My daughters education inspired by the honey bee

Now that I have a daughter I am beginning to imagine what her education looks like. No longer am I hypothesising about the general problems with education but rather wondering about what do I want her to experience.

And I'm not confident that the elitist the more you pay the more you get access to networks and opportunity model, that seems to be where the Australian model continues to move, is what I want for her.

Kids are inherently creative, innovative and without boundaries. I have written about this before . Innovation and creativity with people at the centre happens naturally when the environmental and social factors converge in that magical mix. So why isn't there an educational environment that strives for the mix of these factors that will allow every child to be successful. It is much the same challenge as organisations have when attempting to create a culture of innovation within themselves. And yet those whom we hold up as truly innovative increasingly have elements which do not look like the traditional model. When will education learn these lessons? What does the model look like?

If you haven't come across an example of the power of these factors then I urge you to read up on the Honey Bee Network. A movement in India that recognises that knowledge use has been historical asymmetrical, the holders of informal knowledge are often at the forefront of innovation and creativity and yet are rarely the beneficiaries of the benefits that can come (economic or otherwise) from their knowledge.

I purport that the same is true of our education system. In a world where our knowledge breath and depth are growing once we have the fundamentals mastered we should enable access to both formal and informal knowledge across the community agnostic of age but with interest, creative problem solving and relevance as the drivers. At 14 years old perhaps my daughter will hold the key to the next biomedical breakthrough, as this child has, with the help of informal learning from his father. The challenge is to design an education system that connects children to experts based on their interests, allowing her and our community to benefit from this potential.

Traditional change management doesn't work. So what's the alternative?

A clear goal without being able to see all of the 'how' along the journey

A comment on CEB Global's white paper "Making change management work"

The statistics are well known. Measured by those who implement change over 50% of change initiatives are considered to have failed. It is not seem to be unique to an industry, country, type of change or size of the organisation. So if resources, culture and know how don't make change successful what does?

In their whitepaper CEB go some of the way to identifying the route causes and helpfully look at what will work. They conclude that change must be owned bottom up, my experience would agree. As employees we do not expect to behave like a robot, we want to contribute, influence and feel valued.

CEB also note that the types of change we need to implement are becoming more complex. My operations perspective of organisations as akin to an organism, operating within an eco system, with one dependent on the other and yet able to influence it, would concur. Organisations must change to respond to the highly variable nature of todays operating environment and yet with deep subject matter expertise required in many industries (if not all) and increasingly interconnected social, political, cultural, functional and informational systems (Narayana & Nath 1993) how can we possibly plan and implement change with any certainty of the outcome.


So it is all very well to say change needs to be 'owned' but what does that look like and how to we shift our mindsets. Here are the 3 key things that I believe leaders need to support this type of thinking:

1. Boundaries or constraints and goals

The architect Fooi-Ling Khoo of OOF! Architecture was recently quoted as saying 'constraints are the friend of creativity'. I believe this is true of the change management process too, however I have a caveat - if as a leader you apply boundaries be prepared for them to be proven invalid. How can we expect those who work for us to be creative with implementing change if we do not recognise when the status quo no longer applies?

The organic view of organisations allows for, and actually expects, the organisation to evolve. This in turn changes the boundary conditions in which and with which it operates. For example in reviewing travel insurance requirements personal items of high value can one day be regarded as a liability and with a minor change in technology, the next they become essential tools for emergency management.

I have always encouraged the teams I have lead to gently challenge the boundaries and assumptions on an ongoing basis. There is always one which has become invalid and you never know it might lead to the next break through opportunity for your organisation.

Goals are a different beast. As a leader it takes practice to articulate a goal without embedding the 'how'. When you're empowering a team they and you must have a mutual understanding of the goal and therefore what success looks like. I strongly advocate for intermediate goals to be defined too because this allows clarity of when progress has been achieved.

Not to mention without goals how will you know when to have cake to celebrate!

2. Be less rigid (and by that I mean entirely flexible) about the 'how'

The end goal in any change is the ultimate determinant of success. Traditional change management places far too much emphasis on the how change will be implemented.

Rigidity on how a change is to occur restricts those who, as CEB observe, hold the subject matter expertise and whom are rarely the leader themselves.

Emphasis predetermines what failure looks like. Being measured to these failures along the journey is demoralising and demotivating. Leaders need to let go of their own ideas about the 'best way' or the 'right way' and within reason, failure particularly along the journey, needs to be overlooked in preference for what was achieved.

