David Rock on Neuroscience, Leadership and the SCARF Model
Mar 25, 2010
David Rock on Neuroscience, Leadership and the SCARF Model
Shortly before taking a break from writing last Fall, I began digging more deeply into the work of David Rock, who for many years has been exploring the field of neuroscience and its implications for management, coaching, and organizational life. (This resulted in my November 2009 post David Rock on Neuroscience, Coaching and Leadership.) Having begun writing again, I continue to find inspiration in Rock's work.
The SCARF Model
Much of Rock's current thinking is distilled in Managing with the Brain in Mind, published in August 2009 in strategy+business, Booz & Company's quarterly magazine (free registration required) and in "SCARF: A brain-based model for collaborating with and influencing others," a paper originally published in 2008 in Issue #1 of the NeuroLeadership Journal (co-founded by Rock) and available as a PDF on the Resources page of the site promoting Rock's new book, "Your Brain at Work."
The SCARF model referenced in both pieces (and briefly touched on in my previous post) refers to Rock's framework for understanding the five primary social dimensions within which our brains respond to perceived threats and rewards. From Rock's "SCARF..." paper:
[T]wo themes are emerging from social neuroscience. Firstly, that much of our motivation driving social behavior is governed by an overarching organizing principle of minimizing threat and maximizing reward (Gordon, 2000). Secondly, that several domains of social experience draw upon the same brain networks to maximize reward and minimize threat as the brain networks used for primary survival needs (Lieberman and Eisenberger, 2008). In other words, social needs are treated in much the same way in the brain as the need for food and water.
The SCARF model summarizes these two themes within a framework that captures the common factors that can activate a reward or threat response in social situations. This model can be applied (and tested) in any situation where people collaborate in groups, including all types of workplaces, educational environments, family settings and general social events.
The SCARF model involves five domains of human social experience: Status, Certainty, Autonomy, Relatedness and Fairness.
Status is about relative importance to others. Certainty concerns being able to predict the future. Autonomy provides a sense of control over events. Relatedness is a sense of safety with others, of friend rather than foe. And fairness is a perception of fair exchanges between people.
These five domains activate either the 'primary reward' or 'primary threat' circuitry (and associated networks) of the brain. For example, a perceived threat to one's status activates similar brain networks to a threat to one's life. In the same way, a perceived increase in fairness activates the same reward circuitry as receiving a monetary reward.
I've taken the liberty of adapting Rock's graphic version of the SCARF model, with an increased emphasis on the disproportionate ability of threat responses to drive us away relative to reward responses' ability to pull us closer:
Some further comments on each of the five dimensions of the SCARF model:
Status
Status is "about relative importance, 'pecking order' and seniority," Rock writes in "SCARF..." He cites the work of epidemiologist Michael Marmot, whose research suggests that status is "the most significant determinant of human longevity and health, even when controlling for education and income."
Two key aspects of our brain's perception of status are: 1) how easily a threat response can be triggered by such conventional workplace practices as performance reviews and "feedback" conversations, and 2) the fact that threat and reward responses related to changes in status can be triggered "even when the stakes are meaningless," as Rock writes in strategy+business. These dynamics imply not only that extreme care must be taken to conduct reviews and provide feedback in ways designed to boost, rather than threaten, the recipient's status, but also that attention must be paid to all the little, everyday ways in which interpersonal status can be built up and torn down.
Certainty
The importance of certainty can be seen as a result of the brain's effort to conserve energy, which derives from the limited capacity of the prefrontal cortex, the seat of executive function. As I wrote last November, "we resist mental effort around decision-making and impulse control because we're preserving resources in case we need them more urgently in the next moment," and the same dynamic contributes to our resistance to uncertainty. When we're acting with sufficient certainty, our brain senses patterns, successfully predicts next steps, and operates much more efficiently. But when we lack certainty and can't predict what will happen next, "the brain must use dramatically more resources, involving the more energy-intensive prefrontal cortex, to process moment-to-moment experience," as Rock writes in "SCARF..."
That said, it's useful to distinguish mild uncertainty from excessive uncertainty. The former triggers a mild threat response, generating just enough adrenalin and dopamine "to spark curiosity and energize people to solve problems, Rock writes in strategy+business. However, he continues, "when perceived uncertainty gets out of hand, people panic and make bad decisions."
Autonomy
Our perception of our ability to exert control over our environment has a substantial effect on our response to stress factors in our life. When we feel more autonomous, we're much more resistant to stress--and when we feel less autonomous, we can perceive the same set of circumstances as much more stressful.
Two aspects of autonomy worth nothing are: 1) autonomy and certainty are intertwined--more autonomy yields a greater sense of certainty about the future; and 2) similar to status, "even a subtle perception of autonomy can help," Rock writes in "SCARF..." suggesting that even where autonomy is substantially limited by organizational constraints, meaningful perceptions of autonomy can be generated by small gestures.
Relatedness
"[I]n the brain," Rock writes in strategy+business, "the ability to feel trust and empathy about others is shaped by whether they are perceived to be part of the same social group... When [a] new person is perceived as different, the information travels along neural pathways that are associated with uncomfortable feelings (different from the neural pathways triggered by people who are perceived as similar to oneself.)... Once people begin to make a stronger social connection, their brains begin to secrete a hormone called oxytocin in one another's presence. This chemical, which has been linked with affection, maternal behavior, sexual arousal and generosity, disarms the threat response and further activates the neural networks that permit us to perceive someone as 'just like us.'"
So in an interpersonal setting it's important to interact in ways that will surface points of similarity, strengthen social connections and increase a sense of relatedness. From a neuroscientific perspective, this process generates oxytocin, allows our brains to classify the other person as "friend" rather than "foe," and contributes to feelings of trust and empathy. Of course, this begs the question of how to address dimensions of diversity. I'm certainly not suggesting that such differences be ignored, but Rock's theory (and my empirical experience with a wide range of clients and students) implies that differences are much more effectively addressed only after a sense of relatedness has been established.
