Some of us look at all the changes and panic; others of us just stick our heads in the sand insisting that nothing much has changed. I've found in working with individuals and organizations that those who can map multiple scenarios for how the future could unfold can keep their calm, access their creativity and stay afloat.
How are you responding to the current crisis?
What do you know about the 1, 2 and 5 year future?
What don't you know?
How are you retooling to thrive amid uncertainty?
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Career management is an act of leadership
In our rapidly changing work landscape it's time to promote and reinvent ourselves. Such is the pathway to continuing success and satisfaction. It is also the way we can have the greatest impact as leaders. When you reinvent yourself you are drawing on your passion, reconnecting with your values and using foresight. I have found that many people have trouble doing this on their own since it is so hard to challenge our past identities, or get to our best thinking, even if we want to move in a new direction. And this is especially true in crisis times.
What have you always wanted to do that you haven't yet done?
Are you using your creative talents to their fullest right now?
What have you always wanted to do that you haven't yet done?
Are you using your creative talents to their fullest right now?
Creativity is more important than ever!
Leaders who want to make a difference need to be more effective, creative and far-sighted in a time of rapid change and reduced resources. But how do we actually do that? The default position for many of us is to operate from a mindset of scarcity. But crisis-thinking narrows, rather than opens up options. So the psychology of scarcity only serves to make things worse.
Down economies are good times for bolstering innovation and creativity about doing more with less.
What kinds of investments have you made to help maximize your own and your peoples' creativity and resourcefulness?
What additionally might you do in the coming months?
Down economies are good times for bolstering innovation and creativity about doing more with less.
What kinds of investments have you made to help maximize your own and your peoples' creativity and resourcefulness?
What additionally might you do in the coming months?
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Making a habit of asking "What If?"
I wrote the scenario below --called "Dependent America" -- back in June as one of four possible 15 year futures --worlds of 2023 -- in which we'd be struggling to sustain the middle class. I'll share the other three in subsequent posts.
The project uses a powerful and fascinating technique -- scenario thinking -- in which you develop four plausible stories about the future in order to stretch your thinking about what is possible, and so that you can plan for the unexpected. (For more on scenario thinking see my website ; also check out http://www.gbn.com/ -- where I was trained to use this tool).
As I look back over these last few months, it looks truer and sooner than I expected.
As you read through it, ask yourself -- what do you see unfolding that seems to support this scenario? what about it seems most or least plausible? how would your work change if this scenario were to develop?
Dependent America: 2023
This is a world in which America’s example and vibrancy to attract global talent and investment is severely diminished. Its military power and reach have declined significantly, but government plays a larger role than it has for many years – both in regulating and providing. Globalization has slowed overall, but China and Europe have pulled ahead, having been the first movers on alternative energy and bio-sciences innovation, respectively. The U.S.’s historic role as a haven for migrants from around the world has shifted, and now more highly educated Americans are moving abroad in larger numbers.
The U.S. is a fine place to live – with higher levels of equity and a lower level of material consumption. "Simple" and "functional chic" were choices at first, when the "green tipping point" led some people to move off the grid in order to diminish their carbon footprints. By 2015, "functional chic" was a necessity, increasingly mandated by government, along with mandates about healthier eating and ownership.
ZipCars arrival on the scene in the early 2000s were viewed as a novelty, but in 2023 many people have forgotten what it was like to own their own car; vehicles are now generally shared by several families. By 2023, simple and low consumption was a way of life. Anyone who longed for the "good old days" of materialism or fast-paced, innovative business culture had to go abroad, most likely to Asia. They are now helping support families and favorite social causes back home.
While acceleration of life had once seemed inevitable with Moore’s Law and 24-7 trading, the world of 2023 is slower. Striving for success is no longer valued as the only pathway to a worthwhile life. "Slow down, don’t compete" became a popular catch-phrase. In part, this is because Americans can no longer compete with other global super-powers. But the slower-paced life is also driven by strong norms against consumption, as well as opposition to the whole ethic of innovation that had once been so pervasive. The U.S. government, in an attempt to recover an edge in innovation, is aggressively trying to attract highly-educated workers, both American ex-pats and non-Americans. One of its main recruitment strategies is an advertisement campaign in global newspapers touting America’s "multi" culture where anyone of any culture can feel at home.
The project uses a powerful and fascinating technique -- scenario thinking -- in which you develop four plausible stories about the future in order to stretch your thinking about what is possible, and so that you can plan for the unexpected. (For more on scenario thinking see my website ; also check out http://www.gbn.com/ -- where I was trained to use this tool).
