CultureView more presentations from Reed Hastings. There was an interesting article over the weekend in the Telegraph from Dan Pink on Netflix's "no policy" approach to HR policies. It's an outgrowth of their corporate culture, captured beautifully in their "Reference Guide on our Freedom and Responsibility Culture" outlined in the Slideshare presentation above--well worth a read through. Pink's article notes that Netflix has learned something that Clay Shirky talks about in Cognitive Surplus: Creativity and Generosity in a Connected Age:  . . . when we design systems that assume bad faith from the participants, and whose main purpose is to defend against that nasty behaviour, we often foster the very behaviour we're trying to deter. People will push and push the limits of the formal rules, search for every available loophole, and look for ways to game the system when the defenders aren't watching. By contrast, a structure of rules that assumes good faith can actually encourage that behaviour. So if you think people in your organisation are predisposed to rip you off, maybe the solution isn't to build a tighter, more punitive set of rules. Maybe the answer is to hire new people. It strikes me that it is this bad faith approach that underlies most social media policies in organizations. And for that matter, it's a mental model that drives organizational behavior around most things related to both employees and customers, including learning. What would be different about what we do if we started with different premises, assuming that most workers are honest, trustworthy, hard-working and focused on doing the right thing? What would services, policies and activities look like if we assumed the best of people, not the worst? How much more time could we spend on innovation and ideas, rather than on the sort of "whack-a-mole" management that leads us to continually chase after closing all of the loopholes in our punitive systems.?

I've written before about the importance of reflective practice in professional development--the process of reflecting on your development as a professional and recording those thoughts somehow. The problem for most people is that getting in a regular practice of reflecting and recording can be difficult. Developing new habits can be hard, so having a tool to help you along can be invaluable. So, via TechCrunch and Marianne Lenox, here's a new one to consider adding to your reflective practice arsenal-OhLife. The site pretty much says it all:  It's an email-based journaling option that will remind you daily about posting with the added bonus of including a random entry you've posted previously. Your nightly email looks like this: Some advantages for reflective practice: Even if we hate it, we all still check email. Having a daily reminder to think about what you've learned that lands in your inbox each night seems like a good way to start developing the daily practice of reflection.  The daily reminder comes at 8 p.m, so if you're a night person, it's a good time to do it immediately. If you're a morning person, it will be waiting for you when you get up. The random reminder of previous posts can be a great spark to additional learning and reflection--I could see getting a reminder of where I'd been at in a project previously and being able to post on how far I've come. Or if I'd posted on a particular tool or idea but hadn't done anything else with it, the reminder might be enough to get something going again. Posts are archived on the web for easy access from any computer and (presumably) your smart phone. They are also totally private, so you can keep this reflective practice journal just for yourself.  Seems like a nice option for a learning/reflective practice journal, no?

Glen Ross of the American Cancer Society recently shared this hilarious video of a typical conference call. I probably spend a good 10-15 hours a week on these things and I have to say that the video pretty much captures my experience. So in support of more effective conference calling, here are some resources that might help: Fast Company's 10 Rules for Effective Conference Calls--Great tips, but I particularly enjoy the dialogue for how violating the rules plays out in a call. Leading More Effective Conference Calls--This tip list starts with what I think is the most important question. Do you actually need to do a call? How to Participate in a Conference Call--A lot of times the onus for effective conference calls is put on the leader. Personally, I think participants need to take some responsibility too. Five Ways to Be a Better Conference Call Participant--Another list to share with participants. Use a "People" Clock to Maintain Visual Attention--Pair individual photos with a clockface and you get an ingeniously simple way to bring a little more life into a call. Particularly effective for team calls.

I'm back from a two-day conference and I think I've discovered one of the reasons conferences are becoming a big waste for me--the homophily problem, otherwise known as "birds of a feather, flock together." Most professional conferences are made up of people who are in a particular occupation or industry, which means people who tend to look at the world through the same lens. We tend to view problems and solutions within familiar, proscribed frameworks and to see the same enemies and heroes in any given situation. The problem is that this gets boring. It's also dangerous, because it impedes our ability to see and adopt new ideas. What if we did a different kind of conference though, one designed to specifically address the conference homophily problem? I'm thinking of a conference mash-up, where we combine different groups of professionals or industries into a single conference where the workshops and networking could let us build on each others different frames of reference. We could start small--maybe combining people in similar occupations who work in different industries. I'm thinking, for example, of a conference for classroom teachers and corporate trainers/educators. We have a lot in common but there are enough differences in what we do and how we do it that we could definitely learn from each other. A conference mashup could be really radical too--like accountants and graphic artists or the financial services industry and bio-tech. Surely we could learn from each others approaches. If nothing else, we'd probably have some really interesting conversations. What do you think? Could this work? Or is it a completely crazy idea?

