alternatively, are you going to disagree with the system and choose simply to not participate? The quiet non-participation does not lead to anything except maybe to you been seen as a non-performer and to change resistance when the system will further develop to something you disagree even more.
Fearless or Pragmatic? If you choose to fight, it really boils down to deciding how much you’re willing to challenge the system. This choice is best envisioned as a continuum. At one end, you fearlessly behave the way you believe you should, even though the system may have consequences, either expressed or implied, for those who behave that way. At the other end, you gingerly select the safe route, expressing your displeasure at the system when you’re not stepping on toes, or perhaps toes of people who can’t hurt you. There can be a feeling of accomplishment if you lean towards the pragmatic option. You see that you are not flowing and you have not fled, ergo, you must be fighting.
Earlier I was more fearless, was about to step on too many toes and became more pragmatic. The pragmatic approach has led to the results I was hoping for. Slowly but surely. Slower than my fearless change agent would have wanted, but I have achieved them at the end anyway.
It’s a delicate balance, but Nevin believes a thoughtful blend of compassionate articulation, well-founded arguments and insightful behavior can be seen as an effort for a greater good. You can stir a change movement that affects the system and creates positive results for the organization.
Lately I have been thinking about Kaizen (continuous improvement), and came across shmula.com blog by Pete Abilla. Earlier this year he wrote a post about The Atomic Rules of Kaizen. The post was so good I will quote it as such:
Systems that are internally consistent and externally pragmatic stem from just a few rules. Systems with exceedingly many rules typically fail or will not endure. For example,
Most mathematical truths stem from just a few axioms
Music stems from just a handful of finite notes
Most Martial Arts stem from a few principles of angle, attack, force, etc.
This same approach is true for Kaizen. In Kaizen, it is important to have fidelity to just a few atomic rules, from which a range of behavior will originate. Below are the rules that I subscribe to:
Spend no Money
Add no People
Add no Space
Add no Steps (Touches)
These four atomic rules collectively form constraints, leading to some creative tension. For example,
We will be compelled to use creativity
We will be compelled toward elegance
We will be compelled to respect people
We will be compelled to question the status quo
We will be compelled to think “we can, if…” instead of “we can’t because…”
We will be compelled to focus on processes, instead of finger-pointing at others
We will be compelled to make many small improvements, instead of big, water-shed changes that take a lot of time and resources
We will be compelled to seek the collective wisdom of many people, instead of a few, select heroes
In a tough economic climate in which we all find ourselves, a Kaizen worldview is needed more now than ever.
Earlier this week Toyota president Akio Toyoda gave a speech which was almost like an answert to my previous post about How should business leaders learn from GM's latest turning point?
In HBS Newsletter last week Nancy F. Koehn, Professor of Business Administration at Harvard Business School, highlighted three fundamental management issues on which GM has failed for decades:
First, pay close attention to what is happening to consumers' lives in the context of the larger environment—not only their stated preferences, but their hopes, dreams, wallets, lifestyles, and values.
Second, keep an equally close eye on the competition.
And third, understand how a company's structure and culture relate to its strategy.
In his speech this week Mr Toyoda addressed all of these fundamental issues and outlined how Toyota is going to move forward. His speech covers many things from company philosophy to recovering from past challenges, from current challenges to realigning the organization and re-segmenting the market to overcome the challenges.
There is one paragraph I want to highlight from the speech, but you should read the whole speech.
Rather than asking, “How many cars will we sell?” or, “How much money will we make by selling these cars?” we need to ask ourselves, “What kind of cars will make people happy?” as well as, “What pricing will attract them in each region?” Then we must make those cars.
Matt May said it well in his blog: If every company leader thought and acted in the transparent manner you will hear in Akio-san's message, I dare say the world would be in a far better position today.
Manager’s Toolbox is my collection of management and leadership best practices. Writing about them forces me to process them and as a result I will better remember them and have them available when I need them.
My aim is to summarize and internalize the knowledge I need during my management career.
Recent blog post on Bill Matthies’ Business Wisdom got me commenting on creative chaos and productive neatness. And it got me thinking of brainstorming which might look like creative chaos. But when brainstorming is mastered the creative chaos is actually guided by productive neatness.
where Ideo presents these rules and stories).