Fairness
"The perception that an event has been unfair," Rock writes in strategy+business, "generates a strong response in the [brain], stirring hostility and undermining trust... In organizations, the perception of unfairness creates an environment in which trust and collaboration cannot flourish." Rock notes in his "SCARF..." paper that "unfair exchanges generate a strong threat response [that] sometimes includes activation of the insular, a part of the brain involved in intense emotions such as disgust... People who perceive others as unfair don't feel empathy for their pain, and in some instances, will feel rewarded when unfair others are punished."
And like status, perceptions of fairness are relative. I'm reminded of a recent experience with some colleagues in which I acted in a manner that I felt was fair and justified, while several others had the opposite perception. At the time I was surprised not only by the difference in our perceptions, but also by the difficulty we experienced in resolving the issue under discussion. However, in hindsight it's easy to see that the relative nature of fairness implied that there was no absolute truth to be discovered, and the logical arguments of either side were bound to be fruitless. It was only after we stopped trying to convince the other side of our rightness and simply accepted our relative perceptions that we made any progress toward resolving our differences.
Conclusions
The implications of the SCARF model (and the neurological processes it describes) for the workplace are made clear in Rock's strategy+business article:
Although a job is often regarded as a purely economic transaction, in which people exchange their labor for financial compensation, the brain experiences the workplace first and foremost as a social system...
Leaders who understand this dynamic can more effectively engage their employees' best talents, support collaborative teams, and create an environment that fosters productive change. Indeed, the ability to intentionally address the social brain in the service of optimal performance will be a distinguishing leadership capability in the years ahead...
The impact of this neural dynamic is often visible in organizations. For example, when leaders trigger a threat response, employees' brains become much less efficient. But when leaders make people feel good about themselves, clearly communicate their expectations, give employees latitude to make decisions, support people's efforts to build good relationships, and treat the whole organization fairly, it prompts a reward response. Others in the organization become more effective, more open to ideas and more creative. They notice the kind of information that passes them by when fear or resentment makes it difficult to focus their attention. They are less susceptible to burnout because they are able to manage their stress. The feel intrinsically rewarded...
If you are a leader, every action you take and every decision you make either supports or undermines the perceived levels of status, certainty, autonomy, relatedness and fairness in your enterprise. In fact, this is why leading is so difficult.
More specifically, as Rock writes in his "SCARF..." paper...
[K]nowing the drivers that can cause a threat response enables people to design interactions to minimize threats. For example, knowing that a lack of autonomy activates a genuine threat response, a leader or educator may consciously avoid micromanaging their employees or students. Secondly, knowing about the drivers that can activate a reward response enables people to motivate others more effectively by tapping into internal rewards, thereby reducing the reliance on external rewards such as money.
Looming in the background are several key factors Rock mentioned in his talk at Oracle last November: First, as made clear in the graphic above, threat responses are usually much more powerful than reward responses, and thus we move away from threats more quickly and more vigorously than we move toward rewards. So it's not enough to give equal emphasis to rewards in our leadership and management practices--our brains' disproportionate response to perceived social threats implies that we need to put a much greater weight on efforts intended to generate a reward response, and take great pains to avoid triggering a threat response. (I'm reminded of psychologist John Gottman's research indicating that the ratio of positive to negative interactions in good relationships is 5:1, even in times of conflict.)
Second, our typical reaction to the strong negative emotions generated by a threat response is to suppress them, particularly in the workplace. But this response has many undesirable consequences, from reducing our own memory function to raising the blood pressure of people around us. So the cost of a threat response isn't borne solely by the person experiencing it, but by anyone who interacts with them or depends on their effectiveness. It's a shared--one might even say contagious--social experience, and this highlights the importance of group dynamics, perhaps most significantly the extent to which it's safe (or unsafe) in a given group to express negative or difficult emotions. (I'm reminded of my post last year on crying at work.)
Finally, we have very little time--approximately 1/3 of a second--after the perception of a potential threat before a neurological threat response is triggered. So on an individual basis, it's essential to cultivate our ability to recognize the conditions that might trigger a threat response and proactively reappraise the situation. And at the group or interpersonal level, it's important to be aware of the speed and ease with which a threat response can be triggered in someone else, to understand how such a response is likely to undermine effective communication, and to take steps that support the other person's reappraisal of the situation without creating defensiveness. (The importance of reappraisal is a topic I'll be returning to in the future.)
As I noted last November, I see Rock as a (and perhaps the) leading figure in the process of helping practitioners such as myself understand current neuroscience research and apply its findings responsibly. Rock's SCARF model is a great example of his ability to translate the science into language appropriate for a lay business audience, and I expect to refer to it regularly in my work with coaching clients and MBA students. Many thanks, David.
Photo by Vato Bob. Yay Flickr and Creative Commons.
You might also like:
David Rock on Neuroscience, Coaching and Leadership
Neuroscience, Joyful Learning and the SCARF Model
High-Performance Communication
LinkWithin
Mar 25, 2010 in Change, Coaching, Communication, Leadership, Management, Motivation, Neuroscience | Permalink
Comments
Ed,
Thanks for bringing this to my attention. A great resource for creating the conditions to help people become 'more creative', also to allow me to become more proactive about helping the people I work with / live with.
From a career perspective, it also gives us a model for a)assessing our current workplace and b)assessing a future workplace.
Obviously b) requires more detective work, but at least we have a start.
Thanks
Simon
Posted by: SimonK_cascaid | Mar 29, 2010 at 05:20 AM
Thanks, Simon--I appreciate it. I'm interpreting David Rock's original thinking here, so I certainly encourage you to check out the works that I cite for further details.
Posted by: edbatista | Mar 29, 2010 at 07:14 AM
I too follow David’s and other’s interpretations of the science of the brain, and appreciate your summary (which I came to via David's tweet).
My interest also is in how to use these findings and interpretations to build more effective leaders (and everyone is a leader). One way I use the new ideas is as an intellectual appeal to people to listen, feel, and watch for how their own bodies match the theories. As clients start to notice, and connect more to their bodies, they have more choice in what to do next.