Friday I wrote a post on conference homophily--conferences that bring together people who share the same worldview and conceptual frameworks--and proposed conference mash-ups as a solution. I got a lot of great comments that I think warranted another post. Conference Mashup Models and Options Tim Davies suggested framing a conference around some shared challenges or problems:I wonder how this would work framed around particular 'problems' and challenges: the literature on open innovation and wide-search innovation - taking problems from one field into completely different fields to find solutions - suggests there is great benefit to be found here. Two or more fields grappling with similar challenges might benefit from co-hosting a conference around that area. This seems to me to be one of the more fruitful areas for getting buy-in and participation, especially if you can make the case for how two different fields could benefit from collaborative problem-solving. You could also frame it in terms of collaborative opportunities, as Dianne Rees suggested in her comment: My perfect mashup right now would bring mhealth professionals together with mlearning professionals and health care social media mavens to innovate patient/physician-centered mobile apps. This is a great example of how three different groups could find opportunity in working together. Dianne's idea also lends itself to a 48 hours approach, where the groups could come together to actually develop their mobile apps over an intensive 2-day period. A few people suggested some potential structures for a conference mashup. Ronda Grizzle pointed me in the direction of THATCamp (The Humanities and Technology Camp), a "free, open 'unconference' where humanists and technologists meet to work together for the common good." As Ronda described it:It's an unconference--short, cheap, no papers, no invited speakers. It's about gathering together a small group of varied experience and skills to actually work on problems and issues. The agenda is set during the first hour of the conference, with people suggesting topics for sessions, and then voting on the topics. The ones with the most votes get put on the schedule. Nobody brings presentations or reads at you; it's about making connections and getting work done. Their website is a rich resource for planning and implementing an open space-type conference where there is a much greater focus on networking and collaborative discussions. They also have a Boot Camp option for helping people develop new skills. This is generally an "add-on" to the larger un-conference. Paul Angileri shared the idea of Gangplank, a group of small business owners from a variety of fields who meet and work together on a regular basis, in part to encourage cross-pollination and innovation. Their Manifesto would make some great conference organizing principles:We have the talent. We just need to work together. Different environments need to overlap, to connect and to interact in order to transform our culture. In order to create a sustainable community based on trust, we value: collaboration over competition community over agendas participation over observation doing over saying friendship over formality boldness over assurance learning over expertise people over personalities Tim Davies offered another model, based on "The Interesting Conference":By simply paying the £20.00 ticket price and bringing our own mug and plate of goodies to share, access was granted to a quirky, lively, but refreshingly low-key event. Organiser Russell Davies filled Conway Hall in Bloomsbury with 200 guests and 30 interesting speakers, who were tasked with presenting for 10 minutes on a topic unrelated to their day jobs. The result was eclectic and delightful: a school teacher entreating us to reconsider our assumptions about nuclear power; a designer confessing her Indian superpowers; a typographer mapping out his 5000 mile cycling adventure; and a media consultant revealing psychological violence in 1970s girls’ comics. The latter taught the women in the audience to never mock a monkey, for fear of winding up like poor Kitty, whose demise is graphically documented in the Misty magazine circa 1979. A sense of democracy and community spirit pervaded the day, with speakers introduced on a first-name-only basis, everyone lunching together in the park, and, at one point, the entire hall standing to wave their arms in unison as they conducted an invisible orchestra (led ably by a man identified only as John, who won a competition to conduct a real orchestra a few years back and wished to pass on the skill). Tim also had some great suggestions for combating conference homopily on a smaller scale, without going the complete conference mashup route:Alternatively, just inviting someone from outside the field to keynote at an event, or people from different fields to take part in key panels, may be a way to at least shake up unquestioned assumptions that are often implicit in homiphilous gatherings... Conference ChallengesA few commenters had some concerns. Tracy felt that the conference mashup idea won't work in all sectors:Nonprofits are the best to setup since they're mission-driven. The public sector is another good one as well since it's under one roof. The private sector is tough because there's a lot of competition and talent could be taken away and rivalries can start (which is not a bad thing, but not good for your purpose on this post). And despite her personal enthusiasm for the idea, Ellen Behrens said that some past experiences with the concept had led her to believe it might be a hard sell. My association staffer experience tells me that it's one of those "nice in theory but tricky in practice" ideas. Mostly because of (guess!) money. When I've heard association execs talk about various conferences they've held in cooperation (and collaboration) with other associations, they've generally ended with a remark such as, "We'll never do that again." Why not? "We did most of the work, but they got half the revenue." Or: "Most of the attendees were our members, but they got half the revenue." Or: "The logistics of holding a conference are difficult enough without doubling -- or tripling -- or quadrupling -- the number of player groups involved." There's no doubt that both Tracy and Ellen raise some very legitimate concerns. The objection I suspect we'd hear most frequently is that other industries or sectors don't understand our issues and problems, so what would we have to learn from them? To Tracy's concern that there could be issues around talent stealing and competition, I actually think that a mashed up conference would cause LESS of a problem. I think there's probably more competition within an industry than between industries, so if companies can come together for industry-associated conferences, they would have less to fear from a mashed up version. One challenge I think would be in deciding how to mash it up--which industry or occupation would you connect with and how would you frame the conference to meet the needs of all the stakeholders? This would require considerably more planning and networking than probably goes into most conference organizing efforts, although I think it would be well worth the work. I also think there's a general entropy challenge that comes from having the same people organizing conferences year after year. I've been involved with several organizations where I've tried to introduce some new ideas and been met with a ton of resistance from the organizers who have been running their conferences for years. They feel like they have a model that works and no one wants to mess with it. Even adding some things around the edges--like incorporating technology--can be a real challenge. This whole conversation has me thinking more about conferences as professional development and what we could be doing to shake things up to make them more interesting and useful. I'd love to hear more from people on what conferences they've attended recently that were really interesting and what activities made them that way. . .

