- What are you are aiming to achieve? The outcome of it all? This business of yours? Sir…?
- The measures that might tell you that you are getting there? Where are they?
- And Sir? - what's the actual need you are trying to fulfil?
- What is your vision exactly?
- Does the world actually actually need what you are aiming to do?
- The story. What's the story really Sir?
- And your strategy? No-one seems to know what that is.
- The people in the business don't seem to care Sir? Why should they?
- The road map you say you have? Where is that?
- The alignment. Where is that Sir?
- And the things that differentiate the business from all the others? Can you tell me that Sir?
An occasional series of slants at the Wonderful World of Business - in visual form.
Friday, 29 April 2011
Said Detective Colombo to the CEO...!
Wednesday, 27 April 2011
Monday, 25 April 2011
Innovation? - An Egyptian Pyramid Of A Definition.
Sunday, 24 April 2011
Saturday, 23 April 2011
Apple - Please Make Pens!
If Apple Made Cars?
Friday, 22 April 2011
11 Years Thinking Change
More odd that 11 years on, the more I work with seemingly 'non-creative' industries (Government, Mining, Financial Services, Pharmaceutical Industries for example) the more creative I become - and can be.
These 11 years have been interesting - and while the following 'Ages' are not as crisply segmented as they sound - they are fairly close to what I now know about what creativity really means, and how that emerged.Year One: The Age of Context. Coming from the creative industry everything was about the idea and its cleverness or the sheer awe of its production. It wasn't essential that it met every dimension and it could be argued (and was) that it didn't need to. I didn't agree. It irked me that I was responsible for solving the wrong problem really well. I needed to think bigger. Context became a big part of my life. The first year of the business was all about mapping the context and building what is now the Discovery Framework, which was all about the surrounding context within which to think. It often shocked people and me that so much from one industry could be so relevant to another. Many people remarked on how rethinking their own context generated fresh thinking. Creativity. I thought I was onto something.Year Two: The Age of Facilitation. In the early days I had great friends and colleagues who would facilitate while I sat quietly and built the content into the context of the framework. This was all about 'active-listening' - translating the conversations forced by the contextual frame. It occurred to me that creativity was about knowing where to hunt for the truffles. Where a fresh idea might be lurking - and how to trap and then skin an insight. It meant asking a question and then a better question and then… I freely admit that I was happier butting in and I couldn't stay quiet. I know I was frustrated and I was frustrating others, but I needed to keep the questions digging deeper and deeper. I needed to actually step it up. The age of facilitation meant I had to move from sitting at a drawing pad in the corner to getting into the art of facilitation. Could I do both? Ask the questions and complete the framework?Year Three: The Age of Collaborative Endeavour. By now I had been completely seduced by the power of context and the sheer effect a visual interpretation of the conversations was having. We were now beginning to see the importance of having the right people in the program. Inclusion and ownership – engagement and understanding. We were observing how behaviours were altering in some situations and not others, how groups reacted differently when their leaders were present and how we could leverage these dynamics. At this time we had started to become much more structured and the context was being informed by better thinking ahead of time. We were working within more collaborative systems and architectures. We were growing.Year Four: The Age Of Structured Thinking. Now it was all starting to make sense. We had become very much more capable of being prepared for the work that was coming along. Bigger and bigger issues, larger and larger enterprises. We could understand the context, we could appreciate the bigger picture. We realised that we knew nothing. That helped. We seemed able, because of the frameworks and the discussions, to better 'think' about a smarter idea, a new scenario, a more deft turn of phrase or something completely new and fresh. To start to think like this requires this emergence, this journey. We were better able to work together to cause this ideation through the structured and visual surfacing of seemingly curious ideas that then became less curious. We could analyse these things more objectively and now we started to create decision architectures. We had grown to respect far more what a well considered framework could produce. It didn't restrict creativity it made it happen. Whether we built them ahead of the sessions or during - these 'tools' formed the basis of what we now know why frameworks work to solve issues. We were also starting to be able to describe what we did.Year Five: The Age of Sustainability. Solving the wrong problems well is a fools errand. It's also what many businesses and Government agencies seem to do repeatedly. In truth we are impartial about all the outcomes of our work as long as they can be sustained. This means putting the ownership and capability of the outcomes into the hands of those who must deliver. We began to engage on many more