I'm curious how you have been using their work?
Cathy
Posted by: Cathy Carmody | Mar 29, 2010 at 07:47 AM
Thanks, Cathy--I appreciate it. Your comments on the added value of neuroscience as a teaching tool are echoed by David, who's said that "Neuroscience gives leaders a language they're comfortable using to understand their experience," and (I'm paraphrasing here) "People pay attention when we use] hard science to help explain 'soft skills.'" (See my post from last November.) I use neuroscience both implicitly--thoughts about threat and reward responses are clearly an inspiration for my recent post on Safety, Trust, Intimacy--as well as explicitly--in some settings I'll talk about, for example, the SCARF model with clients or students.
Your comment about helping people "connect more to their bodies" reminds me of a post from several years ago on Physical Presence and Leadership, and I agree that neuroscience research is pointing us toward a better understanding of the mind/body connection, and specifically the implications for interpersonal effectiveness.
Posted by: edbatista | Mar 29, 2010 at 09:46 AM
Ed,
This is very useful information and aligns well with my coaching activities and it looks like something I need to follow up on.
Posted by: Dan | Apr 20, 2010 at 10:45 AM
Thanks, Dan--I've learned a great deal from neuroscience research that's informing my approach to coaching, and David Rock's work has been an essential resource in that process. You may also be interested in my post on Rock's SCARF Model an overview of Rock's work based on a talk he gave here in the Bay Area last year.
Posted by: edbatista | Apr 20, 2010 at 01:31 PM
Ed,
Terrific summary on David Rock's SCARF model and how leaders can finally really use the valuable research coming from social neuroscience and other evidence-based models of leadership.
I've been intuitively using and teaching similar concepts to clients for many years ... finally the fields of linguistics, neuroscience, and positive and social psychology merge in a language we can easily understand!
Looking forward to more of your posts...
Christina Haxton, MA
Sustainable Leadership, Inc.
Posted by: Christina Haxton, MA | May 08, 2010 at 09:01 AM
Thanks, Christina--I appreciate it. Like you, I've also found that neuroscience is providing compelling explanations for many practices and techniques that I've used in my coaching. And I'm equally excited by the integration of the various disciplines you mention--I think Rock's work makes a big contribution in that area.
Posted by: edbatista | May 08, 2010 at 09:53 AM
http://www.edbatista.com/2010/03/scarf.html
Safety, Trust, Intimacy
Mar 09, 2010
Safety, Trust, Intimacy
In my capacity as a Leadership Coach at Stanford's Graduate School of Business, I work regularly with groups of MBA students whose purpose is to help the members learn, become more self-aware (and more aware of others), and change their behavior in order to achieve their goals more effectively.
But I'd argue that every group in every organization serves one or more of these purposes in addition to the group's explicitly stated function. Intentionally or not, each group in which we participate serves as a de facto learning laboratory, within which we come to understand how our interactions with others support or undermine our efforts to accomplish the tasks noted above.
It's clear that some groups are more effective than others at helping the members learn, increase their awareness and change their behavior, and I believe that the group's levels of safety, trust and intimacy are the key factors in determining its effectiveness in this regard.
1) Every group's experience is rooted in a set of initial conditions: How and why were we assembled? What will our first meeting be like? What will we discuss there? These initial conditions form the foundation for all subsequent "layers" of the group dynamic.
2) The foundational qualities that define every group are the levels of safety, trust and intimacy: Safety = A belief that we won't get hurt. Trust = We mean what we say and we say what we mean. Intimacy = A willingness to make the private public.
3) When safety, trust and intimacy are established, these qualities support the actions that lead to greater success as a group: experimentation, risk-taking and a willingness to be vulnerable.
4) When we feel able to experiment, take risks and make ourselves vulnerable, our ability to learn, to increase our self-awareness (and our awareness of others) and to change our behavior in order to achieve our goals more effectively increases dramatically.
5) The process of building one layer upon another occurs in a unique context—so in addition to asking whether learning and change are taking place, we also need to assess how the group's context supports (or inhibits) the development of the underlying layers in the group dynamic.
As we learn, become more aware (of ourselves and others), and change our behavior to achieve our goals more effectively...
Learning, awareness and change become self-reinforcing norms in the group.
Group members become more willing to experiment, take risks, and express more vulnerability.
We value the importance of safety, trust and intimacy and act to enhance these qualities in the group.
And we identify and seek to replicate initial conditions that support the development of these qualities in future groups.
So we need to ask...
How will the group's initial conditions support or inhibit the establishment of safety, trust and intimacy?
At each step of the group's subsequent development, are we increasing or decreasing the levels of these qualities?
What behaviors in the the group dynamic support the development of these qualities? And what behaviors inhibit these qualities?
A final point regarding feedback: While excessive delicacy and indirectness inhibit learning, awareness and change, the degree of candor and directness in a group must be calibrated to the group’s current levels of safety, trust and intimacy. Feedback attuned to these qualities can increase their presence in the group by stretching the group’s capacity for candid and direct discussion. But feedback that fails to take these qualities into account can actually lead to less safety, trust and intimacy than before and undermine the group’s ability to learn and change.
(Here's a 10-slide PowerPoint version [268 KB] of this post.)
http://www.edbatista.com/files/2010/03/Ed_Batista_Safety_Trust_Intimacy.ppt
http://www.edbatista.com/2010/03/safety.html
Five Leadership Lessons
Oct 10, 2011
Five Leadership Lessons
Two weeks ago I began working with my fifth class of Leadership Fellows at the Stanford Graduate School of Business, and this coming week the Fellows meet the groups of first-year MBA students with whom they'll be working this Fall in the school's Leadership Labs. It's prompted some reflections on what I've learned over the last five years about leading groups, with an emphasis on leader as coach and guide rather than as directive authority figure. (Although note that I continue to re-learn these lessons regularly--while I recognize their fundamental importance and try to integrate them into my own practice, I can't say I've mastered any of them.)