Much of my work over the past few months has been focused on helping several organizations get up and running with social media. Last week I was doing a debrief with one of my clients on how we'd used Facebook and Twitter to support an event and how the results weren't as successful as they'd hoped. There were multiple reasons for this, unconnected to the the technology, but one issue really stood out. Their engagement with social media continues to emphasize the "media" aspect, with much less attention paid to the "social." And that's where they're missing the boat. Focusing on the "Media" in Social Media I think many organizations are understanding that they need to start being active in places like Facebook and Twitter and have begun to give up their iron grip on using only their websites to communicate online. But they are still focused on the one-way "media" aspect of social media, concerned with what they will communicate, not what other people might be discussing and how they can participate in those conversations. Some characteristics I see in those organizations focused on the "media" aspect of social media include: Desire to have only one or two people participating in social media so that messages can be "controlled." This is an extension of the tendency for organizations to refer people to Marketing/PR people when they want to communicate with the outside world. More of a focus on establishing their presence and on what they're going to say, rather than on finding out where conversations may already be happening and adding value to those discussions. Related to this, a greater tendency to post about their own activities and information and less interest in sharing what others may have to say. Social media policies that restrict employee access to social media sites, thus restricting the ability of the organization to even engage their own staff in helping them promote activities. Lack of involvement in using the tools from top managers. If you haven't used Twitter, Facebook, blogs, etc., it's difficult to understand their particular strengths and challenges. You aren't able to understand their potential power and make good decisions about how to utilize it.  These behaviors are relics of the pre-social media world. Various social media platforms are treated simply as alternative channels for delivering "the message," rather than as two-way forms of communication and engagement.They are another version of TV or newspapers or annual reports and brochures. From "Media" to "Social Media" With most organizations I've found that the only way to get them to try social media is to first engage them with the "media" aspect. It's what they understand. It also seems to be the best way to help them get comfortable with the technology. They don't have to focus on new ways of behaving, just on the mechanics of tweeting or posting on a blog. The challenge is getting them to then embrace the "social" functions, helping them to understand that they will never get what they want from social media if they simply treat it as a broadcast mechanism or a content delivery system. They don't use the tools properly and then are disappointed with the results, making it more difficult to get them to continue to invest the time and energy it takes to listen and nurture communities. When they use social media in the old ways, it doesn't work. What I'm realizing is that in meeting clients where they're at, I may be doing them a disservice. I've thought it made sense to let them get their toes wet in the technology by helping them get comfortable with the tech before we dive into too many new behaviors. But I'm beginning to wonder if it doesn't make more sense to work with them first on embracing the culture and principles of social media before even getting into the technology piece. I try to reinforce and point out the need for social engagement, but the broadcast mindset is a strong, sucking whirlpool that can draw you in before you know it, I'm finding. I'd hoped that by living with social media for a time, these organizations would see it's possibilities. I've thought that the best way to see social media's power is by jumping into it. But for some people this may not be the case. It's possible to use all these tools as one-way broadcast media, missing the social aspects entirely. The results are disappointing, though, and will leave people wondering why they bothered. Without the "social," social media doesn't work. My challenge is to find a way for people to see and embrace the social aspect more quickly. Without that, their efforts will be wasted.

Harold Jarche, like me, is reflecting on his recent attendance at conferences: I’ve been thinking about knowledge sharing, after attending a couple of conferences in a row and heading off to another. One thing missing in these discrete time-based events is that there is litle time for reflection. Most presenters hold back their knowledge in order to "deliver" it just before the big official presentation. This presentation is followed by some immediate questions & discussions and a coffee break. Then it’s off to see the next presentation. Reflection, if it occurs, comes much later, and usually after the participants have gone home. I've encountered this issue, too, so I'm thinking that one way we could improve conferences would be to provide a "Reflection Session." It would be near the end of the conference and scheduled like any other breakout session. Instead of stuffing new information into people's brains, though, it would be a workshop for consolidating what they've already experienced. I'm picturing: A quiet room with more of a coffee shop set-up--some tables with chairs, but also a few lounge chairs. Possibly some music, although that's such an individual thing it might be better for people to be invited to listen to their ipods.  Some guidelines on reflective practice. Note, we would NOT discuss these. They would simply be available for those who were interested. Some tools for reflection--some small blank journals, some prompts for thinking. These Debriefing Questions could be good. Also the One-Sentence Journal--could be applied to each session the individual attended.  Art supplies--some people are visual thinkers and it could be very cool to encourage them to use art to express what they've learned. Of course, this is something of an introvert's dream of a reflective session, so I'm thinking it could be followed by an extrovert's debrief where we had people share one or two ideas they got or questions they have as a result of their participation in the conference. If we wanted to get really creative, it could be a sort of Ignite format--3-5 minute presentations on the most compelling question or idea you experienced. What do you think? Would you attend a "Reflection Session" at a conference? How would you structure it and what would you include? Flickr photo via Laurel Center for Social Entrepreneurship

I'm sorry to say that I've been spending a lot of time lately with staff working in organizations that aren't that into professional development. Because of time and financial constraints, training is not a priority and there is little attention paid to ensuring that staff have the skills and knowledge to perform their jobs. The best these people can hope for from their employers is that they will be allowed to sit in on a webinar or attend a 1-day training session once a year. I know from experience that while there are many companies and organzations (usually the larger ones) that take learning pretty seriously, reality is that most workers cannot count on their employer as the primary avenue for improving their skills. They may get some training to learn how to use proprietary systems or processes, but the kinds of skill-building that make people effective and marketable are just not going to happen. So how do you engage in professional development when you can't count on your organization to provide it? A few thoughts. . . 1. Recognize that YOU will have to be the primary source of professional development. They say that the first step to addressing a problem is recognizing that you have it. I think a lot of people are still stuck in a world where they believe that their organization OWES them professional development. If they aren't going to get it at work, then it's the employer's problem. I would argue, however, that this is cutting off your nose to spite your face. A few years ago I wrote a post, "Who's in Charge of Learning?" in which I made the case that we, as individuals, have to take responsibility for our own learning as it's our primary means for remaining competitive in the marketplace. Given the current state of the economy and the huge numbers of layoffs we've experienced, I think there's an even stronger reason to believe that it's up to individuals to pay attention to keeping their skills updated if they want to not only be effective now, but be ready to go to another job if and when the situation arises. 2. Know what skills and competencies are in demand for your particular occupation--or for occupations you'd eventually like to get into. Once you recognize the need to take charge of your own professional development, the next thing you need to do is get a grip on the skills, knowledge, tools, etc. that are cutting edge in your profession. This is going to mean getting outside your organization, because if they aren't into training, then they probably aren't into being on top of competencies either. I actually think that engaging with other professionals through social media can be one of your most powerful opportunities for learning about the most "in-demand" skills because the professionals I know who are on Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook, blogs, etc. take their learning very seriously. Connecting with professional and industry organizations is another good strategy. 3. Seek out learning opportunities. This could be an entire post of its own, but here are a few ideas:  Find smart people online, on Twitter, on LinkedIn and who blog. Pay attention to what they talk about. Check out their links, participate in their conversations.  Volunteer for "stretch assignments."  Design Personal Learning Experiments. Beth Kanter is really good at them. Engage in reflective practice. Run a web search for skills you want to learn. You'd be amazed at the number of free videos, tutorials, slideshows, and "how-to" posts  that will turn up! Connect to professional organizations. They can point you to the people, classes, certifications and skills that will help you continue to develop as a professional. Consider joining or starting your own community of practice. Do Lunch & Learns with colleagues. Form a Facebook Group. Participate in a Twitter chat. Find other professionals and engage with them in the learning process. 4. Rinse and Repeat Learning is an ongoing thing. Skill needs change and if the recession has proven anything, it's that we need to keep our skills fresh. I know that for myself, if I slack off for even a few months, I start to feel stale and behind the times. It's one of the many reasons to be as active as possible in social media, I think, because there's always learning going on there, even if you can't take advantage of each opportunity. Learning can also help combat the dreaded burnout. It gives you a sense that you're accomplishing things and keeps your mind active. What are your thoughts? Have you worked for a company or organization where you had to take professional development into your own hands? What did you do to keep on learning?  

