Amplified

A Singular Economy

2011-09-02T19:18:00.000-07:00

The problem with our economic system is that it is based in the assumptions and theories of a different age. New technology, shifting values and patterns of behavior have conspired to create the situation in which we find ourselves.

The Web represents a medium that reduces transaction costs - or "friction" - in the economy to zero. Conversely, the value gained from the knowledge available on the web is rising asymptotically to infinity. Therefore, the concept of an "information singularity," defined as a point at which all encoded value may be shared ubiquitously is nearly upon us. Perhaps I'm stating the obvious, but if so then clearly we have not worked proactively to avoid the obvious consequences.

If we accept the premise that one function of currency is to serve as a medium of exchange, the singularity removes the need for the medium. It's like discovering that air travel eliminates the need for land as a medium of transportation. The term "the Web" can be considered as a pseudo-metaphor, or perhaps one that indicates opposite meaning... it isn't about spinning out new connections, but rather eliminating the friction associated with bringing things together. Thus, a "black hole" or information singularity analogy is more apt in describing what is happening to the economy.

The sucking sound you are hearing from job loss is the Singularity.

You probably do some of the sucking yourself. You download images for free when in the past you would have had to pay a photographer. You watch video clips for free. You read articles for free. You use Wikipedia when before you might have hired an expert. But why? Other experts are posting and making sure what is available is as valid as it can be. All this free media is wonderful for the consumer but devastating for the producers. The customer is king? Sure, but what happens to societies that consume to the point of devastation? Angkor Wat and Easter Island come to mind.

The Knowledge Age is upon us and we live in an interesting time to be alive and have access to it. However, the producers of knowledge, narrative, media - whatever you want to call it - the sensemaking stuff - will shortly be unable to continue to produce under current economic models. That is, at least those who are not already independently wealthy. But by pulling the ladder up after themselves, has the previous generation truly done us a favor?

We are at a crossroads. The choice is to either continue to uphold concepts and values that return us to a pre-singularity world, or to embrace the change and figure out a way forward.

Throughout history, people have fought the future and lost. The question is how the pain manifests and instantiates at various systemic levels. Will there be more war? Will there be more crime? More domestic violence, familial and community upheaval? Possibly. Probably unless we get our collective act together and realize that yes, it is the end of the world. But just as the phoenix rises from the ashes, the future will be one that is brighter. One that does not rely on a currency to motivate people, because people can trade value without the need for middlemedia.

Perhaps it is also time to return the favor to those who refuse change. Certainly there are sectors of the economy where currency plays a different role. Perhaps those roles should be granted greater distinction and recreated digitally. Whatever the new system looks like, we must be careful not to label it with epitaphs of the past.

There are many questions and challenges ahead, but we have remained tethered to the ground by the root of evil for too long. It is time to release our grip on cash and open our hands and hearts to others. There's nothing stopping us but ourselves.

I call upon business leaders, economists and academics to design the new economics of value. One where a "barter economy" is as anachronistic as calling cars "horseless carriages." The Singular Economy is one that focuses the light of value globally, and, perhaps one day, at the stars.

###

P.S. Am remembering a clip from a movie... found this. And this.

What do you think? I realize that this may be too Star Trek for many people to handle, but for those of us who wish to achieve greater visions of the future than our current world, don't we owe it to ourselves to explore and experiment with different ideas? Let's not repeat the mistakes of the past, but help economics to evolve and spring forth new life. If you agree or disagree, why or why not?

The Voice of the Techie

2011-03-30T13:30:00.000-07:00

Occasionally I reply in writing to questions from colleagues, clients and social media sites and cc them here.

Question: How do we manage, motivate, influence and inspire technologists? Are they really unique and different from non-technologists? What makes them click?

As an expert in the management of knowledge and innovation, I get to keep a foot in the world of technology. While working with one client, I became frustrated with what I felt was excessive push-back regarding the implementation and adoption of a new social media platform for KM (knowledge management). After several months of assuming I was dealing with technocrats rather than innovators, I learned from one of the risk management experts that there were fundamental flaws in some of the technology that would put the organization at risk, so there were security issues at play that made sense. No one had bothered to disabuse me of my assumption, and in truth I should have questioned it myself since most "techies" that I know get into it because of the new and exciting capabilities that technology affords. That they have to say "no" to new technology, whether IT or in other areas, goes against their nature.

So I'd say one of the lessons learned from this that dovetails with the academic research on the topic is this: don't make assumptions, but if you do, assume that technologists will push the organization as fast as possible. They will shut down only when they feel their voice is not being heard by management. So it remains imperative that, beyond the "skunk-works" approach to innovation, some foresight around how the technology will be reintegrated into the business model requires that those on the frontiers of discovery remain in the loop. At the point of decision this can become more complex depending on the decision-making process.

Finally, I'd say in this day and age we are all "techies" to some degree, so let's not label and dismiss. Moreover, if you are ever labeled an expert in technology you will come to understand how limited your knowledge truly is. Which is why we specialize. Which is why we need cross-functional teams. Which is why communications and systemic feedback loops - especially difficult conversations among people of different specialties and levels of seniority - remain essential to the evolution of innovation.