1. Initial Conditions Matter
And much more than we realize. I don't mean "Make a good first impression," because that connotes phony, superficial positivity--a pasted-on smile and a hearty backslap. I do mean that in any leadership position or differentiated role we need to pay close attention to our first interactions with the people we're serving and to all of the factors that might affect our initial meetings. Because human systems are so dynamic, with so many variables shaping their outcome, even the smallest things at the outset can have a big impact on the initial course of the relationship. And in any differentiated role, the smallest things we do will be noticed and parsed for meaning. There are some simple guidelines to follow here--take a moment to get centered and present before getting started, connect on some level with everyone in the group, remember everyone's name--but my overarching advice is simply to raise our level of awareness: Notice everything we can, reflect on the experience afterward, and test our assumptions as the system evolves.
2. Embrace Mistakes, Failure and Surprises
As leaders and coaches and teachers, we typically design experiences for the people we're serving with the expectation that certain things will (or won't) happen. We define a set of parameters for the experience, and we work to insure that things stay within that boundary. These structures and plans are sincerely intended to support others' learning and grow out of our legitimate expertise--but while those good intentions and that expertise provide us with some structure and safety, they also serve to limit the possibilities before us. And our need for structure and safety can be driven less by a concern for the people we're serving and more by our desire to appear competent and avoid embarrassment. So don't flinch when things go wrong, because that's when the richest learning is possible, and that's when we become learners right alongside the people we're serving. I'm not saying it won't be scary--it will be--but perhaps the most important lesson, for us and for others, will come from how we respond to that fear; lean into it.
3. Growth May Look Like Struggle
Even when things aren't going entirely wrong, they may not be going well. Groups cycle in and out of periods of struggle, and particularly early on in their development they may look to a leader for resolution. But before we leap to rescue the people we're serving from what looks like struggle, it's important to recognize that most growth actually looks exactly like struggle from one perspective or another, and if we're took quick to jump in we may be depriving the group of its most valuable experiences. The first step is recognizing what we're thinking and feeling as leaders when the group is struggling--we tend to view it as an indictment of our leadership and feel anxious to push the group past the difficulty. The next step is to use this awareness not as a spur to action, but as a signal to pause, do nothing, and start asking questions instead: What growth might result if I hold back? What opportunity might be lost if I intervene? And am I worried about the group...or about myself?
4. Feedback Is A Gift
We say this a lot at Stanford--so much so that it runs the risk of sounding like a cliche. But it's never more true than when we're getting candid, meaningful praise or criticism from someone who's experienced our leadership. And yet to make it possible for others to give us this gift, there are so many steps we must take to establish the necessary conditions. Ask for feedback and act upon it--and be aware that how we respond to praise is as important as how we respond to criticism. Give feedback, and do so honestly and candidly, and yet be aware of the influence we wield in our differentiated role--own our feedback as our subjective, personal response, and insure we're not being viewed as the source of objective truth. And note that the more of this we can do in public with our team--particularly when it comes to people giving us feedback--the more everyone will learn, not only because they'll absorb the content of what's being shared, but also because it will normalize the process and make it safer for them to do it on their own.
5. Safety, Trust and Intimacy
I've previously described these three factors as the foundation of any group that aspires to help its members learn and grow. I define safety as "A belief that we won't get hurt," trust as "We mean what we say and we say what we mean," and intimacy as "A willingness to make the private public." The presence of these characteristics in a group supports the experimentation, risk-taking and vulnerability that are essential steps toward meaningful learning and growth--and the safer, more trusting and more intimate the group, the greater its potential value to its members. But a challenge is that the steps required to establish this foundation can appear to take time away from more pressing tasks--and as leaders we can easily get distracted by short-term deadlines and obligations and neglect the group's longer-term development. In my experience group members themselves sense the need for these factors to be established in the group, and they express that need quite clearly, although often indirectly. The key for a leader is to listen for and respond to any signals related to members' needs in these areas, while noting that it may be particularly difficult for members to articulate them in the face of our (perceived) indifference if we seem too focused on deliverables and results. This aspect of group development is a true test of a leader's ability to focus on what we know to be important rather than what appears to be urgent.
UPDATE: Be sure to check out Dan Might's very thoughtful response to this post, Six Leadership Lessons.
Photo by Nicolas Vigier. Yay Flickr and Creative Commons.
You might also like:
Safety, Trust, Intimacy
Taking the Plunge (Safety, Risk, Learning and Growth)
Six Leadership Lessons from Dan Might
LinkWithin
Oct 10, 2011 in Change, Coaching, Leadership, Learning, Management, Motivation | Permalink
Comments
I really like your 5 points and have found the same as I work with leaders. I think # 2 is one of the hardest, both for me and my clients. We don't like mistakes, failures, and surprises. What I find helpful is to look at them as opportunities for learning, and spend enough time reflecting on what we fear, why things went different than expected, and what to learn from it.
In the business world, there is too little time taken for reflection. Leaders deceive themselves thinking they don't have time for reflection. Yet, that is the only way we truly learn. If we don't take time for it, we'll keep making the same mistakes over and over.
Thanks for the reminder to look at what is really important instead of what seems urgent.
Posted by: PhDAda | Oct 10, 2011 at 08:26 AM
Thanks, Ada--I appreciate it. And I firmly agree on the need for leaders to engage in reflection. It can take many different forms, from actively working with a coach to regular journaling to simply taking a moment at the end of a big day, but it's essential not only to avoiding mistakes but also (and perhaps more importantly) to repeating successes.
Posted by: edbatista | Oct 10, 2011 at 08:39 PM
Enjoyed your post Ed.
Feedback is the food of champions, another cliché I know but it's a helpful belief and one that motivates me to step outside my comfort zone - which links to your second point.
Failure is simply a form of feedback on the current state of your reality, ignore it at your peril!