levels. The people involved in the thinking process were now far more able to 'own' the process for themselves. This meant that we were able to give them more and more accountability for the outcomes. This work was never about us but enabling real creativity on the part of the team considering the 'exam question' we were debating. Creative problem solving is not an event it must live and be watered often once born. If we don't think sustainably then we solve an event. If we think sustainably we can transform everything.Year Six: The Age Of Partnering. The approach to solving problems this way kicked off with being impartial to a given outcome. A more creative way to think. I was a client myself and deserved every lame solution I bought. With this business I never wanted us to be a solution that conveniently re-engineered the problem so that it looked valid. Whatever we did - we didn't want the curse of the 'expert' getting in the way of being as creative as we could be. Around this time we realised that we needed to excel at partnering. We had always had an Expert Network to call on once we had identified the real problem. We needed to be able to leverage skills and resources that did have expertise only once we knew what the actual problem was. In finding excellence in our partners we added to the creativity, to the context and to the power of the whole.Year Seven: The Age of Visualisation. So yes it's always been a visually biased approach but visual doesn't mean just pictures. Words, phrases, data - they are all visual. We are not a graphic recording or big pictures company. We like information design but we are not an infographic maker. In the late half of the first decade of the 21st Century the world became capable of developing high power, multi-media and fast tools for creativity. We also were given unlimited ability for expression - unlimited white–wall space using 'micro–film' electrostatic paper. This allowed scale and that created immersion and enabled a dramatically more interactive experience. This era ushered in new 'everything' - Data modelling technology, 3D software for film, social media platforms. They all started to become things we could all master and afford. This changed everything. Creative thinking was possible over long distances, by many more contributors and of course visually! And all of this at such high quality that ideas and contributions could multiply with almost no limit. We could extend the known power of visual decision making and creativity beyond the realms of anything we had known. We did.Year Eight: The Age of Comparative Patterns. As we started to analyse, archive and codify what we really had achieved we saw yet more clues in our 'story so far'. Not only had we managed to solve the frustrations of developing strategy and transformation for teams - we saw the importance of this kind of creativity for more dimensions than business. We saw a 21st Century that needed more awareness of the systemic stupidity that caused social unrest and inequity and also the critical issues of climate change, ecological disasters and so on. We coined the phrase - 'ethical/social continuum' - meaning we would work with organisations to help them do better things with more moral outcomes. We became keen to enable others to get greater access to what we had learned and we saw that we had many peers for whom what we did would be familiar/complementary. Systems Thinking, Design Thinking and Value Networks for example. Year Nine: The Age of Transferring Capability. So we had come a long way and we had proven the approach in over 2500 assignments/interventions. We could see that we could share the value. By now we had had over a hundred companies and individuals ask if they could also use the approach. We hadn't really developed it that way but we always knew we could. This is still a big work in progress, codifying everything, but we were determined even then. We started to finesse the tools. We started to explain what we do differently and translated it all into English. We had always written about what we did but now we started in earnest making it understandable and less technical. We started to structure the objects and build a scalable architecture. It was a huge undertaking but it is coming to fruition.Year Ten: The Age of Social Platforms. Our work is purely co-creative. That means it includes all and any input from multiple sources. All stakeholders can and should play. It is facilitative and interactive. It is highly visual and transports those involved to new places and greater value. The advent of truly accessible global tools like social networks with multi-media rich platforms have revolutionised our ability to deploy all of our dimensions at least to some degree. As they continue to become more powerful and integrated they bring with them their own stimulus and structure for added creativity and input. This is one hell of a ride!Year Eleven: The Age of Consciousness and Empathy. Standing as we often do between many powerful egos and ambitions we see amazing opportunities for additional value in all this. We are now both more subtle in the discussions and more urgent with the structures - forcing greater tension between the outcomes and the realities of what the enterprise seeks to achieve. Each of the previous 'Ages' have stayed the course. They are all continuing to define creativity in our assignments. They are all the mainstays of how we create value, increase opportunity and deliver innovation to our chosen markets.