Too often have I seen precedent and expectation be applied which to me is directly contrary to allowing people to own the process.

3. Reconsider timelines

CEB touch on the challenge of time in their whitepaper. I visualise the timeline for most change initiatives as a spiral - moving forward and narrowing towards the final goal, but often looping back over what feels like familiar territory.

Being comfortable with this spiral view of change is difficult for those used to operating with a traditional project management approach. It feels like rehashing, failing, or not getting anywhere.

But the reality is that the loops allow those impacted by the change to come on the journey, learn from it and embed the outcomes in their work. It can be likened to the Agile project management theory from the IT world where the project and its timeline are responsive to the environment around it. The looping also recognises that any change initiative is dealing with people and therefore is inherently unpredictable and will require frequent redirection.

4. Celebrate (and learn) from failure

I won't rehash as I explain here why I have a passion for recognising, celebrating and learning from change and why I think it is essential to good leadership.

So all in all I agree with CEB, 'traditional change management doesn't work. But I do think there are some tools and exercises that with support any leader can implement to improve their chances of successful change implementation.

Find the CEB whitepaper here

Dialogue: intention and perception

Adapted from Senge: Thinking, a stream of context on which the leave our thoughts, float independently. Until we enter into dialogue, allowing us to examine our thoughts and others in the context of the whole stream.

I believe everyone comes from an intention to do good and everyone is flawed and will at some point experience failure. With these things in mind we must actively and overtly create environments where this is not only permissioned but where we pick each other up, learn and move forward. But often our perceptions of others intent gets in the way of creating an environment where everyone can be successful in their experience of failure.

I am often asked for my advice or opinion particularly by young women in technical roles and often on the topic of perception. I was particularly struck in a recent teleconference by how bewildered one young woman was and how well she articulated her own bewilderment. This is a woman with multiple university degrees, the recipient of awards and if you were to meet her one of the loveliest people you could meet. And yet her question was and I quote "I often find myself not knowing how to act, what is expected of me or leave a meeting worried that people will think I am too opinionated, too forthright". For context she works in a male dominated team in the engineering industry, although like me she enjoys the company of and feels she is well respected by her colleagues. She does not report being harassed or demeaned. So why is she so worried, I would say even preoccupied by, trying to figure out how to behave?

I wanted to relate an example of how perception has impacted me in my professional and personal life and then I will come back to the preoccupation of the young woman I spoke to.

For me perception and unconscious bias are closely related. People hold perception, always will and they will always be different to our true intention because firstly, they do not know us and never can and secondly, they view our actions, words, expressions through their own unique combination of bias lenses. In my mind I visualise these as a semi physical thing much like wearing multiple pairs of glasses.

I was perceived as being overly aggressive by my hierarchical peers in a 360 degree assessment. I believe with hindsight, only possible by removing myself from the environment, that this assessment was the product of perception and my reaction to it. Firstly my reaction was to attempt to fit in and conform to the environment around me, I felt strongly that I needed to stand up for myself and my team.

For all attempts I had made to understand my optimum work style I had overlooked that I thrive, like most people, in environments where dialogue is respectful and valued and thus try to create this space. Unfortunately that was not where I found myself when the assessment was undertaken and nor was I conscious that this was at play. So why was the dialogue lacking and why were my attempts perceived as aggression.

Bohm articulately describes dialogue as "participation in a pool of common meaning, capable of constant development and change". But Senge highlights the two conditions deemed necessary for this to occur: the suspension of assumptions and the treatment of each other as colleagues. For more see the reference below. But Senge also notes that the presence of hierarchy is the antithetical to dialogue and the hierarchy between roles within the technical decision making framework as well as the management structure were certainly strongly present for me.

So with my combined need to feel I had to defend myself and the presence of a strong heriarachy,  my attempts to create dialogue by challenging the thoughts of those I perceived as my peers in an attempt to reach 'better' more creative outcomes, were perceived as aggressive. It won't be the last time I am perceived to question unfairly or too aggressively but next time I will better understand what could be going on in the exchange and be better able to articulate my intent to those around me.

Back to my colleague who is unsure of how to behave. It's both wonderful and terrible to be aware of this in the moment because I believe there are few people who can truly adapt in that moment. Unfortunately most of us will not have the language, hindsight or ability to distance ourselves sufficiently. So what else can we do but be authentic, embrace failure if it occurs, celebrate success, observe the perception we create and try again with a little hindsight.

References
Senge, P. 2006, 'Dialogue and discussion', in The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organisation, 2nd edn., Random House, London, pp. 221-232.