Last night I had dinner with my husband, my two daughters, my ex-husband, his wife and their 5 month old baby girl. We ate Chinese  in the house my ex and I bought together 10 years ago, gathered around the dining table his new wife brought to the house when they married. My daughters sat at one end passing their baby sister back and forth between them, while the four parents sat at the other, watching what we've created together in the past 7 years. It wasn't always this way. While our divorce was far more amicable than most, my ex and I had our share of rancor and bitterness, punctuated by pain. The falling away of your old way of life never comes without a price. But the four of us--and I include our spouses in this because my ex and I could not be where we are without the willingess of our partners to come on this journey--we have worked hard to create from the destruction of one family a new one. My ex and I  were not able to save what we had, but from the ashes of our 15 year marriage, we were able to salvage the friendship that brought us together in the first place. And with our new spouses, we have created a new, and I would say stronger family for all three of our daughters. I want to acknowledge this now because I'm grateful for our ability to have created something good from something so painful, especially on this Thanksgiving Eve. But I also think it's an important lesson in the power of creative destruction. We could have limped along in our broken way, trying to hold things together for the sake of the children. This is something that people do in marriages all the time. This is also something that organizations and companies do, clinging to the old way of life long after all signs indicate that the old ways are gone. But we chose a different path, to go through the pain and upheaval of acknowledging that we had to find a new way of being a family. We chose to end what we had in order to give ourselves a path to a new beginning. In that process, we had to put ego aside and focus instead on creating a common good together. We had to be honest and transparent in our communications with one another and we had to keep revisiting the point of what it is we were doing--returning to our mission, if you will. We had to be willing to have difficult conversations and to give up some things we thought were important in favor of other things we found to be more important. And we had to trust that if we kept focused on our goal and believed in our collective desire to do the right thing, everything would work out. All of these, I think, are things we have to do whenever we're faced with an old way of life being replaced by something new. Failure to do them just leaves you bitter, anger and unable to move on. All of this was hard, but it was worth it. And as I think about how good it felt to sit around that table last night, I'm grateful for the lessons of creative destruction these past few years have taught me.

Peter Bromberg over at ALA Learning is asking about how you create a culture of curiosity, something that's been on my mind of late. He points out that curiosity is the only known antidote to the single biggest block to learning: the idea that we already have the answer (and it’s 1st cousin, "I don’t care about the answer".)  Being in a state of curiosity means looking out at the world, collecting data, observing human behaviors and interactions, and asking "why?" and what if? I've observed that curiosity seems to be dead or dying for many of us on the job at a time when questioning minds need to be hard at work finding new solutions to intractable problems. Curiosity is necessary to learning, true. It's also necessary to innovation and effective problem-solving, two skills we need desperately in this economy. So some thoughts on nurturing curiosity: Cultivate beginner's mind--Curiosity is all about realizing that you don't have all the answers and getting rid of your "Been There, Done That, Bought the T-shirt" mentality. Easier said than done, but necessary to develop if you truly want to re-discover curiosity. Incorporate "Who, What, What If, Why, When, Where, How" into your daily vocabulary--Curiosity is also about asking questions. So it makes sense to start adding some key questioning vocabulary to your daily conversations. See if you can force yourself to to start using these simple words more frequently. Encourage reflection. As individuals and organizations, we need to be encouraging professional reflection, not just action. We need to think about our experiences and ask questions about what has worked and why, what hasn't worked and why and what we can do differently. Developing the reflection habit can help us create a natural place for using our curiosity. Talk less, listen more. Curiosity grows from the space of paying attention to what is happening around you. Listening and observing give you the fodder for curiosity. When you are talking, you are too absorbed in what you are saying to leave room for questions. Spend time with a pre-schooler. Three and 4-year olds are probably the most curious human beings on the planet. They want to know EVERYTHING about how the world works and aren't afraid to ask "Why?" several hundred times a day. If you want to get your curiosity mojo back, spend a day with 4-year old. Share more. I've found that the more I share, the more questions I get in return. These questions that come from people who may be less knowledgeable or experienced than I am in a particular topic can be an external source of beginner's mind. They remind me of questions I've long ago thought I answered. But if others are still asking them, then they can point me in some different directions. Think about important questions--Curiosity, I think, partly comes from thinking about important problems and questions. When we feel like we're dealing with larger issues, rather than minutiae, we may be more likely to have an open mind. Think about the mundane--While the "big" questions are a good place for curiosity, I also think that the smaller things in life can be just as fruitful. The discovery of pennicillin, for example, came from curiosity about mold on a piece of bread. It doesn't get more mundane than that. So what are your thoughts? Do these ideas make sense to you? What else would you add to the list? How do you think we could do a better job of cultivating curiosity, both individually and in organizations?

