Comments

Great topic Madeleine

I think any organisation can take on as you put it ‘this kind of revolution.’

Organisations are actually ‘people’ and people can and do change. Many people don’t want to change of course – we all have our comfort zones but I remain an optimist.

Providing there is clarity and focus from leaders and complete trust given to front line staff I believe ANYTHING becomes possible. This is about mindset and if it can be achieved in our UK education system there is hope anywhere in the world. I love the story of GK Chesterton who wrote a letter to The Times letters section as follows:

Dear Sir

In answer to your question ‘What is wrong with the world?’ – I am

Yours faithfully

GK Chesterton.

Wonderful stuff – it’s all and only about mindset and trust.

Posted by Trevor Gay at September 4, 2007 10:42 AM

I believe the type of education will first find success in our charter schools system and slowly make the turn into mainstream. Schools as organisations, at least in my state, are slow to accept cutting edge ideas and information. It is my experience that not enough teachers, administrators and support staff show interest in new ideas and technologies. A choice to adhere strictly to the current system often results in ignoring these. Because of this many will need to work their way out of the system before progress can speed up unfortunately.

In the meantime teachers and administrators that allow staff and parents to participate in out of the box ideas and accommodations will learn quickly how well it can work. Using learning styles and neurological data, among other things, to increase learning is the future. Those who learn and apply it will be well ahead of others who choose to adhere strictly to the current system.

Posted by James Wood at September 4, 2007 3:12 PM

It's always too late for an established company. Unless they set up a division and leave them alone. Haven't seen much of that. It's even difficult for startups where the founders come from big name companies. "You are where you came from."

But, change the power structure at least for the first two layers of management and great things can happen. Back in the early 90's I worked in a division of Baxter (aka Travenol) where Ellen Rudnick (now teaching at the University of Chicago) ran a new division. It was unlike the rest of the company. Great things came from the division, but then management started being supplemented by more "traditional" managers and it slowly died.

The key to this is a shared vision and a light management touch. Add diverse employees, a touch of direct customer contact and great things will happen. I've seen it.

Posted by Bruce Fryer at September 5, 2007 1:06 AM

Good line level managers who can be both traditional and give a little space. THis stuff often works best at a small level.

As a lowely programmer a few years ago I had an idea for a system that could make a real difference. Told my boss about it - Straight answer back "Paul I am not going to be able to get this in as a recognised project" - "But let's just say there will be a certain flexibility in the deliverables some of your other work"

My manager was utterly traditional apart from being able to cut a little slack now and again - sometimes it's all that is needed.

Posted by PaulH at September 5, 2007 2:49 AM

Getting any change into an established organisation seems to be well nigh impossible, which you all seem to have experienced.

There is a fantastic book (which we use on our WOW! Projects workshop) called 'Orbiting the Giant Hairball' by Gordon MacKenzie. In it he describes the frustration of being creative (director) inside Hallmark, the famous greeting card company. The chapter entitled "First there's grope, then there's rote" describes a recognisable sequence that begins with a good idea, when we grope around to make it work, followed progressively by activities that turn good ideas into replicable good ideas. We end up embedding them into a reliable process and thereby eliminating at a stroke all of the energy and spark of the original idea! MacKenzie's final conclusion is "If an organization is to choose vigor over an ultimate state of inert uniformity it must honor and support both the rational exploitation of success and the non-rational art of groping".

All of the frustations I hear (often from what PaulH calls 'lowly' people in organisations) point to the fact that we have got really good at what MacKenzie calls rational exploitation, but cannot seem to grasp the essence of 'groping' at an institutional level. Maybe the best that some middle managers are able to do is 'to cut a bit of slack', but wouldn't it be great if the start up mentality that Bruce experienced could become more of the norm?

Perhaps I'm living in cloud cuckoo land, but I am so pleased to see that at least some schools are setting out to educate our young people with a different mindset .......it gives me hope for the future! Revolutions have to start somewhere!!

Posted by Madeleine at September 5, 2007 3:40 AM

U.N. report released Monday, which said the United States "leads the world in labor productivity." Link below.

Ireland is 2nd - UK well down the list. Somehow even though socialist public school fails the USA, the universities are EXCELLENT - & I feel the corporate free market world provides optimal education per ROI & U.N. report results - yes to free enterprise!

Posted by John at September 5, 2007 9:23 AM

Yesterday the BBC Breakfast programme did a using business creativity methods in school.

Peter Cook, the person who organised it, based the intervention on some of his ideas from Sex, leadership and Rock'n'Roll which Tom has endorsed.

Here is a link to the piece on Classroom Creativity.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/default.stm - click on Ready to Rock

Posted by Steve Gorton at September 5, 2007 2:02 PM

John (Sean) – I think the report says Norway leads the world unless I am reading a different report than your link! Supplementary Question - where is the statement that UK is ‘well down the list’?

I quote from your link;

Norway, which is not an EU member, generates the most output per working hour, $37.99, a figure inflated by the country's billions of dollars in oil exports and high prices for goods at home. The U.S. is second at $35.63, about a half dollar ahead of third-place France

Posted by Trevor Gay at September 6, 2007 5:19 PM

Something I found the other day in the International Herald Tribune written by Tyler Brule:..."sitting on reception" ..I've dubbed it 'Director of first and last impressions'.

A clear reminder, on how each person in every company can make a difference, by how they are interpreting their role and how they act according to this interpretation.

Posted by Rolf at September 6, 2007 7:35 PM

"Each US worker produces $63,885 (£32,000) of wealth per year, more than their counterparts in ALL other countries, the International Labour Organisation said in its report. Ireland [smart to avoid UK] comes in second at £27,770, ahead of Luxembourg, £27,592; Belgium, £27,391; and France, £27,080." Please read more carefully!

UK far down the list - difficult to find them. Main theme here is somehow free enterprise business education in USA excels & makes up for deviance of public school socialist "education". I was lucky to cruise through Catholic private school & earn a bachelors' degree at 20. :>)

Posted by John at September 7, 2007 9:20 AM

Bachelor’s degree at 20 ... Passing exams only goes to prove you are good at passing exams :-)...

University of Life provides many more qualifications.

Posted by Trevor Gay at September 9, 2007 2:39 PM

Rather an interesting final riff here, guys! I have to say that I am becoming more and more thoughtful about just how much use research and data is as we look ahead for our organisations.

Time and again I find myself reading one survey that seems directly to contradict the findings of other/previous surveys. I was rather aghast to find this recently on our TP Wire Service - two closely adjacent stories (both on 30th August) seemed to draw completely opposite conclusions.

The workplace wish-list declared that found clear evidence that many workers are deeply dissatisfied with their employment.
Nearly two thirds – some 62 per cent – were either actively or passively looking for a new job. Two stories later, in Most Americans Like Their Jobs, we hear that three out of five American workers say they are satisfied with their careers.....

If we remain fixated on proof and evidence to determine how we move forwards, we will by definition be basing our decisions on present and past reality. I fear that with this mindset it will be virtually impossible to find our way through to a future for organisations that is radically different from today's. Those prepared to move forwards on instinct and ambition, which I suspect includes the emerging Asian nations, will win the day, and leave the rest of us trailing behind.

The 20th century saw the USA and Europe, leading the way in breakthrough thinking, but what about the 21st century???

Posted by Madeleine at September 10, 2007 5:30 AM

Madeline – I like your words - ‘If we remain fixated on proof and evidence to determine how we move forwards we will by definition be basing our decisions on present and past reality.’ I think we should spend less time in business trying to prove things just for the academic joy of researchers and we should spend more time listening to stories of real experiences of front line staff and customers. The best way to know whether you are meeting the needs of your customer is to ask her/him and the staff closest to her/him - if the answer is ‘no’ then you believe it and change. Still on the evidence/proof tack - For many years in healthcare clinicians have had to cope with the accusation that only 10-20% of the treatments they provide have any scientific foundation. That says to me that 80-90% are based on gut feelings, experience and subjective view of medical practitioners

Posted by Trevor Gay at September 10, 2007 7:22 AM

I knew of an undergraduate who got into a big-name U.S. university without a high school diploma. But, she'd started a non-profit fund-raising organization already. The focus of college admissions officers is moving away from the child who is well-rounded, i.e., joined all the clubs in high school, to those who have a depth of knowledge in one topic or have put a concentrated effort into one endeavor. Also note that, at the time he wrote the book, 100 percent of Dennis Littky's graduates had been accepted to colleges. That's not to say that every child continued his education, or that the percentage is the same today (I haven't seen recent numbers), but every one up to the publication of the book had the option to continue if he chose. So, the rules are changing. Colleges are starting to move in the direction of looking for outliers rather than those who excel in the traditional ways. I don't think that all the valedictorians from U.S. high schools have to give up hope yet, but they should think about making a name for themselves by something other than getting straight A's.

Posted by cathy mosca at September 10, 2007 8:35 AM

Change. Ah, the wonderful topic of change. Changing the box that we “traditional” limit ourselves and others by changing the way we view the box – the paradigm. Trying, experimenting, and evaluating alternative methods for accomplishing objectives is a task that requires the shoulders of leaders. Organizing, structuring, and efficiency-improving are the right tasks for managers, provided the leadership knows the right direction for the changes.

Regards,
Jonathan Frye

Posted by Jonathan at September 10, 2007 3:06 PM