“…minimising the energy cost of decision making”

I was fascinated and curious about this phrase I heard on a Cynefin webinar on managing complex systems with David Snowden this morning. He was talking about different types of leadership and the different domains of the Cynefin Framework. 

It really got me thinking… and found these quotes about energy gradients on  his blog post - https://www.cognitive-edge.com/on-energy-gradients/

“To create order, or maintain chaos requires energy while complexity is a natural state…The dominant, lowest energy cost domain is complex, but that requires comfort with uncertainty and a degree of self-organisation”

I’m not sure what it all means, and am busy making sense of it. David’s post did remind me of an image we created in 2010 for a blog post on leadership styles, inspired by this quote we found by General Kurt Von Hammerstein-Equord. he was the commander-in-chief of the German army between the wars, and is remembered for being a staunch opponent of the Nazi regime.  

I divide my officers into four classes; the clever, the lazy, the industrious, and the stupid. Most often two of these qualities come together. The officers who are clever and industrious are fitted for the highest staff appointments. Those who are stupid and lazy make up around 90% of every army in the world, and they can be used for routine work. The man who is clever and lazy however is for the very highest command; he has the temperament and nerves to deal with all situations. But whoever is stupid and industrious is a menace and must be removed immediately! 1933 

What do you make of it? If you are curious too, and would like a chat Id like more opportunities to make sense of this energy gradients concept and what it might mean for leadership practice in public service systems change - julian@delta7.com

Why visual metaphors are a powerful way to connect people and build more effective relationships

When you have brilliant colleagues working in silos, it can be really hard for them to learn from one another. Eliciting their visual metaphors can bridge the gap between different people and cultures and allows them to create a shared or common language.

Here are two examples of personal metaphors that Caitlin Walker and I created for a whole team that helped them understand what is most important for each other in their work, and in doing so brought them together in ways that enhanced team performance.

The metaphors we use at work help us to connect the words we use to the meanings we make of our experience. Metaphor in greek means “to transfer, or connect”. A good metaphor is a bridge of meaning, helping us to understanding one thing, or experience, in terms of another. Metaphors can  influence, and sometimes limit, how we see and understand the world. Once created they can drop below our radar and become unconscious and habitual, implicit assumptions that influence our thinking and behaviour. When organisations are in crisis mode and under pressure to change, we often hear a cry of "we need to change mindsets!" Generating new metaphors can be one way of opening up new possibilities and give us new ways of seeing things.

View fullsize

What visual metaphors could we create to open up new possibilities in how we work together? 

Uncovering the BS

Calling out the BS - Guest blog by John Higgins

What does this image say to you?

 In his cracking new book, Radical OD, Mark Cole says he is ‘personally moved to observe that the harsh overseer is more honest about their intent than the duplicitous humanistic manager’.

 In a world addicted to growth, forever wanting to squeeze more from less, the denial of this brute contract creates an Alice in Wonderland world where nothing is as it seems – and everyone pretends, prisoners of an undiscussable ideology.

 To be nice to people has to have a business case. To be ethical, upstanding, a decent colleague, friend or lover has to have a business case. Everything gets sucked into a morass of instrumentalism, where we all become tools to each other – and people wonder why loyalty, collegiality and mutuality have evaporated.

 To overcome this, but without challenging the basic extractive nature of workplace relations, the consulting and business school world ramp up the wall of bullshit, featuring any number of nonsense words that apply fake perfumes to this stinking reality.

 Meanwhile those who benefit most from this extraction of performance from people, hold fast to the fantasy that everything is for the best in this the best of all possible worlds. And so the collapse in trust across the hierarchies of life grows – hierarchies which those at the top desperately try to deny are there. Silence and play acting become the norm.

 In the old Soviet bloc the saying went: ‘We pretend to work and you pretend to pay us’. This can now be reworked to apply to modern Western work life: ‘We pretend to buy-in and you pretend to care’.

Contact John at https://www.speakinguplisteningup.com/

"The hero effect"

I was at a diversity and inclusion event recently, and overheard this story that happened to someone at work .

Where does this image take you to?

Power and privilege; how do these effect relationships at work?

I’ve been wondering about how power effects people in meetings and what is the impact on health and performance…What do you see in this picture? How does it feel? What are some consequences for each person and their organisation?

How do we move from Hierarchy to self managing teams? ODNE south east gathering session 27/9/19

Relationships and tasks- getting the balance right - ODNEurope south east gathering 17/6/19

At our last ODNE SE gathering last week, We explored and shared experiences of how to create a learning culture, and how can we pay attention to what matters. One theme that came up in discussion was the idea that when people are working on their tasks, and may feel under pressure,  they can find it hard to find time and space to build relationships. As someone remarked, it’s ironic that taking time out from delivery and spending time to learn about each other is critical for improving how we deliver our work predominantly interdependent tasks. It may feel really hard to make time for relationships as they are at the heart of any culture of improvement.

We have been looking at what some call the dominant view of management that believes that work is done transactionally by individuals (Hartling, L. and Sparks, E., 2008); yet the collaborative, interactive nature of organising and coordinating mutually interdependent tasks and roles means that effective working relationships are what gets things done (Fletcher 2001).

If learning to nurture working relationships are so critical, why we do we call it the soft stuff?

What's missing from this picture?

This picture was inspired by a fascinating HR network event I attended a few weeks ago hosted by the People Director Partnership’s Richard Goff. It had a great panel discussing “what will the Government do next?” The panel consisted of Dr Hannah White, Deputy Director, Institute for Government; Matthew Fell, Chief UK Policy Director, CBI; Paul Nowak, Deputy General Secretary, TUC. I was struck with the complexity of the situation and how all three speakers noted the degree of polarisation between the parties that seems to be splitting the government in two and the need for a long term shared vision for our country.

What do you see in this picture? What’s missing? 

The Loneliness of the Long Distance Leader

You may have a bold vision of the best way forward - but does your team share it?

Will they follow you?