Thanks
Aled
Posted by: The_Mediator | Oct 11, 2011 at 02:24 AM
Thanks, Aled--great point. How we frame feedback has a big impact on our ability to hear it, absorb it, and learn from it. For example, I've found it helpful to think of feedback as "data from one person about my impact on them at one particular time." So what I choose to learn from any given piece of feedback incorporates my perspective on the feedback giver, my intended impact on them, and the interaction that led to the subsequent feedback.
You're absolutely right that we ignore feedback at our peril--and yet I've also seen people who treat feedback as a series of demands to change, which can be both exhausting and unproductive.
The challenge as I see it is remaining open to everything that we can learn from feedback without feeling *obligated* to do anything in response to a particular piece of feedback.
Posted by: edbatista | Oct 11, 2011 at 10:29 PM
http://www.edbatista.com/2011/10/five-leadership-lessons.html
Leadership Lessons… Ten Ideas to Take From 2011 into 2012
Leadership Lessons… Ten Ideas to Take From 2011 into 2012
Leadership December 27, 2011 by Lori Cullen
As 2011 draws to a close, I wanted to take a minute to reflect on what I have learned about leadership and being a Principal. There were many things learned, however, there are key things learned that I want to remember and apply to 2012. Not in any particular order, here is my top list of being a great leader and great Principal.
1. Communication is King, Communication is Key
Image by P Shanks via Flickr
I can’t say it enough, in enough different ways; that is my motto. If there is something I really really want people to know, I need to say it often, in many different ways and in many different formats. Same goes for me, if there is something you really really want me to know, tell me often, tell me in person, and by email. There are non-effective forms of communication in schools with the top 2 being Over the PA System, and At An Assembly. I find if you make announcements or give important messages in these 2 ways, perhaps 10% of the people will actually hear and understand. Then there is the long range of ways of communicating until you get to the most effective; being one on one or with a small group of people face to face, with them taking notes. If they don’t take notes, a follow-up email is necessary. I also think it is important to remember, just because I said it, doesn’t mean they learned it (or even heard it for that matter!).
2. Just Because I Said it, Doesn’t Mean They Learned It
I find that I often tell people “how” to do things… how to write report card comments, how to conduct parent meetings, how to work with a student, how to organize a classroom…. and the list goes on. However, just because I said it, doesn’t mean they learned it. In fact, doesn’t mean they learned it, heard it, get it, understand it, believe it! I find if I want people to learn something new, I have to teach it! (wow, amazing concept for an educator). Tried and true teaching strategies work for adults too. Don’t just tell an adult how to ride a bike, teach them. Show them, help them, support them, let them try it, encourage them, listen to them, answer questions, applaud, cheer and celebrate!
3. Back it Up
Not your hard drive, your words! I find that backing up my ideas, thoughts, and initiatives with current, quality research found in reputable literature is the way to go. I am fond of saying “This isn’t Lori’s thing, or Lori’s way,” this is because we know this is best practice and it is proven good and right for students. This is based on research and backed by data, the way we do it in our school is specific to our content, but what we do is tried and true.
4. Let Others Do
I often have teachers and staff approach me and say “Can I do this?” If the “this” is in any way reasonable and safe it’s always worth a try. Remember riding the bike? How will they learn if they don’t try? My job in this is to talk it through; make sure it is the best try (don’t hop on a bike that is too big or too small or has a bent rim and wonder what you did wrong) and then support the outcome, whatever it may be. A word to the cautious: “Can I do this,” is quite different from “Can WE do this.” See #1 – communication. Then sort out the WE.
5. Listen
There are people in my school who are experts at what they do. The book-keeper, administrative secretary, custodian, tech specialist, all know things that I do not know. Appreciate them. Appreciate their knowledge and expertise. Let them help!
6. Be Aware
Be aware, be where the people are. I find that many things in a day can pass me by if I don’t leave the office. Just walking around the school, walking outside of the school, walking into classrooms brings an awareness of the goings on, the successes, and the challenges. How can I improve on things if I don’t know what needs improving on? Having people tell me is one thing, seeing things for myself is a whole new “Ooooohhhhhh.”
7. Follow Up
Following up on things I say or things I ask is a necessary way to add meaning to what I do. For example, if I ask teachers to read a chapter in a book or watch a webinar and I never go back to it, ask about it, talk about it, then really it wasn’t that important in the first place. I find that what you focus on shows people what is important, and what is important is what improves. Unless I follow-up, really I am just making weak suggestions.
8. Change Your Mind
It is an exhilarating feeling to know you can change your mind at any moment. Usually not on a whim, but when you learn or realize something new that would be more productive or effective. You know the old saying, “Doing something over and over the same way and expecting different results is ….(you fill in the blank).” Don’t do things over and over the same way unless you can’t think of a different way, or its working exceptionally well. Over the years, with all the mind changes, we have developed into a team that is flexible, progressive and growing. Trying things in a different way on a different day is the example of growing and changing.
9. Be Gracious, Be Kind
There is no reason I can think of to be anything other than gracious and kind with all of the different people you meet and work with. People like to be thanked, people like to be treated in kind, courteous ways. People who are treated this way are productive, happy people. And, the word gets out…. before you know it people will WANT to come and work with you!
My moms class picture. Martintown Public School circa 1950. My mom is middle row far left.
10. Have a Sense of Humor
Life is stressful, work is stressful but it is true that everything goes a lot easier when you can laugh at yourself and laugh about things. From a person that has the ability to let people get under her skin, not owning, not exasperating, lightening up helps get a person through any day. Luckily I work in a school and I am blessed to be able to talk to, enjoy, laugh with all of the little people who come through the door of the school everyday. In the end, they don’t really care about the budget, or the regulations, they just live in the moment.
A Final Note: Live in the moment, enjoy the children, if you don’t like the choices you made today, you are in luck! You can wake up tomorrow and make different ones! What choices will you make today?
