turning a team into a system

My recent research has been about how to reverse-engineer what's going on in a system in order to understand and fix it. But my career has been focused on the other side of that coin: creating new systems. 

Systems are patterns of interaction that take on lives of their own that go beyond the immediate intentions of the people involved. When they turn bad they become malignant conflicts, and when they turn good they become virtuous cycles of positive outcomes. My career in design management has been built on putting people together, establishing the rules of engagement, and watching the results explode. 

When I put people together I give them five simple rules of engagement that help things go well. First, they need to treat each other like future job references. This reinforces the reality that we are all together for a relatively brief time, but more importantly it puts people in the mindset that we all need to be constantly impressing each other and be looking out for each other at every step. When you interact that way, it creates new pathways of interaction that inevitably lead to results you never imagined. 

Second, they need to always get to maximum appropriate truth with each other. If something is bugging you, get it said because each small interaction creates ripples that take on their own lives in the larger system; often far beyond what was originally intended. Keep in mind, however, that it must said in a way that will build the relationship in the long term (remember Rule One). This is not a license to shoot off your mouth and be hurtful.  

Third, the group needs to be a hotbed of ideas. This means that anything that gets in the way of the best idea bubbling to the top needs to be eliminated. Things like egos, destructive behaviour, failing to draw out introverts, etc., need to be overcome or the best idea will not bubble up. And if you are a leader, you need to set the tone by acknowledging that your idea may not always be the best - but at least you created a system where the best idea rises.  

Fourth, individuals need to love excellence in what they are doing or creating together. Strategy happens in the small moments when nobody is looking, and if every single person is drop-to-your-knees in love with what the group is doing they will guard it in those small moments from anything that will water it down or cause it to be less than amazing. 

Fifth, the group needs to understand, respect and leverage the chain of command. Each system has a hierarchy, whether it's overt or unspoken. If the role of someone with responsibility for others is to make their team's work life easier by removing barriers and bringing clarity, then it's the responsibility of the team members to make sure that actually happens. The hardest challenge for a leader is getting accurate, timely information, and if the team is able to provide that information it has enormous impact on the rest of the system. 

Systems create amazing things, or they become malignantly destructive. In my experience, these five rules of engagement create the former. 

 

 

leadership by inspiration

Nile Rogers is a monster producer & performer. He was helping out with the new Duran Duran album, when bassist John Taylor said this about him: 

"When you're working with Nile Rogers, everybody raises their game. It's like there's royalty in the house. Every engineer is on point, we're playing our best, and the guy whose job it is to make coffee is going to make the best pot he's made in months. It's just the effect that Nile has on people. And Nile doesn't make judgments about my bass sound; he is so enthusiastic about me doing what I do." Bass Player, Oct. 2015, p. 29

What a great way to sum up inspirational leadership. 

leadership and the mousetrap

There’s an old advertising saying (from Jon Steele): If you’re going to build a mousetrap, leave room for the mouse. The idea being that if you expect to engage people they need to see something in it for themselves, and if it’s all about you there’s no room for them. The same is true of leadership. By definition a leader needs people to be engaged and that means they need to see what’s in it for them. If leadership is all about the leader, there’s no room for anyone else. The way a leader makes this happen is the subject of many books, but trust is at the root. If you are unable to allow yourself to trust those around you, you are making it all about you and are not leaving room for others to be fully engaged. Leaving room for that mouse means trusting others and letting yourself be a little bit vulnerable to their level of accomplishment. Good leaders are able to make that work; great leaders are able to make that succeed spectacularly.

a practical roadmap to collaborative decision making

This process of collaborative decision-making will ensure an interdisciplinary approach to a difficult problem, it will engage the participants, and it will advance the solution forward to the next stage of resolution. More importantly, it will bring the participants closer as co-workers by fostering new connections and modeling collaborative behaviour.

Read More

the sunk cost effect

In this week's New Yorker, business columnist James Surowiecki describes the "sunk cost effect" as the tendency of executives to stay the course on failing initiatives because of the otherwise laudable approach that it's better to see something through than be seen to quit or admit a mistake. Especially when serious money has been spent to get to its current state.

Read More

prospect theory and the good friday agreement

This is a topic of interest that will support my research into solving environmental conflicts. This article critically examines Hancock, L. E., Weiss, J. N., & Duerr, G. M. E. (2010). Prospect theory and the framing of the Good Friday Agreement. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 28(2), 183–203), and applies the learnings to my research.

Read More

recursive communication in environmental conflicts

This is a topic of interest that will support my research into solving environmental conflicts. This article provides an understanding of the manner in which stakeholder positions are established through the attempt to communicate such positions, and how the differences, and similarities, arise in comprehending the same piece of information?

Read More

intractability & framing in environmental conflicts

This is a topic of interest that will support my research into solving environmental conflicts. When looking at environmental conflicts, there is a stream of literature that focuses on the concept of “intractability” and its root causes. This article identifies key characteristics of intractable environmental disputes and the role of framing in understanding, resolving, and making them more tractable.  

Read More

prospect theory & framing in environmental conflicts

This is a topic of interest that will support my research into solving environmental conflicts. When looking at environmental conflicts, there is a stream of literature that applies Prospect Theory to how parties to a conflict frame their participation, and that of others. This article examines the theory and its implications for stakeholder disputes.

Read More

design, scale and economists

We academics love buzzwords as much as anyone. If you follow design thinking these days, one of the buzzwords du jour is “scale,” which for design thinkers means “context.” If you want to think like a designer, you need to look at the big picture. Here’s why. 

Read More

design thinking and focus

“The great thing in life is not in realizing a purpose, but in fighting for it. If we feel the possibilities of a great work looming large before us and impelling us to action it is our duty to consecrate ourselves to it. Failure in a great work is nobler than success in a petty one that is beneath our maximum of possibility. We have nothing to do with results - they do not belong to us anyway. It is our duty to do our best bravely and then to rest in the comfort of this fact alone.” 

Read More