A Conversation with Dr. Kull

2010-12-19T10:39:00.000-08:00

In this interview conducted by a colleague I share my story and purpose for pursuing an academic career.

Is Anthropology a Science? Let's Start at the Beginning...

2010-11-30T16:34:00.000-08:00

In response to a recent article in the Chronicle of Higher Education questioning the legitimacy of anthropology as a "science," I posted the following:

As academics, one of our responsibilities is to hold social convention up to the light of reason. This is why we define our terms as neatly as possible.

Define "science."
Define "discipline."

You start to see the problem.

I went through this exercise when asking whether or not Knowledge Management was an emerging business "discipline." Not a lot of literature on the subject - everyone "just knows," which is counter to intellectual rigor. So I created a framework for doing that in my 2002 dissertation, "Stories of Knowledge Management: The Search for Coherence in a Community of Practice," basing much of it on Thomas Kuhn's work around the history and structure of science.

Conclusions: a "discipline" is largely whatever community of practice members agree upon that it is. With no intersubjective definition of science (is it repeatable or simply methodologically sound?) anthropologists should blow-off the criticism as more pecking-order BS of single paradigm-laden status-seekers. Yes, we'd all like to be famous for our research, but not by diminishing others who practice research innovation and pursue valid efforts to develop a greater understanding of our world by pushing and/or questioning epistemological boundaries.

That said, we should not waive our linguistic rights to categorize and weigh meritorious work based on those categories. I simply point out the need to put the horse before the cart and define our terms before excluding fields of inquiry... and, when in doubt, opt for more inclusion than exclusion to foster creativity and passion.

Comedy... at Yale?

2010-11-20T11:32:00.000-08:00

http://chronicle.com/blogs/tweed/harvard-yale-and-the-non-apology-apology/27846

My response to the "That's Why I Chose Yale" video by Harvard students and the backlash over a remark some criticized as insensitive of the bizarre murder of a student.

I teach organizational and business communications. My observation is that this concept of sensitivity has gotten out of hand. People need to be more accepting of the generally good intentions of others, especially those trying to lighten things up though attempts at comedy or humor in the workplace.

I applaud the video. It's obvious to me that the comment, while perhaps in poor taste to some, was intended to be funny. For those who lack a sense of humor, often people laugh at statements that are deliberately offensive. So no, an apology is not warranted, though this by no means suggests the students made a personal attack at the victim's family, any more than the fake mugging later on in the reel is made to poke fun at those victims.

When judging these things, ask yourself what kind of society you want to live in. One where people are constantly walking on eggshells or one where people are given tacit permission to be creative, unconventional and/or improvisational.

The students may want to apologize for choosing Yale, but that's not my problem. No offense to the parents who have to write the check. Ha ha.

The Golden Rules of Power and Influence

2010-09-14T00:10:00.001-07:00

Many years ago I wrote an article, inspired by Dr. Peter Vaill at George Washington University at the time. I can't find the whole text but thought my audience would enjoy the gist of it:

Golden Rule #1: Do Unto Others As You Would Have Others Do Unto You.

I believe this is Biblical and just good sense.

Golden Rule #2: Do Unto Others As Others Would Have You Do Unto Them.

This recognizes that people are different and want different things.

Golden Rule #3: Do Unto Others As You Would Have Others Do Unto Others.

In other words, lead by example.

As we move toward flatter, more democratic organizations and institutions, I hope these three Golden Rules will serve you well. Please post or link stories here where you have found resonance in these principles.

Should I Let My Employer See My Facebook Page?

2010-09-13T23:40:00.000-07:00

There's been a lot of talk in recent years about whether or not one should post potentially incriminating photos, opinions, and other personal expressions on Facebook as one's employer might see them and it would make an employee or potential new hire look bad.

Folks, here's the thing: Any employer who uses your personal expressions against you is foolish and not worth your time. Ask yourself if you want to be led by people who demean and shame you for having fun. So you get drunk at happy hours and your buddy caught you praying to the porcelain god. Did you get your work in on time? Yes? Then no problem. NO??? And then you lied about it??? Big problem.

Trust is the glue that holds organizations and communities together. Without trust, people are out for themselves and WIIFM* becomes the driving principle behind your company's culture. Is that what you want?

Certainly, personal habits can get in the way of peak performance. But in the end, performance is what matters. If blowing off some steam and having a good time helps people deal with work they don't enjoy, either work to make the work enjoyable or bring some humor into the workplace. The idea is inclusion, not exclusion. In American business, we like diversity: research shows over and over that the more heterogenous your workforce, the more innovative you are likely to become with the right leadership. Research also shows that executives who have imbibed are more creative then those who have not... I'll show you the citation but you'll have to buy be a drink first. And post it on Facebook. Cheers.

*WIIFM or "What's In It For Me?"