Related articles
What Leadership Lesson Are You Most Thankful For? Bonus Gift Edition (blogher.com)
Five Leadership Lessons (edbatista.com)
5 Leadership Focus Areas for 2012 (forbes.com)
http://www.attheprincipalsoffice.com/2011/12/27/leadership-lessons-ten-ideas-to-take-from-2011-into-2012/
BUILDING A RESEARCH CULTURE
December 7, 2011
International research
Here is the talk I gave at the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry summit on higher education in Delhi:
FICCI conference talk: building a research culture
Pete Downes, Principal and Vice Chancellor, University of Dundee
Before commencing my talk I would first like to respond to the chairman’s suggestion that the most significant research breakthroughs are often brought about by individuals unsupported by grand strategy or by eye-wateringly expensive infrastructure. At the University of Dundee, which I am fortunate to lead as its Vice Chancellor, we have developed one of the world’s leading centres for biomedical research. In terms of citations and other markers of excellence our scientists and clinicians have enviable reputations, but more significantly, our work has impact on society in terms of clinical outcomes and the development of a biotechnology cluster in Dundee that now accounts for 16% of the area’s economy. I am therefore asked frequently, by politicians, journalists and fellow academics, ‘what is Dundee’s secret; what was the strategy for success?’ Well I can reveal now that our secret strategy was that we had no strategy! Developing research excellence was the result of grasping opportunities and selectively supporting emerging strengths. Retrospectively, it has the appearance of a strategy that worked, but don’t be fooled. What I believe does matter, however, is culture. The culture in Dundee that nurtured its success and continues to do so has the following elements:
1. Only recruit faculty whom we believe are better than we are (from wherever they may be in the world).
2. Collaborate to compete.
3. Respect and value the contributions of all staff including support staff.
4. Celebrate one another’s success stories.
I now want to contribute to the topic of ‘building a research culture’ under four headings. Why we do research; the role of universities in innovation; capturing the impact of investment in research; implications for research-led teaching.
Why we do research
By this I mean of course why should universities do research? The first reason is that we have a responsibility to create a legacy of new knowledge for future generations. The technological, social and cultural developments from which we benefit today are the result of advances in knowledge made by previous generations. In this respect we stand on the shoulders of giants. Abdicating this responsibility would be the academic equivalent of failing to provide for our children! The second reason is that humankind is curious by nature. Creating new knowledge and understanding is one of our greatest cultural achievements and is intrinsically rewarding, motivating and inspiring. The third reason, to quote Einstein, is that we are curious for a reason. We know, both instinctively and from experience, that knowledge and understanding of the most fundamental and esoteric kinds, can eventually be put to good use. That universities should bear the major responsibility for driving curiosity-led research relates, in my view, to the fundamental concepts of independence and academic freedom as well as to the value of research as an inspiration to students.
The role of universities in innovation
Innovation concerns the harnessing of new knowledge and understanding to the needs of society and it includes not just economic, but also social and cultural needs.
Traditionally the role of universities has been to expand knowledge, to publish the findings of research and to allow others to exploit it as they will. Such a passive approach has been justified by the unpredictable nature of when and how knowledge can best be exploited. I do not accept this justification not least because it is tolerant of an approach that is demonstrably inefficient. Universities should play active roles in ensuring the efficient exchange of knowledge with the many users of the outputs of research. They should do this not by shifting from curiosity-driven research to applied research, but by developing partnerships with industry and those who will drive cultural and social developments.
The key lessons that emerge from these ideas are as follows:
Universities must not be persuaded to stop doing curiosity-driven research.
There must be a balance of short medium and long term impacts of research.
Universities must shift from the traditionally passive mode of knowledge dissemination to one that is more actively engaged with the users of research.
Capturing the impact of investment in research
Governments which invest heavily in the research capacity of universities nowadays increasingly expect a return on their investment not least because the people who elect them want that too. Publications in high quality journals and the resulting citations for that work enhance the reputations of individuals and the institutions which employ them, but the information is more or less instantly available throughout the world. Any applications that arise are therefore not, in any obvious way, tied to nation or place where the initial investment was made. The partnership approach introduced earlier tends to create clusters of intensive activity where new knowledge is much more likely to be exploited by users of research within the cluster than elsewhere in the world. As a bonus, the users of research, in partnership with universities, will begin to frame research questions designed to address problems they face in their businesses driving a self-supporting, mutually beneficial virtuous circle.
This brings me back to the concepts of knowledge exchange and intellectual property (IP) which are central to my University’s engagement with innovation. IP can be broadly divided into two types. Tangible IP takes the form of patents, copyright and direct university-owned spin-outs. Intangible IP is best represented by the distinctive, high quality expertise and reputations of the faculty and the research units in which they work. The latter is frequently underestimated in terms of its significance and power to drive the key partnerships that I have referred to frequently in this presentation. An example of the latter in Dundee would be the Division of Signal Transduction Therapy, based around world class expertise in cell signalling research, which has brought inward investment in excess of £50million from several of the world’s leading pharmaceutical companies and spawned two new companies in the city.
Implications for research-led teaching
As research, especially in technology-driven disciplines, becomes more and more intensively competitive, we will need new models to deliver research-led teaching. The old model of individual faculty doing research, teaching and shouldering their share of administration is out of date and can often lead to a culture of mediocrity in both teaching and research. Workload allocation will in the future increasingly recognise the distinctive contributions and talents of individual faculty and research-led teaching will be delivered by teams, not individuals. In turn academic leaders will need proactively to manage workload allocation, and differentiation of faculty roles.
But there is something else more profound than more efficient ways of working. There is a tendency for universities to be cloistered environments where academic achievement is held above all other forms of distinction. Yet we want our students to be highly employable and key participants in economic growth. Ensuring universities are highly networked organisations fully engaged with multiple partners is the best way I know to maintain the links not just between teaching and research, but between teaching, research and innovation. The type of engaged university that I have described therefore will not only produce research that has impact, but, even more importantly, employable, innovative graduates.
http://blog.dundee.ac.uk/principal/2011/12/building-a-research-culture/
Welcome to the Quality Assurance Framework (QAF)
Welcome to the Quality Assurance Framework (QAF)
The University's Quality Assurance Framework describes in detail the main policies, procedures and guidance related to quality assurance, learning and teaching enhancement and academic standards.
