Wednesday, April 30, 2014

In A Search For Authenticity, Locally Hosted Meals & Management by Accident


It was an hour and a half to drive home tonight in the rain. Nonstop sheets of gray pelted the windshield and I flipped around the radio trying (mostly in vain) to find a song worth listening to.

The delay became somewhat worth it when I caught a really interesting news segment on WTOP News. I am always interested in trends, and they were talking about the trend toward locally hosted meals, such as with Cookening, Home Hosted Meals, and so on.

In this business model, the impersonal, cookie-cutter restaurant is replaced with an encounter with a true local person who is simply hosting a dinner party, wine and cheese tasting, etc. at their home. I could see the appeal, especially when you align this kind of business with airbnb, where you get a place to sleep from a  local person - rather than a cold and sterile hotel.

People nowadays want to do business with people. Not plastic. Not customer service "robots."

Which relates to a second topic. People want to bring their humanity to work. Not completely of course. But just enough that they are relating to one another in a real way. This is a shift from earlier times, when the mode of interaction was colder and more formal.

The demand for increased authenticity makes it more difficult to interact successfully at work. As opposed to times past, when role division and distance was more explicit, today the employee may be more technically proficient than the manager and they may also be friends outside of the professional environment.

Let's complicate matters with the unconscious. We all carry emotions left over from our relationships of the past - successful and not. There are issues not fully resolved, dynamics still to be played out. It is inevitable that we will bring these emotions into the workplace, just like we will seek to make "friends" among people who really just want to get paid for pretending to be a friend and to offer "genuine" hospitality.

There is so much literature out there on leadership and management, marketing and how to run a business, and relationships. It would be nice, in a way, to buy a recipe book and plug it into the wall so that we could be successful.

But that would eliminate the meaning of the journey, wouldn't it?

We have to find our way an inch at a time.

* All opinions my own.

Monday, April 28, 2014

Bumps & Bruises


As a kid I knew my share of punks and bullies. Kindergarten, fourth grade, fifth grade, tenth. George, a girl with a boy's name, attacked me in a parking lot - I was only eight or nine. True, I got her pretty good. But she left me beaten up on the pavement, and I cried in shame as my parents carried me home.

Life is about bumps and bruises. My mother had no mercy about that. "Turn off the waterworks," she would admonish me when I started to cry. "It's enough."

It was better in the olden days, at least in some respects. We played outside - a lot. Chalk on the sidewalk, jacks, skipping rope. Plastic pool in the yard. Barbecue at Grandma's.

At camp I ran as fast as I could around the track, sprinting till I lost my breath and fell. Skinned my knees so many times. Picked at the scabs - why? Trying to make it go away was useless.

A child of the consulting life, moving every year till I was ten, I learned to live the solitary life. New friends in new places meant a whole new set of bullies. I took my mother's advice to heart and toughened up.

But then a funny thing happened...somewhere along the path to adulthood I began to make friends that stuck with me. Got married, started a family, went to grad school and began to enter the workplace, forming new friendships there.

What I learned over time, particularly working for the federal government, is that we don't toss our working relationships away all that easily. My mental model was the private sector, where you're employed "at will" and they can fire you for as little as an ill-conceived Tweet. 

But in the civil service, people can literally work together for life. And in the course of that working together, they know joy and sorrow and pain. They argue and misunderstand one another. They celebrate great achievements and mourn the awards they should have been given. Say things out of turn, write the angry emails you're supposed to hold - and then send them anyway.

And yet somehow they stick together, they muddle through. Eventually, once time has passed, they find a way to laugh about it all. 

There is something really beautiful about that. 

Here's to the beautiful thunderstorms, to the way they gather up in ominous swirls of clouds, wind and pouring rain, then leave the air cleaner tomorrow.

* All opinions my own. Photo isn't me.

Sunday, April 27, 2014

Is There Such A Thing As Too Much Feedback?


Over the past few years I've gotten a lot of feedback about my leadership and management style. Some of it's been good -- visionary, quick to learn, creative, insightful, direct.

Other parts have been bad (really, the flipside of the good) -- too quick to change things, do things my own way, tactless at times, need to think through more carefully "how will we get there."