Who knows where next?
Sunday, 10 April 2011
Problem Solving using Visualisation. The Menu!
Saturday, 9 April 2011
Getting To Balance. Wabi-sabi!
- Firstly the Metaphysical Basis – Things are either developing toward or evolving from nothingness.
- The Spiritual Values. Truth comes from the observation of nature. Greatness exists in the inconspicuous and overlooked details. Beauty can be coxed out of ugliness.
- The State of Mind. Acceptance of the inevitable. Appreciation of the cosmic order.
- Moral Precepts. Get rid of all that is unnecessary. Focus on the intrinsic and ignore material hierarchy.
Business & The Holy Grail
- What outcome do we want?
- How would we measure that?
- What's stopping us getting to these outcomes?
- What would NEXT look like?
- What is vital/imperative to have in place to get there?
- What are our strategies and tactics to get there?
- How must we re-think our operation and approach to get there?
- What does our roadmap need to look like to get there?
- Your customers probably don't know the full extent of what you do so what do you think they think you do? Is that the most valuable – will that keep you ahead?
- If you could imagine the 'bits' in-between your product and your competitors product - and describe the gap between that and what your customers would REALLY like - what would that be?
- If we could create value in-between the spaces created by our products and our competitors products what would we call that category and can we own that/build that before everyone else?
Thursday, 7 April 2011
Mind's On Fire - Part 1 (Extracts from a Discussion With Myself)
Sunday, 27 March 2011
Smashing. The Mental Model!
Etiquette Shmetiquette, David Attenborough and the birthing of a big idea!
Saturday, 26 March 2011
If you ask a London cabbie!
Living Life Axiomatically!
Friday, 25 March 2011
Vision For Better Thinking!
Monday, 21 March 2011
Seems we have a problem...
Until it gets fixed - In the meantime - head here http://johncaswell.tumblr.com/
Sunday, 20 March 2011
Aiming Low.
Our media has perfected a sewer rat/train smash mentality. And it's no coincidence that we are calling social media - 'Social' Media.
Playing to the lowest common denominator (it would appear) IS the strategy for guaranteed profit and cash. At the expense of our lives and our futures – but let's not get picky. Yeah, so are we all good with that? What could WE do anyway right?
Ensuring that our ethics - the low bar of morality sinks deeper into the swamp with every edition - IS the best way to keep them demon denominators falling. No question. The more they fall the more big business and society cashes in on the lazy product and services that go with. Easy! Cheap.
Reality TV doctrine states it like that and sees to it that each 'new' sad idea sucks yet more blood from the audiences along with their cash. Whilst frowned upon publicly (through the self same media) by both the political and business ‘systems’ it’s no secret that this very clear business model exists. It is the model. Simples.
Lowest common denominator means highest possible audiences. Numbers!
Speaking personally - as a westerner - I intensely dislike all the big three systems. I call them the unholy trinity. Politics. Business & Media. The political ‘system’ represents everything I dislike. It's corrupt, foolish, inept, untrustworthy, unhelpfully argumentative and not intelligent. It has a bad side too. Business, typified by the financial sector, needs no more 'outing' and the media, well that our diet and we get what we deserve if you agree with most commentators. And we do nothing about it because we don’t have a voice.
Sadly we seem to lack a credible alternative to these systems.
I don’t hear the triumphant throngs or massive hordes of fans for the fat cat salaries of the ‘system’ of Business or the 'Business of things' - Finance, Education, Health or whatever. I meet countless people who are very unhappy working for these businesses so the internal ‘systems’ are pretty messed up too.
This isn't rocket stuff.
But we don’t have a single ‘system’ of our own – under the control of the WE.
