Now be honest, are you really working globally?

Many, actually nearly all, of the clients that I work with have locations in more than one country. Notice that I did not say that nearly all of my clients are global. To me, there is a huge difference.

Companies locate in various countries for many reasons: merger, economics of manufacturing, tax laws, customer reach, new market expansion, the list goes on.

Working across locations does not necessarily mean they are skilled at working globally.

Companies working effectively on a global basis are dealing head-on with the challenges of cross-cultural communications, time zone issues, language barriers, and the need to collaborate across all types of boundaries. There is much more to working globally then simply having multiple international locations.

I remember these same topics discussed in boardrooms in the mid 90’s, when expansion was the name of the game and money flowed freely. We may have missed some valuable opportunities to create the processes, cultural understanding and infrastructure that would have facilitated global success. Perhaps we were running too fast after the short-term opportunities and forgetting the long-term needs and benefits. Sounds familiar, doesn’t it?

The need to work effectively globally will not go away, but will instead be enhanced as US-based companies put even greater emphasis on emerging markets. It may suddenly become apparent to those working in the US that they are the minority in their organizations and most of their colleagues are located across an ocean or at least across a border. I believe that preparation now will be the key to competitive advantage in the future. How will you communicate and share critical learning in lightning speed across geographic and cultural gaps? How will you ensure that everyone in the organization, no matter the location, is as fast, bright, well prepared, and knowledgeable as your best people? There is no time like the present to begin that journey. Or, do we want to continue to work in multiple international locations? Working globally makes a great deal more business sense.

Why Do We Complicate Knowledge Transfer?

I often say to my clients that if people practiced common sense, talked to each other often, openly and honestly and did not make assumptions, I would have much less work. Yes, that is overly simplified but we so often make knowledge transfer overly complicated.

Again today I was reminded of this as I read the blog posting from Mike Myatt at N2Growth. Mike writes about leadership and communication and this posting spoke to the need to carefully choose your words, the order in which you say them and the respectful way in which you speak. Again, this is not complicated yet the impact is profound.     
http://www.n2growth.com/blog/5-communication-tips-for-leaders/

Why is this new news? Why must organizations pay to have external consultants remind them how to communicate, collaborate and team? Somewhere along the line we've lost the plot and we've made it more complicated.

There is no doubt Knowledge Transfer is an asset to a company. We just completed a project with deep business value. Using the Knowledge Transfer principals we facilitated the transfer of manufacturing knowledge between sites around the world resulting in a measurable increase in both capacity and quality in each site. The practices and processes for Knowledge Transfer were essential in this work. However two of the big first wins were the creation of a 'knowledge holders list' to identify those people across all sites with experience and knowledge in the specific manufacturing process, and the creation of a list of system components and parameters to ensure all participants began with the same data on the various manufacturing systems. These two pieces connected people to those they needed across the globe and took away assumptions about the systems they worked with.  Those two pieces required work but it they were not complicated. The clients loved them.

The same can be said for transferring tacit knowledge between people. Again, the standardized processes we bring are critical but it all begins with respectful communication, asking questions from a stance of curiosity not judgement, and listening completely without assumption. Begin there--- begin with respect and a lot of interest and curiosity and you will see the difference.

Of course we enjoy having the work. More than that, we are energized by making a difference. So, let's make a difference by asking real questions, by listening openly and by communicating with respect often. Let's think about how to let others know what we have learned. At  then end of meetings, let's ask what our biggest learning was, who else needs to know and how will we tell them. Let's not make it overly complicated.

The Power Of Expectations

I am constantly reminded about the power of setting expectations. As we work together inside and outside of organizations, and as we get to know each other, we think we understand what is expected of us, and that we are clear with others what we expect of them.

I believe that is actually rarely true. Clarity around expectations is critical but not frequent.

For example, recently I was observing a conversation with a small group of clients who were meeting together to kick off a new project. One of the most talented leaders (let's call her Helen) talked about her expectations of others. She said there were 3 levels of expectations in her mind.

Immediately, her colleague, (let's call him Bob), another well respected leader, agreed. They both smiled and nodded as they acknowledge what they believed were their common thoughts about the 3 levels of expectations they held. Ahhh, alignment.

Or at least the assumption of alignment, which held until Bob began to discuss what he obviously thought they both agreed to: "Yes, three levels: a) not meeting needs b) satisfactorily meeting needs c) super pleasing-- above and beyond meeting needs."

The attitude in the room began to shift.

Helen's relaxed body language changed as she realized that somehow she had not been heard or understood. She became uncomfortable. That led to the group feeling uncomfortable without yet understanding why. Helen stopped the conversation, tipped her head and said "No, I'm not sure you heard me. As we both agreed to, there are three levels of expectations: a) satisfactorily meeting the needs b) above and beyond c) way above and beyond--integrating new pieces even the client would not have thought of. There is no expectations of not meeting needs. And there is an expectation of going above and beyond what people think is above and beyond."