Wayne Turmel has an excellent post about the power of using social media for listening. The post summarizes his podcast interview with Jim Kouzes, author of several books on leadership, who says that  the intersection of social media and strong leadership lies in the opportunities for listening that social media provides: "Social media is a great opportunity to get input from your people and let them feel listened to and heard- if it’s used effectively". That effectiveness is demonstrated by not only gathering feedback, but responding to it and displaying it for all the world to see, even when it’s not flattering. Then (and here’s the hard part) taking actual action based on that feedback. The importance of listening with social media is echoed in this article on what separates social media rookies from veterans. SmartBrief and Summus Limited asked the readers of various SmartBrief newsletters to complete a survey about their businesses’ use of social media. They heard back from about 6,500 readers. One of the key findings was that veterans were more likely to listen than rookies: The rookies are about as likely to say they use social media to put out news releases (38.7% of veterans compared with 39.3% of rookies) and maintain active fan pages (39.5% of rookies compared with 36% of veterans). But when it comes to listening, engaging, soliciting feedback and other activities that involve having a more open, fluid relationship with customers, the veterans lead the way in every category. In talking to both organizations and individuals about using social media, I find that the listening component is seriously under-valued. There's a focus on what you should say, how you should say it and which channels are the most effective for getting out that message. But both leading and learning require us to listen, too. It's the listening that gives you actionable information and feedback that can help you shape your interactions. It tells you what stakeholders are worried about or find challenging or value so you can engage with them in a more authentic way. Listening helps you really understand what's going on with people and provides you with the best opportunities for bringing them value. Some Listening Resources If you want to start listening more, here are some resources to get you started: 8 Stages of Listening--this is a good first step to determine where you are in your listening behavior.  What to Listen for in Social Media--This article suggests that listening for tensions, passions and context can give you some greater insights. Social Media Listening Primer--developed by the wonderful Beth Kanter. Creating a Social Media Listening Dashboard--This is a webinar and resource page that I did for a network of organizations serving youth in Pennsylvania. It includes lots of links to other articles and presentations. How to Set Up Your Listening Dashboard--A nice step-by-step white paper.  What do you think? What role does listening play in your use of social media? What advice do you have for becoming a better listener?

Yesterday was a typical day for me as a knowledge worker--lots of unrelated problems to solve, ranging from troubleshooting an issue with a Wordpress blog I was setting up for a client to gathering information on employment statistics for people with disabilities. I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in having this kind of wide-ranging work to do. Even the specialists among us have found their job duties broadening in this tight economy. For me, solving these problems turned out to be relatively easy. I work for myself and don't have to worry about site blocking, so was able to easily access and search the blogs, social networks, videos and forums that gave me the answers I needed. If necessary, I would also have been able to access my own networks through social media. Unfortunately for the vast majority of front line workers at the organizations I work with, this would not have been the case. For them, many of these sites are blocked. If "blog" is in the title or URL, they can't go there. If the information is on a social network or forum, they can't visit it. Forget YouTube and its vast array of tutorials.  Even many basic websites are blocked. At the same time, their managers will complain that staff don't solve their own problems, that they aren't innovative or creative in their work. Well of course they aren't--they are denied basic access to the people and information that might actually help them get their jobs done! They are forced to rely on people within their own organizations--many of whom don't have the answer either--and on those websites the powers that be deem to be "acceptable." When I do trainings and presentations, participants will frequently ask me how I "know so much." It's simple. No one is blocking my access to the web, so when I have a question, I can get an answer. I'm empowered to get information and solve problems on my own. If you want people to do their best work, they need the same access.

Jane Hart writes an interesting post on top-down vs. bottom-up approaches to nurturing social media in organizations, making the excellent point that bottom up support of existing social media activities will work better than imposing social media use from the top down. What I've been observing in my work with clients, though, is a tendency to use top-down strategies to support bottom-up initiatives, especially in organizations where they're just delving into social media use.  For example, one organization with which I've been working identified a project where employees had expressed interest in using Facebook as a strategy for sharing information and connecting with stakeholders. Management rightly concluded that it made sense to experiment with social media by supporting this project. However, despite my best efforts, the "support" for the project quickly devolved into conversations about who was "allowed" to post and what they were allowed to say--classic control issues that characterize the top-down approach. Reading Jane's post it occurred to me that we need to have a better understanding of the questions and strategies that will nurture bottom-up participation in social media. Nothing kills a grassroots initiative faster than "Big Brother" strategies. So, some thoughts. . . Ask  employees what they need from management to support the project. This is probably the most obvious question, but one that I think can get lost in the shuffle. If employees have shown the initiative to start using social media, then they probably have some good ideas about what would be helpful to them in keeping the initiative going. In particular, they are likely to have identified the institutional barriers that impede their ability to make full use of social media. Pay attention to what they say and use an open mind in evaluating their ideas. Do what you can to implement their strategies. Focus on removing barriers to social media use, rather than on erecting new ones. In my experience, employees who are trying to use social media for work have a wealth of ideas for moving things forward. Their major problems tend to be with the organizational barriers that stand in their way. Although it is tempting to management to want to control social media use, if they're serious about supporting bottom-up projects, they need to refrain from going down this road. They should work with the project team to remove barriers and make sure that they are not putting new ones in their place. Provide employees with resources and ideas that will help them implement their project. Keep an eye out for articles and examples you can share with the team. Share these as a way of indicating your understanding of and support for what they are doing. Highlight their successes. Recognition is always appreciated. Share the results of the social media work done by your teams with other members of the organization during meetings and through organizational newsletters and emails. Focus on what's working and share that with others. Treat mistakes as learning opportunities. Don't panic and clamp down on the team when the inevitable social media mistakes are made. Accept that someone is going to accidentally post something problematic and that this is part of the process. Use these situations as learning opportunities to determine how you can handle situations the next time they arise. These are a few of my thoughts. What do you think are the best ways to support bottom-up social media initiatives. What has/hasn't worked in your organization?