The QAF website is structured in 14 sections, as indicated in the two navigation bars shown above. There is also also a QA Archive containing ELIR reports, past Programme Review and Accreditation reports, Lists of External Teaching Collaborations and Accrediting Bodies, L&T Committee and Academic Quality Sub-Committee minutes.
The document Policy Status of the Quality Assurance Framework outlines the formal standing of the QAF documents, guidenotes and templates.
Principles
A key principle of the QAF is that the primary determinant of teaching quality is the relationship between those delivering and supporting teaching and the student. In accord with this, its policies and processes aim to:
support regular reflective practice on the part of staff, teaching teams and academic managers;
promote active involvement of students and their representatives, including the students' association (DUSA);
create a culture of continuous improvement and enhancement;
encompass the requirements of professional statutory bodies, when appropriate; and
facilitate communication of needs and priorities both from the 'bottom up' and from the 'top down'.
One of the main aims is to connect strategic developments at University and college levels to the planning and delivery of academic programmes at school level. The QAF process diagram summarises how this is achieved.
The University recognises that QA and continuing professional development are closely linked. The directors of QA and Academic Professional Development work closely to provide a structured programme of events in consultation with colleges and schools and publish a newsletter, Highlighter, which aims to publicise current issues and agendas in learning and teaching. The institution also recognises success in these areas via a series of awards for innovation, excellence and lifetime achievement.
Development of the QAF
The University of Dundee's QAF was revised in 2008, following a review which took into account the reorganisation of the University, the Learning and Teaching Strategy 2007-12 and the Strategic Framework to 2012. The views of staff and students also informed the review, which was approved through Senate in May 2008. The review recognised that in reframing quality assurance (QA) procedures, the University was building on strength, as evidenced by the 'broad confidence' outcome from the QAA Scotland Enhancement Led Institutional Review of 2004.
Embedding the QAF
Information about the QAF is primarily distributed via this website, including the 'QAF News' section, with regular updates provided via the Highlighter newsletter.
The implementation of the QAF is managed at College and school level. College or school websites should be consulted as appropriate.
The formal mechanism for discussion matters of related to QA is the Learning and Teaching Committee and Senate (remits, agendas and minutes are available from here).
Specific queries about implementation of any of the sections of the QAF should be directed to the Director of Quality Assurance, Dr Jonathan Weyers (Ext 84258; j.d.b.weyers@dundee.ac.uk or Dr Eric Monaghan (Ext 84290, e.d.monaghan@dundee.ac.uk). Contact details of other central and college staff with responsibility for learning and teaching and quality assurance can be found here.
The QA team regularly meets with the School Secretaries' Forum, which is a key mechanism for discussing the day-to-day operation of the framework. The team also meet frequently with college and school boards, programme review teams, heads of learning and teaching and heads of QA to give the background to the QAF, outline the QA procedures and discuss good practice.
Working closely with the Library & Learning Centre (Educational Development), the QA team also help to organise conferences and workshops with a focus on quality enhancement.
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/qaf/
PRINCIPAL'S OFFICE
Principal's Office
Our Structure
Professor Pete Downes is Principal and Vice-Chancellor.
The University is structured in four colleges each of which is headed by a Vice Principal, and two further Vice Principals take overall responsibility for research and enterprise, and educational development.
The Annual Review outlines the University's recent achievements and includes a letter from each College Head charting progress at College level over a range of initiatives.
Quick Links
Court
Senate
Academic Affairs
Quality Assurance Framework
Principal's Blog
...to advance and diffuse knowledge, wisdom and understanding by teaching and research and by the example and influence of its corporate life.
Our Mission
Facts & Figures
Recipient of the prestigious Queen's Anniversary Prize 2005, the University has 17,500 students, over 3,000 staff and an annual turnover of over £200 million. It ranks
Among the best in the UK for teaching quality
Among the UK's top universities for research income per capita
Consistently among the best scientific workplaces internationally
Contact Details
University of Dundee
Nethergate, Dundee
DD1 4HN
Tel+44 (0)1382 383 000
principal
Location
Visitors & Businesses
Campus Map
Student Satisfaction
Our University rates among the highest in the UK for student satisfaction, combining a remarkable quality of life with an enviable cost of living.
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/principalsoffice/
The Secrets of a Principal Who Makes Things Work By MICHAEL WINERIP One columnist’s idea of a good principal:
One columnist’s idea of a good principal:
A good principal has been a teacher.
While Ivy Leaguers in their 20s can now become principals, Jacqui Getz, 51, the new principal of Public School 126, a high-poverty school in Chinatown, came up the old way. This is her third principal position, but before that, she was a teacher for nine years and an assistant principal for four. It’s hard for principals to win over teachers if they haven’t been one.
“You’re the principal,” Ms. Getz said, “but you have to know how a teacher feels and how a teacher thinks.”
A good principal feels at home in a cafeteria filled with 800 children eating rubbery scrambled eggs for breakfast.
At Table 510, Ms. Getz discussed “Maniac McGee” with Beckie Zheng; at Table 500, Hula-Hoops with Annika Dalland. At Table 220, Ms. Getz spotted a second grader, eyes closed, resting his head on his arms, and brought him a box of Raisin Bran with a carton of milk. “You need to eat,” she whispered.
A good principal has her own style.
“He wants to meet you,” said a third-grade girl, who was holding her little brother’s hand. From where the children stood, Ms. Getz must have looked like the Eiffel Tower. She wears heels because she believes tall principals have an edge. As she walks, her bracelets clink, her heels click. Before they see her, students know Ms. Getz is coming around the corner.
A good principal protects her teachers from the nonsense.
“I want my people to feel I have their backs,” she said.
Last year, the city’s Education Department put into effect its 32-variable equation that looks like a chemical configuration for rocket fuel but is actually a formula concocted to rate teachers based on student test scores.