All of it is good. And I hold myself responsible for doing better.

But does there come a point when feedback itself impedes progress?

Yesterday I was watching an old episode of The Brady Bunch. This is the one where the kids get measles, and they're all in bed, kvetching. There's Mr. & Mrs. Brady & Alice the housekeeper, putting the trays together in the kitchen, each one specifically tailored to what the kids wanted to eat.

They trudge up and down the stairs with the trays. It's funny to watch them going up the stairs, then down the stairs, huffing and puffing.

My daughter says, "I wish I had an Alice at home."

Mr. Brady walks into the boys' room and hands the oldest son Greg his tray.

Greg says, "I wanted bologna."

Mr. Brady says, basically, "But we made this just for you, it's the food you want, just the way you want it."

Greg repeats, basically, "I wanted bologna."

Mrs. Brady says, "Now now, dear, if he wants bologna, he gets bologna."

And Mr. Brady takes the tray back down the stairs.

I tried to explain to my daughter that in the Bradys' world, it was possible to change out Greg's food, to let them choose their own separate doctors, to flex out Mr. Brady's schedule so he could help Marsha with her math problems. (Sexist script!)

In the real world it's not realistic to fix every problem. The feedback may be accurate, but we have to prioritize.

Or it may not be accurate, or helpful at all, but the manifestation of some other problem that is coming out as a negative comment about work.

The amount of feedback that our employees and customers provide will only increase moving forward. What's needed is a systematic, rational approach to listening to it and responding.

Otherwise we're setting up false expectations, and serving our stakeholders worse in the process.

* All opinions my own.







Saturday, April 26, 2014

Normalizing The Irrational Website


Over the course of my career I've been a consultant, a client and an academic. Worked in the private sector and the public sector. Done internal and external communication, branding, web, social media, mobile, and open data. But one thing has remained constant:

NOBODY WANTS TO CHANGE.

The funny thing is that people always ask for fundamental change. They say "we have to get away from the past."

But the reality in most cases is that individuals and groups are usually fundamentally wedded to the dysfunctional culture that they know.

I remember when we moved to New Jersey back in the '80s. Boxes sat in my living room for years because my parents couldn't agree on where they should go. I could have brought in an expert to simply unpack the boxes and put them away in a logical place.

But the hidden logic behind the irrational boxes was as follows: we disagree and these boxes are a symbol of our refusal to budge.

Until you get the logic of the dysfunction, you can't make a change. You see this on reality TV shows all the time, where an expert and a desperate client duke it out until the client admits and faces their problems and consequently changes their ways. (The show "Tabitha Takes Over" on Bravo, where hair salons get a makeover, really captures this dynamic.)

I remember as a brand consultant one engagement in particular where we did a whole assessment for a customer, then a report-out showing where they were falling short in employee engagement. They flat-out, angrily disagreed with our findings. They wanted an outside opinion, but couldn't handle it.

None of the above is new information. But when most people are confronted with this type of situation, e.g. an irrational organizational arrangement, brand, or web presence, they too easily jump to the conclusion that it should be "normalized" as per the way a total outsider would want to see it.

This is not the case. Rather one has to respect the healthy tension that exists between two things:

1) The organic situation - this is the situation that has evolved on the ground, the reality that has evolved as a result of culture, history, relationships, internal and external politics, technology and budget limitations, leadership and employee capacity, and so on. From a website perspective, it is also the reality of the relationship between the organization and its customers, the way the site is set up iteratively to offer the fastest connection between stakeholder and information.

2) The structured ideal - this is the wholly rational approach, the one that a computer might design, one that totally ignores the subjective reality of the situation, one that delivers an ideal that is interoperable in a massive communal setting. For a brand, the structured ideal puts the organization in a context of other brands. For a website, it sets the data free so that it can be aggregated into other settings where similar information is offered.

Writing in the early 1900s, at the dawn of the Industrial Age, the sociologist Georg Simmel called this tension "the tragedy of modern culture." He leaned toward the organic, arguing that individuality could not survive in the context of the big cultural machine, which sucked up personality and spit it out in a watered-down pop culture format that all could appreciate.