I was offline most of yesterday, so didn't get the bad news until the evening when I saw a Facebook friend was looking for an alternative. It seems that one of my most-used, least lauded social media tools, Delicious, is about to go down the tubes. Although I rarely am conscious of it, Delicious has probably been one of my most valuable resources. I've been using it since 2006, which feels like an eternity.  It's safe to say that every day I'm on my laptop (which is most days), I tag and bookmark at least one item into it--which is why I currently have 7,000 items saved. Aside from the items I tag for myself, I also use it as a way to point clients to information that they might find useful, doing this long after my contract with a client has ended because it's so easy to do. The ability to add notes, although I don't use it all the time, has also been helpful. I even used Delicious to create my own online portfolio.  And Delicious has made it easy for me to access my bookmarks from any computer, helpful during presentations or if I'm working onsite for a client. It's the social arena where it has really shined for me, though. My Delicious network is filled with great people who tag with the same fervor I do. They are often the source of articles I might otherwise not have found. Checking out what other people have bookmarked under the same tags has also been a tremendous resource. In many ways, Delicious has represented for me the very best of social media. It solved several problems I had with the old way of doing work. Bookmarking, tagging and annotating items were easy to do, so I could easily adapt my work habits to incorporate it. The social aspects consistently brought me value. And all of it was free. Which, of course, is what has spelled its demise. So today, I'm in mourning. Also in search of other options. At least I'm not alone--Marshall Kirkpatrick is also feeling down and his post makes me feel even worse as he describes some ways he used Delicious I'd never even considered. In RIP Delicious,  Beth Kanter shares my sadness and also offers some alternatives, including Diigo, where I have an account but haven't been active for awhile. (Here's another article with some alternatives.) In considering these, I'm going to have to think about what is most valuable to me in social bookmarking. If it's primarily about the tagging and saving of my own materials, something like Evernote could be my best bet. I've used the free version and it's really powerful, including providing the ability to read items offline. But it lacks the essential social element that is part of what made Delicious so useful to me. For the social piece, I might be better off with Diigo. We shall have to see. In the meantime, I will be raising a glass to my dear departed friend, Delicious. If you're a Delicious fan, let me know what you're planning to do in the future. Would love to hear thoughts on other tools. I'm particularly interested in options that will allow me to import my Delicious items so I don't lose what I've already done.

For one of my clients, I'm developing an online community of practitioners working for a variety of nonprofit, government and for-profit entitities in New Jersey. We wanted to treat the process of forming and nurturing this community as a learning project so we could share our "lessons learned" with others who are doing this kind of work. Our intent is to write an Issues Brief at the end of the project ot share with others. A few days ago I ran across an excellent post from the Harvard Business Review, The Best Way to Use the Last Five Minutes of Your Day. It suggests ending each day with three questions: How did the day go? What successes did I experience? What challenges did I endure? What did I learn today? About myself? About others? What do I plan to do--differently or the same-tomorrow? Who did I interact with? Anyone I need to update? Thank? Ask a question? Share feedback?  Although intended for individual practice (and I may use them that way), these seemed like the perfect questions for continuous reflection on our project. I've now set up a Google doc that I've shared with other leaders on the team and we're recording our responses each day so that we'll have a record of our work and can also respond to what we're learning. I'm seeing particular value in the third question-who did I interact with and what do I need to do?--for this project, as it's very much about nurturing relationships and forming connections. That question forces us to think each day about how we are connecting with people and what we need to do to keep those connections going. I'll keep you posted on our progress, but wanted to share a little of the process, as I think these are great questions to apply to both projects and individual improvement.

Allyson Kapin, co-founder of  the Rad Campaign, and I had the opportunity to record a Social Good podcast with Allison Fine for the Chronicle of Philanthropy about the demise of Delicious and the issues that arise when free tools disappear. In the podcast, Allyson Kapin makes some excellent points about the need to not put all your eggs in one social media basket and makes a plug for open source options, which are probably the most sustainable way to maintain free tools--unless you're Google. We also discuss the characteristics of social tools like Delicious that make them most attractive to people. You can listen to the podcast here.

My older daughter graduated from college in May and has been working at her new job since June. Last night we had a conversation that got me thinking about how school does a really terrible job of preparing our young people for "the real world" by setting up some seriously unrealistic expectations. In school, we teach kids that: Life happens in a series of connected, time-delineated steps (courses, semesters) so there's always "light at the end of the tunnel" and its clear what the next step will be. If you follow the rules--of an individual teacher, of the school--you will be rewarded. If you work hard, you will be rewarded. There are always "right" answers to questions and problems. Problems are well-defined and if you don't get the "right" answer, it's because you didn't work hard enough.  Ironically, those kids who take these lessons of school most seriously--who try hard to do what we ask them to do in school--end up being the most disillusioned and ill-prepared for what happens when they graduate. Further, these rules are hidden, making their impact more insidious and talking about the problems they cause more difficult. What we really need to be teaching young people, if we truly want to prepare them for the "real world," is that: Work and its problems are really ill-defined. Rarely are there "right" answers. More often than not we are having to make trade-offs that force us to choose between "bad" and "worse" or at least between "OK" and "less OK." There are always going to be extenuating factors and issues that impede our ability to achieve the ideal, even in those situations that seem the most clear-cut. Sometimes hard work is rewarded. Sometimes it is not. Sometimes following the rules is rewarded. Sometimes it is not. The challenge is learning when to stop beating our heads against a particular brick wall where our hard work and rule-following is not working. When do we need to break the rules? When do we need to work hard at something else or somewhere else? Related to this, working harder isn't always the answer. Sometimes we are in situations where problems go unsolved and issues are unresolved because of things that are entirely outside of our control. Sometimes there is no answer and we have to learn the lessons of patience and of moving to a new situation, rather than just buckling down and trying to make the best of what we have. There is no "light at the end of the tunnel." There is just more tunnel. Some parts of the tunnel are darker and some have more light flickering in. But there is always tunnel and we are never sure what lies at the other end. I remember graduating from college and facing many of the same issues my daughter is now facing. I was so used to a world where everything had been so clearly defined for me, where if you just went with the program you would get where you needed to go. But that's not how the real world operates. It seems like we should be preparing our kids for that.

