Imagine: Students Deciding How To Best Learn

Imagine a new educational standard focused on students learning how they best learn and use this undertanding to take more ownership of their own learning.  They would be exposed to a whole range of learning methodologies from flash card memorization to project and inquiry based learning. They would explore and experiment with classroom and virtual media, visual and auditory media, learning on small and larger groups. The would possibly discover that different approaches work with different learning competencies and that as they grow, their best learning approaches might also grow.

This kind of meta-learning, learning how to learn, is perhaps the highest competency requird in a world where all relevant useful knowledge will be in a phone, on your glasses or some other wearables.

The Curious Life Of Plutocracies

Any community, region or country serious about how engaged people feel need to think about how plutocracy fits into the model. Plutocracy is a society or a system ruled and dominated by the small minority of the wealthiest citizens. (Wikipedia) Plutocracy is clearly a complex issue. Once a society reaches the tipping points where elected and appointed government leaders are essentially controlled by the economic influence of wealthiest, no one on either side has the power to change the dynamic. Many policy reform proposals fail to gain enough traction because the dynamic rewards everyone on both sides.

A less published but real issue I often encounter is the "average" citizen's actual deep fear of the chaos that would happen if the wealthiest lost power. They fear more and deeper corporate welfare bailouts and massive layoffs to sustain wealth levels. I believe these fears are enough to keep the whole issue out of everyday conversations, making its continuance more possible.

We need to think about what adult conversations about these issues would sound like and how we can convene them for the good of the whole.

 

 

Getting Beyond Nationalism

Again this year, America will dedicate a day shooting fireworks in celebration of leaving its Mother hundreds of years ago. As we reflect on the future of nationalism, we need to rethink the role of nationalism in a global world. In his current TED talk, policy advisor Simon Anholt suggests that issues at smaller scales are often global issues and whether they are, all scales of issues are most intelligently addressed with global collaborations and strategies.

Interestingly, this is a call for a movement away from the industrial era nationalism that once served to progress civilization, and like many old solutions, now becomes a barrier to new solutions on all scales. 

The least of the nationalism problem is its core bias for competition. Competition in apart means protecting national solutions instead of sharing them. It means striving to do alone what only can be done together. It means fighting for talent, resources and markets instead of connecting these with more collective intelligence and momentum for shared benefits.

So many of the advances in technology, science and medicine we see today came about because of unprecedented collaborations instead of competitions across political and national boundaries.

From his talk: 

Why are we so slow at achieving these advances? What's the reason for it? Well, there are, of course, a number of reasons, but perhaps the primary reason is because we're still organized as a species in the same way that we were organized 200 or 300 years ago. There's one superpower left on the planet and that is the seven billion people, the seven billion of us who cause all these problems, the same seven billion, by the way,who will resolve them all. But how are those seven billion organized? They're still organized in 200 or so nation-states, and the nations have governments that make rules and cause us to behave in certain ways. And that's a pretty efficient system, but the problem is that the way that those laws are made and the way those governments thinkis absolutely wrong for the solution of global problems, because it all looks inwards. The politicians that we elect and the politicians we don't elect, on the whole, have minds that microscope. They don't have minds that telescope. They look in. They pretend, they behave, as if they believed that every country was an island that existed quite happily, independently of all the others on its own little planet in its own little solar system. This is the problem: countries competing against each other, countries fighting against each other. This week, as any week you care to look at, you'll find people actually trying to kill each other from country to country, but even when that's not going on, there's competition between countries, each one trying to shaft the next. This is clearly not a good arrangement.We clearly need to change it.

This reality calls for nation states to finally move from memoralizing independence to celebrating and leveraging interdependence.

The Shift To Meaningful Work

In the upcoming book, due out on Labor Day, on enjoying life without getting stressed about time, Making Sense Of Time, I talk about creating a life of meaning. This is a life of living on purpose of making a positive difference in our world. When people get this notion, some rethink their choice of work or career.

They're working to make or sell things people don't need, things that harm people and/or their environment, things that perpetuate social injustices, income disparities, the dependencies of poverty and food deserts. Or they do work that simply doesn't feed their soul.

These people will only experience of life of significance when they shift their work or careers accordingly. It happen suddenly or in stages but happen it must if they want to enjoy their life to its fullest.

Employee Owned Businesses In Startups

More startups should consider employee owned business models.  First, the problems with the model. It goes against the grain of founder who feel entitled to exclusive rights to ownership, authority and incentives. It mitigates against investors who require control that mitigates against employee ownership. It requires more process intelligence in the organization than usual.

On the plus side, it energizes innovation and engenders loyalty. It attracts talent it wouldn't attract otherwise who would be more committed with the passion of co-owners than entitled employees. It increases productivity because a sense of ownership increases engagement. And, these kinds of businesses more likely cultivate new entrpreneurs which grows local economies.