Uncommon Nonsense

2010-05-13T09:45:00.001-07:00

The other day I posted a quote by Einstein on "common sense."

Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen.
- Albert Einstein

It generated this reaction:

Loranna Lee Butterwick: Common sense is an actual power of inner sensation (as opposed to the external five senses) whereby the various objects of the external senses (color for sight, sound for hearing, etc) are united and judged.
~ Aristotle

And my reply:

Common sense is an oxymoron and is neither "common" nor logically coherent across case-by-case situations. I like to avoid it altogether. Uncommon nonsense is probably better.

To expand on this discussion, consider the two idiomatic English expressions:

1) "You can't judge a book by it's cover."
2) "The clothes make the man."

Consider the underlying meaning here and you may see a contradiction. What we can say is that first impressions matter, but they should not be the sole basis upon which we judge others.

Finally, I have observed, and I believe this resonates with most people, that once you have learned something new it seems obvious in hindsight. Moreover, you may begin to believe you were the odd one out and that everyone must know this. Not true and a dangerous assumption.

One of the traps I encounter, whether it is in front of a classroom or a boardroom, is not doing a level-set of the audience before launching into my talk. We all come from different places, regardless of how homogenous the group appears. We all hold different knowledges (as Peter Drucker puts it) and different attitudes and perspectives. So creating a safe space for people to feel free to ask questions is essential.

I do it this way: "There is a Zen saying that one should approach every situation with the beginner's mind." That is, just because you know something, take the attitude of learning instead and see how far that gets you. In my experience, the most successful people are not those who know the most, but who can learn faster than the competition.

But that's just common sense.

What is AMPLIFI's story?

2010-04-27T16:44:00.001-07:00

Back in 1997, when I was in graduate school, I had the idea for a company of the future that would utilize leadership coaching, talent branding, and emerging digital media and social networking to help jobseekers, entrepreneurs, speakers and other thought-leaders and industry leaders to amplify their voice. Hundreds of interviews and a dissertation later, I have an affirmed methodology and many success stories for helping to craft a leadership brand through digital storytelling.

The day has arrived where technology allows us to change in the way we take people from a set of skills to a person who can lead. From "what" to a "who."

Whether you are new to the job market, just starting out as a consultant, or looking to make a move to lead a corporation or lead a new initiative within your organization, AMPLIFI can help you brand your knowledge, talent, ideas and accomplishments.

Looking forward together,

Michael
1-866-AMPLIFI

But My Attic is Already Full!

2010-04-01T12:04:00.000-07:00

In a recent debate regarding a new theory proposed in one of my graduate classes, a student and I got into a bit of an argument. He later apologized for being "disrespectful." Below is my reply.

Dear [name omitted],

There's an old Zen proverb that goes like this (don't you just love storytelling and management?):

Acolyte approaches Zen Master with a cup full of tea. Zen Master takes teapot and pours more tea into cup. Acolyte says, "but Master, my cup is already full!"

Master replies: "Yes. That is your problem."

;)

We need to approach ideas without ad hominem attacks. While certainly people should get credit for their ideas, once the idea is out there it needs to be debated on its merits. In the universe of discourse of any field there is always disagreement. There's a saying that "I'll believe it when I see it." More aptly, people tend to come to the world (more and more as we age) with the attitude, "I'll see it when I believe it." Academe is rife with studies that show people do not take action based on information that is right in front of them because they do not fit their preconceptions. Covey's first "habit" of highly effective people is "seek first to understand, then to be understood."

If we accept the premise that learning organizations need to learn faster than the competition, then we as individuals in these larger systems need to play our part to help not hinder the learning system. I believe that science will eventually show (and is starting to show) that intelligence is strongly related to our ability to learn, which often means letting go of old ideas, or at least allowing the old ideas to fit within (thus correspond*) to the new paradigm. New neuronal connections are forming all the time. I think the "aha" feeling is actually a central nervous system response to these connections.

One view being reduced under a new, larger view is called the Correspondence Principle in cybernetics. E.g. Newtonian physics is perfectly workable under the larger paradigm of Einsteinian physics. We can use Newton's theories quite usefully in architecture, for example, without having to resort to the action of subatomic particles. But having that understanding is important to explain phenomena that do not fit our Newtonian worldview.

I should write this up. Oh, I just did! Thanks for the trigger.

Apologies if in our debate I came off as elitist. I enjoy a good debate (was regional champ in high school but never got the winning touchdown. Or the cheerleader.) and wish more students would engage. Don't let "respect" get in the way of debate. Indeed, a respectful learner is one who contributes an argument or perspective that may, in fact, transform the understanding of the listeners. Apropos: I'm very interested in hearing more about your work with simulations re Second Life or other virtual forums. There's a whole new world for "management anthropologists" out there!

Thanks for this note. Shows a lot of character. Keep talking and don't take it personally if I cut you off. Much better to have too much conversation than not enough.

Cheers,
Michael

* The etymology of "correspond" is "to answer together in harmony."