Elsewhere, using Simmel's theory as a reference, I have argued that brands have to evolve by putting organic in dialogue with structured (or "subjective" in dialogue with "objective") in order to remain authentic while also relevant to the public at the same time.

For every organization, finding the balance between organic and structured data will be different. Therefore it is a grave mistake to apply the principles of information architecture like a blunt stick. Rather the key for all parties to have an awareness that there is a tension between organic and structured data, that it has to be negotiated, and that the boxes can't stay in the living room forever.

* All opinions my own.



Thursday, April 24, 2014

Can Negative Emotions Propel You To The Top?



Many people make the mistake of thinking that psychologically healthy people are the best equipped for success. In fact the literature on leadership and management suggests a different story - that executives rise to the top precisely because they have significant personality extremes and/or disorders. (Read "Is Your Boss A Psychopath," "Is Narcissism A Leadership Trait" to get the idea.)

At the same time, the very extreme traits that help someone to get ahead can also hurt the organization. Accordingly, the table below (which I developed, incorporating the articles above and my own knowledge) shows some of the potentially helpful and unhelpful characteristics associated with a tendency toward personality extremes.


Characteristic
Definition
Helpful Manifestation
Unhelpful Manifestation
Paranoid
Think everyone’s out to get them
See risk before others do
Perceive bad intentions where none exist, potentially eliminating talented staff and missing out on opportunities for collaboration
Psychopathic
No feeling for other people
Business acumen and know how to work people and the system to get what you want
Prey on people to get what they want, especially subordinates, fracturing and demoralizing the team
Narcissistic
Think they’re superior, that the whole world revolves around them, almost as if nobody else exists
Vision and confidence inspire the team
Tend to surround themselves with “yes-people” who they perceive as inferior, stifling healthy disagreement and competition
Greedy
Never satisfied with what they have
Acquisitive energy gives them ambition and motivation to do more and more
Don’t know when enough is enough; potential to overextend the team and create burnout
Obsessive
Can’t stop thinking about the same thing
Intense focus on perfection can yield great products and services
Can alienate members of the team by insisting that their way is the only way
Insecure
Tendency to feel ashamed of oneself
Strong work ethic (as a way of proving that one is indeed “good enough”)
Inability to balance work with other aspects of life; workaholism

At the end of the day, not all people are born to be moderate or balanced. So be it. We can use those extremes for good. But we also need to be careful not to allow extreme tendencies to harm the organization.

* All opinions my own.

Tuesday, April 22, 2014

10 Signs Your Change Initiative Stands A Chance


Change initiatives are notoriously prone to failure. As an employee you want to learn how to be a weathervane. Which way is the wind blowing? How do we make the most of good weather, and set the damage from a thunderstorm right?

You also want to know what a good mix of positive indicators looks like. Here are 10 pretty reliable ones that a change initiative is going well. (You can infer from their opposite when it's not.) Note that they tend to occur in combination and reinforce each other - just like ketchup and mustard look strangely good sitting side by side.

1. Leadership has stated the vision in broad terms.Middle management can translate that vision into action items. Staff can say it in an elevator ride.

2. People are excited to talk about it.

3. Cultural readiness is apparent as people seem impatient to just start implementing already.

4. Opportunity presents itself in the form of distinct "easy wins" toward the bigger picture.

5. Team members have a way to align their natural talents with goals in such a way that they are self-motivated as well as largely self-directed. 

6. People can join the team and understand what it's working toward fairly easily.

7. The scope of the change initiative can be modified without losing focus, because all have a fixed gaze on the ultimate destination. 

8. The organization is willing to accept some level of sacrifice in the name of achieving the overarching goal.

9. Commitment over time becomes an ingrained part of the process - people expect it to take years, not months.

10. Resources are committed to get the job done well - it's not a setup for failure.

* All opinions my own. Photo by me.

Monday, April 21, 2014

Celebrating Genius As A Form Of Diversity


A lot of companies talk about innovation, but few are prepared for dealing with actual creative people. They hire for uniqueness and then complain that unique people drive them not to celebrate, but drown their sorrows in drink. (At 7-Eleven you can go either way.)

