I receive an e-newsletter from Genius Catalyst which I always read. How often do we actually say we read an e-newsletter each time it arrives?
This one is well worth the time. I am attaching part of yesterday's edition.
I put it forward to you today as a reminder of how critical our choice of language is as we work to manage knowledge. The experiment provided here is a powerful example of how our language builds trust, and how trust impacts our work, our relationships and our organizations. Trust is a primary component to managing knowledge.
Enjoy, and when you have a chance, take a look at Genius Catalyst.
"The greatest gift we can give our children is a yes that means yes and a no that means no."
-Bill Cumming
Many times, in our desire to leave options open or in an effort to be polite, we say "maybe" to things we know in our hearts we do not really want to do (or will simply not follow through and do).
The problem with saying "maybe" when we actually mean "no" is that we begin to learn that what we say is not to be trusted - that far from our word being our bond, it's just "noise in the machine".
How would your relationships with others (and your relationship with yourself) change if you suddenly began to not only mean what you say but also to say what you mean - that is, if you not only walked your talk but began to talk your walk?
--------------------
Today's Experiment:
--------------------
1. Choose a day this week where you do not have any "earth-shattering meetings" during which changing your habitual communication patterns might be hazardous to your long-term future.
2. When that day arrives, resolve to speak ONLY when you can put yourself 100% behind each and every word you utter.
3. Decide when else it might be appropriate to experiment with the power of your word.
As my friend and mentor Bill Cumming says, "If someone doesn't get that you mean what you say when you say "No", they won't think you mean what you say when you say, "I love you."
Have fun, learn heaps, and talk your walk!
Copyright info for the following: This newsletter and all content within it is (c)2007 Michael Neill and Genius Catalyst Inc. except where otherwise noted.
Monday, July 30, 2007
Sunday, July 29, 2007
Are we ready for the wonders of communication and technology
Do you find it hard to keep up with all of the new technologies and uses of them? I wonder on occasion if we as humans are actually ready to keep up with the myriad of possibilities laid out for us. Do we know the basics of communications well enough to do it in real time, immediately, between cultures and languages and traditions?
My question really is, if we are not yet superb at the subtleties of face to face communication, how do we think we can do it real time, around the world, using short text and never meeting.
And if we are that good, why are we not applying it to making our organizations work effectively, addressing global issues or communicating between countries to create common language and understanding.
I am perplexed. We can use sites like Twitter to share what each of us are doing at exactly this moment, yet can not find a way to stop bloodshed or increase across cultural communication or even to help feed our neighbors when in need.
Maybe I am the only one who wishes we would apply our new found communication to issues which will bring us forward rather than creating videos of babyies acting as little landlords to allow a comedian to be seen around the globe. We don't just need the tools, we need the common sense and set of priorities to use them. We need to keep the motto "Do the Right Thing" in mind as we build and use the streams of communication we work so hard to create.
Being talked at is not a good use of your time either, dear reader. Many of you let me know by email what you think of my posts and I appreciate the feedback. Perhaps you'd like to let each of us know about your thoughts on the subject above and post them to the blog. I, for one, am listening.
My question really is, if we are not yet superb at the subtleties of face to face communication, how do we think we can do it real time, around the world, using short text and never meeting.
And if we are that good, why are we not applying it to making our organizations work effectively, addressing global issues or communicating between countries to create common language and understanding.
I am perplexed. We can use sites like Twitter to share what each of us are doing at exactly this moment, yet can not find a way to stop bloodshed or increase across cultural communication or even to help feed our neighbors when in need.
Maybe I am the only one who wishes we would apply our new found communication to issues which will bring us forward rather than creating videos of babyies acting as little landlords to allow a comedian to be seen around the globe. We don't just need the tools, we need the common sense and set of priorities to use them. We need to keep the motto "Do the Right Thing" in mind as we build and use the streams of communication we work so hard to create.
Being talked at is not a good use of your time either, dear reader. Many of you let me know by email what you think of my posts and I appreciate the feedback. Perhaps you'd like to let each of us know about your thoughts on the subject above and post them to the blog. I, for one, am listening.
Friday, July 27, 2007
Just how complicated can we make this?
I have come to believe some organizations and individuals allow themselves to feel overwhelmed by the task of identifying and sharing knowledge. They decide that managing knowledge is all too complicated and they just don't have time.