Learning Philosophy

2009-11-20T00:30:00.000-08:00

We are all learners. In this world – especially in this time in history – we must recognize the vast changes that affect the most intimate details of our lives. Changes in technology, communication, economics, attitudes and values. The world of business is one that both creates and follows trends, seeking to create value whenever and wherever possible. The purpose of organization is to create value.

This is a journey of the intellect, but also a journey of the heart, for the essence of the transaction is love. People coming together not just to survive, not just to blaze a trail or find nirvana, but to bring back the boon and offer others the sense of wonder and excitement and joy that the best of us have found within ourselves. This is value. This is something for which we will trade our time and energy and knowledge. Economists call this “gains from trade.” But trade is not sanitary, sterile copulation. It creates children. It spawns relationships that last a lifetime. It feeds ideas that were left in the dark corners to starve. It breathes life into our lives.

"It’s just business." What a cop out. Say Sport, I don’t mean it personally but I’m going to ruin your livelihood. And yet we choose to play the game. We can equally choose to raise hedgehogs in Montana in isolation. When we choose business, we choose to love others. Make no mistake about it. When we make money, we are reaping the rewards of the value we create. Yet money remains a symbol of nothingness. Of death. Of the certainty that all we do here is without meaning. The root of “mortgage” from the French is morte. Death. No one wins in the end when we focus on the symbol of value, not value itself.

Yet death in many languages connotes transformation and enlightenment. To learn we must let go of the old ideas. Neuroscience tells us that brain plasticity need not founder as we age if we continue to rattle those neurons with new challenges.

Life, love and death. And in between we learn something about how the universe works, how to treat each other, and how to learn to be happy. As we grapple with the chaos of information, new knowledge, opinion and news, we must remember to return to love and ask ourselves simple questions: What did I do today to create value? Whom did I love? What did they learn from me? What did I learn from them?

And finally, the question that all sentient beings who have learned the value of organization, collaboration and learning ask when living with presence:

What do we do next?

On Hiring Commitments

2009-11-02T21:21:00.000-08:00

I once had a conversation with a supervisor at hiring with a government agency. I had stated that I’d made a commitment to another organization and would not be able to work for his organization. He asked simply to whom I’d made that commitment. I named the organization.

His reply: "Michael, you don’t make commitments to organizations. You make commitments to people." I said, "When do I start?"

The Virtual Trading Post

2009-10-19T15:46:00.001-07:00

With the economy in the tank, I ran across this article in which the author was "shocked" and "floored" that an individual had offered to trade services for merchandise. This is how you ruin your business reputation, she claims, and offers advice. While her three tips are interesting from the perspective of crafting perception for a target audience, the point that bugged me until I had to stop swinging cats and say something was this: yes, perception is reality, but the nature of innovation is to create new realities. Virtual realities. Like a virtual trading post. Like eBay without PayPal.

Academic hat is ON: The idea of a barter economy is not new. We can imagine a two-by-twosy of two categories, tangibles and intangibles, wherein one corner we are trading tangibles for tangibles, to the catercorner where we are trading intangibles for intangibles. (Like it? Don't be a SICI (Swipes It but doesn't Cite It.) And hat OFF.

Regardless of its tangibility, what is in trade is value. If a consultant's services are seen as high value, I'd gladly give him or her a nice table lamp if I don't have the cash handy. Why not? Before there was money there was the old trading post. Or travel outside of the developed world sometime and see how every transaction is a negotiation of value as well as a valuable experience in itself. "You make me laugh? Okay, I take off 5 dinars!" I'm not sure how the economists will react, but business is about adapting to a changing economy and finding that fledgling opportunity in a crisis flock.

One of the underlying cultural prejudices reflected by the author - one that we may all find ourselves guilty of from time to time as is the nature of categorization strategies to reduce complexity in the world - is that a failure of marketing is a failure of the value a customer or client may ultimately receive. While the perception of value remains perceptual and can certainly affect the utility of experienced value, it does not necessarily follow that the utility of value is undermined by it's branding or marketing. I know personally some terrific consultants who do not and will likely never get their professional brand to a "socially acceptable" level, and a few are no fun to work with either. But they know their thing and they do it well. So we're human. Let's be more accepting of each other's differences, even in business. Especially in business.

So not to pass judgment on either the author, the consultant's email that triggered the article, or the rest of the posting. Just let us bring down our shock level to, say, around floor level. Meet me there for a drink. Cheers.

Good leaders inspire. Great leaders empower.

2009-10-13T07:43:00.001-07:00

What are you waiting for?

The Trail of Knowledge

2009-09-29T02:45:00.000-07:00

Tell the truth: you are secretly trying to dominate the world through some internet app thingy that you haven't quite figured out yet. As am I.

Amateurs. Bloggers are amateurs. Politicians are amateurs. Students in my class writing gibberish are amateurs. The latest new hires: amateurs. But we were all amateur at one point, right? So no big deal. Same story, different decade. You learn the rules, you adapt, you fit in, and everything moves along as smoothly as before. The older generation helping the younger generation develop their skills, attitudes, goals and dreams.