Conversational Respect Leverages The Power Of Gender Diversity

The research clearly points to the fact that groups are more creative with women engaged in the mix. The gender percentages are irrelevant. All that matters is the quality of gender mixed engagement. Recent data reports that when in gender mixed groups, men tend to talk and interrupt far more when other men are present. We only have access to the advantage of gender variety when everyone practices courtesies of not interrupting, not dominating and engaging in collaborative dialogue.

Competition In The Civic Space

I continue to hear stories of non-profits in communities acting competitively with others with whom they share an impact space. Acting competitively emanates from several salient beliefs:

  • They believe their growth must be about size of impact
  • They believe their growth requires the consumption of as many resources as they can garner
  • They believe the resources they must garner includes the resources of other non-profits
  • They believe deceit is required to get resources of other non-profits

The growth by competition perspective legitimizes all forms of attempts at merger, acquisition, hostile takeover, brand bashing, political maneuvering and inauthentic collaboration which is thinly disguised steps toward guerrilla attacks on other organizations.

When I taught the stages of human development years ago in undergrad psychology, we talked about competition as being a decidedly adolescent conversation.

Partnership is the adult conversation. Partnership is trust based mutual interest for mutual gain. The adult conversation between and among non-profits in common impact spaces is about exactly what kinds of resources anyone can lend to help others and what kinds of resources anyone needs to improve the depth of impact.

For funders who haven't been followng the research, there is no data supporting the mythology that competition makes organizations more innovative. Innovation comes from innovation competencies and a culture of passion and engagement. The fact of monopolistic lack of innovation is not a statement about the lack of competition but the lack of these competencies and culture.

Funders who want to move their funded non-profits from adolescent to adult conversations will do so by hosting and supporting as many partnerships as possible in their communities of interest.

Cooking: The Last Mile

As we consider the self-sustainability for food independence by improving fresh local food access, we also need to pay attentions to the last mile: cooking. If people get all kinds of access to their own and locally grown food but they don't know how to prepare it, they will likely return to expensive, non-local and processed foods. Cooking is the last mile we must travel to make sustainably healthy eating possible.

People with children can learn in their schools. People who visit health care clinics and hospitals can learn there. People who patyicipate in neighborhood associations can learn there, we have to get creative about how people can naturally learn how to cook and how to enjoy cooking.

Voter Engagement

I learned today that apparently the software exists to survey candidates and voters on their respective values, priorities and perspectives so voters can see exactly how a field of candidates scores on commonalities and differences relative to their own. This would make choices more personal, authentic and intelligent. Imagine the possibilities of this kind of engagement. And why not?

The Moral Imperative Of Male Leaders

I learned today that in our world of 8 billion people, women own 2% of the wealth.  Even if this figure is increasing at glacial speed it still speaks volumes about the profound social, economic and political illiteracy that we have about the potential of women entrepreneurship.

I will continue to argue as I have that men in leadership have a moral imperative to individually and collectively work overtime to cultivate cultures where the empowerment of women as entrepreneurs become central to the transformation of local and global communities.

This is not a call for a new paternalism but rather a deep peer respect for the compelling perspectives that women bring to our understanding of sustainability in communities.

Male leaders have a unique position to validate this kind of empowerment.

It is our obligation to our granddaughters granddaughter's legacies. It will take the synergy of new conversations, policies, education, structures and institutions. It is a moral imperative because it is possible.

Collaborating Across Cultures

As I continue my work with teams that span multiple time zones, I stay sensitive to how cultural differences and human commonalities always factor into core dynamics like communication and trust. Let's start with human commonalities. Transcending cultural distinctions, people feel most able to be honest in relationships where trust has been built. People hear others to the extent they feel heard. People make decisions more on intuition of feelings the rationality of facts. People are more creative when they are happier than when miserable.

On the differences side, each culture can differ in the nature of communication, hierarchy, gender assumptions, social courtesies and sense of time and space.

There are several things we can do to optimize cross-cultural collaboration success. Here are a few considerations.

  1. Do not generalize whole cultures. Some cultural differences are regional and ethnic and need to be treated uniquely.
  2. Create time for everyone to share stories and examples of how they relate to things like time, courtesies, trust, respect and communication on a daily basis.
  3. Leverage the universal trust building approaches like personal storytelling and promise making/keeping early and often.
  4. Create safe spaces for people to share their perceptions and discoveries of cultural differences and similarities.