So, who said they had to start with the most complicated pieces and go from there? Frankly, starting at the complex, in my humble opinion, will lead to failure. It is like teaching a child to run before they walk or crawl-- simply doesn't work and isn't logical.
If every organization took it upon themselves to be disciplined enough to do the following, experience shows they could shift their culture toward a learning environment. Yes, with just the following changes.
1. For every meeting, create an agenda which includes a well crafted description of the purpose of the meeting, what role is played by the meeting (make decisions, have discussion, create new ideas, etc), identify those who are mandatory and those who are optional, describe each meeting topic and who will present it, and let people know if they are able to send a delegate or not.
2. Designate a note taker at the beginning of the meeting (or before) and clearly describe their role. Do not take verbatim notes (unless it is a requirement) but focus on the key learning, the action items, the areas for further exploration. Get the notes out to people directly after the meeting.
3. At the end of the meeting determine: What are the key learnings from the meeting, Who needs else needs to know them, How will they be shared?
The last three points are key. OK, this is simple, isn't it? Now, try to put it into play. What do you need to have in the organization and in yourself to make that happen consistently. If you do not have discipline to have effective and productive meetings, and share your learning after, what would lead you to believe you will have a successful complex KM initiative?
Let's keep it simple. Here is an example of a website that does just that. They know their audience, they know their content, they make it simple to reach. The subject (astrophysics) is not simple at all. But the subject seems quite uncomplicated on this site. Let's hear it for Harvard!
http://www.cfa.harvard.edu
Don't fret that you have not yet found a way to put social networks to work. Get the basic hygiene of sharing knowledge right and you will come a long way. How complicated do you need to make it?
So, who said they had to start with the most complicated pieces and go from there? Frankly, starting at the complex, in my humble opinion, will lead to failure. It is like teaching a child to run before they walk or crawl-- simply doesn't work and isn't logical.
If every organization took it upon themselves to be disciplined enough to do the following, experience shows they could shift their culture toward a learning environment. Yes, with just the following changes.
1. For every meeting, create an agenda which includes a well crafted description of the purpose of the meeting, what role is played by the meeting (make decisions, have discussion, create new ideas, etc), identify those who are mandatory and those who are optional, describe each meeting topic and who will present it, and let people know if they are able to send a delegate or not.
2. Designate a note taker at the beginning of the meeting (or before) and clearly describe their role. Do not take verbatim notes (unless it is a requirement) but focus on the key learning, the action items, the areas for further exploration. Get the notes out to people directly after the meeting.
3. At the end of the meeting determine: What are the key learnings from the meeting, Who needs else needs to know them, How will they be shared?
The last three points are key. OK, this is simple, isn't it? Now, try to put it into play. What do you need to have in the organization and in yourself to make that happen consistently. If you do not have discipline to have effective and productive meetings, and share your learning after, what would lead you to believe you will have a successful complex KM initiative?
Let's keep it simple. Here is an example of a website that does just that. They know their audience, they know their content, they make it simple to reach. The subject (astrophysics) is not simple at all. But the subject seems quite uncomplicated on this site. Let's hear it for Harvard!
http://www.cfa.harvard.edu
Don't fret that you have not yet found a way to put social networks to work. Get the basic hygiene of sharing knowledge right and you will come a long way. How complicated do you need to make it?
Monday, July 23, 2007
Managing Personal Medication Knowledge
Sometimes we are able to find sites which provide not only excellent practical, usable knowledge but great examples of how to organize and represent information well. This is true in the Consumer Reports site on Medications.
http://crbestbuydrugs.org
The folks at Consumer Reports have listened well to their audience and created a site which answers questions, provides background information and helps the audience make well informed decisions. It is eye opening in the area of drug to drug interaction and the risks involved in taking multiple medication. We assume our physicians understand each drug and will consider how the new drug they prescribe to us will interact with current drugs taken. However the complexities of such knowledge are highlighted here.
As we consider the medications we take, we must be well informed consumers, proactive in our own care. This site helps each us make sense of a complex situation. http://crbestbuydrugs.org
I highly recommend a review of the site, not just as a consumer of medications but also as a KM practioner. Well done, Consumer Reports.
http://crbestbuydrugs.org
The folks at Consumer Reports have listened well to their audience and created a site which answers questions, provides background information and helps the audience make well informed decisions. It is eye opening in the area of drug to drug interaction and the risks involved in taking multiple medication. We assume our physicians understand each drug and will consider how the new drug they prescribe to us will interact with current drugs taken. However the complexities of such knowledge are highlighted here.