As I look back over these last few months, it looks truer and sooner than I expected.
As you read through it, ask yourself -- what do you see unfolding that seems to support this scenario? what about it seems most or least plausible? how would your work change if this scenario were to develop?
Dependent America: 2023
This is a world in which America’s example and vibrancy to attract global talent and investment is severely diminished. Its military power and reach have declined significantly, but government plays a larger role than it has for many years – both in regulating and providing. Globalization has slowed overall, but China and Europe have pulled ahead, having been the first movers on alternative energy and bio-sciences innovation, respectively. The U.S.’s historic role as a haven for migrants from around the world has shifted, and now more highly educated Americans are moving abroad in larger numbers.
The U.S. is a fine place to live – with higher levels of equity and a lower level of material consumption. "Simple" and "functional chic" were choices at first, when the "green tipping point" led some people to move off the grid in order to diminish their carbon footprints. By 2015, "functional chic" was a necessity, increasingly mandated by government, along with mandates about healthier eating and ownership.
ZipCars arrival on the scene in the early 2000s were viewed as a novelty, but in 2023 many people have forgotten what it was like to own their own car; vehicles are now generally shared by several families. By 2023, simple and low consumption was a way of life. Anyone who longed for the "good old days" of materialism or fast-paced, innovative business culture had to go abroad, most likely to Asia. They are now helping support families and favorite social causes back home.
While acceleration of life had once seemed inevitable with Moore’s Law and 24-7 trading, the world of 2023 is slower. Striving for success is no longer valued as the only pathway to a worthwhile life. "Slow down, don’t compete" became a popular catch-phrase. In part, this is because Americans can no longer compete with other global super-powers. But the slower-paced life is also driven by strong norms against consumption, as well as opposition to the whole ethic of innovation that had once been so pervasive. The U.S. government, in an attempt to recover an edge in innovation, is aggressively trying to attract highly-educated workers, both American ex-pats and non-Americans. One of its main recruitment strategies is an advertisement campaign in global newspapers touting America’s "multi" culture where anyone of any culture can feel at home.
Want to jumpstart your effectiveness and creativity? Invest in capacity building
We use the somewhat deadening word "capacity building" to refer to some of the most important and undervalued aspects of organizational work: helping ourselves and the people who work with or for us to access their most creative, collaborative and effective selves. And, dare I say it, tapping into our sense of passion and purpose.
Capacity comes from Middle English roots meaning roomy and to hold. "Build" means to establish, increase or strengthen.
We analytically trained people, who do policy, advocacy, writing and strategy work, tend to think we have all the capacity we need -- mostly in our heads. We have our natural talent, no increasing or stengthening needed, thank you.
But why are we willing to invest in acquiring more and more knowledge, or learning to ski, but not to tap into our best selves? Why are we willing to endure less than productive meetings and thinking processes and participate in them over and over again?
A few questions to ponder as you think about whether you need to do this:
How can you expand your thinking -- and explore it in all its roominess -- to hold the most possibilites you can? How can you make room in your day to connect with your sense of purpose? How can you help your people or your organization to hold even more of your collective energy and creativity? What will you lost if you don't do this, particularly during these challenging times?
Capacity comes from Middle English roots meaning roomy and to hold. "Build" means to establish, increase or strengthen.
We analytically trained people, who do policy, advocacy, writing and strategy work, tend to think we have all the capacity we need -- mostly in our heads. We have our natural talent, no increasing or stengthening needed, thank you.
But why are we willing to invest in acquiring more and more knowledge, or learning to ski, but not to tap into our best selves? Why are we willing to endure less than productive meetings and thinking processes and participate in them over and over again?
A few questions to ponder as you think about whether you need to do this:
How can you expand your thinking -- and explore it in all its roominess -- to hold the most possibilites you can? How can you make room in your day to connect with your sense of purpose? How can you help your people or your organization to hold even more of your collective energy and creativity? What will you lost if you don't do this, particularly during these challenging times?
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Honor your creativity, don't drown in it
I can say from experience what it is like to be an entrepreneurially minded person: I'm in one of those moments now -- they happen every few weeks; at times every few days: I look around and realize I'm excited to be pursuing about ten ideas when all I can handle is one, at most three. I surf from one exciting possiblity to the next idea that is too fascinating and too good to put down.
Before I know it I am lost in a cloud of more and more ideas, moving and an ever faster pace, swirling around with no center. I am stuck.
Entrepreneurs, a wise person once told me, can either move mountains or burn out in despair. I do have a technique for getting out of this, if I remember to use it. You can use it too.