 

 

5 Secrets To Making Mentoring Relationships Work

Each mentoring relationship has its own unique qualities, dynamics and arcs. They can last weeks or years and form around a single focus or a series of evolving questions. That said, whether people choose mentors or they are chosen for them, good mentoring relationships share several characteristics. Strengths are obvious Mentor and mentored know from the start what strengths each brings to the table. These include specific areas of skill, mastery, knowledge, experience, personal qualities and connections. The relationship works when these are known, continuously discovered and leveraged to benefit the mentored.

Communication is clear Both mentor and mentored clearly communicate what matters to them in each interaction. It's important that the mentor knows exactly what the mentored's current questions are. These are what they are working on researching and deciding. If either wants something more than is happening in the relationship, these are stated clearly and immediately.

Learning how to think In the best mentoring relationships, the mentored learns not as much what to think about their questions, but more how to think about their questions. The mentor uses questions, stories and introductions to other resources as prime tools to facilitate this development. The most valuable contribution the mentor makes is when the mentored feels more self-empowered to successfully think through important questions in their future.

Measuring success The best way to begin the relationship is for mentor and mentored to articulate how they would each define success as a result of the collaboration. The more specific the terms and related timeframes the better. Any changes need to be communicated as they shift. Monitoring progress needs to be continuous on a cadence that makes sense to both. The mentor is only as effective as the real time report of progress and changes the mentored reports.

Shared responsibility The mentoring relationship is a collaboration, the opposite of a hierarchy. A collaboration is a partnership based on mutual interest for mutual gain. No one is in charge; responsibility for everything is shared. Both initiate interactions and conversations. Both make sure communication is clear, strengths are engaged, lessons are shared and successes are celebrated. Both sustain mutual care and concern for each other.

Depending on the chemistry and evolving character of the relationship, a mentor can also add the kind of value a coach or friend might. There could also be times reverse mentoring can add value to the relationship, especially in complementary areas of strengths the mentored brings to the table or develops in the process. There is no magic to whether interactions are regular or irregular, virtual, in person or by phone or video. Each relationship finds its own niche that works.

At the end of the day, the mentoring relationship is priceless. It is essential and unique to our professional and personal growth and development.

The Art Of Authentic Civic Engagement (long)

In civic engagement, public institutions and organizations invite community input into their deliberation processes expected to potentially impact the functioning and well-being of the community. Hosting leaders' motivations for civic engagement can be any one of many.

  • They have had good experiences of doing so in previous engagement contexts
  • They are mandated to do so by higher powers
  • They fear reprisals from the community if they don't
  • They are optimistic that experimenting with civic engagement will yield useful considerations for their decision making
  • They believe that creativity exists in the community that is vital to complex issues and opportunities 

Certainly not all civic engagement processes are designed for authentic engagement. When hosting leaders invite authentic engagement, they are intentionally transparent, genuinely interested in building positive connections within the community and clearly demonstrate community impact on the decision making process.

When hosting leaders are mandated to do civic engagement and lack the skill and/or will to invite authentic engagement, they are more simply interested in seeing the exercise as a way to create the appearances of listening while working to convert as many attendees to their conclusions.

The design of inauthentic civic engagement processes is simple and involves only a few key questions:

  • What will be presented on slide decks?
  • How will we maintain control of microphones and time so the fewest number of people speak?
  • What rebuttals to resistance will we have prepared?
  • How will we do any necessary post-event damage control?

Authentic civic engagement involves a completely different set of questions. Here are some examples.

  • Exactly which decisions are hosting leaders inviting the community to engage about?
  • How will the process represent authentic engagement in shaping decisions?
  • How will the natural influencers and connectors in the community be identified and engaged?
  • How will hosting leaders communicate the nature of scope of actual impacts of engagement on ultimate decisions going forward?
  • How will engagement events be structured for optimum community learning, dialogue and creativity?
  • What structures will we use to leverage as much input from and interaction among as many people as possible?
  • Are there important post-decision ways the community can add value to the ultimate and ongoing success of the effort?
  • What success indicators will hosting leaders use to assess the value of the effort?

The success indicators for inauthentic civic engagement are simple: the appearance of "enough" people attending and minimum negativity voiced from the community.

For success indicators in authentic civic engagement processes, here are just 7 of many possible.

  • The number and variety of community attendees in the process
  • The quantity and quality of participant inputs into the process
  • The participant before and after trust in the hosting institutions/organizations
  • The actual impact of community input on hosting leader learning and decision making
  • The ultimate impacts of decisions on the functioning and well-being of the community
  • The increase in connections within the community as a result of the process
  • The community perception that this is a strong, vibrant, flourishing community

Authentic civic engagement, even around the issues of great complexity and sensitivity, helps grow and strengthen communities in the power of the process and the effectiveness of its impacts. At the same time, hosting organizations and institutions deepen their capacity for empathy and creativity from their unique role in the life of the community.