As we consider the medications we take, we must be well informed consumers, proactive in our own care. This site helps each us make sense of a complex situation. http://crbestbuydrugs.org
I highly recommend a review of the site, not just as a consumer of medications but also as a KM practioner. Well done, Consumer Reports.
Thursday, July 19, 2007
The Time It Takes To Manage Knowledge
I've written in this blog before about the desire in organizations to have a silver bullet to address knowledge management. Some organizations simply think there should be one process to handle all of the challenges of sharing what they know across the organization. What's more, that one process should also get them to work well together across boundaries, collaborate openly and hold hands while singing kumbaya. Right.
In that same vein, organizations will say they want that one process to take an hour because they are simply too busy. Too busy to learn? As though 20 years of accummulated technical or scientific knowledge combined with a depth of understanding of the organization, the industry, or the regulators, can be transferred back to the organization in two hours.
If it was that fast and that easy, it would have been done. And often what keeps the organization so busy is rework from redundant mistakes which could have been prevented by taking the time to learn.
To me, this is a matter of the organization not taking responsiblity for it's own issues. For example, sharing knowledge is not just about creating a process, it is about creating a culture in which knowledge sharing is valued. The culture must allow and facilite honest talk, to learn from both the successes and mistakes made. We, as consultants, can not give an organization time if they do not make the time. We can not create a process to faciliate learning if the organization will not take the time to learn. At some point the organization must stop and take accountablity for their own issues. Do they value the experience and learning held by each employee, or do they not? They must be honest. Learning requires honesty, courage and openness. There is not a process in the world that can replace those traits. A well crafted process can have some limited effect, and can begin to change the culture, but that will not last if the organization squealches learning.
If an expert is willing to share what they have learned over years of experience, but are told that they can only have 2 hours of time to identify and share the knowledge, is that not an insult to them? And add to that only a few people will be given the time to learn and if the expert speaks of mistakes it might hurt their career. Why would they bother? It sounds more harmful then helpful.
Where did we stop taking responsiblity for ourselves in organizations? When can we step up to the plate and know that for an organization to succeed in the long term, we must each develop the willingness to look at ourselves, our work, our outcomes honestly and determine what is working, what is not, and how to fix it. We need to know what role we play in the success of the organization and not be timidly deciding that we can not rock the boat or make waves (or mix metaphors). We must take the time it takes to share knowledge, to learn from each other, to have the conversations and dialogue needed to be innovative and continually improving. Less than that simply provides only a short term illusion of success.
In that same vein, organizations will say they want that one process to take an hour because they are simply too busy. Too busy to learn? As though 20 years of accummulated technical or scientific knowledge combined with a depth of understanding of the organization, the industry, or the regulators, can be transferred back to the organization in two hours.
If it was that fast and that easy, it would have been done. And often what keeps the organization so busy is rework from redundant mistakes which could have been prevented by taking the time to learn.
To me, this is a matter of the organization not taking responsiblity for it's own issues. For example, sharing knowledge is not just about creating a process, it is about creating a culture in which knowledge sharing is valued. The culture must allow and facilite honest talk, to learn from both the successes and mistakes made. We, as consultants, can not give an organization time if they do not make the time. We can not create a process to faciliate learning if the organization will not take the time to learn. At some point the organization must stop and take accountablity for their own issues. Do they value the experience and learning held by each employee, or do they not? They must be honest. Learning requires honesty, courage and openness. There is not a process in the world that can replace those traits. A well crafted process can have some limited effect, and can begin to change the culture, but that will not last if the organization squealches learning.
If an expert is willing to share what they have learned over years of experience, but are told that they can only have 2 hours of time to identify and share the knowledge, is that not an insult to them? And add to that only a few people will be given the time to learn and if the expert speaks of mistakes it might hurt their career. Why would they bother? It sounds more harmful then helpful.
Where did we stop taking responsiblity for ourselves in organizations? When can we step up to the plate and know that for an organization to succeed in the long term, we must each develop the willingness to look at ourselves, our work, our outcomes honestly and determine what is working, what is not, and how to fix it. We need to know what role we play in the success of the organization and not be timidly deciding that we can not rock the boat or make waves (or mix metaphors). We must take the time it takes to share knowledge, to learn from each other, to have the conversations and dialogue needed to be innovative and continually improving. Less than that simply provides only a short term illusion of success.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)