2015 failure report

January 2016 - Reflecting on failure over the Australia day long weekend, from our campsite at Cohuna

You might think this is a strange thing to blog on, my failures. So I will begin with attempting to explain why this is important to me. 

I was inspired by Engineers Without Borders (EWB) Canada, since 2008 they have published a failure report. Asking just such a question in interviews: "What people perceive their biggest weakness to be?" - is one of my favourite questions. The diversity and depth with which many people have considered this in relation to the position they have applied for is insightful and a reflection on how humble they are, what would your answer be? 

For me the process of writing this piece centres on the learning which comes with practicing the admission of my own flaws through tangible examples (not necessarily avoiding them reoccurring, as sometimes it takes me more than one shot before the lesson sinks in!) and allowing others to learn from them. Not in the hope that you don't have to experience them (this too is unrealistic) but in the hope that if they happen to you can recover more quickly.

I have often done this in private, diaries and reflection pieces on projects, roles or situations. But public reflection is new, so hear goes. 

1. I am not a lone wolf and am poor at relying on just myself to motivate, inspire and generate action

And yet this is exactly what I tried to do for 8 months after leaving Boeing. I thought I would 'go it alone', consulting to schools through Cleverist on how to relate Science, Tech, Engineering and Maths (STEM) concepts to the world around us. Something I remain passionate about.

I start with this as it is an example that, on reflection, I knew about myself but failed to translate. In the past I rarely studied alone seeking the support of my friends, prefer professional projects which are complex in relying on multiple stakeholders and prefer travelling with friends and family. 

This is due, in part, to the element of my personality which enjoys and indeed needs to think big, to blue sky solutions and in the words of Eric Weinstein explore options D, E and F as if they were real. Without people to explore and refine this thinking, and balanced by people who compliment my bias to action by translating these ideas into tangible but aligned outcomes, I have trouble articulating my thoughts and down selecting the most appropriate path(s). This results in wasted effort and resources (yes $ too) with limited impact. 

Before I expend effort & particularly money I will ensure I take the time and surround myself with the people who can support the filtering and translation that maximises the impact of my actions.

2. I tried to create yet another offering for teachers. Despite knowing of the overwhelming flood of STEM related offerings available, and spending significant time documenting why engagement remains a primary challenge

I joined the throng for 8 months before working out I was better off using my skills to increase the impact of the outstanding existing options. My efficiency and first hand corporate experience coupled with months of first hand classroom observation meant I had a unique set of knowledge. Don't beat em', join em' it is more efficient and effective than attempting to compete! 

This realisation led initially to my contract and later permanent position on the EWB Australia team.

In future I will seek opportunities, which insight passion and with which my values align, to maximise the impact of the change I can create.

3. I isolated those I sought to create change with by not articulating the journey at the beginning

I fear the articulation of the journey when undertaking organisational change. At the start of the process I fear articulating the steps will unnecessarily lock the process and hence myself into actions which may not be appropriate as the change progresses. This would have been apparent to the EWB staff as I led them through the introduction of a new organisational structure. I left people feeling uncertain and even fearful through a lack of articulating the how, why and when of the change. For me this personal fear comes from being subjected to and observing actions demanded simply because they had been articulated at the beginning of a change, despite being inappropriate and in some cases damaging.

My MBA subject this semester introduced to me the concept of Action Research which is an academic description of my preferred approach. The most relevant definition of Action Research is:

"a disciplined process of inquiry conducted by and for those taking the action. The primary reason for engaging in action research is to assist the “actor” in improving and/or refining his or her actions."

Action research allows adjustment of subsequent action based on the observed measurable outcomes of the previous action. An approach to change somewhat similar to the process of agile development as is commonly used during software design. Action Research does not however excuse explaining the overall direction and steps up front and this is my failure. It instead encourages open disclosure that the series of steps may change based on need but the direction and end goal remain, thus providing the reassurance people need.

In future I will spend sufficient time and energy articulating the journey right up front!

4. I once again allowed my paid work to impact my life beyond work

This is I am pleased to say something I have gotten better at; to quote my husband it is '2000% better than when you were at Boeing'. My evidence for how far I have come is a health check conducted during my last 12 months at Boeing. My blood work, muscle strength and cardiovascular fitness were all borderline ok for my age. At the time I remember thinking this was an appropriate sacrifice for the rewards I was experiencing professionally. In retrospect I recognise how delusional this sounds. 

