Archive for Business

The Root of Institutional Greatness

November 12, 2012 Rebecca Reynolds Business, Collaboration, Leadership

“It’s challenging when leadership can’t even agree.”  - Anonymous University Chancellor

Gaining leadership alignment in these times of rapid change and social rearrangement is so fundamental to institutional success that without it, it’s only a matter of time before institutional relevance is in the balance. And forget about institutional greatness.

To achieve something big – to solve a complex problem, or reach new levels of accomplishment, or exponentially broaden impact, or develop a game-changing innovation – requires a level of focus and clarity of Olympic proportions. Essential to this is alignment.

Alignment among individual leaders first, and then down through the organization and out into the community, whether local, national or global. This alignment is not about getting everyone to think the same, but rather to develop a view that encompasses myriad individual perspectives from which a grander vision is possible.

Without leadership alignment, organizations (and countries) are left to govern themselves from the bottom up, instead of enjoying the freedom of governing within a shared visionary framework. Without leadership alignment, communities are left to formulate their own (mis)understanding of the institution, if they bother thinking of it at all. Without leadership alignment, the leaders themselves are impeded in moving forward, fall short of achieving what is desired, and experience a diminished role of service.

The way in to leadership alignment – whether the team is reaching for a new business model, increased capacity, or innovative solutions to long-endured problems – is the leadership conversation. This is a simple idea: how people talk about their institution, their issues, and their world is the genesis of the results they achieve.

Even the greatest leadership teams get into troughs of habit in their conversations, in the way they frame issues and describe their worlds. And worse are the isolated silos of thinking and vernacular that foster so many illusory conflicts. Add to this the growing number, complexity and scope of issues facing leadership today – in our organizations, our communities and on our planet – coupled with the pace of change, and leadership is surely tested to deliver on its primary purpose: articulating a compelling vision.

For leadership to create and hold such a vision, here is what’s required:

A shared understanding of the world

A common language with which to discuss it

A broad view of what is possible

These are not insignificant goals; they are the foundation for brilliance.

And the only way to achieve these goals is through conversation. Not the quick and dirty repartee of the break room or text, not the functional email delivering edict or information, not certainly the soundbite or check list. The real kind. The kind of conversation that takes time, that wrestles with assumed meaning, surfaces unspoken values, considers new perspectives, that seeks more to learn than to persuade.

The kind of conversation that, when all is said and done, opens minds and creates accord.

When was the last time you treated yourself to a conversation such as this?

 

 

 

No comments

Analogy of a Helicopter

October 1, 2012 Rebecca Reynolds Business, Leadership

There’s a moment when the helicopter is finally free of the ground and the used air from hovering, when the rotor takes in its first fresh air, like the first breath after a deep-sea dive, that the ability to lift really kicks in – it’s called Effective Translational Lift.

I experienced Effective Translational Lift (ETL) on a first-time helicopter ride a few weeks ago and it started me pondering the brilliance of its analogy to something often considered elusive.

I’m referring to those moments in life when it’s as if we, like the helicopter, suddenly move high enough and fast enough to finally escape the used air of our old thinking – and in those moments, the rotor of our mind takes in completely fresh thought – pure, newborn idea – causing a swift surge upward. We’re instantly catapulted to a whole new thought plain, with a much-expanded view. Effective Translational Lift. Exactly.

This human version of ETL creates that feeling of aliveness, tingling through every cell, firing along the pathways of our nervous system, that makes life worth living. ETL is what spawns great invention, is the midwife of creation, and is what’s meant by illumination, revelation, and epiphany. These words have a sacred intonation, but are not specifically religious. They are perhaps the religious experience, which is to say, the moments in which perfect and higher order clarity emerges inside us – as if out of thin air.

You know what I mean. The moments when suddenly we see differently, as if a veil has been lifted, and bigger, as the lens that’s zoomed out. And it is quiet. The mind goes blank – is blown, as we say – even if only for seconds. Like the helicopter’s upward surge, the mind too takes its quantum leap – as if stepping deftly over some number of rationales that otherwise would’ve taken years to unravel.

The pilot told me he never tires of witnessing his passengers’ experience of ETL. I know just how he feels. In my work with individuals or teams, I watch for their ETL moment, for it is the precursor of a new clarity for action. It may prompt something as small as an individual’s change of career or as complex as how to reinvent an organization of thousands. The clarity may come in a brief conversation or may take months, depending on the magnitude of the transformation – or, to use our ETL analogy, how large and loaded our helicopter is.

But unlike the pilot, I never know exactly when the human ETL moment will come. Human moments of sudden transcendent clarity aren’t certain or predictable. Unlike the helicopter’s ETL, ours isn’t a function of physics. It’s squarely in the realm of metaphysics, and yet, no less real. That’s its magic. And my alchemical creativity comes in playing with the exact combination of words, pictures, feelings, energetic shifts, confronting, cheering, explaining, and using the basics of time, sleep and contemplation to bring it about.

Perhaps because of this metaphysical quality, we often cast such moments as inexplicable, non-repeatable, and perhaps even illusory. Sometimes, I hear people wistfully describe one of these moments from their distant past, as though it’s the rarest and most precious of gems. And it is precious.

But what if these moments didn’t need to be so rare? What if there is a way to cultivate them in our lives – what would that mean? Faster learning? Vastly increased clarity? A greatly expanded presence of being? And with that, what more could we bring into this world?

What I’ve found in my work – both with myself and with others – is that, although human ETL isn’t predictable or definite, it is not only attainable, but repeatedly so. The price for it is a willingness to notice that in some way we are stuck. Hovering close to the ground, as if tethered to the tarmac. And a willingness to consider what stale, used-up thinking is running the rotor of our minds, holding us back from what we most desire.

You don’t have to know what to do. Really. What you have to do is be willing to look – to sign up and step into the helicopter. The pilot handles the flight plan, pre-flight checklists, and communication with the tower; you need only buckle yourself in and ready for the ride. Perhaps what makes ETL so rare is how difficult it is for many of us to do just this.

But for those who do, the reward is majestic. ETL kicks in and you’re soaring at new euphoric heights that were impossible moments before. Like the helicopter, on that cool autumn day, shimmering in morning light as it sped down the runway and in an instant, lifted skyward in a stunning ascent.

Enhanced by Zemanta
2 comments , ,

Leadership Succession: Term Limits for Executive Staff?

July 18, 2012 Rebecca Reynolds Business, Leadership, Nonprofit Organizations, Planning

The idea of term limits for executive staff leaders in nonprofit organizations came up in a LinkedIn group last week. It’s a provocative concept, one that incited a range of comments and got me to thinking.

Although this article focuses on nonprofit organizations, its points are germane to both for profit businesses and government as well.

For the most part, nonprofits take for granted that board governance should specify term limits for its member and officers. It’s a good thing, too. There’s more than ample evidence that organizations without term limits eventually experience problems: stagnating board involvement, decreasing vitality and innovation, and, in some cases, a leadership stranglehold by a few individuals.

But should terms apply to executive staff positions as well? LinkedIn members viewed the idea with skepticism, even considered it radical and, for some, threatening. And I can understand why. One person explained that in smaller communities where the pool of qualified candidates is limited, it would be onerous and even risky to the nonprofit’s health and stability to institute staff terms. Another suggested that he saw no reason for terms if the executive was still performing well. And someone said it was out of the question in an economic slump like the one we’re in.

As I considered the proposition, I realized that the idea of a leadership staff life cycle occurs organically in all organizations. In other words, all nonprofits at some point outgrow their leadership staff and need to address this eventuality. Some address it more directly and strategically, others – tragically – only when the situation has become dire.

The organizations that are attune to the signs of staff leadership “terms” expiring, consider and plan for leadership succession as part of their strategic planning and executive leadership evaluation processes. Those organizations that are not explicitly attune, will instead be confronted with the symptoms of leadership that is “beyond its expiration date,” such as declining mission relevance, morale issues, financial problems, etc. The more aware organizations are that all things have a life cycle – boards, staff, the nonprofit organization as a whole – the better they can prepare for change.

For example, the most challenging leadership transition in any organization is from the founder to the organization’s first executive leader after the founder (or the similar situation of an executive director who has been with an organization for decades). The transition from the founder comes for all organizations, and yet, too often, is left unspoken until things turn for the worse. This is because many organizations are unable or unwilling to overcome the emotionality surrounding the transition, not to mention the founders themselves. And yet, this transition is a critical one for boards and executive staff to foresee and prepare for well in advance, to ensure the stability and longevity of the organization into the future. Not doing this may be a way to avoid ruffled feelings, but it puts the organization at risk, which should be an unacceptable trade.

So, while I find the concept of leadership staff terms useful, I think it may be too prescriptive a solution given the huge range of circumstances in nonprofit organizations. One organization’s appropriate executive leadership tenure will be another’s stagnating yoke and yet another’s “blink and you missed it” time period. For example, a mature and stable organization will have different needs from its executive than a start-up, so an arbitrary number of years for leadership terms, while easy, doesn’t make good sense. The bellwether for when leadership should turn over has everything to do with what the nonprofit currently requires.

Instead of prescriptive term limits for executives, I endorse that nonprofit organizations build into their planning and evaluation processes explicit conversations about this issue and develop policy and plans to guide a consistent leadership succession process. And such processes should apply to all major executive staff, from executive director to development director, administrators, CFOs and program directors. Evaluation processes for these positions should be developed with criteria defined to drive optimal performance by the nonprofit – this too will change over time and so must the evaluation process and criteria for each executive position.

And to circumvent much of the high emotion that can surround the topic of leadership succession, bring all executive staff aboard with full awareness of the nonprofit’s values, plans and process in this area so that individuals understand that it isn’t personal to them, but rather, simply the way the nonprofit does business.

The biggest problem in the area of leadership succession is that too many nonprofits just plain get comfortable when things are working well - the “don’t rock the boat” mentality kicks in – and they forget that at some point things will change. Perhaps setting term limits would help make sure this doesn’t happen. But even better is remembering that the only constant is change and being prepared for those predictable changes should be the nonprofit’s standard procedure. The need for executive staff turnover is one such predictable change. Not only does it make sense to plan for this to foster innovation and organizational relevance, it is one of the smartest ways to avoid crisis, highly emotional, or at worst, litigious situations.

2 comments ,

Business Info Guide’s Interview with Entrepreneur, Rebecca Reynolds

June 27, 2012 Rebecca Reynolds Business, Featured, Leadership
This interview, focused on entrepreneurialism, was conducted by Stephanie Chandler, author and CEO of Business Info Guide, where it was originally published. I share it here to give Call to Contemplation readers some additional background on my perspective, and also as an entrée to the ongoing dialog about new lines being drawn in the business space. Or should I say, old lines (like those between for profit, nonprofit, and government sectors; employee/employer; doing good/making profit, etc.) being blurred or erased. It is republished here with permission.

What does your company do?
RRC is a management consulting firm specializing in leadership development and organizational transformation. We use clients’ current projects as the applied learning environment to develop their leadership mastery and achieve superior results. Client achievements range from buildings built, watersheds cleared, and balance sheets balanced, to forests renewed, homeless sheltered, performances sold out, refugees protected…and so much more.

Was there a specific turning point when you realized your business was moving to the next level?

Over 20 years, my business has up-leveled several times. The cycle of my firm’s growth and expansion parallel my own readiness to stretch, and each cycle has been prompted by a desire to broaden the reach and application of my expertise.

For example, I first started RRC as an outgrowth of my executive leadership roles in nonprofit organizations. At that time, I realized I was a change agent and that striking out on my own would enable me to apply my skills to a wider range of situations. Then, after nearly 10 years consulting with hundreds of nonprofits, I felt ready to apply my capabilities to a broader arena – RRC immediately started getting clients in the public sector and began our focus on multi-stakeholder collaborations and executive leadership development there. Now, 10 years later, we are moving into the international arena. So, our growth is a consequence of my evolution, in tandem with the opportunities of our changing environment.

What processes or procedures have you implemented that have helped grow your company?
There have been two very significant processes that have supported RRC’s growth – one more obvious and one perhaps less.

First, we strive to systematize everything we do – my team’s vernacular includes “maintenance” versus “development” efforts. Whatever is maintenance, we codify as standard process (SOP) in our team handbook and in RRC’s policy/procedures manual. This serves as our foundation. Then when we move into development – e.g., creating our social media strategy, we are much more attentive to exploring and validating what works and what doesn’t before we identify SOP. We do a lot of innovation and creating at RRC, so this clarity helps everyone know what mode we’re in!

The second, perhaps less obvious process is the use of collaboration tools. We teach collaboration to our clients, so we must excel at it ourselves. We have worked with most of the basic tools out there (Central Desktop, SharePoint) and continually push the boundaries of how we use them, both internally and with our clients.

What is most rewarding about running your business?
Bar none, it is experiencing people achieve much more than they ever imagined possible. To see someone – whether a client executive, a client group member, or an RRC team member – realize their heart’s desire is inspiring and energizing for me. I never tire of it.

What challenges have you faced and how have you overcome them?
My challenges generally fall into one category: dealing with my limitations. These may result from different causes: what I don’t know or am blind to, what I am afraid of, what I don’t think is possible. But ultimately, each are addressed the same way – by examining my thinking and making shifts. Over the years I have made it my practice to use RRC as my own learning environment. This mindset enables me to overcome any challenge since all challenges are simply my current curriculum for growth.

If you were starting over today, what would you do differently?
I would network more. Before the terms existed, I was a “solopreneur” and a social entrepreneur. A common trait of both is the “go it alone” mentality. I started RRC after just six years in the work world, which was possible because of that mentality. But what I didn’t know then was how much more was possible and faster by connecting with others with whom I share values and vision. Since I have opened to this, my business and my own growth have expanded exponentially.

What advice do you have for other business owners?
Document your business strategy and processes early. One of the defining characteristics of entrepreneurs is our unique ability in some area or other. Too often we take this ability for granted – since it’s easy for us, we assume it isn’t worth much. This couldn’t be farther from the truth. The entrepreneur’s unique ability is the source of everything in their business. Documenting it means you can more easily replicate it, teach it and productize it. This can seem like tedious work, but the payoff is enormous.

Please list any favorite books, tools or resources (software, website, etc.) you would recommend for others:
Warren Bennis’ books on leadership.
James Gleick’s The Information – essential reading for understanding the role of technology and information today and its fascinating evolution.
Twitter: following broadly and using theme lists and Paperli.com enables me to tap into the global consciousness in a flash.
For my blogs, WordPress has been a terrific tool – both versions (.org and .com)

What is something that people might be surprised to learn about you?
I am a sports movie junkie. The irony is I don’t follow any professional sports, but a good sports movie (has there been a bad one?) enthralls me. The reason is simple: even though sports movies are formulaic, the formula of teams triumphing over adversity is what I live for. My favorites are Remember the Titans, Mystery Alaska, and now Moneyball.

Is there anything else you would like to add?
Entrepreneurial businesses are the way business is moving, so many more people of all ages, situations, and with every possible idea are getting into them. This is tremendously exciting for a variety of reasons: greater opportunity for personal satisfaction and purpose; further democratization of the economy; increased possibility for collaborations, partnership and joint ventures; and more flexible business models that are resilient to change – to name a few. I would encourage anyone with a passion to explore the entrepreneurial business model – but don’t think you have to go it alone or start from scratch. There are tremendous resources out there (the Business Info Guide being a terrific example), as well as myriad mastermind, networking and mentoring groups. This is a truly exciting time for small business entrepreneurship!

 

 

No comments ,

Wilted Flower Lessons

June 14, 2012 Rebecca Reynolds Business, Leadership

Something mundane happened last week. But the more I thought about it, the more I realized it held remnants of the sublime.

I’d stopped by Costco to buy a bouquet. My colleague had just returned from vacation, it’s spring, and I felt like having a bit of it in the office to celebrate. Running late, I almost didn’t take the time. But in the end, decided it was worth the extra 30 minutes.

Back at the office, I unwrapped the flowers from their swaddling clothes of tissue and cellophane, my colleague looking over my shoulder. What I found was not what I expected. The flowers, looking so pretty from the top of the tightly wrapped bouquet, were browning terribly around the edges! They looked at least 10 days old. I was crushed.

“They’re okay,” my colleague said resignedly. That did it. I headed straight to my office and picked up the phone.

As the phone rang, I realized it was more than the disappointment of purposefully taking time out of a busy day to get flowers only to find them half dead. The previous three times I’d purchased flowers at Costco – roses, to be exact – they’d drooped after a day or two and never opened. The closed buds tinged brown ended up in the trash. I could see them lying there. The wilted spring bouquet was the last straw.

On the line, a young woman’s voice answered; I briefly told her what happened. She gasped an empathetic “oh no,” then told me she’d transfer me to someone who could help. Another young woman’s voice greeted me; I told my story again. She too was sorry, and said of course I could return them. That’s when I explained the real issue of consternation.

I’d already made time to stop at Costco and didn’t have any more to spare. I didn’t want to drive back, with the flowers or not, and wait in the refund line – no matter how friendly or quick. The woman then asked “What would you like?” I considered. Actually, I knew exactly what.

“Ideally,” said I, “I’d like someone from Costco to drive here and bring me a new, fresh bouquet. Now, I know that’s probably impossible, so second best would be a refund over the phone so I don’t have to come down there, remember to bring my receipt, stand in line and all that.” She was doubtful about the phone refund. After some discussion, she suggested that I speak with the manager and see what he would do. “Perfect,” I said.

In a moment, I was explaining for a third time, this time to a young man. He too immediately aligned with me, and we had a similar conversation to the one I’d just had. And then he asked the question again: “What would you like?”"

Emboldened by the time before, I told him my ideal scenario – fresh flowers delivered to my office, as well as the backup option of a phone refund. I also repeated what I didn’t want and why. His reply surprised me.

“Actually, it’d be easier for me to bring you new flowers…” - he was thinking out loud - “…and I’d like to get out of the warehouse for a bit. Where’s your office?” I told him and he became more sure – “yes, we could do that. Now, what flowers did you get?”

My colleague, who’d been listening to this exchange from her office next door, was stunned. Within an hour she and I both had pretty bunches of fresh tulips on our desks, which we selected from the box of bouquets brought for us to choose from.

This was an extremely happy ending. And needless to say, my faith in Costco has been fully restored – even moved up a notch.

But the experience goes beyond our mere happy ending. There are some useful lessons mixed in among those posies…lessons about customer service, but also about life.

On the “Offender’s” Side:

1: Align with the offended. Really. Listen to their complaint. Don’t take it personally. No matter what. Then genuinely empathize with their experience.

This is one of the hardest things to do – especially the more the offended is blaming you. But really, the offended’s issue is theirs – it’s been brought to you to help remedy it. Moving away from the offense to how to solve it is done quicker if the offended feels empathy.

Each of the three Costco reps totally agreed with me that wilted flowers were a nonstarter, which meant I didn’t need to convince them of my position but rather could start solving it.

2: Offer some solutions. If they don’t work, ask the magic question: “What would you like?”

The power of this question surprised me. I felt it operate inside me like a magic potion. Think about it – when someone asks you this question, really asks, can you resist? As my mind played out exactly what I wanted, in full living color, I felt my energy shift. Tightness melted into ease, breath dropped from chest to belly, all as I imagined fresh flowers being delivered to my office.

Next time someone is upset, try asking and watch what happens.

3: See if you can do what’s being asked. Get creative. If you really can’t, offer up something good or better from what you’re able to do. And if that’s a non-starter, offer to move it up the chain.

Again, all this must be genuine for it to be meaningful – and people can tell the difference.

On the “Offended’s” Side:

1: Don’t “settle” or “make do.” If something needs to be rectified, clearly state the issue. Keep emotion out of it, as much as possible, but be direct.

This too can be challenging – especially if you’ve stored up previous grievances, like I had with the roses. But keep in mind that offense is rarely intentional. So, the more dispassionately the offense can be described, the easier it is to begin doing something about it. (If you’re just in need of a good rant rather than a solution, call a friend or your mother.)

2: LISTEN for the reaction. And not just to the words, but to the intent. Check your gut: does it feel genuine? If yes, proceed to 3. If not, ask to be transferred UP.

3: Offer options for how the “offender” can remedy the situation, being sure to give a range, including your IDEAL solution. Also, be clear about what will NOT be acceptable. If asked the magic question (“What would you like?”), go for the gusto and consider yourself blessed. But if you don’t get asked, you can simply ask it of yourself!

So, go ahead, in an area that has long bugged, frustrated or annoyed you, ask it: What would you like?

 

 

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta
No comments , ,

A View of Ubuntu

May 31, 2012 Rebecca Reynolds Business, Collaboration

After three weeks in South Africa, the last of which I’d spent on safari near Kruger National Park, I flew to Johannesburg where I had a layover of a few hours before my flight back to the states. I’d scheduled to meet a friend at an airport café.

Even after just a week, the re-entry into teeming, jostling, noisy humanity was overwhelming.  So I scouted a table in an empty area opposite the cafe, where I could easily spot my friend’s arrival and also regain my equilibrium. As I took my seat, I saw a phalanx of people passing by on what I realized was a main artery of the airport.

Just come from long, quiet days in a game drive truck, the silent observer in me was still in service. So my instinctive choice of a seat next to a large white column that offered some cover made sense, allowing me to gaze at the crowd without being noticed.

Such variety marched before me – people in ones and twos, in groups dressed in matching uniforms (airport personnel and sport teams) and even costumes. People with dark skin and braided hair, people with lined faces, people with fair skin and hats. And the sounds – people laughing and shouting in Zulu and English and Afrikaans as they flung by, others with eyes darting about mumbling in Japanese or Italian, and some shuffled mutely as though lost.

It looked like the world parading by, the world of humans, that is. And I pondered the difference between this observation and that from the game drive truck. I noticed that in looking at my own species, I easily picked out unique individuals, as compared to when I looked upon a herd of zebras or elephants, who more or less looked the same. Watching a herd of elephants, or even following a lone leopard through the bush, I was really only aware of the species in general. And for the most part, each species hung out with its own.

One notable exception was the vervet monkeys and the impala, which we came across in a sunny meadow one afternoon. It struck me then that this was one of the few times I’d seen two separate species markedly together. The ranger explained that they join for protection – the monkeys have the advantage of tree-climbing heights to watch for predators, whereas the impala have incredible ears to listen for them. This kind of cooperation was remarkable because it’s rare.

Back at the airport, I realized I could see in two ways – the usual way of seeing people one by one, noticing the color of hair, of shirt, of shoe, but also the safari way, seeing all as one swarming herd of a single species. And in this view, the idea of ubuntu came to me.

We’d discussed ubuntu in the leadership seminar I took during my first week in South Africa. Our conversation was based on Archbishop Desmond Tutu’s essay on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), where he explains the concept. After apartheid, South Africans had to decide how to deal with its aftermath – what legal process would be used to reach justice? Consideration of the options (criminal courts like those at Nuremberg or general amnesty) resulted in a third, now renowned, choice of the TRC – the process by which the accused could admit their crimes to the victims and be forgiven. According to Tutu, the choice to forgive rather than to punish was not only a necessary one for a country in dire need to unite itself, but also a culturally aligned one – aligned with the idea of ubuntu.

As Tutu explains it, “ubuntu speaks of the very essence of being human….It is to say, ‘my humanity is caught up, inextricably bound up, in yours.’ We belong in a bundle of life.” Rather than Descartes’ “I think therefore I am,” ubuntu implies “I am because you are.” This interconnectedness is at the root of humanity, and South Africa’s ability to come together even under the most heinous conditions Tutu attributes to the worldview of ubuntu.

As I sat watching so many humans gliding by, reminding me that globalization is no longer a theory but a living reality, I thought how terribly important it is now for us to engage the view of ubuntu. It may seem like an ideal or somehow impossibly selfless,
but then I recalled something else Tutu said: “To forgive is not just to be altruistic; it is the best form of self-interest.” And I saw the monkeys and the impala sitting side-by-side under soft afternoon light.

 

This piece is the last in a series on South Africa written for and published on www.Africa.com. This series explored leadership themes from her range of experiences on the South Africa trip. Reynolds will be starting a new series called Leadership Conversations, coming soon here and on Africa.com.

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta
One comment , ,

Alphabetical Order

March 8, 2012 Rebecca Reynolds Business, Collaboration, Leadership

In college, I traveled to Italy for six months to study in the archives. My subject was, of all things, 18th century Italian opera. What I was looking for, namely letters from any of the prime donne (first ladies of the opera house), was not to be found in US libraries. So, I spent a semester planning, reading history, contacting likely scholar mentors, and learning Italian so I could go and search in the Italian archives.

When I arrived in what was to be my home, the small, medieval hill town of Siena, I immediately got to work. First, intensive language study; second, intense social life (I was just 24); third, practice in approaching the archives. Facing the mirror, I rehearsed my introductory sentences about being an American, studying 18th century opera, and looking for letters from singers of that period. When I’d got it down, I headed for the local library – a palatial edifice founded in 1759. I didn’t really expect to find anything there, just to practice, to get the feel of it.

My rehearsal was pointless; the arch fellow behind a monolithic desk barely glanced at me as he pointed, raised arm and index finger, at a stack of what I took for card catalogues. Not bad, I thought. Just like home. At the case, I peered at the tiny white cards on each mini-drawer. And here began the mystery that would engulf me for the rest of my six-month trip.

Each card was written in a sloping, curly que hand that looked like it belonged to the first librarian back in the mid-1700s. The drawers were in alphabetical order, but it was unclear of what. Some entries were name of historical figure, some of place, and some of author, with no obvious system denoting why or which. I was baffled. Upon closer inspection, I found there were also no numbers in the top right or left corner of the cards: no Dewey Decimal system. Egads – it never occurred to me that Dewey wasn’t ubiquitous! What was going on?

Enter Mr. James Gleick and his wonderful book The Information, out in paperback any day now. As it turns out, how we organize information is indicative of who we are. Makes sense. And the way we organized things early on had more to do with the things themselves than with the efficiency of the system. In other words, Gleick explains, information was ordered by subject, rather than by alphabetization (which, by the way, didn’t come into common practice for an astonishingly long time – 1613, to be exact).

What Gleick explained, that seems quite obvious upon reflection, is that humans think about things in terms of their experience of them. And then, bin them up accordingly. (Everything I eat, everything that breathes, everything that grows, etc.) This system worked quite well for a limited quantity of information used by a small and perhaps congenial group of people. So, it wasn’t until the amount of information increased and a larger, more diverse group was using it that the need for a more efficient cataloguing system arose.

This, significantly, would cause information to be separated from experience. Alphabetical order, as Gleick explains, “is unnatural. It forces the user to detach information from meaning; to treat words strictly as character strings.” The Dewey Decimal system takes abstraction a step farther since the number has nothing whatsoever to do with its correlated subject. (At least a letter corresponds with the name.)

With Gleick’s help, I see now that what I’d found in Siena’s small, but centuries old library was the layering on of alphabetical order over what appeared to be a prevailing subject matter system. And, as I would come to learn from living in Italy, Italians hold hard to how things are done – no matter how seemingly nonsensical or inefficient. But then perhaps, so don’t we all.

Back then, as I sat staring into a drawer (and by the way, the cards came fully out, which also made me gasp – how easy it would be for them to be stolen or put in the wrong order!), it suddenly occurred to me that I’d never find anything in Italy. All that way for nothing, simply because I had no idea how the Italians organized things! This was something, in all my preparations, that just hadn’t crossed my mind.

But I was in Italy and for six months too, so I endeavored to figure it out. As I traveled first from Siena to Florence to work in the archives there, and then on to Bologna, Modena, Parma, Verona and Venice, I began to see something I now refer to as an “organizing principle.” All this means is the method by which information is structured or catalogued: by time (date or period) or by subject (name, place, or field), and which is primary and secondary and so forth.

When I’d get to an archive, I’d challenge myself to think of every possible organizing principle with which to conduct my search. I’d try different methods and sequences as I scanned the shelves, the indexes and what card catalogues there were. I’d leave my own organizing prejudices behind and try to imagine how people in the 18th century might think. The more flexible my thinking, the faster I found the key for using each archive. And soon, it became the game, the researcher’s version of hide and seek.

The happy outcome of my Italy trip was finding seven letters from my favorite prima donna, Caterina Gabrielli, on which I based my thesis. The letters were hidden away in the Vatican Archives…but that’s another story.

The true treasure of that trip was the notion of the organizing principle. We all have them. And which ones we use dictates how we organize our worlds – both our physical one and, more importantly, the one inside our minds. Knowing this has proved invaluable in my leadership, collaboration and strategic planning work over the past 20 years (not to mention my travel).

Little did I know that dusty Italian archives would prove a useful training ground for a consulting career. Or that a book, with an unassuming cover, called The Information, would help explain a mystery a quarter of a century old.

Enhanced by Zemanta
4 comments , ,

The Gift of the Skeptic

February 16, 2012 Rebecca Reynolds Business, Collaboration, Facilitation, Leadership

Do you know how in a group there’s often one person who won’t get on board? He or she just seems to be interminably skeptical and constantly throws stones at whatever the group is working on. And pretty soon, the work feels like a large rock is tied to the back of it, putting a major drag on forward movement.

The group inevitably grows weary. And depending on the situation, the rock’s drag may win out and the project gets dropped. Or in other cases, people will start to look back at the rock and give it nasty looks, shake their heads at it and maybe even come around and cut the rope. In some cases, the group just slogs on, dragging the rock forever.

What’s up with the rock?

At first glance, the rock appears to be the skeptic. Those who sit apart from the group, mutter under their breath or roll their eyes, and when they do contribute, speak out loudly with sarcasm or confrontation – all in the name of skepticism.

But not all skeptics employ these tactics. For instance, accountants and attorneys often play the skeptic role, and do so by calmly explaining legal or financial reasons for rethinking what everyone else is enthusiastically supporting. Although this can feel like a “wet blanket”, people are generally glad that someone bothered to “kick the tires” to prevent driving off in a lemon.

The skeptic then, is not a person or a set of behaviors; it’s a role. A valuable role that keeps us from doing things that we’ll regret, cause us harm, or waste resources and effort. We all use skepticism to protect ourselves: we are skeptical of politicians’ promises, skeptical of advertising claims, skeptical of things that seem too good to be true – some of us are skeptical if too many people endorse something.

In fact, we need the role of skeptic. It’s hugely helpful in situations involving large investments of money, a high risk of bodily harm or that defy generally established norms (remember the Wright brothers?) The adage “a healthy dose of skepticism” reminds us all to use this critical faculty in our daily lives. The “healthy dose” refers to using it appropriately to the situation.

So, the question is, how do we gain the gift of the skeptic in a way that’s
constructive and additive rather than destructive and an impediment to
progress?

First, design the role into group process. When the group recognizes the value of the skeptic’s gift, this role can be designed into group process, in a “healthy dose” appropriate to the situation. (For example, experimental brain surgery requires a bigger dose of skepticism than, say, exploring new restaurants for a dinner party.)

Designing the skeptic role into process means identifying the most opportune times for the full group to apply the skeptic’s perspective. In this way the role of skeptic is shared and the burden for tire-kicking isn’t left to one person or to a small minority. This also frees the group to be visionary and innovative together, to be practical and methodical together, and to be critical and skeptical together – each of which are equally important to the creative process. With everyone taking on the role of skeptic together, the group’s cohesion is increased, with outliers able to join in.

Second, distinguish the role from the behavior. Once process has been designed to include the skeptic’s role, the next step is for the group to create normative standards for participation and to clearly communicate what these are. Explain that the skeptic’s role has been designed into the process, and there is no need for one person to take it on him/herself. Nor will it be useful to play the role of the skeptic (i.e., interject criticism) when the group is still in the learning or idea generation phases. Once group process and norms are clear, the next step is to enforce them.

Finally, openly address “rock” behavior. When a process is new, it may take a bit of road testing to get it right. So if “rock” behaviors begin to appear, they need to be addressed right away, as a demonstration to all that the process is now different from before. The group needs to make clear that indeed there will be the opportunity to evaluate and critique as part of the development process, but not at this time. In other words, the mis-timed skeptic behavior should not go unchecked.

This can be done by group participants, the group’s designated lead, or, depending on the size, nature and track record of the group, this may be done best by a neutral facilitator. The point is, groups that do not check this “rock” behavior allow themselves to be held hostage by it.

* * *

So, the group develops its process to explicitly include the skeptic role, communicates this from the outset, and monitors that everyone is clear as the process unfolds. What if then some people still take on the lone skeptic role? What if these individuals continue to sit outside the circle, pitching rocks in, rolling their eyes, and even jumping up every now and then to rant and rave, or stomp out?

One reason for “rock” behavior by the skeptic is that the group isn’t really playing the role. In many groups, the majority of people will seek convergence. This is a human trait: we are relationship-oriented. This can lead to acting too quickly or to “group think” resulting in the status quo. In these situations, the skeptic may resort to “rock” behaviors to get the group’s attention. Since the skeptic role is essential to achieving effective and lasting results in anything, but particularly in something new, groups need to be sure it is given real attention. When this happens, many times the “rock” behavior will simply disappear, because it’s no longer needed.

Sometimes the skeptic needs more certainty before acting than others – s/he is more risk averse. Or the skeptic may have specialized knowledge that causes them to see risk that no one else does. In such cases, even if the group dons the skeptic role, this may not feel sufficient to the skeptic, so s/he will continue to tire kick long after everyone is well-enough satisfied to give whatever it is a go. The key here is to try to understand if the skeptic has a valid point the group hasn’t considered, or if the individual’s risk tolerance is really at issue. The more self-aware the individual is – the more able to identify this for him/herself – the more easily the situation can be resolved.

In some cases, the skeptic role has become so second-nature to the person that s/he no longer distinguishes between the role and self. This type of person has become the role. The person has come to identify with it and to use “rock” behaviors as self-expression. This is an unfortunate state for the individual because any skeptic that’s unaware that skepticism is fine as long as it remains in a “healthy dose” risks becoming the boy who cried wolf: ignored by his peers and ostracized to the back of the room. Coaching can be very helpful with this kind of individual, with the aim of increasing self-awareness and options for self-expression.

In other cases, the skeptic is playing the role to prevent change. Some will even continue the skeptic role into the implementation phase, looking for opportunities to say “I told you so” to undermine the process. This is the worst type of skeptic behavior because the criticisms are really masking a hidden agenda. Most groups can sense this, even if it’s not openly discussed. This shouldn’t go unchecked if a group desires to make progress. But even this skeptic has something s/he is concerned about protecting – whether for the greater good or for him/herself - listening to what this is can bring valuable information to the group.

* * *

In summary. The issue is not with the role of the skeptic. The role has the inestimable value of avoidance of pitfalls. The issue is with how, when and by whom the role is played. The skeptic role is far more productive if openly recognized for its value by the entire group and then designed into group process. The skeptic role is also more effective if it doesn’t get played by the same one or two people in every situation. And finally, the individual who seems trapped in the role and/or in “rock” behaviors should be coached to see that the role is a choice and that other roles can bring just as much satisfaction.

Remember: A little skepticism goes a long way. And “rock” behavior is really only suited to preventing something from going over a cliff.

This is a follow-up piece to Collaboration: What to do about Politics and Power Plays? 

Enhanced by Zemanta
9 comments , , ,

King: Civil Rights or Sameness

January 19, 2012 Rebecca Reynolds Business, History, Leadership

Last weekend, I visited the new memorial to Martin Luther King, Jr. in Washington DC. This followed a trip to Anacostia, MD to see Frederick Douglass’ home – who came 100 years before King, and both visits came on the heels of a recent trip to South Africa, where Nelson Mandela lives still. Civil rights have been on my mind.

Civil rights. Two little words for such an enormous concept, such an important idea. The idea that we all need food and water to survive; we all want some voice in how things go in our lives; we all want to LIVE – to express ourselves, to discover, to work, contribute, relate, find meaning and connect. A grand idea, I notice, reduced by these two words to a legal concept – that of rights.

When I entered the MLK memorial, my first sight was King quotations, writ large across granite walls that hug the landscape, the letters of which are made crisp by the play of sun and shadow. What struck me about these words was that King wasn’t really talking about rights. He wasn’t talking about a platform or legal precedent or even a group of people.

He was talking about truth essential to us all – deep truth, as basic as bone.

He said things like:

“I have the audacity to believe that peoples everywhere can have three meals a day for their bodies, education and culture for their minds, and dignity, equality and freedom for their spirits.”

And:

“We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly.”

As I moved along the wall, I came upon the monument itself, made of massive granite chunks. One of which has King’s body emerging from its end – like a ship’s figurehead, facing into the wind of the future, eyes wide and standing tall. King’s visage stares across the Tidal Basin toward the Jefferson Memorial, out of a bright whiteness of stone. I wondered at the choice. His face, his lips, his massive hands, holding in place arms folded across his body, all seemed a bit wrong. I longed for the warm tone of his skin; I longed for his open arms, his hands reaching out to us all.

But instead, the memorial casts him in hard lines, imposing, stern, and seemingly miffed at us. Arms crossed as though holding back, keeping his distance. Why? Was this who he was? Or who we need him to be? Is he posed this way to let us know there is more to do? A stern father towering over us with authority and disappointment?

Maybe that is comforting or inspiring to some, but I hoped to look into the countenance of the man representative of the words carved deep into the rock behind him. The words reminding us all that we are one.

“I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word in reality.”

It struck me that rights are an unnecessary concern in a world where unconditional love prevails. We need only be concerned with rights when they are in jeopardy or worse, being transgressed. But the entire idea of rights rests on the notion that we are fundamentally different from each other. That some of us are different, and because of that, deserve to be treated differently.

As long as this difference remains the ground we stand on, we will continue to have to fight for equal rights. Whether it’s poor, uneducated, one color or another, large, small, male or female, this set of beliefs or that, across a river or an ocean, these differences appear, in retrospect, so terribly arbitrary and archaic. And yet, we persist in justifying our obsession with difference with whatever current rationale for this group’s inferiority or wrong or lack of some fundamental sameness the rest of us share. Yesterday were those with black skin; today those who love people of the same gender; tomorrow it’s me; the day after it’s you.

When will we begin with the idea that all people, in fact, all life, is made of the same stuff? And the differences so much smaller than the sameness, they are very nearly inconsequential? When will we accept that our focus on difference is our undoing? This is not a political or legal position, although great politicians and lawyers have espoused it. This has been the stuff of spiritual teachers since time immemorial, but more recently has been argued by philosophers and proven by science.

And in this moment, when our lives across the planet are being pushed closer together with globalization and King’s “inescapable network” is the very real internet, it’s time to rethink “protection of rights.” King presaged the way:

“If we are to have peace on earth, our loyalties must become ecumenical rather than sectional. Our loyalties must transcend our race, our tribe, our class, and our nation; and this means we must develop a world perspective.”

These words today seem so simple and right, and even obvious. Maybe that’s the irony of Truth. The bigger it is, the simpler it is in the abstract, but the more challenging, even impossible it seems in practice. So, although Martin’s loving words, from the heart of a deeply spiritual man, are the surround of his memorial, it is King as stark, harsh, massive presence that commands its central position. And isn’t this just exactly our problem? We take what is so tender and lovely – our sameness – and make it so hard and brutal – our fight for right against which we must fight for equal rights.

For me, the real feeling of King’s memorial is evoked not by his massive, stalwart, near-grimacing presence, but rather by the expanse of the space surrounding it. Four acres nestled among walls of such beautiful words, where visiting people look up, out and through a lens, the narrow focus of the mind as it penetrates meaning. They cast their reverent gaze on the man, his idea, and each other. And his legacy is reflected in those faces, laughing, reading, chatting, all the while, perceiving the gift. The gift of what is right. What is true. Against which, all the tyranny and smallness and meanness of spirit, all the torture and brutality and disregard simply look petty.

We think about rights as a way to get to equality – when in fact, our sameness, our fundamental equality, as King would say, is where it all begins.

Enhanced by Zemanta
5 comments , , ,

Greetings of the Season!

December 23, 2011 Rebecca Reynolds Business

From our holiday newsletter…stay tuned for more from South Africa.

Dear Friends,

As we approach the final days of 2011, the sense of satisfaction of a year well-lived is upon me. 2011 has certainly been a big one at RRC, full of milestones and new ventures.

First, the company turned 20, an achievement that snuck up on us in all our flurry of activity! Then, in February, I began a sabbatical to explore who and what is on the cutting edge in leadership, and planned travel to Aspen, Boston, Colorado Springs, D.C., and New York to participate in a wide range of leadership events. I also started this blog to share my experiences and reveries along the way – and have been so gratified by your readership and comments.

The culmination of my leadership sabbatical was a three-week trip to South Africa. I traveled there to take part in Aspen Institute’s Global Leadership Initiative with 60 leaders from around the world. My itinerary also included individual meetings with prominent South African leaders, tours of the country’s rich history and culture, and finally, safari in the famed Kruger National Park area. It was a “trip of a lifetime”, opening my mind to new ideas and grand possibilities with amazing people.

Following are some tidbits from my travels, illustrated with a few of the more than 2000 pictures I took while there.

It is indeed a year for gratitude at RRC – for the bounty of what the year has brought, which includes our relationship with each of you.

Season’s best to you and yours,

Lessons from Safari

Spending time in the bushveld of South Africa’s Mpumalanga province affords not only incredible wildlife viewing, but also some quiet lessons. First, the word safari is Swahili for “long journey,” bringing new meaning to what a safari portends. Next, the hours spent on game drives watching animals in the midst of their daily lives – taking a drink, preening, knocking down trees, nursing, rolling a matrimonial dung ball, or slithering across the road – bear witness to how great are the gifts each of us is given.

Every animal, no matter how small, has its ability, its camouflage, and its distinct role in the order of things. And they are, surprisingly, adept communicators: the impala snorts at the leopard, telling it that it’s been seen. The leopard grunts back, “Ok, relax, I’m not hunting you.” Simple, straightforward messages are key to getting along.

And finally, despite the enormous power of these animals to harm, there’s an understanding that allows humans such privileged access. The bush: an uncommon place for leadership learning.

RRC Celebrates 20

RRC is in its 20th year – yes, that’s right, 20 years of partnering with our clients to achieve great things though visionary, collaborative processes. To celebrate, we launched our new homepage, that features images that reflect the enormous breadth of our work over the past two decades: buildings built, watersheds cleared, balance sheets balanced, homeless sheltered, performances sold out, forests renewed, refugees protected…and so much more. Many of you will recognize photographic representations of your projects!

2011 also marked new levels of RRC involvement in a wide range of organizations doing good in our world: Colorado Public Radio, Boys and Girls Clubs, and the Museum of Nature and Science, to name a few. We are indeed grateful for this rich and varied history, and look forward to the next two decades of dreams becoming reality!

Leading from the Boma

Aspen Institute’s Globalization Seminar took place in Stellenbosch, just outside of Cape Town, assembling 60 world leaders in dialogue. Three groups of 20 convened in a boma, an open air, thatch-roofed structure indigenous to Africa, that allowed the breeze to ruffle paper and billow minds. The topic was leadership in the age of globalization, which was addressed through a series of readings from Seneca to Conrad, Thomas Friedman to Desmond Tutu.

What the immersive conversation showed was that, although the challenges are great in this time when the world is truly becoming one, there are far more similarities among us than might be expected. Economic prosperity, environmental justice, cultural expression, resource sustainability, and social well-being are priorities no matter who is talking. The question is, how will we create a new model of global governance through which these shared priorities may be realized equally for all?

Cape of Good Hope for 2012

Standing at the bottom of the African continent (okay, actually Cape Agulhas is the most southerly point) is a place conducive to historical reflection.

The first European to name the rocky point was Portuguese explorer Bartolomeu Dias, who called it Cape of Storms in 1488. But later, John II of Portugal changed it to Good Hope. Dias must’ve encountered the vicious weather that prompted the namesake. And perhaps, the name also aptly described his mood since his crew forced him to turn back before he could proclaim the spice route for Portugal.

For King John, on the other hand, Dias’ adventure proved that the King’s tremendous investment in exploration would, in fact, pay off – he had plenty of good hope for a future maritime voyage to India. The cape’s name, then, is a case of perspective – and the optimist’s won the day.

As we stand at the end of 2011, gazing out to the open seas of 2012, let us appropriate the name for the coming New Year. 2012: the Year of Good Hope. Let’s raise a glass to it – Cheers!

Enhanced by Zemanta
One comment , ,
« Older Entries