How to shift innovation’s intent from creating intellectual widgets to forming intelligent societies.
I want to share that last week I applied for the Bucky Fuller Challenge Award. Hoping you will wish the inGENuity team and me lots of luck. Learn more at links to the story below. Vic 🙂
The following are my comments to an associate who went to the ‘Conscious Capitalism’ conference.
I anticipated when I reviewed Gil’s notes from the ‘Conscious Capitalism’ Conference, that I would be brought into a state of aggravation. Expecting that the language would point to the same old talk about doing good business, while actually covering up that its not doing ‘good’. BUT, I was pleasantly surprised! I’m so relieved, and quite jazzed, about seeing signs of real change, captured within key phrases that were noted. A shift in the integrity of mind and heart about business and the model of capitalism.
His notes suggest to me that, just maybe, we are finally around the knee of the wake up curve, where many of the speakers seemed to be recognizing the need for a different kind of change in business, that so far has merely been rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
Within the language of his notes, there are signals of a readiness to alter our formula for what business is, how we do it, and why … what it’s real purpose is. While moving away from concepts that have merely cloaked more of the same destructive activity that continues to occur.
I will also be so bold (dare I say?) that I was relieved not to see the word used that has represented a mission we have all adored as our savior for so many years – ‘sustainability’. LOL! Suggesting to me we have to go beyond what it represents in order to achieve it.
Finally, to also see that people were questioning even the conference theme itself (as in the last note) by stating: “Does the phrase ‘conscious capitalism’ further instill the corporation with misplaced personhood?” This is where I hope to see a powerful generative conversation to emerge. Because behind its teeth are answers we’ve been seeking.
I got this video off of Charles Lemos’ site and was referred to it by Ben Roberts’ Facebook conversation. Derek Sivers gave this presentation at the TED Conference this week and got a standing ovation. It’s pretty brilliant in its takeaway. The video below is a healthy perspective on the collective’s role in leadership, especially the ‘first follower’. Watch how this natural form of taking the lead seeds the beginning of collaboration.
Here’s the transcript, with bold notes made by Charles. Thanks to Charles and Derik.
If you’ve learned a lot about leadership and making a movement, then let’s watch a movement happen, start to finish, in under 3 minutes, and dissect some lessons:
A leader needs the guts to stand alone and look ridiculous. But what he’s doing is so simple, it’s almost instructional. This is key. You must be easy to follow!
Now comes the first follower with a crucial role: he publicly shows everyone how to follow. Notice the leader embraces him as an equal, so it’s not about the leader anymore – it’s about them, plural. Notice he’s calling to his friends to join in. It takes guts to be a first follower! You stand out and brave ridicule, yourself. Being a first follower is an under-appreciated form of leadership. The first follower transforms a lone nut into a leader. If the leader is the flint, the first follower is the spark that makes the fire.
The 2nd follower is a turning point: it’s proof the first has done well. Now it’s not a lone nut, and it’s not two nuts. Three is a crowd and a crowd is news.
A movement must be public. Make sure outsiders see more than just the leader. Everyone needs to see the followers, because new followers emulate followers – not the leader.
Now here come 2 more, then 3 more. Now we’ve got momentum. This is the tipping point! Now we’ve got a movement!
As more people jump in, it’s no longer risky. If they were on the fence before, there’s no reason not to join now. They won’t be ridiculed, they won’t stand out, and they will be part of the in-crowd, if they hurry. Over the next minute you’ll see the rest who prefer to be part of the crowd, because eventually they’d be ridiculed for not joining.
And ladies and gentlemen that is how a movement is made! Let’s recap what we learned:
If you are a version of the shirtless dancing guy, all alone, remember the importance of nurturing your first few followers as equals, making everything clearly about the movement, not you.
Be public. Be easy to follow!
But the biggest lesson here – did you catch it?
Leadership is over-glorified.
Yes it started with the shirtless guy, and he’ll get all the credit, but you saw what really happened:
It was the first follower that transformed a lone nut into a leader.
There is no movement without the first follower.
We’re told we all need to be leaders, but that would be really ineffective.
The best way to make a movement, if you really care, is to courageously follow and show others how to follow.
When you find a lone nut doing something great, have the guts to be the first person to stand up and join in.
Be a follower, join a movement. That’s how change happens.
I have been asked to clarify the difference between ‘debates‘, ‘discussions‘, and ‘dialogues‘ (note wikipedia incorrectly clumps discussion into the same definition as ‘debate’). Below is a first attempt at trying to evolve our understanding of these three primary communication processes. I ask for your feedback, and also for your own insights on this matter.