A third colleague, Greg, was standing near by listening in, joined the conversation with, "No really, I think both of your expectations are a bit high." As Greg listed his expectations, the other two began to look aghast. And the sudden realization hit them that they did not share common expectations but held each other to standards no one agreed to. There was no alignment. They had worked together for a long time, and assumed they understood and agreed to expectations held.

This could have been a recipe for disaster. Instead it was an opportunity for honest dialogue and communication. As we all began to talk about the assumptions we make that we are not aware of, the colleagues realized there may be many places they assume alignment but only because they do not check their assumptions. When experiences and values differ, even by a few degrees, that creates a set of beliefs and expectations in each of us that we need to illuminate as we deal with others.

Aligning expectations can seem like it takes time, like it is yet one more way of holding hands and singing folks songs. In truth, aligned expectations can save vast amounts of time and money as resources can be quickly targeted toward agreed to goals, employees are working toward the same objectives with clarity and confidence. Trust is built. People understand clearly what is expected of them and are able to work towards those expectations without mayhem.

What a powerful tool, expectations. What we expect of ourselves, what we expect of others, and what we believe they can expect from us. There are few tools more useful or more impactful in business and yet completely overlooked. Targeted, focused effort toward communication and collaboration around expectations pays back over and over again.

How Trust and Blame Affects Knowledge Transfer

Trust is one of those concepts, like organizational culture, that most of my clients react to by saying..."Yes, this is critical but too big to tackle". Often that means they ignore the issue, thinking somehow magically it will take care of itself.

The truth is that the longer we wait to identify and address issues in these areas, the more ingrained they become and the harder they are to shift. From a business perspective, not addressing issues like trust can impede speed, decrease the ability to collaborate and enhance organizational silos. Employees who work in a culture of little trust keep knowledge to themselves. Why shouldn't they? If they share, they may not be taken seriously. The knowledge they have to share may be wasted on those who believe they have to know the answers themselves and are therefore not willing to listen or learn, much less be involved in good, rich dialogue.

One of the signs or symptoms of lack of trust is the 'blame game.' Yes, you recognize this, I am sure. And, I am sure you realize what a powerful detriment to innovation and collaboration the blame game is. To be honest, I not only witness the blame game in many client organizations, but have seen it evolve to the 'shame game' as well.

Somewhere along the line some organizational cultures have shifted to where employees forget that they have a business arrangement with their companies, a contract, to provide their working hours, time and skills to increasing success and share price while upholding the values and ethics of the organization. When the culture allows or encourages people to put their own success ahead of the good of the company, employees are not fulfilling their obligations to their employers or to the shareholders. In truth, this is not a win for anyone. This is not the formula for sustained success.

The blame and shame games make it quite difficult, and certainly not safe, for innovative thinkers to come up with new ideas, new ways of addressing persistent and critical business problems. If the price of implementing a well considered new idea might be public criticism or humiliation by fellow employees, why would anyone take the risk and try something new, no matter how important it might be to the sustained success of the company?

I am deeply concerned that behavior such as talking behind people's back. feeling like for you to win someone else must fail, being rewarded for keeping yourself both safe and visible is allowed. how do we move forward, create agility, enhance collaboration and innovation in a culture of such deep distrust.

And how do we share the critical knowledge needed for our organizations to survive and thrive?

To that end I have now intertwined the great work being done around trust into the practices and processes for transferring knowledge. These issues can be addressed but they must first be acknowledge. Integrating work of such talented practitioners as Paula Love and Richard Hews allows me to create even more impactful and practical practices to help my clients sustain success. I am committed to being honest about the trends and patterns I see, and working with great collaborators to develop practices and processes to help clients address those patterns. We are all in this together.

Daily Work Life in 2020

A few weeks ago Gartner released their report on the key changes of the nature of work for 2020 and CIO Magazine did a story on it August 4th.

http://www.cio.com/article/602066/Your_Workplace_in_2020_Gartner_s_Predictions

As I read the top 3, I was struck by how often we say-- it is not the technology, it is the people and the process. Yes, technology can enhance but will never replace the human aspect of work.
And now, that seems to be new news.

Gartners' Top 3 Key Changes in the Nature of Work for 2020

1. De-Routinization of work
2. Swarming
3. Attention to Pattern

What do they mean by the De-Routinization of Work?
"The core value that people add is not in the processes that can be automated, but in the non-routine processes, uniquely human analytical and interactive contributions that result in words such as discovery, innovation, teaming, leading, selling and learning." The report goes on to say "Non-routine skills are those we can not automate. For example we can not automate the process of selling life insurance policy to a skeptical buyer, but we can use automation tools to augment the selling process."