I am that type of person. Not book-smart, necessarily, but "out there," outside the box, radical. I'll do anything to solve the problem. My mind is on the Rubik's Cube 24/7 - creative, workaholic, dramatic, demanding and obsessed with perfection. Spacey, because I'm thinking. Awkward, because introverted. Dramatic. And so on.

I understand that it's a lot for people to handle. But there is also no workplace where we really dialogue about what creativity means and how it manifests itself among a "normal" team. More than that how to encourage creativity at all levels and stages of one's career.

Really all of us are geniuses at something, I have found - it's just a matter of discovering which thing. Certainly we are different, there's no two ways about it. Particularly because we need innovators so badly nowadays, it is important to take the time to learn people's unique methods and preferences at work, rather than thinking about "norming" teams. I don't want boring norming. I want a creative storm!

A long time ago I visited the Fashion Institute of Technology in New York and remembered how I once wanted to be a designer. That particular gift was not mine, but I still think with awe about the craft. Giorgio Armani, Betsey Johnson, Donna Karan...fashion is a RUSH. When you see it, you feel it. Just like beautiful jewelry, architecture, haute cuisine, and on and on.

The students at FIT all looked kind of freaky, and I felt right at home. It reminded me of living in Greenwich Village in the late '80s. You could never be "out there" enough - everyone was out-"freaking" everyone.

It shouldn't be a contest of course. But we would be so much better off, and so much richer as a country and a world, if we could just appreciate each other for the vibrant beings we truly each are.

*All opinions my own. Photo by me.




Trend: Vintage Feminist

Snapped pics of these items in a shoe store on Las Olas Blvd. in Ft. Lauderdale, and got the sense that they exemplify a trend. (Not sure of the name, but we're seeing this type of stuff in a bunch of places.)







There's also a lot of gladiator going on right here in terms of women's shoes, but haven't got a great photo just yet. Also dandelions, and massive necklaces.



* All opinions my own. No endorsement or non-endorsement expressed or implied. Photos by me.

Sunday, April 20, 2014

Blame Hitler


In "Hush" a young girl's friend is effectively murdered, and the ghost knocks at her window in her dreams until she pursues justice.

Today I started reading "Unchosen," by Hella Winston. Normally disdainful of books, I walked in the street fixated to the Kindle. And suddenly started to cry uncontrollably.  

(Like the writer Nora Ephron said, you have to put the pain on paper or it lives in your head forever.)

My entire nuclear family on my father's side, which I have never understood in proper sociological or historical context, could have been lifted, in a certain sense, from Chapter 1.

It talks about Yossi, a young Hasidic man who shaves his sidelocks and beard in a gesture of freedom.

Yossi's parents strictly forbade any contact with the outside world and he had barely any education. 

His grandparents were raised in New York City and had not known such stricture until the post-Holocaust immigrants arrived from Eastern Europe. They adopted it. 

Yossi is one of so many people who cannot live within the restrictions of their communities, and yet they cannot reject it and still be a loved part of the group.

It's not exactly my historical story, but close. My own father's parents both survived the camps - physically intact if not necessarily emotionally. He is a playful guy who loves American culture. And he married my mother because he loves her, in an act of rebellion against arranged marriages and the values represented by his Hasidic dad. 

Like Yossi's grandfather, my Zayde went from wearing American style suits to Eastern European garb. In a community where the rabbis blamed assimilation and Zionism for the concentration camps.

My father was always ambivalent about his act of independence. It was a slap in the face to his father. By being who he was, he had broken the rules - which left him forever marked and shamed, no matter whether anyone said it aloud or not. 

For her part, my beautiful, loving, sincere mother was always treated as inferior. I could not stomach this, and how my dad seemed to hypocritically shift between enforcing Old World rules and pursuing New World freedom.

Nobody chose to live this tragedy. It was all inflicted on us by the actions of one evil man, may he burn forever in Hell, and those who went along with him.

My aunt, on my mother's side, lives up in Monsey and is super-strictly religious. She became that way so her kids could marry. And she thinks she knows why I'm not religious. 

"Blame Hitler," she once said. "He really fucked your family up."

It's true. Hitler directly killed six million. And then he systematically destroyed many of those who survived. Because the families that remained looked for a way to explain the unexplainable and they tried to carry out an insane kind of logic on their kids.