Except for a couple problems. First of all, the new guys coming in aren't really all that interested in what the old guys did. Sure, there's some value there, but it's the 21st Century, dude.

Second, that old guy isn't actually training the young guy in the way it is supposed to be done! Dang it! They've gone off and started their own company. Traitors.

I've observed this phenomenon among many if not all (to overgeneralize, and academics LOVE to overgeneralise!) professions as people move from the metaphorical cradle-to-grave within their community of practice.

It's the bell curve.

I suppose I could find a hyperlink, but I believe most people know what a bell curve looks like, so let's skip ahead.

In the beginning, there was the Novice. He made mistakes, not knowing what he was supposed to do. Think: left tail of bell curve. Then he became an Apprentice. The Apprentice knows the lay of the land, but still hasn't got it right. He's still learning from the masters.

The Journeyman represents the major area of the bell curve; this is where competence is defined and practiced. But futher ahead is a guy who is taking the tried-and-true and experimenting a bit with different approaches. He's the Wayfarer.

At the end of this Trail of Knowledge we find the Expert. He's sort of disinterested and fiddling with some new gadget. Maybe smokes or wears bad ties. But he knows this landscape. He's been over and under and around and through every pathway he can imagine. Other experts imagine different pathways, and they argue about that, but the level of confidence of the expert is so high it is sometimes hard to see past the size of that ego. But they're usually right, so that's worth something.

There's something else though of interest. The experts fall on that right-tail of the bell curve. What we might infer from that is the following:

To the untrained eye, what a Novice does and what an Expert does is the same. Huh?

Let's take the concept of "degrees of freedom" to illustrate what we're trying to learn here. A Novice shows up and is swinging his tools every which way but loose: many degress of freedom. Why does he do it? Because he doesn't know any better.

An expert shows up and is also swinging his tools, but with the kind of wizardry reserved for video games. And like the magician, sometimes he screws up. In fact, he screws up proportionally to the number of Novice screw ups. What's the difference?

You already know the answer: The mistakes the expert made were on purpose.

But why would someone make mistakes on purpose, you ask? Well then obviously you're not an expert. But to lift the curtain the point is this: experts need to push boundaries, question established ways of doing things, test and retest things again (but this time with different glasses), and then argue over what they witnessed. This is the essence of innovation. And the freedom of the trail, pardner.

Note on etymology--

Amatuer: a person who engages in work for the love of the work, not for the reward. May we all become amateurs. (Shh. Don't tell Payroll!)

iLove IT

2009-09-06T21:47:00.000-07:00

I confess. I only started texting this year. About three months ago, in fact. Racked up a $200 bill the month I started and blew through those data limits. Now: no limits.

Went out, bought the new iPhone 3Gs, and maxed it out. Then started to play with the apps.

"Geepers," said I, after downloading "Stanza" and discovering that my $.99 extravaganza now obviates the need to look into getting a Kindle, which was the next new thing I needed. I could read a book on my iPhone. And I did. "Alice in Wonderland." I've used Carroll's mythical tale to describe information technology too. It's a vibrant theme. We pitter-pat our touchpads in amazement at what is happening in such a short time period.

Then my sturdy Nokia cell phone of 3+ years is sick. Then my Garman navigator craps out on me. All in the same day. Curiouser and curiouser.

To the point: the iPhone apps are market substitutes for many products; Kindle being one example. After the initial purchase, I have found that I will be saving money in the future while enjoying greater capabilities.

Anyone have some good iPhone app stories to share?

President Obama's "Waterloo?" PLEASE!

2009-07-21T19:46:00.000-07:00

In recent news, notable conservatives backed Sen. Jim DeMint's (R-S.C.) statement that the health care crisis and President Obama’s anticipated policy challenges will be his “Waterloo.”

Conservatives should not be afraid of change, just conservative about it. We need to try something new. If it doesn't work, we can always ditch the effort and try something else. Our flexibility as a nation is the essence of innovation and what has helped our society and economy adapt and thrive in the past.

As always in these political tug-of-wars one side will select hyperbole and inappropriate metaphors to scare the populace. This one, like many the Republicans have resorted to in recent years, is embarrassing to any reasonable conservative. Such language applied tongue-in-cheek can raise a chuckle, but with the shrill vitriol of the Republican death rattle such rhetoric causes a rolling of the eyes and creates even more contempt for the Right. It is a shame, since the principles of honest and constructive debate have done more good overall in histroy even though political castration of one side over the other remains a long and ignoble American tradition.

Instead of Obama's Waterloo, how about Obama's Carthage? He loses this battle and the political soil that results may be so plowed with salt as to render it infertile for years to come, even, to extend the analogy, with people dying in the streets. This view would suggest that he does not have much chance of winning against a hostile Roman army intent on killing every living thing in sight.

Let's get back to healthy polarities - those that help us think about the pros and cons of policy initiatives and raise our awareness of the issues surrounding change and its reversal should things not work out as we would prefer.