Yesterday I read a wonderful Change This Manifesto on The Zen of Business: 7 Habits of the Highly Creative by Matthew May. I'm currently in what I'm referring to as "creative recovery" (otherwise known as AA for creatives) so these habits really struck a chord with me. One of my favorites on the list is the habit of "Seijaku" or stillness, solitude, quietude. It is the habit of learning to quiet your mind, designating a place and time for creative solitude. In other words, "stand still when the hippos charge," advice from National Geographic journalist Boyd Matson. As luck would have it, when I opened up Typepad to start this post, I saw that someone had visited a post I wrote a few years ago about The Tyranny of Now. In it, I lamented the fact that I was responding to the "nowness" set for me by my email and my ringing phone and the clamor of unread items in my feed reader. In other words, the hippos were charging around me and I was running for my life. This is an issue that has plagued me off and on for awhile now, so lately I've been trying to create for myself moments of creative solitude. I start my day with Morning Pages, a practice of writing 3 pages of stream of consciousness, just to empty your brain. What I've found is that each morning, as soon as I open my eyes, I'm flooded with the things I didn't complete the day before and the things I MUST do today. By emptying my brain of these worries, I create in myself a stillness that allows me to get to my "to do's" with less anxiety and more focus. I have also designated another room in my house--NOT my home office--as the place to go when I need to get some space from my work. This quite literally changes the dynamic for me as it is a room that's off limits to my laptop and phone. When I enter it, it says that I'm setting a boundary between me and technology that I will not violate while I'm in there. It's helped tremendously in getting my brain to shift from the Tyranny of Now when I need it to. The other practice I'm working on happens to be one that is in May's Manifesto--the idea of "Datsuzoku" or taking a break from routine. May points out that our bodies and brains work in 90-minute "pulses" or rhythms: When we're awake, we move from higher to lower alertness every 90 minutes. And here's the thing: our bodies clearly signal that rhythm in the form of restlessness, hunger, drowsiness and loss of focus. Generally we either ignore or overrride these signals, because we have a lot to do and many ways to artificially pump up our energy with various supplements. The problem is that after working at high intensity for more than 90 minutes, our brains begin to shut down. We become more reactive and less capable of thinking clearly, creatively and reflectively or seeing the big picture. I've most definitely noticed this in myself and have been trying to pay closer attention to the signals my brain and body give me that it's time for a break. This isn't always easy--I have to fight with myself to NOT keep going. There's something that says I'm being "weak" or "unproductive" if I don't push through. But in reality when I honor what my brain and body are telling me, I'm actually MORE productive. It's funny what can happen if we just stop and listen. So what do you do when the hippos charge? Do you stand still? And how do you do that?

Lately I've found myself counseling a number of professionals I know to give up the "permanent full-time employment" option (a myth, anyway) in favor of working for themselves. Some of the reasons are pretty obvious, but some are less so. Below are the reasons I've been sharing with people in favor of working for themselves: 1. You Diversify Your Funding Stream.  Would you rely on a single company's stock for your retirement fund? Why, then, do you rely on a single organization for your salary? Particularly in this economy where cutting jobs is the first thing companies do in response to downturns. Strength and security is found in diversity, not homogeneity.  2. You Can Tell The Truth More Often. Many of the professionals I know just really want to do a great job without getting bogged down in company politics. This often means that they want to voice unpleasant truths their organizations are unable or unwilling to hear. Oddly, companies and organizations seem much more open to constructive feedback when it comes from the outside. (The reasons why could take up an entire blog post of their own). They may not actually DO anything with this external advice, but at least you were able to stay true to your own sense of how the work could/should be done.  3. You Can Focus on Work that Plays to Your Strengths Most organizations aren't particularly good at knowing employee strengths and leveraging those strengths. They may THINK they're good at it, but most people know this isn't true.  When you work for yourself, you can go after the projects that play to what you're good at. This has the added benefit of making you look like a superstar because you can become known for the areas in which you excel.  When you work for someone else, it's likely that you'll end up in the dreaded "other duties as assigned" part of the job description that tends to play to your weaknesses. Some companies have a particular genius for this; they are the cause of the Peter Principle.   4. You Will Be Valued More It's crazy, but for some reason, many companies and organizations value advice and resources they get from the outside more than the knowledge that can be found on the inside. When you are an external contractor, that fact alone will add value to the work you do for many people.  Combine that fact with Item 3 above on playing to your strengths, and you are definitely going to be feeling better about what you do. 5. You Can Have More Control Over Your Work Environment When I worked for someone else, two things drove me crazy--people dropping into my office just to "chat," (I'm an introvert) and having to attend useless meetings. Both of these items have virtually disappeared from my life since I began working for myself.  I also have the added benefit of being able to make my own schedule and decorate my office any way I want. No one cares what screensaver I use and no one blocks my access to social media!  6. You Can Be on the Leading Edge of the Next Industrial Revolution Freelancing is our "back to the future" industrial revolution of the 21st century. Those who are on the crest of that wave are most likely to benefit from it.  7. You Get Variety Without Having to Change "Jobs" Most of the professionals I'm connected to love to experiment and try new things. Generally it's easier to have this kind of variety in your work life as a contractor than it is when you work for someone else. You have control over the projects you will do and can choose those that give you a better mix of activities and opportunities.  Of course, working for yourself may not be the best option for everyone. But more and more I believe that for those professionals that really care about what they do and want to have more control over how they do it, contract work may be the best choice.   ________________________________________________________________________________________ Want priority registration for events, special discounts and other goodies? Then sign up for The Bamboo Project newsletter! If you sign up before January, 2012, you'll get my free "Looking Back/Looking Ahead" activities. Each day for 15 days, you'll receive an email with a specific question that can help you reflect on what you've learned in 2011 and get you started planning for 2012. It's a great way to jumpstart your career for the New Year!

I've observed that when it comes to change of any kind--personal or professional--the impetus for action only comes when we are finally able to observe and accept the reality of our current situation. In fact, one of the ways we most consistently try to maintain the status quo is by denying reality, saying that things are better than we know they are.  I've watched this dynamic at work in many situations. I've done it myself. Denying reality is one of my favorite ways to keep myself stuck. I will convince myself that work situations or relationships are "not that bad," which keeps me mired in a netherworld where I'm clearly unhappy, but feeling powerless to do much to change it. Sometimes I will allow myself a glimpse of reality, but then quickly I can talk myself out of it. When you deny reality, though--when you refuse to accept a situation as it REALLY is--then you deprive yourself of the necessary creative energy to make changes. You will keep telling yourself that things are "good enough" or "not that bad" and then you will continue to stay stuck.  One of the most important things you can do when you want to make a change is to take a scrupulous and honest inventory of your situation and of yourself in the situation. Paint a picture of reality that doesn't try to gloss over the painful or difficult parts. Be clear about what is and isn't working. The more honest you can be, the more you can clearly see reality, the more energy you will have to start making changes.  Denying reality is one of the easiest and most reliable ways we use to stay stuck. When we're really ready for change, we need to give up this reliance on fairy tales and start taking a cold, hard look at what we're dealing with.   