To illustrate the impact this had, I have a strong memory of a weekend away with friends at Port Arlington in 2013. Not only did I take my laptop but I skipped meals to sit on a nature-strip, on top of a hill, at least 700 meters from the house, to get enough phone reception to talk to work. Part of leaving was as a result of my inability to rebalance this expectation I had both places on myself and that others placed on me. 

This year I had some minor slips where I worked too late, didn't take time owed to me, brought work home (& on weekend trips) and chose to work over spending time with friends or family. Although minor in comparison I recognise these incidents as unacceptable to me. I will continue to strive to demonstrate the balance I believe is key to maximising productivity.

5. I did not make my personal commitment to EWB Australia explicit and in conversation used 'you' when I meant 'we' 

As a newbie to the EWB Australia staff and particularly to the leadership team I was not explicit enough in making my personal commitment clear. I was new to the sector, worked for an organisation which has previously failed to meet EWB's ethical partnership test and am outspoken in questioning the way things have always been. An outsider. 

I used 'you' not 'we' when referring to change within the organisation. Thankfully a thoughtful member of staff mentioned it to me and though this awareness I do not believe I have made this mistake again.

I can only explain this by saying that even though I am custodian of the CEO role I continue to struggle with my own validity for being in the position. I am regularly humbled and surprised by those who have had career long influence in the social sectors and they gain as much from me as I have from them.

In future work I will ensure that it is explicit which direction I am working towards by articulating my personal alignment with a team or mission.  I take comfort from knowing within myself, that I will not engage if I do not fundamentally believe in the goals of an organisation.

_________________

I hope you can take some learning from my learnings. Please share your thoughts and reflections with me as I certainly have more to learn from you.

Further reading 

You can read about EWB Canada's report here.

https://www.ewb.ca/ideas/admitting-failure-0 

I have encouraged and enabled EWB Australia to also produce a failure report, our first attempt can be found here.

 http://www.ewb.org.au/ourimpact/failure

Swimming away from the shore

Two slightly obscure and perhaps seemingly unrelated things have prompted me to write this post. Firstly I was listening to an episode of the Tim Ferriss show featuring Eric Weinstein and secondly I was reading responses to The Australian Institute of Directors (AICD) report on the need for Investment governance in NotForProfits (NFP).  Both prompted me to think about the challenges the social and NFP sectors face. The comments on LinkedIn in response to the AICD report reflected common challenges and barriers to change; not enough money, culture and values vs mission.

The thing that struck me is that these challenges are not unique to a profit or NFP environment. They're not even unique to a startup or multi million dollar business. They are instead functions of people in the business and perhaps reflect the culture of the NFP sector. Which retains, to my eyes an altruistic, expectation of giving and self sacrifice, where the rewards associated with corporate employment are to be turned down in favour of the good karma which indeed comes from contributing to a cause bigger than yourself. 

Perhaps coupled with a fear of being judged by the same standards as your corporate peers. If pay and benefits were equitable across sectors then competition in the job market fundamentally changes. Significant for a sector employing 9.3% of the Australian workforce and contributing approximately 4% to Australia's GDP (ref) For context, in 2012-13 this contribution was more than double that of the state of Tasmania, and larger than the forestry, fishing and agriculture industries. And growing!

For those who have read or listened to Dan Pallotta, his proven premise that you have to spend money to make money is entirely relevant here (if you haven't watched The way we think about charity is dead wrong please take the time to do so). Pallotta also contends that it is the public whom are opposed to this approach, however I have witnessed opposition from within the NFP industry itself, those with the closest personal values alignment whom I had hoped would also be most willing to maximise impact. 

Struggles with competing skills sets or priorities happen within profit driven business too (think the IT team who wish to implement change but face resistance from the current users). Yet increasingly, cross functional skill sets where understanding the needs of the client are equal to technical ability, are being recognised and valued for the solutions they deliver. This understanding is an advantage the NFP sector holds in abundance, a deep empathetic connection to the sections of our society who most need understanding. An understanding which coupled with sustainable business models should enable them to deliver high impact solutions.  

I acknowledge the NFP industry does struggle with a constant tension between purpose, values and the realities of operating in a capitalist society. However to find mutually inclusive solutions (financial, operational and high impact) in Eric Weinsteins words I strongly believe we need to look past options A, B and C and focus on D, E, F and beyond. This is not a capability that everyone possess but one that Weinstein does offer some suggestions for cultivating. Suggestions such as partnerships between non tradition organisations, like MasterCard offering cash free banking to refugees, provide exciting opportunities for NFP and for profit entities in a time where much of a businesses value is derived from its intrinsic value not its tangible assets.