The intent here is to help organizational change processes be more conscious and more effective by becoming aware that how we communicate with each other strongly effects meeting outcomes, as well as how well thsoe outcomes sustain the desired changes.
In short, this is all about how we make conscious decisions that influence positive change.
Our world is in dire need of evolved decision-making techniques that can provide us with a better way for sharing and choosing solutions that are healthier for ourselves and the planet. Effective communication is the glue that allows for real, sustained change to happen. Note that communication colors all levels of organizational development, including its methods of leadership, its ability to learn, team work and collaboration, and the sustainability of innovation itself.
+ + +
DEBATE = Language is manipulated with the intent to cripple other viewpoints (argumentative). Change is hard to come by with this approach. However, it is useful for keeping an existing systems in place. Energy comes from the lizard mechanisms in the brain, which attempt to protect and defend. The person with the most power over another is seen as the best leader. This process is not good for creating change except at conscious predetermined places in the process where challenge generates a different thought process that can bring clarity and assurance on choices that have been made.
DISCUSSION = Questioning each other comes from a predisposed positioning (having an agenda). Change is possible but usually can not be sustained due to the process being based on a questioning process that makes each feel someone has to win. Others often loose their identity to consensus. It’s based on a sudo-democracy process whereby everyone unconsciously assumes that there is a best answer, thus only one viewpoint is ultimately chosen. Occasionally discussion moves into dialog, but usually it moves into debate.
DIALOG = Collaborative inquiry with an openness to possibilities beyond each others own beliefs and views. Communication about communication happens allowing the creation of a safe environment; a place where the unexpected and insight can happen more freely. Everyone’s viewpoint is allowed whether or not others agree with it. All work to wear the shoes of the one speaking and seek to integrate diversity rather than extract the best answer. It stands for the power of the question is valued more than answers. The challenge for creating change is that too often dialog does not move toward decision-making and action.
TRILOG = Ideally, all three forms of conversation are useful if used in tandem with each other. Dialog is to be used during the early envisioning stages. Discussion during the goals and strategy-making stages, but only at the point when decisions have to be determined. Debate is useful to challenge a new system against an old one. It must be used very consciously however, because otherwise power over can destroy all previous efforts. Dialog should again be used to close a group’s process because it brings us back to our humanity and to what’s most important, which are the relationships. They are as important (or more) than the outcomes generated by the group, for it is what becomes the foundation for sustaining the determined change.
About Room Geometry = One final point to make here is this: Be aware of the geometry of the room in which people gather. If shared views are the choice, be sure to stage the room with multiple small circles in mind. If one person’s opinion is to be impressed upon the group, then line up the chairs in straight lines without breaking up the group. I for one almost always choose to use circular geometries because it seems to appease the need for all to feel like they are participants rather than merely receivers of information. A room’s geometry needs to be considered at all levels of a community’s decision-making hierarchy including company meetings, town hall meetings, city council meetings, board rooms, and living room gatherings.
+ + +
To bring in more of a trilog approach (with an emphasis on ‘dialogue), use this collaborative design tool during your next meeting: Create a ‘Learning Exchange Markeplace’. For more information, contact Vic Desotelle.
OMG … What have we done to ourselves and our children’s future?!
Most of us think the nightmare of Fukushima’s nuclear power towers is over, but it has only just begun. Do not feed your family Pacific Ocean fish, ever again.
The blindness of our so-called intelligent experts, and the complacency of us as citizens, has now placed humanity in an accelerated breakdown of the planet’s life system. And it is continuing to get worse. Only this time it is affecting not just the environment, but us as well – Human Beings DIRECTLY. Scientists are warning the greatest risk to humanity, right now today, is coming from Fukushima’s fuel pools.
Even with the Fukushima nightmare happening, are you aware of how many more nuclear plants are being readied for development right now? Why, after a series of major incidents over the years, do we still continue to allow nuclear energy? Feel the fear of our foolishness – Feel it to your core. Because the upwelling of that fear may be the only thing that can enable us to act out against the horror of nuclear energy. With tears in my eyes I ask you to read more on the data being gathered. Here is a list of 28 signs that prove the U.S. West Coast is getting radiated.
Watch the videos below. You have every right to feel terrified as you watch. Let that fear help us to act on what we can today, not tomorrow. Although it may already be too late for us and for many generations to come, please take the initiative to act. Find ways to STOP putting any more radiation into our world.
BuckyFuller Design Science Challenge:
