Category Archives: Collective Intellegence

Gaining Influence

Posted on by
Reply

As a functional manager it is one thing to know that you have the information and potentially the answers to some of your organizations issues, it is quite another to influence senior or corporate management’s decisions.

In the most recent issue of the Harvard Business Review researchers Anette Mikes, Assistant Professor at Harvard Business Review along with Matthew Hall, London School of Economics and Yuval Millo, University of Leicester wrote “How Experts Gain Influence” about the findings of their 5 year study on gaining influence in an organization.

They found that in order to increase their impact, functional leaders should develop four specific competencies:

1. Trailblazing: finding new opportunities to use your expertise
This particular mode of influence involves uncovering previously unidentified issues or challenges that may prevent the organization from achieving its goals or initiatives.

2. Toolmaking: developing and deploying tools that embody and spread expertise
Basically, come up with succinct but simple tools, such as reports or visual models that can be employed cross-functionally for greater visibility, understanding and ultimately consideration.

3. Teamwork: using personal interaction to take in others’ expertise and convince people of the relevance of your own
This competency draws heavily on harnessing collective intelligence across the organization and as a result creating inclusiveness and buy in.  For example, if you were creating a reporting tool (see toolmaking) great influence and support will be gained by engaging other functional managers in the design.

4. Translation: personally helping decision makers understand complex content
Keep it simple!  Use your own expertise to interpret information into a usable format and actively engage yourself in the explanation.

Although these four competences identified by Mikes, Hall and Millo may seem basic and perhaps have an air of common sense, execution is often hindered by the same barriers we see to collaboration such as ego and hidden agendas.  As such, this weeks Kingbridge Insight is to suggest that if you struggle with attaining influence as a functional ‘expert’ perhaps the solution is self reflection – are you allowing your personal behavioural barriers prevent you from demonstrating the competencies required to be influential in your organization?

Email, RSS Follow
Share

Collaborative crowdsourcing the Boston Marathon bombers, and more

Posted on by
Reply

For me, the response to the marathon bombings has been a fascinating example of the new open and empowered world we live in today.  I am fascinated by the collaboration between expert groups and the public at large in putting this story together.

As these two young Chechen terrorists discovered, it’s hard to hide nowadays.  Multiple security cameras documented much of their movements at the bombing site and many more personal digital cameras, both still and video, covered other aspects of the event, and much of their movements afterwards.

More importantly, tweets, Facebook pages and other social media, along with more traditional television news , kept massive numbers of both local and distant observers up to date on what was going on minute by minute.  A lot of the early reports were wrong, but gradually the wisdom of crowds phenomenon, along with dogged reporting by professional journalists kept putting the pieces together and got it right.   Despite strong criticism from the FBI and some older professionals about the out-of-control speculation that would damage reputations of innocent people (“leave the police work to the professionals”), it is hard to argue against the fact that public participation, and collaboration, substantially shortened the time frame to capture and understanding why and how it happened.

Just as important and amazing was the extraordinary leaderless collaboration from hundreds, maybe thousands, of individuals, including runners, observers and total strangers who rushed to help the wounded at the site and in the hospitals.   They knew what to do without guidance.  Area hospitals were well coordinated to share treating the wounded.  Hospital personnel, many off duty, heard the news and returned to help staff their team in preparation for the arrival of a rash of ambulances.   Others organized fund raising drives to help the families whose lives had been so disrupted.

Perhaps the greatest outcome of this outpouring of caring and constructive assistance is the positive culture of this community that comes from recognizing they can all contribute to overcoming tragedy.

I’d like to think every community can do this.

This week’s Kingbridge knowledge gift is a suggestion for creating a climate of collaboration.  And it is to practice random acts of kindness.   You might say my “knowledge gift” is to share knowledge gifts.   If you give something away with no expectations of getting something in return, you can create a “pay-it-forward” mind set.   But, there is a delicate balance and a bit of a paradox.   It can’t be seen as selling.  That will be viewed as a hidden agenda.   And it shouldn’t be seen as sympathy, or just kindness.   That can come across as disempowering or condescending.   Ideally it should come across as sharing a passion or a lesson that shows caring and respect.

Email, RSS Follow
Share

Un-common Sense

Posted on by
Reply

Duncan Watts has just written a new book with the title “Everything is Obvious (Once You Know the Answer): How Common Sense Fails.  Watts explores how our reliance on commons sense and the idea of what is obvious in human behavior to govern our everyday lives often translates to errors when anticipating or managing the behaviors of many individuals in a complex setting over time – such as in a corporation, a culture or a certain market.

With common sense we can rationalize just about anything into an obvious conclusion.  The study of social sciences is often looked upon as unnecessary for that very reason.  If a study concludes that people living in the city are more likely to own vacation home then our common sense will tell us ‘of course they are more likely to own a vacation home so they can get away from the hustle and bustle of the city and relax’.  While that same study could conclude that those living in rural areas are more likely to own vacation homes and again our ‘common sense’ would kick in and tell us that ‘of course it makes sense that those in rural areas would be more likely own vacation homes, they are more relaxed and aren’t as addicted to the corporate life and convenience of the city.’  It would be seemingly obvious either way but the accuracy of the pattern can only be determined through the study of social behavior.

For example, under the guise of common sense, marketers may feel that they have a good sense of what consumers want and how to sell them more.  However, their predictions are often based on their own ‘obvious’ motivations rather than the complex variety of motivations that exist within a diverse group.  The same is true for any problem that falls under the umbrella of ‘social’ rather than scientific.  However, as Watts points out in his book we actually have a much better grasp on the physical sciences than managing problems with a people factor such as the economy or corporate culture.

“The paradox of common sense, then, is that even as it helps us make sense of the world, it can actively undermine our ability to understand it.”

 

Email, RSS Follow
Share

Bringing Minds Together

Posted on by
1

I recently had the opportunity to contribute and article to the Harvard Business Review for a special issue focused on collaboration.  I was somewhat amused by the fact that when I asked if authors would have the opportunity to discuss their work and integrate some thoughts that this wasn’t possible – ironic perhaps considering the focus of the issue.

The link below contains the article abstract.  If you wish to obtain a full copy of the issue the directions to do so are included.  Otherwise, a limited number of complimentary copies are available if you contact institute@kingbridgecentre.com

http://hbr.org/product/bringing-minds-together/an/R1107F-PDF-ENG?Ntt=r1107f

 

Email, RSS Follow
Share

Experiential Learning – Simulated!

Posted on by
1

We all know that the best way to learn something is to do it.  That’s why doctors have 5 year residencies and mechanics and plumbers have appreticeships – you need practical experience to recognize symptoms, identify the problem and act accordingly.  The same is true for learning to manage group dynamics, promote innovation and practice culturally preffered leadership skills.  You need to experience the situations and practice your response to get it right.

Simulated experiential learning has long been in practice for medical, military and business training but is a relatively new initiative in organizational development training.  However, group simulation activities can lead to efficiency, effectiveness, and risk reduction in the workplace let alone the potential to garner new skill sets.

We have all sat through the endless slide shows and overly simplified dramatizations commonly used in ‘culture change’, ‘leadership’ and ‘how to be innovative’ workshops – none of which allow learners the opportunity to practice the principles and skills in real life situations. Simulations use real life parameters but often with an element of competition to keep groups engaged and ensure optimal performance.  Rather than heading back to the office with a set of principles, the participants leave having experienced implementation of the principles with opportunity to learn from their mistakes in a risk-free virtual environment.

If you want to check out one of the leading organizations in the production of workplace simulations ExperiencePoint covers topics ranging from practicing social resposibility, customer service practices to leading innovation.

www.experiencepoint.com

simulation pic (2)

Email, RSS Follow
Share

Designing Collaborations

Posted on by
Reply

There are several key components that when combined in the proper measure can result in successful collaborations.  Creating the framework for the collaboration is one such factor.

Harnessing the creativity of a group requires not only the usual considerations of timing, data requirements, and the resources needed but also careful ‘engineering’ of behaviors and mindset.  This apparent contradiction of soft skills with the recognized hard skill association of engineering allows you to consider the process of organizing behavior in order to maximize creative mindset and minimize those that destroy collaboration.

Soft stuff is the glue that holds the hard stuff together. Knowing who should contribute to the collaboration and their necessary skill sets in addition to being prepared to mitigate negative behavioral tendencies (Divas, Pontificators and the like) are important considerations on an individual level.  For example, when a particular personality needs ‘management’, the ideal approach is 3 pronged:

1. Arrange a pre-meeting one on one with the individual and warn them that they may encounter topics or opinions that could cause an emotional/negative reaction.

2. Recognize their abilities/skills etc. and let them know their inputs are valuable to the group achieving their goal.

3. Find a solution that works for the individual and the needs of the group to prevent potentially destructive situations.

Let us say for example you have a member of your group that given his level of expertise and experience believes he/she should not be limited to the one time 10 minute speaking limit that has been set for meeting participants.  The result of the 3 pronged approach above could potentially be to offer this participant several opportunities to speak but with say a limit of 5 minutes per.  This approach respects the time of the rest of the group and minimally disrupts the flow but satisfies the participants need to comment often.  You can’t change the person but you can change the rules!

When considering the collective; dynamics, politics, pre conceived notions and potential conflicts should all be evaluated and prepared for in advance in order to ensure every participant is contributing at 100% capacity and not hindered by behavioral issues.

That isn’t to say of course that as a ‘collaboration designer’ you can’t have a little fun.  At least one organization I know of employs water guns in their creative sessions.  If a member of the group is perceived by others to be pontificating, squirt!  If a participant is negative about an idea without first asking questions, squirt!  Condescending, squirt!  Hogging the floor, squirt!  You get the idea.

Email, RSS Follow
Share

The Collaboration Paradox: Understanding the Magic of Getting Things Done – Webinar!

Posted on by
1

One of the mainstays of successful collaboration is engineering interactivity and purposeful communication between the members.  Advances in technology have provided the tools to make this easier and accessible but it is still up to the organizer(s) to create the right conditions for collaboration to work.

Take advantage of the opportunity to learn about what makes a successful collaboration (and not so successful) via one of the very technology tools that make it possible by joining the Pegasus Communications Webinar “The Collaboration Paradox: Understanding the Magic of Getting Things Done” with me, John Abele on January 11, 2011.

blog-banner

The Collaboration Paradox:
Understanding the Magic of Getting Things Done

with John Abele

A 90-minute live webinar andjohnabele interactive discussion
Tuesday, January 11, 2011, 2-3:30 pm ET | Register for this live webinar

Description
The need for more truly powerful collaborations, where the collective intelligence of a diverse set of minds is harnessed toward a common goal, is greater than ever. And yet we find collaboration vexingly difficult to do. In this webinar,John Abele, renowned co-founder of Boston Scientific, will examine the many different types of collaboration along with the barriers to making them effective. He’ll describe new tactics and approaches that may seem counterintuitive, but that will help unleash the wisdom of a crowd far better than more obvious approaches. John will share learnings from his extensive experiences in business, medicine, education, science, and philanthropy.

In this webinar, you will::

  • Learn from extraordinary successes and spectacular failures
  • Take away tips for overcoming the challenges that stand in the way of effective collaboration
  • Discuss how to foster rational discussion by understanding root causes, analyzing issues and options, and weighing trade offs—together
  • Understand how best to collaborate around implementing solutions
  • Receive a copy of the “Kingbridge Meeting Design Guidelines,” from the Kingbridge Centre and Institute

Pricing
This 90-minute interactive session is $129.00 per site (a single phone line). You can use a speakerphone so that a group of people can participate. You will also have unlimited access to the recorded version following the event.

Date and Time
The live webinar is being held on Tuesday, January 11, 2011, from 2 to 3:30 pm ET. When you register, you will receive detailed information about how to call in and participate.

Presenter
John Abele is the retired founding chairman of Boston Scientific Corporation (www.bsci.com) and one of the pioneers of less invasive medicine. He holds numerous patents, and has published and lectured extensively on the technical, social, economic, and political trends and issues affecting healthcare and on strategies for improving collaboration between individuals, businesses, and organizations. John’s major interests are science literacy for children, education, and disruptive technological innovation. He is currently vice chair (former chair) of the FIRST Foundation, which works with high school kids to make science literacy cool and fun, and owner of The Kingbridge Centre and Institute, a conference center that is devoted to perfecting the “Art of Conferencing” and hosting exceptional meetings.

Register for this live webinar!

Email, RSS Follow
Share

Barriers to Collaboration – Group Dynamics & Pseudo Collaborations

Posted on by
Reply

Sometimes barriers to collaboration are related not to a behavior, but rather to factors that influence the group dynamic.  The following are common such problems:

  1. Conflicts of interest. Transparency helps, but the collaborative leader can help by tactfully putting comments in context and juxtaposing individuals with different causes in a way that creates insight and comparison.  The key is visibility and the best way to achieve that is with humble questioning that reveals a potential conflict or problem.  The challenge is to avoid accusation, but reveal the problem.
  2. Dueling hidden agendas. Sometimes people are not even aware that they have a hidden agenda. A good collaborative leader will tease out all the agendas by asking the right questions.
  3. Strong egos. Few people with strong egos leave them at the door, even when asked to do so.  As a result, you may get ego clashes.  The right leadership, with appropriate humor, can turn egos into an asset. Sometimes a friend can mentor a colleague into not becoming a pompous ass.    Introducing the potential offender as knowledgeable, skillful, open minded and humble can produce a self-fulfilling result, although admittedly not all the time.

When these dynamics dominate the result is all too often Pseudo-collaborations.  A great many collaborations are in name only.   A job needs to be done and a team is appointed to do it.  The criteria for being appointed to that team may be technical, but frequently it is merely availability.  One of the most unfortunate aspects of pseudo collaborations is that they perform the “box check requirement.”  Leaders and participants know that they are serving a political function that passes a “looks-like-a-collaboration” test, but the dynamics are bureaucratic and self protective.  These collaborations define the old joke that a camel is a horse designed by a committee. Perhaps the most common pseudo collaborations are “blue ribbon panels.”  Although this is usually a political phrase, every organization, when confronted with a highly visible major problem, wants to demonstrate its seriousness by pulling together great (and highly respected) minds to work as a team.

Most of us think of collaboration as working together for a common goal.  And it is.  But, is it enough to just pull together the brightest minds, put them under the command of a respected leader, and wait for the fruits of their labor to come forth?  Obviously not, but frequently hope triumphs over reality. And rhetoric generally trumps facts and content.  It takes a very skillful leader to create an atmosphere where the ego of the individual is subservient to the success of the team.

Email, RSS Follow
Share

What is ‘Real’ Collaboration?

Posted on by
Reply

Before we can dive into defining ‘real’ collaboration we need to clarify the type of collaboration we are referring to, which is collaboration for creative problem solving.  In these collaborations there is a diverse group of participants who are not just working together but harnessing the collective intelligence of the group to produce innovative ideas, solutions and actions.

Real collaboration results from a delicate balance between too little and too much control.  It works best when there is a high level of creativity in the group, a common goal, a sense of urgency and a certain amount of friction in the group.   However, even with these components collaboration will fail if the behaviours that result from the pressure and tension are not moderated appropriately.  The recipe for collaboration has many ingredients including design, leadership and environment.

Successful collaboration is often seen in times of crisis, when the common goal of a group is survival.  For example, the current mining disaster in Chile: 33 miners trapped underground for 17 days before being discovered managed to survive on 48 hours worth of rations.  This feat itself could only have been made possible through significant collaborative effort among the trapped miners.  All 33 were dedicated to a common goal, the sense of urgency profound, and any self serving behaviours moderated for the benefit of their collective survival.<

Email, RSS Follow
Share

The Collaboration Curve: Continuous Learning for Continuous Improvement

Posted on by
Reply

“Collaboration curves hold the potential to mobilize larger and more diverse groups of participants to innovate and create new value” 
~ John Hagel III, Harvard Business Review

We have all heard of the experience curve and the effects it has on reducing costs and time while increasing accuracy in product and service development- it’s logical.  However, the inherent flaw in the experience curve model for business is that once you reach a certain level of expertise the costs, time and accuracy continue to improve only marginally until a new innovation is introduced.  And it is with the collaboration curve that the innovation increases.

“We’re seeing the emergence of a new kind of learning curve as we scale connectivity and learning , rather than scaling efficiency”

The more participants you have working on a design or project and the more interactions between those participants in a carefully designed collaborative environment, the more the rate of performance improvement goes up.  Essentially, because with continued collaboration comes continuous ideas that translate into continuous innovation.  It eradicates the lull in performance improvement that occurs in the experince curve model.

Take Apple for example.  They are experienceing a seemingly never ending cycle of expansion through the applications for their devices (iPhone, iPad, iPod etc.)  The reason of course is that they crowdsource.  Apple doesn’t think of the hundreds of application ideas and advertise them, they merely offer the platform and software neccessary for their users to develop apps based on their own ideas – and because of it the App Store is massive and Apple continues to gain revenue, reputation and offer continuously evolving product.

So I urge you to consider how you are applying the Collaboration Curve learning cycle in your organization?

Email, RSS Follow
Share