Yesterday I talked about how we keep ourselves stuck in a rut by denying reality. Today I want to talk about another way we keep ourselves in the same patterns--compromising our vision of what could be.  Robert Fritz, in his excellent book, The Path of Least Resistance, says that the energy for creation comes from the tension between our vision for what we want and the reality of our situation. When the tension between vision and reality is low, we do not have sufficient energy to create something new. When we deny reality, as I discussed yesterday, we are reducing the tension in the situation. But we also reduce tension and the energy for creation when we compromise our vision.  I've found that co-workers, friends, family members, etc. are particularly good at helping us compromise our vision. They will tell us that we are not being "realistic," that our "expectations are too high," or that we need to learn to "compromise." Surrounded by this feedback, we will slowly whittle away at our creative vision for what we want in our careers or our personal lives. Eventually, it will be so close to the "reality" that we are denying, we will have lost all energy to make a change. And then we are stuck.  To remove ourselves from this place, we need to be clear and unwavering in our vision for what we want to create in our lives. We need to ask ourselves, "What Results Do I Want to Create? and must be unstinting in describing those results.  There are plenty of places we can compromise in our lives. Our vision for what we want to create is not one of those places. 

"Beta" is the experimental, developmental stage of a software package. It's the time during which you are experimenting with what does and doesn't work, learning about the capacities of the software, tweaking it, getting input on how to make it better, faster, more effective, more efficient. During the beta phase, you're looking at how the package can bring value to customers, getting feedback on how well it works and how to improve it.  There was a time when we could see our careers as a sort of "finished product." We could go into maintenance mode, resting on our laurels. At a minimum, we could be reasonably secure that if we kept doing what our companies asked us to do, we could count on some level of job security. Those days are gone.  In a world where companies and organizations are asking on a regular basis about the value you bring, we all live in perpetual beta mode. Every day we have to ask ourselves, how are we tweaking what we do? How are we developing the skills and knowledge we bring to the table? How are we creating value? Perpetual beta can be stressful, but it can also be exhilerating.  What are you doing to manage a career that's in perpetual beta? 

Yesterday I had the honor of facilitating the first class in a 6-month Leadership Academy. We had 18 men and women from a variety of backgrounds. Some are in their late 50s, others in their 30s. Some work in not-for-profits, while others work in for-profit companies. Some are small business owners. Most have been in leadership roles for at least a few years.  Our goal in this first class was to start talking about how we define leadership and what leadership goals people wanted to set for themselves. We used the VisualsSpeak Image sets to have some amazing conversations about what it means to be a leader.  What emerged from the stories and conversations we shared were three big questions that I think every leader needs to ask him/herself: Who am I as a leader?  This, of course is a fundamental question. As we first began to define leadership, it became clear what it means to be a leader is shaped by our experiences, our industry and occupation, our corporate culture and our own personality.  We  talked a lot about whether or not people perceived themselves as leaders--was it part of their identity? Sometimes we don't see ourselves as leaders because we have some idea of leadership that doesn't include the type of leader we may be. This is especially true for people who may be more facilitative, introverted or quiet in their leadership style. Figuring out the ways in which we lead and how these fit in with our identity is a foundational issue when we begin exploring ourselves as leaders.  Am I the leader I think I am? Several participants indicated that they had a particular view of themselves as leaders, but it was a view that they hadn't examined in awhile--if ever. Several also realized that maybe their view of themselves wasn't the view that others held of them. Asking this question gets at both other people's perceptions, as well as our own perceptions of ourselves that may not have been examined in awhile.  Am I the leader I want to be?  This is a question that invites the potential for change. It asks us to be more intentional about the kind of leader we want to be and then to act in alignment with that vision. For several people in our group, this was a major question they want to explore.  How would you answer these questions for yourself? What would your answers tell you about yourself as a leader? 

Professional development isn't just about the answers. It's also about questions. You can learn a lot from the questions you ask. They can tell you about patterns in your work and in your thinking about your work. They can point you in new directions or show you where you may be feeling stagnant. Questions are what drive and motivate us. But we have to notice the questions to do anything with them.  A Question Log can be a great way to begin your positive professional development journey. It is merely a log of the questions that occur to you during the day. Noticing and Logging Your Questions The first trick to keeping a Question Log is to get in the habit of noticing your questions. For many of us, questions zip through our brains without us even realizing them. Make it an intentional practice to notice the questions you are asking yourself. Or try stopping once an hour and reflecting on what questions occurred to you recently. Noticing your questions is a practice you may have to build.  To record your questions, I suggest getting a small notebook or a series of index cards to carry with you at all times. As questions occur, jot them down, along with the date.  Alternatively, you can use your Droid or iPhone. Send an email to yourself as questions come up. The question can go in the subject line and any additional notes or thoughts can go in the body of the email. You can organize these into a folder or Gmail label called "Questions."  Working with Your Questions Periodically (perhaps as one of your weekly rituals), review your questions. Look for patterns. Are you asking questions about particular people or particular aspects of your work?  Are you asking big questions or small ones?  Are they "negative questions," with a focus on problems, what isn't working and how you can get less of something in your life? Or are they positive questions that ask you to consider what is working and how you can get more of certain things?  What do your questions tell you about your concerns and fears?  What do they tell you about your hopes and dreams?  I've learned a lot from working with my questions. They tell me when I'm down in the weeds of a problem and maybe need to take a step back. They show me when I'm too focused on worrying and need to spend some time on reframing to look for opportunities and lessons. My questions also let me know when I need to make some changes. Sometimes these are small course corrections, but sometimes they are bigger, meatier changes.  I think we can get caught up in trying to find answers, so that we lose sight of how our questions can help us understand where we're at and what we need or want to do. The more we pay attention to our questions, the more comfortable we become with having them in our lives. In an uncertain world, this is a skill we need to cultivate.