How Smart Do Leaders Need To Be?

How smart leaders need to be is a consideration based on the importance we place on engagement. When a leader's interest is engagement, the leader works to build and leverage the group's collective smarts. Being the "smartest" person in the room is not a requirement for engagement of a group acting smarter together. Engagement has plenty of room for leaders to be subject matter experts for a group. Another way they add unique value is often being one of the people in a group who come to the table with the strongest capabilities to invite new questions.

The Power Of Humor

In my family culture, humor continues to play a figural role in animating affections and softening life's hard edges. I'm not talking about particularly sophisticated or inside jokes humor. Just simple situational commentaries and jests. Humor goes along way in any social and professional context, whether with familiar or new people. Humor juices and humanizes each interaction. There are no substitutes for the unique value humor has.

For several years, I did workshops for health care providers on developing their potentials for using humor with patients and peers. People were typically inspired by the significance of humor and their ability to cultivate it as a core social competency. As they discovered, it is certainly core to emotional intelligence for any context where trust matters.

Onboarding

There is an art to assimilating new employees in organizations. The key is to define the success indicators for the process. One consideration in designing a good process is whether newer or more tenured people are best to do the assimilation activities. Another is who new people get exposed connected to first. These considerations are based on the possibility that not all approaches are equal when it comes to accelerating a successful process. I would also. Argue that it is equally important that others discover new people, including people inside the organizations as well as customers, clients and suppliers. Getting the relationships right is basic to new people getting everything else right.

Transforming Work ... Meet Your New Boss: Trust

Back in the industrial era when the quantities of work could be measured in prescribed units of time, we felt confident we could time-study and predict what anyone could get done spending 8 hours at their desk, machine or work station. These expectations were taken even more seriously when organizations removed choice and communication from employees through the hierarchies of standardized systems, structures, roles and rules. Well, work has changed. People have more access to information and connections than ever. Work requires more choice and communication than ever. The variation of people's strengths has significant impacts on the velocity of work. Technology makes remote and virtual work more possible in ways no one can imagine or predict. Workplaces committed to retaining talent are flexing every dimension of work to achieve the intention.

All this adds up to the now meaningless metric of the 8-hour single-location work day. More workplaces are holding people accountable for specific outcomes not prescribed hours and locations. The new currency is trust. Accountability is no longer measured by the iron fists of bosses but by the social intelligence of trust. The organizations that leverage the new workplace realities and opportunities will be those that learn quickly how to create sustainable cultures of trust.

The Regulations Conversation

What would be the character of an adult conversation about federal and global regulations? We would likely consider how corporations would behave without regulations and what that behavior would say about their capacity for consciousness and conscience. What would many do if they regained the freedom to pay literally the lowest wages possible and produce any profitable toxins and debt possible? And could any government or network of governments ever have the ability to do anything sustainable with corporations who would gladly buy political freedom from profit diminishing regulations?

According to some, stocks would increase considerably which would lead to greater increases in political buying power. According to others, next generations would have medical, environmental and social problems they might not be able to mitigate or resolve.

In the conversation about the next generation, the question of what kind of world we want our children to have is a different question than what kind of world we want all children to have because of our stewardship and legacy. This is a larger conversation than social and environmental justice, or the legitimacy of profit from war, oil and wars about oil.

Adult conversations, I would argue, are those whose character is dialogue motivated by new questions and mutual learning for mutual gain. We need them in these arenas more than ever.

Collaboration, The Opposite Of Hierarchy

In collaboration, people share decisions, thinking, resources and responsibility. It is the opposite of hierarchy which is a two-class system of power haves and have-nots. People who continue to defend the value of hierarchy would argue that there are selected times when collaboration is appropriate in organizations. In a hierarchical parent-child culture, parent figures approve of collaboration for the purpose of generating proposals for higher level approvals.

In these cases, people aren't actually deciding anything together on their own initiative. Their decisions have no power. They are simulating decisions that later become one of any number of considerations that in hierarchies are not required to be transparent. 

All of this raises the interesting question of whether people who have authentic power as collaborative decision makers outperform groups without collaborative power. It's been my experience that indeed they do.

Immigrants As Gifts, Not Problems

Family stories this weekend reminded me of the passion and strengths my grandparents brought to the US as teenagers from places like Naples and Prague. While we debate the legitimacies and restrictions of immigrants, and immigration grows exponentially for all kinds of economic and political reasons, it's time to have adult conversations about how communities can best engage the passions and strengths from other countries.

This is not a complicated conversation because the gifts are real and relavant to the growth potential of many communities who are concurrently doing whatever they can to attract young national talent whose prime distinction is their unchosen geographic origins of birth.