One that could change any of this. We lack a unified ‘system’ outside of the 'Unholy Trinity'. I will not go into the other major ‘systems’ like religion here. I do so to avoid getting stuck/sidetracked.with the point I want to make. It is the same point.
All of these systems were borne out of command and control thinking.
Understanding the western systems means to get at the heart of our stuckness.
It will be argued - I'm sure - but I think the following is true. Most of the problems and frustration in society can be laid at the door of our inability to influence these three institutionalised ‘systems’.
I believe that they are so well entrenched and so self serving as systems that - however unintended initially - they are the cause not the solution of the problem. They are deeply woven into the subconscious. We are not really challenging them as if we thought of them as ‘systems’. We are simply anaesthetized.
Worse still they defend themselves by purporting to be at our service and disposal.
These three systems are connected and self serving - Political, Business and Media. Each is in cahoots. Each has a wink and a nod to the other when we are not looking. Sadly they wink and nod even when we are.
WE vote in the governments, we buy from the businesses and we are influenced (or say are not) by the media. But we are the recipients of all these three interlocking systems. The media swings between each color of political party in order to keep this insidious and diabolical melting pot going, business goes where the money is and governments know that this keeps all the systems oiled (as long as it can keep it in balance).
WE are immensely critical of all three and we can and do complain. We complain all the time. We've complained for as long as I can remember. But the dirty little secret is there is no WE.
There is no We. We are not WE.
Apart from the internet there isn't a ‘system’ that I can see that is representative of WE. I don’t see a ‘system’ capable of being a valid alternative in a way that balances out or alters the unholy trinity. Why would they let us is? The internet though presents a compelling opportunity. However it is merely the platform.
WE have to use it as WE.
I remain optimistic but impatient. Slowly we see the 'unholy trinity' being challenged in critical ways.
- Media is struggling with its sales, caught in the headlights of blogs, self publishing and citizen news self-reporting. Look what is happening in the Middle East and Africa with Facebook and the social media. It’s still very free and open source has had dramatic effects to enable a fluid world of opportunity for newer and greener shoots.
- Political change is apparent via the 'voice' that is increasingly created on-line. Political blogs, surveys, manifestos, tribes and communities rising up and thankfully it is still democratized and free of too many controls. Countries are being overthrown by social media.
- Business has had to get its act together to understand the phenomenon of online channels but its early days and proves that business simply follows the mantra of shareholder return above all else. When it comes to them being sustainable or more ethical, well they will go there but only if its profitable. Organic foods is profitable so yes they do that and if alternative energy investment by the big oil companies isn’t they will pull out. They did.
- I can't speak about the Financial Services and Banking sector pay situation here. But my message would be to - enjoy it while you can you leeches as with luck a smarter generation is growing up and gonna deal with you - because my generation failed.
Well it's not surprising. It’s the system.
"The major problems in the world are the result of the difference between the way nature works and the way man thinks." - Gregory Bateson
I am suggesting that we need to be a more complete and connected 'WE' if we are to alter the thinking - and if WE wish to avoid the catastrophic implications – the pursuit of growth at the expense of all else. Well…
We humans aren’t deliberately stupid and a vast majority of us see that if WE continue this way then there is a highly predictable outcome. Destruction of the raw materials - end of the 'system'. It is finite. Our ‘system’ relies on constantly squeezing the contributors to the supply chain. The result frustrates all the mini-systems and suppliers that are implicated - constantly marginalizing them in the name of profit or efficiency and ignoring the natural systems that it raids to create the goods in the process.
Nothing stays the same.
Such a simple statement. Positions on this idea rage on every second of the day. It's such a natural and obvious truth and we seem utterly fascinated by the why, what and how of it all. At the same time we are so blinded by the significant opportunities presented by it.
Instead of leveraging the natural systems, evidence of which we see all around us, we fight or ignore them. Each time the natural cycles come back at us with interest. We fuss and interfere with the 'way' of things and wonder why they bite us so badly. Whether it's depleted natural resources or the differences of cultural systems leading to wars we just fail to understand what we are dealing with.
C'mon us – let's imagine WE!