Business solutions that are at once efficient, effective and deliver change in the areas of society that need them the most are unlikely to be staring us in the face or someone would have addressed them already! By using the principles of lean management (efficiency), action research (effectiveness and continuous learning) and Lean startup (fail fast, fail forward) small successes will enable large scale solutions. All these techniques are agnostic of environment and rely on a try, fail, observe, learn and try again methodology. Key is that we have to be prepared to fail and for others to fail, and rather than gloat or dwell on the failure, celebrate the learning that comes from if failure. If we seek opportunities to celebrate the commercial value of deep empathetic understanding, look for partnerships beyond the traditional and invite thinking that looks beyond options A to C. Success will determine success and the NFP and social sectors can transform our communities. 

Culture the product of many 1:1 interactions

Culture the product of many 1:1 interactions

Victor Soho

Together for Equality and Respect breakfast, 2 Dec 2015

I was privileged to attend a breakfast hosted by Women's Health East celebrating and discussing the progress and issues surrounding the Together For Equality and Respect framework. Victor Soho from the Centre for Social Leadership (CSL) spoke on the long term impact of low level sexual harassment with regard to health and wellbeing.

For me, of particular note was the striking conclusion from CSL's research that the long term health implications of low level sexual harassment are more detrimental than a one off severe event. I don't think this will be news to many women who have the challenge of working in an environment where offhand comments, looks, innuendo and statements such as 'don't tell my wife I said that' are common place and go unchecked. I happened to be filing some of my own medical records last night (doing a tidy before moving house!) and found a health check done during the most stressful period of my employment with Boeing where I was beginning to feel I was overly sensitive to the culture around me. The results were not pretty - elevated blood pressure, low cardiac and respiratory performance, poor skin condition - probably the worst health report I have had. And at the time I could not see how this was related to extreme hours, stress and culture of the place I spent most of my waking hours. Situational blindness - shocking to me in retrospect, yet entirely invisible to me at the time. Now looking back I do not believe I was overly sensitive, rather I was beginning to be able to see the culture for what it was, incompatible with my personal values.

So what does this mean to me as a leader who values diversity and equity and perhaps more importantly what should I do about it. Victor's refreshing approach to how culture is formed and maintained provides a starting point. I quote "Culture is the product of many one on one interactions". I have thought for sometime that it is important to continually highlight and provided feedback on appropriate behaviour, particularly early in a leaders journey with a team. A primary teacher friend once told me 'I'm strict at the start of the year because you can always get nicer, with boundaries come respect and you cannot get progressively stricter, you've missed your opportunity to generate respect". Certainly all advice supports the process of continuous feedback. But now Victor's observations connect, for me, my philosophy of providing feedback as essential to the building and maintenance of culture. Which in turn enables us to all be productive, valued contributors in whatever endeavour we choose.

So what behaviour do you allow to go unchecked? Is it acceptable to you and all those around you?

My request is that next time you get that feeling in your gut that flags inappropriateness, say something, take action to improve the culture you are a part of every day.

A supply chain where no money changes hands

Rob Hughes of Live and Learn International prompted me to think about my professional understanding of a supply chain. My corporate experience taught me to think about supply as a series of requirements being defined, constraints being understood (timing, production, cost), contracts being negotiated. All resulting in a product or service being exchanged, often repeatedly for an end outcome. 

But how to consider this in the space of social change globally. In an environment where approximately 80 individuals hold more wealth than the rest of the world. How inequitable that those who most need the products that can improve their quality of life cannot afford to participate in our supply chain which has been developed in a capatilist world!

I have rarely heard social enterprise discussion where a non monetary exchange of goods is discussed. Rob used the example where in Vanuatu post cyclone families would cook a meal for a community who in exchange would support the family to rebuild their home.

I wonder how it would be possible to integrate both a monetary and non monetary exchange into the same supply chain. I believe the answer fundamentally lies in the definition and scaling of what constitutes value. 

It will take great skill to negotiate mutual value and have it defined by different systems; one monetary and one non monetary. For me this could be the fundamental reason why we should increase the value we place on emotional intelligence. To enable the world majority to participate through the value system defined by the world minority, one of money, there must be an increase in mutual understanding.

If both sides of an exchange, value what they are giving and receiving equally, does it matter what currency or scale they value it in? If the next step in the supply chain measures that value by a different scale again, does it matter? I say no, as long as value is reaching those to whom it can make the biggest difference. I think there is an exciting opportunity for non traditional thinking in this space.