Buy a notebook and label it "good ideas." Use it as a place to note ideas as they come along: honor them. Write a few lines so you are sure you remember what's there. And then take the ones that have traction and leave the rest behind. You will not have lost them. They'll be there in a year or five when their time has come.
Before I know it I am lost in a cloud of more and more ideas, moving and an ever faster pace, swirling around with no center. I am stuck.
Entrepreneurs, a wise person once told me, can either move mountains or burn out in despair. I do have a technique for getting out of this, if I remember to use it. You can use it too.
Buy a notebook and label it "good ideas." Use it as a place to note ideas as they come along: honor them. Write a few lines so you are sure you remember what's there. And then take the ones that have traction and leave the rest behind. You will not have lost them. They'll be there in a year or five when their time has come.
Monday, November 3, 2008
How to Break Free of Group Think: Challenge the Crowd
Why is it that we pay so little attention to the impact of psychology in our policy discussions, when it is psychology -- in this case, of the policy makers, experts and pundits themselves -- that so often leads our smartest and most talented people to achieve less than they should?
I'm happy to see that some pundits are coming around, and that we are beginning to see a conversation about the human thoughts and feelings that shape the pronouncements of experts -- with sometimes dire consequences.
Yale economist Robert Shiller recalls Irving Janis' classic book "Group Think" in his insightful article in yesterday's New York Times Business section as a way of explaining why more economists did not foresee the financial crisis. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/02/business/02view.html
The idea is that often experts fear that "if they deviate too far from the consensus, they will not be given a serious role. They self-censor personal doubts about the emerging group consensus if they cannot express these doubts in a formal way that conforms with appraent assumptions held by the group."
Schiller goes even further though in his analysis of what keeps economists in particular from believing warnings about bubbles. He points to another social-psychological phenomenon -- that economists do not have the tool kit to understand psychology by virtue of their training, even if in casual conversation they regularly speak about the kind of mass psychology that can lead to speculative behavior. They prefer to focus the discussion to things they understand well.
Furthermore, those who are drawn to the study of economics, with its technical and mathematical character, tend not to be attuned to psychological nuances -- particularly those that may lead to massive errors in judgement.
This is why the new field of behavioral economics, that has so influenced Shiller's own work, continues to be marginalized by the field of economics, even as those titles move to the top of best sellers lists.
Until we focus on the humans behind the ideas, and shift the culture of the social sciences, we'll be stuck with experts who cannot lead.
How can you build your tool kit to become a thought leader?
1) Learn to recognize your assumptions: do a self assessment (design this)
2) what do you really care about: what is your vision for your personal impact?
3) When was the last time you said: "that can't happen" and been wrong?
4) Have you been willing to take outliers in your field seriously? Identify those people in your circle who challenge conventional wisdom and take them to lunch.
I'm happy to see that some pundits are coming around, and that we are beginning to see a conversation about the human thoughts and feelings that shape the pronouncements of experts -- with sometimes dire consequences.
Yale economist Robert Shiller recalls Irving Janis' classic book "Group Think" in his insightful article in yesterday's New York Times Business section as a way of explaining why more economists did not foresee the financial crisis. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/02/business/02view.html
The idea is that often experts fear that "if they deviate too far from the consensus, they will not be given a serious role. They self-censor personal doubts about the emerging group consensus if they cannot express these doubts in a formal way that conforms with appraent assumptions held by the group."
Schiller goes even further though in his analysis of what keeps economists in particular from believing warnings about bubbles. He points to another social-psychological phenomenon -- that economists do not have the tool kit to understand psychology by virtue of their training, even if in casual conversation they regularly speak about the kind of mass psychology that can lead to speculative behavior. They prefer to focus the discussion to things they understand well.
Furthermore, those who are drawn to the study of economics, with its technical and mathematical character, tend not to be attuned to psychological nuances -- particularly those that may lead to massive errors in judgement.
This is why the new field of behavioral economics, that has so influenced Shiller's own work, continues to be marginalized by the field of economics, even as those titles move to the top of best sellers lists.
Until we focus on the humans behind the ideas, and shift the culture of the social sciences, we'll be stuck with experts who cannot lead.
How can you build your tool kit to become a thought leader?
1) Learn to recognize your assumptions: do a self assessment (design this)
2) what do you really care about: what is your vision for your personal impact?
3) When was the last time you said: "that can't happen" and been wrong?
4) Have you been willing to take outliers in your field seriously? Identify those people in your circle who challenge conventional wisdom and take them to lunch.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