Ok, so does that not mean that in 10 years (Really, 10 years??) we will be back to doing what humans do all the time-- we will use our own tacit knowledge and experience to innovate, collaborate, work together, lead and follow, team together and we will do that without the benefit of some type of electronic system? And, this is a new and upcoming trend we must prepare for now?

If that is the case, I have a whole new language for explaining to my clients about my work-- my current work--to guide them to the benefits of identifying and sharing critical tacit knowledge. Now I can tell them that to prepare for the new wave of the future, to be cutting edge, leading edge, they need to start learning to communicate well, to innovate, think originally and critically, share their ideas and their ways of thinking rather than share only their answers. They need to work on team work-- virtual, fast, effecient teamwork. They need to know how to advocate for ideas and how to listen and inquire about others innovations.

In other words, the message continues to be the same. Though I am heartened again to know we are on the right track but when did the need for human innovation and collaboration become such new thought? My deep desire is that it does not take us another 10 years to see the value of sharing our contextual, deeply held knowledge and to innovate using our experience, insight and creativity with the enhancement, not replacement, of technology.

We have the benefit in our society of incredible technology, brilliant advances in all types of systems and machines, that are continuously faster, more powerful, smaller and sexier.
Yet it all comes back to people, to what we do with what we learn and how we do that together in the most effective, effecient, mindful and respectful ways.

I'm glad to hear that I am cutting edge. It should not take a Gartner Report to tell us that we must be innovative, to be continually learning and that we need to do it together.

Is Social Media No Longer a Conversation?

Mitch Joel, in his blog "Six Pixels of Separation" talks about the end of conversation in social media. Before some of us Baby Boomers have even caught on to the power or potential or possiblities around social media, the communication has already changed. In Joel's view, and I tend to agree, there is no longer actual conversation in social media, but simply feedback.

http://www.twistimage.com/blog/archives/the-end-of-conversation-in-social-media/

As I read the blog I could not help but relate it to what happens in an organization when the culture is less than trusting. In a less than trusting culture, few people feel comfortable standing in a place of not knowing or in a place of curiosity. They don't ask big, wide open questions....they ask safe, less risk taking questions. They are less vulnerable, they are less apt to let on that they are beginners. Couple this with intense workloads and reduced resources and you have little time for honest, open, big, wide, juicy, exploratory conversation.

I wonder if that is true now on the web and in social media as well? Because everything we say or respond to or dialogue around can be found and reported and re-read, re-tweeted, re-published, have we lost trust and the ability to engage in authentic dialogue?

Did we ever have big, wide, open, honest, exploratory conversation online?

If not, we should have...the web and social media allowed us to reach out and connect to minds and views and experiences we could not have reached in this lifetime. What a great time to really, deeply, mine and explore and learn.

Perhaps Mitch is right. Perhaps blogs are now simply a place to publish with a bit of feedback, but only one way feedback, and tweeting is simply too constrained for real conversation. Which leads me to wonder if we have missed a rare and beautiful opportunity to delve into some of the deeper questions with those you would have never had the opportunity to meet through other means, to ponder the mysteries of life, to dialoge around why things are the way things are and how we might shift them for the better. I wonder what you think, what your questions are and what the dialogue, the conversation would be around it.

The class of 2011 mindset

The Class of 2011: what Berlin wall?
http://www.beloit.edu/~pubaff/mindset/2011.php

Just think, most students entering college in September were born 1989. Ok, excuse me, but wasn't that the day before yesterday?

Beloit College has published the Beloit College Mindset List for the 2011. The list has 70 factoids for this group of freshman. The list gives you an incredible snapshot of how context is everything. Let me give you a few examples:

1. What Berlin wall?
8. General Motors has always been working on an electric car.
9. Nelson Mandela has always been free and a force in South Africa.
10. Pete Rose has never played baseball.
11. Rap music has always been mainstream.
13. “Off the hook” has never had anything to do with a telephone.
15. Russia has always had a multi-party political system.
23. Wal-Mart has always been a larger retailer than Sears and has always employed more workers than GM

And we wonder if we need to do cross generational bridging in our organizations? I wonder how we are able to communicate at all. We should take heart that we have done as well as we have but we must focus on the multi-generational workforce (as well as multi-cultural). This is to our sustained success...we must learn not only how to work together with different viewpoints, values, ideals...but we also need to know what knowledge is critical to transfer and how we can do it with relevance.

Given the above list and what you will find at the Beloit website, it amazes me that we are so shortsided as to think we can learn to collaborate cross generationally without any assistance. Let us learn to take the best of the best, whatever age they are, and share it with zeal in a way others can absorb. We are not all the same. Thank goodness. Let's work with that and move forward by leaps.

The Knowledge People Leave With

Today I am speaking to the Minnesota League of Cities. I am struck by the fact that the need for managing knowledge and sharing learning, is everywhere. It doesn't matter if it is a large global firm, a mom and pop shop or a governmental agency. We all must learn to share what we know, leverage and use it wisely, to increase our productivity, quality, effectiveness and to sustain success. We all need to make better future decisions based on an understanding of context, future implications, external trends and patterns, and past experience.

Yet we feel isolated somehow. Client groups often tell me they either feel like the only ones who struggle with the issue of knowledge transfer or the only ones who need it. That is not even logical. We need it in families to help our children know how to best navigate in the world, we need it in schools to help teachers teach and to understand how students most effectively learn, and we need it in organizations, to help us all be as good as the best and not continually repeat costly and energy draining mistakes.

Government needs to understand how to transfer knowledge. The complexities faced not only in the Federal sector but in state and local government are enormous. Small towns also must know how to get funds for road construction, school systems, water and other utilities. They must find a way to have police and fire protection and face natural disasters. They must know how to transfer knowledge with few people to transfer knowledge to. That is a huge challenge in and of itself.

All of this to say we are not alone in needing to learn how to cooperate, communicate and manage our knowledge. As you are learning how to do this for your organization, turn around and teach those in the infrastructure that supports you to do the same. Government and non-profit need the same lessons we are learning on the job. Be willing to share your knowledge.

Managing Knowledge Virtually

Recently a colleague told me about the virtual reality site 'Second Life'. It's an online world in which you create an 'avatar' or a virtual self. Of course the new you does not have to look like you or sound like you, but can be any alter ego you wish. The colleague asked how I might approach Knowledge Management in this new world.

http://secondlife.com

As I thought about that and began to explore 'Second Life', I also witnessed a virtual team here in this reality experiencing communication breakdowns and a lack of ability to manage and share their knowledge. The 'real' team struggled to keep each other up to date and in sync while working from various coasts and on varied projects. The storming, forming, norming and performing that is natural for any team was causing breakdowns large enough to threaten their ability to survive as an effective group. They somehow could not make time to meet, keep each other updated on progress, or create shared visions around projects. Things were going awry.

Yes, there are interventions to be put into place, and behaviors which can be enhanced for this team. But if we are challenged still to manage knowledge and behavior across a living, breathing group of individuals, imagine how we might be challenged to do so in a virtual world.

'Second Life' might sound like nothing more than a pipe dream or a new fad, however major companies are exploring this virtual reality world to see how business can be done. In fact, business is already being done, if in a small way. More will come of this, even if it does not replace global commerce. Tools like this may well enhance it. I simply wonder how ready we are. We have not yet mastered the discipline needed for communication across offices, geographies, cultures, generations....and now we are considering doing so across realities.

The Discipline of Managing Knowledge

I often hear clients ask for a whiz bang process to manage knowledge, as though there is a click of the ruby slippers and knowledge is transferred from brain to brain. Click, whoosh and done.

The truth of managing knowledge is that it is a discipline, just as project or risk management are disciplines. If it were not a discipline, knowledge would be passed from person to person or team to team, simply by osmosis and passing each other in the hallway. Yes, some knowledge is shared in that way, and that is important. But is informal, ad-hoc knowledge transfer enough to ensure the hard-earned knowledge critical to your business and unique to your organization, is captured and shared with those who need it at the time they need it, in a way they can use it?

Consider the last time you encountered a new problem and set off to find the expertise, documents, research, or other information relevant to helping you solve that problem. Remember trying to identify who had experienced this before, where the right document would be located, what it would be called if you could locate it, and whether or not it was up to date? Hours of time trying to locate something only to find that when you did, if you did, it was not quite what you needed.

It takes discipline to capture the learning you have about an issue you know may come up again, if even in another flavor. It takes discipline to consider who might need it next, and where might they go look for it, to help you know where to store it. It takes structure to organize that knowledge to make it easy for the particular audience to use-- especially if they are of a different generation, function, culture or organization.

Rather than a silver bullet or a click of the heels, I suggest going back to the basics. Start with the disciplines you already know and practice. Look at your project management and enhance it with questions such as: why did we approach our project this way, what alternatives did we consider and why, who else needs to know this and how will I get them the information they need. Begin by disciplining yourselves to share knowledge in a familiar way, by enhancing structures already in place.

Discipline yourself to role model the behaviors of sharing knowledge and watch the culture change toward doing the more whiz bang knowledge management interventions. Without the foundation of discipline, there is a great likelihood that knowledge shared now may be gone tomorrow. No one has time for wasted effort.