Of course keeping out the outside world doesn't work. Just like we don't know why the Holocaust happened. Just like my mother and my father and their now-deceased parents before them (may they rest in peace), were all victimized.

Some people find it odd that I - rejecting most religious ritual personally - feel so passionately about defending the right of people to be religious. And to discover themselves in religious community.

But structured faith is essential to life, like water, for many. Even for those who are not traditionally religious, like me. 

May G-d have mercy on all our souls, and grant all the Yossies and Chanas a joyful escape from the purgatory of the streets they wander, sometimes literally. May we find solace in a place where everyone is cherished for simply being who they are.

* All opinions my own. Photo by me.



Friday, April 18, 2014

"Because I Said So"




So I spent a week in supervisory training at my agency (The National Archives) and they taught us a really good thing: You've got to expose your mental models, your reasoning.

In other words, having the right answer is not enough. Doing the work yourself is not the job anymore.

Your job is to motivate other people toward a shared goal.

Sounds obvious, but here's the thing: Many leaders misunderstand what "shared goal" means.

It is NOT your goal that you share with the people. Rather it is "our goal" reached by consensus around what has to be done.

The way you get to "our goal" is to lay bare your logic: how you got from point A to point B.

In my group we're working toward our own shared goals. And I'm spending probably 50% of my time this week just talking to people about the reasoning. Then tweaking it according to their responses.

Yeah - that's the other thing. You get to "we" and "our" by adjusting what you've got along the way.

Many leaders fear being seen as stupid for not knowing all the answers. This is unfounded.

What employees really want is to be included in the process of setting out the goals, and also to help correct them - when incorrect assumptions or faulty logic has been used.

When the enterprise works according to rational logic - not "intuition," "gut feel," "my preference," or other arbitrary criteria - then everyone can put a stake in the ground.

Happy Friday and here's to building and rebuilding, from the ground up.

* All opinions my own.

Thursday, April 17, 2014

How To Get Your Innovation Moving In A Bureaucracy: Leverage The Leader's Field Of Vision


In the movie Paranoia, Liam Hemsworth plays an innovative developer who gets caught between two lifelong rivals. His problem? Overeducated but underpaid and exploited, and he can't get his good ideas taken seriously no matter how good his presentation.

In real life, professionals at every stage find themselves frustrated by a seemingly immovable and impenetrable corporate mechanism that seemingly resists every attempt to inject a new idea. I have often wondered why we put such an emphasis nowadays on advanced education and technical certifications and then ignore the precious advice we've already paid for.

But it can be done. One example: Goucher College provides academic support for the Hispanic community on the weekends, including daycare. But something was missing, realized one student: The community needed a GED testing center, because the credential is important to apply for jobs successfully.

Instead of dropping a voting card in a suggestion box, the student did extensive research, found out exactly how the process works, showed the school how it could be done in a practical manner, and won approval. In my mind there is no better example of innovation for good - this student has  put food in the mouths of children.

Align With The Leader's Field Of Vision!

When presenting his idea, Liam Hemsworth did not understand the perspective of his boss. The leader had created a great technology, only to have it stolen by a partner-turned-rival who was better at marketing it. Had he understood that perspective, he could have presented the innovation in a way that fit into the leader's field of vision.

Do you know how your leader views the world? Vision and values are not enough. You must see what they see when they look out the window from their office. This is essentially how they think, how they take in information, and what motivates them to act.

You Are A Thousand Times Better Off With Your Leader's Support.

A common misconception about innovation is that it must upset people. This is absolutely not true. In fact, most organizations and most people actually welcome it.

The problem is that change takes many years to take root, and you must have an incredibly strong base of support to withstand the winds that will whip against you like a hurricane. (Consider the Internet, social media, and now mobile and "Internet anywhere.") 

So when you are the lone ranger who has an innovative idea - even one as simple as my friend's, who said we should use smaller margins in government correspondence to save paper - do whatever you can to fold it into your leader's vision. You may not get credit for the concept - in fact it is probably better if you do not. What matters is that you use all your cognitive and emotional intelligence to figure out how to get the idea done, and then focus very very hard on researching, presenting and then executing it.