It Is Who You Know, Actually

2009-07-12T04:21:00.000-07:00

Because of the availability of knowledge (explicit - for KMers) on the Web, inside and outside of organizations, putting together a paper or a report or any communication of recombined and repurposed knowledge is easy. Almost anyone can do it. Therefore, the social network one develops is becoming asymptotically important. The rise of Facebook and LinkedIn, for example, has provided people a way to tap into far-flung friends and acquaintances who may have some business value to share.

Looking Out and Linking In

2009-06-06T11:04:00.000-07:00

A colleague from an executive search firm recently asked me this question:

Are you finding LinkedIn to be better than Outlook? I am struggling a bit with how best to utilize LinkedIn. Plus, we are debating how best to use it at work.

Good question as many of us fight to keep current as we push the envelope of possible professional (or unprofessional) contacts.

I find resonance in the anonymous phrase: “In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice, they’re not.”

So it should be much easier to use LinkedIn as users no longer must take (and bill) time to update customer/client information as folks are doing that themselves, with an accuracy as close to 100% as possible, theoretically. However, I find that in practice I still rely on my Outlook auto-fills when sending emails and only go to LinkedIn when something bounces back.

I have pinged them to find more information and will add when I learn more.

Absurdism and Organizational Storytelling

2009-05-13T13:11:00.000-07:00

I was today reflecting a bit on Absurdism, which is a philosophical stance that has resonated with me for many years, and storytelling. One of the tenets of the absurdist move is that, while there may be no ultimate meaning or value in existence, the human condition does not allow us to ever really know; however, the pursuit of that happiness, through exemplars and acts of meaning and value, can remain a worthy and noble adventure.

Storytelling reflects this philosophy in that it does not provide certainty in the form of models or truth-propositions to be tested but rather speaks to subjective struggle – the Sisyphus myth is a central reference – reflecting the hero’s journey with tragic or comedic result (in the sense of comedy with the implied message that “all is right with the world and current social ethics are more or less correct). Thus the many different paths one chooses to travel are not necessarily without meaning to the individual but rather reflect the impossibility of choicelessness in an imperfect world without knowable certainty.

In organizational approaches, the philosophy helps to ground the value of the case study/story while providing working examples of the compelling claims of models and methods that as consultants and academics, we strive to communicate to various audiences, organizations and communities.

Now back to my Cool Ranch Doritos.
(This blog is unaffiliated with Doritos or FritoLay, Inc. Though if they'd like to send me a box I won't object.)

Knowledge Management for National Security

2009-04-26T08:18:00.000-07:00

Someone once said... (and I don't know who said it, but as a blogger who cares if I cite my sources): "When it is time for the wheel to be invented, the wheel is invented." Truer words were never spoken, had I spoken them myself, which I have and will hereby take credit for unless anyone wants to take credit for it (and please cite your source).

Now to the nutmeat: The Markle Foundation Task Force on National Security in the Information Age. Word up. You guys rock. In synch.... with the Federal Knowledge Management Initiative spearheaded by Neil Olonoff (don't know who he is? That's the way he likes it!) and the Federal KM Working Group of which I, humbly, am still hanging on as co-chair, after leaving Federal service for digs at Marymount University in Arlington (Ballston), Virginia.

Anyways. The Markle Task Force penned a pretty parchment for distribution around New Rome Post-Emperor-Bush-back-to-the-Republic-Obama Administration, a.k.a. Washington, D.C. The hired help who crafted the concepts have probably not received proper props for their creative handiwork, though I suspect those listed Members of the Steering Committee were in much appreciation of their fine tapestry of thought on the subject of managing knowledge and information. Their backing will go a long way in the promotion of more efficient and effective government, which should translate to lower taxes, but probably won't.

Nutmeat in a nutshell: people don't talk to one another in the cornucopia of departments, agencies, et al that is the Federal Government. Nor, it turns out, do their laptops, desktops, crack-berries, Spi-Pods or whatever new tinkertoy some forced-out-of-Hollywood-go-back-get-a-degree-in-computer-science CA whiz jockey is going to market next. It's a problem. Furthermore, anyone with a Ph.D. in moviewatching (e.g. Americans) know that when various entities are after the same bad guy they often stumble over each other, all in the name of protecting their turf instead of sharing know-how in a coordinated effort ("Don't give me that jurisdiction crap." - The Matrix). Witness the rise and fall of the Department of Homeland Security as the most obvious example. (Sidenote: the year of the formation of DHS, I predicted at a conference on KM and homeland security that DHS was doomed as long as they saw integration primarily as an information-sharing problem rather than an organizational cross-cultural communication problem and gave them two years before they had a major PR crisis on their hand. Prediction delivered.)

Another sidenote. When my mother asks me, "Son, what the heck is knowledge management??" I say to her: "Have you ever known an organization where the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing?" She: "Yes, that's pretty much any big company." Me: "So that's a knowledge management problem." She: "I guess in the Federal Government it must be an even bigger problem since they're spending taxpayer's pesos (mom currently lives in Mexico) and need to be careful about what they spend, right?" Me: "Must be!" Silence. She: "So what are you folks up in Washington doing about it?" Me: "Heck, mom, I'm just a business professor now. I don't know anything. She: (sidebar, in a whisper, to reader: "actually, he knows everything, but likes to play stupid. tee hee!" Me: "Thanks for your input, mom. We'll leverage your intellectual capital at the next roundtable discussion where such optics will need to be prosecuted in a timely manner, according to relevant specifications, regulations, and reverberations." End of sidenote.

Five words (or short phrases) to remember and share with whomever you know in any branch of Government: We need KNOWLEDGE SHARING, TRANSPARANCY, SECURITY/PRIVACY, INCENTIVES & MEASURES, AND COMMUNITIES.

Hmmm... a useful nmeumonic?

K..S..T..S..PR..I...M..A..C.

Let's make it five words, okay?

Sharing, Transparency, Security, Incentives, and Communities.

STSIC

Well, you can come up with your own. I'm out of coffee.

Until next week.... when my position will be turned over to dun-da-da!
.
.
.
(wait for it!!!)
.
.
.
(so close!!)
.
.
.
ah, but no. You'll have to wait until next time. Sometimes this happens. Don't let it affect your self-esteem.

KM is Dead! Long Live KM!

2008-10-08T05:57:00.001-07:00

This is a theme I have and will be touching on over the months and years. In a conversation to myself the other day - I'm a Gemini (not CapGemini) - I asked myself, "hey, isn't Knowledge Management dead already? Dave Snowden seemed to think so in 2007 at that salty talk in California!" And didn't I just leave the U.S. Government Agency ranked #1 (it is currently 0900 hours) in KM and Leadership, where I (supposedly) was paving the way for KM? And, hey, wait-a-dang-minute! -I- just got elected Co-Chair for the Knowledge Management Working Group in 2008! So that MUST mean that KM is alive and well, right??

Well, right now things are on hold a bit as I transition to my new position as a full-time tenure-track faculty member of Marymount University's School of Business. Although Jeanne Holm, the other Co-Chair, working at NASA, is doing a lot of things that Jeanne Holm does. I'm sure whatever it is, it will BLOW YOUR MIND. According to her Facebook page, she is right now, "looking at using virtual worlds for social issues." Hmm. Sounds expensive, but cool.

So today, my feeling about KM is that it is really a mishmash of some organizational behavior models and development practices... with a little flair. Enabled, of course, by information technology. I'm mean. Ch'yuah. You would have to have been social networking under a rock over the past few years not to know what I'm talking about.

Throw in a little corporate university, lessons learned programs, maybe a community-of-practice or a thousand, and you have it: a full-fledged, top-notch, rinky-dinky, Twenty-First Century* KM Suite! Or System. Or Program. Or Office. Or whatever. Just call it KM, and you'll get to look at all the cool sites.

So that is what my definition of KM is this morning: an ongoing conversation about the most compelling technologies, practices and insights for learning from one another that are changing our world. And it is definitely time for a change in the way we share knowledge across the Federal space. Or private space. Or just: share.

* Recognizing that by the time the 20th was at this stage, in 1908, the first fatal air crash occurred on September 17. Orville Wright was flying a plane that crashed, killing poor S.C. Lieutenant Thomas Selfridge, his passenger. If one parallels or conflates the importance of the airline industry with KM, you can see clearly that by the time you are on your thirteenth bio-copied kidney, KM will be a mature industry.

Why Academics Are Liberal

2008-09-25T01:08:00.000-07:00

I was not sure whether to post this to my personal page or professional page. The two seem so intertwined. Do you feel that way? Especially when politics are involved.

This current presidental contest has muddied my sense of keeping politics out of the classroom. However, as I teach a course on leadership, management and organization, and given that the U.S. Government is predicated on effectiveness in all of the above, I feel it is fair game to discuss in a university setting. Fortunately my graduate students agree and this past Fall semester led to a lively discussion.

Here's the rub: I have seen research over the years that talk about the liberal academic "elite" (like, we can't suck our fat brains through a garden hose?). Somewhere there is the notion that "we" are "brainwashing" people into becoming "liberals." Egad!

It seems that the concern over the few decades about the decline of our educational system has come home to roost. What are they teaching in civics classes these days? In my experience over the years, the citizenry seems to respect less and less the need to achive a modicum of reasonable analysis and debate in the mediated political universe of discourse.

This is unfortunate, and often leeds to accusations by the right regarding the so-called "elitism" of the highly-educated. Let me attempt to shed some light on why a correlation exists between education and liberal thought.

A western liberal education is about the inclusion of people. We see it in the theories of organization that we study. As a professor, I try to bring these principles into the classroom, so that we learn from each other as well as from our academic ancestors.

Inclusiveness and diversity means drawing out all of our collective talents to be the best we can be, not despite our differences, but because of our differences.

We are stronger in our human groupings when we learn not just to tolerate differences, but to proactively respect differences.

Respecting differences means holding a conversation around the whys and hows to build an understanding of the other. One does not have to accept the views of the other, but as cognizant human beings we need to learn to listen with great perspective and humility.

Learning to listen is one of the first, and ongoing steps for becoming an effective leader.

A Conversation with Dr. Kull

2008-06-01T18:24:00.000-07:00

In this interview conducted by a colleague I share my story and purpose for pursuing an academic career.

A New Egalitarianism. Or, Flat is Cool.

2008-04-24T03:00:00.000-07:00

The web continues to thrill me. In Western cultures, liberalism has taken many forms but none so gallantly as the world wide web. One click is as good as another. Click here and Hillary Clinton pops up, click there and some teenager tells us her story. People are people. Around the world, while dour eyes are on the broadcasts of violence and division, other, fresher and younger eyes are on webcasts of sharing and interconnectivity. The world is indeed flat, and flat is cool.

Perhaps we can look to Web 2.0 to see how it has and will transform society. I know that among my friends and professional associates, we are using Facebook, LinkedIn and other sites to amplify our ability to connect with each other and each other's network.

But it is not just about connecting. It is about realizing a world that meets and transcends human needs. In every management university, at some point Maslow's heirarchy of needs is pulled up. You remember it, the 5 levels: physical, security, belonging, ego, self-actualization - right?

What is interesting to me is that you can spin these concepts out and look at the information ecosystems we inhabit and ask simple questions that mirror this model: "What human need is being addressed with this new technology (fill in the blank)."

So perhaps let's think about it this way:

Content as level 1. This is about basic access to documents and files.

Context as level 2. This is about securing knowledge artifacts in a shared environment.

Cooperation as level 3. Belonging, but only to play the role you are handed. Conversation around takes place in work communities around knowledge artifacts.

Contribution as level 4. Ego and esteem, in pursuit of the greater good. Bloggers and those with a need to share their knowledge and expertise. Knowledge artifacts are created by individuals.

Collaboration as level 5. True creativity and problem solving, collectively. Social interpretations, reconstructions, and the "universe of discourse" where knowledge artifacts are created by egoless groups.

I am speaking on this at the e-Gov KM Conference in Washington, D.C. April 28-29, 2008. I will try to post the video from that panel session here.

Ironically, Maslow's heirarchy may help us to become the kind of people who deserve an authentic and flat reply to bureaucracy and nihilism. It is time for a new egalitarianism. I add my voice to the many who call for more voice in support of fostering democratic principles of leadership within organizations and across the web of humanity.

"The Secret Language of Leadership" Interview

2008-04-22T22:20:00.000-07:00

It is relatively known that great leaders are good storytellers. What is more complex is the way that leaders inspire people through storytelling. That is, it isn't about spin or a calculated messaging campaign. It is about authenticity and the ability of a leader to tap into the better angels of our nature through cultural narratives. While one can become a better storyteller through study and practice, the natural storytellers are the exemplars we emulate.

In my 8-minute video interview with Steve Denning he expands on how he came to compose his ideas and the impact they are having on the way we think about leadership and story; these he outlines in his latest book: "The Secret Language of Leadership: How Leaders Inspire Action Through Narrative."

Steve's website is here.

Smithsonian Storytelling and Innovation Weekend

2008-04-22T22:09:00.001-07:00

I've started doing video blogs, or "blogcasts" or "vlogs" or some more palatable term yet to be invented. This one is with Steve Denning who leads the Smithsonian Associates storytelling and organization weekend every year. This year, May 8-10, 2008, the theme is one that is close to my heart, storytelling and innovation. I spent a great number of research hours on the nature of innovation, theories, principles and practices, and found that the narrative that underscores organizational action acts as the mythos through which new ideas are engaged and innovation occurs.

Unfortunately, day 1 is sold out, but day 2 and 3 are still open and can be found here.

Steve's website is here.

See the interview with Steve Denning about this year's line-up.

Kulled and Amplified

2008-04-21T21:37:00.000-07:00

Ironic it seems that for years I have been touting the need for greater creative and intellectual expression for individuals within and among organizations and communities, and yet for all this time I have neglected the need to shout out my own egoistic ramblings.

The time has come. For my followers in the business world, you've clicked on the right blogspot. For my fans who are bored silly with my talk of management and organizational art and science, I have a personal blog called Kulled. There I talk about anything that is *not* related to leadership, management and organization.

These gurglings will accompany some of the many spittoons of wisdom I've trailed across the web over the Internet century. To see where it all starts, go to the AMPLIFI company home and make fun of me there. If I had my druthers (and my academic cloak came sadly minus druthers), I would take you out to lunch for spending your valuable attention digesting these words.

Please enjoy sharing a cup of coffee (or chai tea if that is your preference) with me every now and then as I find time to share knowledge and/or am sufficiently prodded to exclaim my views. You should always come away with a "hmm" but YMMV (Your Mileage May Vary).

Peace, love, and performance improvement.