Paranoia has a different ending than the one I'm presenting here. I won't spoil it except to say that Hemsworth finds it impossible to work within the rules. But if you intend to make your career in a large bureaucracy, you have to find different tools than the ones he employed. Understanding where your boss is coming from, and then presenting a solution that makes it easy to say yes, is a very good way to think about it.

* All opinions my own.

Sunday, April 13, 2014

Lost In The Sauce On Innovation


Why do the very best intentions on innovation end up going downhill? There is more than enough urgency to go around -- so why can't we just pick a problem and fix it?

I think it's because we human beings tend to get lost in the sauce. That is, we start out on the right foot, but ultimately miss the point as we fall into five kinds of traps that distract us from the huge and life-changing goals that we can and must achieve:

1. We have a fixed mental model around what innovation looks like. In our agency, company, organization, institution, or what have you, there is a political and cultural environment that dictates what you can and cannot think, say, and do. It closes down the mind to disruptive and radical solutions that can actually work where the current approaches fail to.

2. We get fascinated by sparkly new toys. For example, social media is a toy. It's great and valuable and important of course. It's the new town square, it's a place where people are talking. But in the end it is the table upon which the main dish is served. You've got to focus on the main dish. (But toys are safer to talk about when there is disagreement about the cost of food.)

3. We try to adapt a bureaucracy that's inflexible. Big, established systems can be Too Big To Fail. When it comes to innovation, they most definitely are. Innovation defies all established ways of doing business. Trying to sprint forward while dragging a freight train behind you, repairing widgets as they pull apart this way and that, is no way to innovate.

4. We don't know what to do about culture. For one thing people move slower than the speed of thought or technology. For another they run the very real risk of getting left behind as organizations progress to the next phase. We have difficulty managing the very rapid pace of innovation and the very slow pace of human change at the same time.

5. We don't really believe that we can do it. Despite all the incredible progress that human beings have made on this planet over the past century, we treat every new approach and invention like a huge shock. If only we had a little more faith in our ability to think our way out of problems, maybe we'd be more successful at new ways to come out of our problems.

Ultimately I think there is only one way to truly innovate. And that is to support continuous and rigorous analysis and critique of all things existing. We have to be free thinkers, and support the right of others to be free. Then when we reach consensus, we know that it's real and not just a bunch of useless groupthink.

* All opinions my own.

Saturday, April 12, 2014

Respect


Respect the rocks for what they are.


Respect the leaves for what they are.


Respect the trees for what they are.


Respect the sky for what it is.


And respect the earth.

If we could only respect people the same way.

* All opinions my own. Photos by me.

Thursday, April 10, 2014

"The First Rule About New GM Is Don't Talk About Old GM"


I was watching this great spoof of the GM hearing that recently left our nation's Senators wringing their hands.

The message: Look at our silly litigious culture. You can't be honest anymore, unless you don't care whether someone will sue you.

We see the same problem everywhere. Screwups abound - they are inevitable - and leaders try to move us past them, largely by quickly apologizing and then ignoring the past.

I understand that impulse. I hate looking back at my high school photos. That miserable sulking face! That depressed, pity-me poem! The weird slogan I chose for my goodbye saying! Oh why!

But you can't wipe the past away and neither should you. It is your life. Your heritage and you own it.

Similarly, employees are stamped by the legacy of the "old way." You can tell them that there is a "new way," but they are not going to feel it for many, many years past the time of your telling. Probably not until two "new way" cycles from now.

You have to have compassion for people. You have to stand where they stand. When you tell the employee a thing they take it the way they take it, not the way you from your high perch want to drum it into them. People are perceptors, they are brains - they are not things.

There is a book called The Chosen that taught me a lot about being a leader. About having radical compassion.

Like the main character Danny, I was a bright but cold young person from a Hasidic background. Like Danny, I was alienated and did not find myself in religion. And like Danny, I learned that you become a compassionate helper of people when you suffer the pain of aloneness and silence.

Don't talk so much about the "new GM." Go to the people of the "old GM," and just sit with them. You may be able to lead the way. But you also have to walk many miles with them in their shoes.

* All opinions my own.

Search This Blog

Copyright 2016 by Dannielle Blumenthal, Ph.D. All opinions are the author's own. Powered by Blogger.