It was degrading for teachers, and Ms. Getz has signaled she is not a believer. “How can this formula tell me about the teacher in front of me?” she said. Under state regulations, test scores can count for up to 40 percent of a teacher’s evaluation. “These tests are so unreliable; I wouldn’t count them 10 percent, 8 percent, 1 percent,” she said. “You don’t want teachers feeling belittled; you want them to keep their dignity so they can be at their best.”
A good principal sets her own high standards.
Many are the ways Ms. Getz evaluates teachers. She regularly visits classrooms. She looks at the written materials they send to families and the administration. She watches them during group planning sessions with other teachers. She studies their lesson plans and notices how they maintain their rooms, when they show up for meetings and whether they take notes. She looks to see how they organize themselves for the day and the records they keep. She listens to parents.
Ms. Getz wants to know whether teachers continually challenge themselves, have the power of reflection, make intellectual connections and are curious about the art of teaching. Some of what she’s hunting for, she can describe only vaguely: “There’s something at the core of a good teacher that kids get, and makes them feel safe and relaxed.”
A good principal works with union leaders to carry out her educational agenda, and if she can’t, takes them on.
At four of the five schools where Ms. Getz has been a supervisor, relations have been good. At the other, union members had taken over school advisory committees, undercutting her. She worked around them until they quit in frustration.
Still, she believes teachers need unions, saying, “Some schools are very hard on teachers.” Said Barry Greenberg, the P.S. 126 chapter leader, “We’re glad she’s here.”
A good principal knows teachers are only part of what make a school run.
Her first week on the job, Ms. Getz was invited by Aixa Torres, president of the tenants’ association of the 2,000-unit housing project across the street, to come to one of its meetings. “The same day, she came,” Ms. Torres said. “She’s on the mark.”
Ms. Getz brings in Diet Cokes for Margaret Javor, the longtime school secretary, but that’s not what won her over. “I like that she compliments my work ethic,” Ms. Javor said.
A good principal takes money out of her pocket for the school.
Against all odds, Ms. Getz was determined to make the principal’s office an inviting place for children. She bought bookcases from Ikea and stacked them with hundreds of books from her home that children and teachers could borrow.
Recently, Ms. Getz interrupted a meeting she was having with department managers, and in marched three little girls looking for books. The girls got the books, and the managers got the point.
A good principal loves and trusts the public schools where she works.
Ms. Getz’s husband is also a principal, at East Side Middle School. Her mother is still teaching at the Center School, and all three of her children have attended New York City public schools.
A good principal worries in private, ignores the surreal and finds a way to get things done.
The department judges them by student test scores and school progress report grades. Many nights, Ms. Getz wakes at 3 a.m. full of worries. “And then I say, I am not going to let them do this to me,” she said.
A few weeks before, the Education Department had sent principals a packet explaining the progress report grading system. It was titled, “New Templates Clarify Scoring and Metrics.” An example of template clarification: “The percent of range is the share of the comparison range covered by the school’s result, used to determine the share of points earned.”
Because of budget cuts, P.S. 126’s sixth grades have gone to 30 students per class from 20 last year, but Ms. Getz does not dwell on it. “I think of how to do,” she said, “with what I have.”
A good principal has a To Do list several feet long.
Excerpts from Ms. Getz’s list from last weekend: Start to plan Performance Assessment Tasks. Rough draft of Principal Performance Review. Plan out first-grade social studies School Study. Review fifth-grade first unit of social studies. Read and respond to GOAL sheets of all staff. Make new templates for Danielson observations .Write weekly family letter. Review professional text math book. Analyze Progress Report. Do feedback Post-its for teachers from informal visits this week.
A good principal leads by example.
School ended at 2:50 that day, but at 5, when Sabrina Bassett, a special-education teacher, came into the office with a question about a mapping lesson, Ms. Getz was there. And at 5:30, when Ian Lambert, a fourth-grade teacher, poked his head in to discuss a spelling curriculum he was putting together, Ms. Getz was still there.
E-mail:
oneducation@nytimes.com
IDEA CHAMPIONS
Idea Champions is a consulting and training company specializing in creativity, innovation, team building, leadership and out of the box products. Since 1986, we've been helping forward thinking organizations unleash their collective brilliance and achieve extraordinary results. Our work, however, goes well beyond getting people out of the box. Beyond brainstorming. Beyond ideas. Beyond the fuzzy front end of the corporate innovation process. What we do, ultimately, is help our clients establish humane, inclusive, sustainable cultures of innovation - the kinds of environments that become fertile ground for the natural expression of creativity, collaboration, commitment and uncommon success.
Curious? Call 1-800-755-IDEA to speak with an Idea Champions consultant.
http://www.ideachampions.com/
Conducting Genius
Conducting GeniusBrainstorm Facilitation Training
“The lightning spark of thought generated in the solitary mind awakens its likeness in another mind.”
Thomas Carlyle
Conducting Genius is a 3-5 day certification training that's ideal for anyone in your organization who's committed to becoming a first-rate brainstorm facilitator. The training is especially suitable for meeting facilitators, change agents, organizational and team leaders, innovation champions, and trainers wanting to become innovation ninjas, or idea catalysts.
Conducting Genius is highly customizable and represents the very best of our 22 years experience designing and facilitating successful brainstorm sessions for a wide range of forward thinking organizations. The training is modular and can easily be adapted to fit the learning needs, social styles, and experience of participants.
While each certification training is unique, it is likely to include a selection of the following topics:
Why most brainstorm sessions fail
The varied roles of a brainstorm facilitator
How to help left-brained people become more creative
Establishing trust and a culture of innovation
Creative thinking techniques
Advanced facilitation techniques
Framing effective problem statements
Idea capture
Emergent design
Identifying and transforming limiting assumptions
Experiential problem-solving activities
The DNA of brainstorming: structure and process
One-on-one brainstorm coaching
Designing customized brainstorm sessions
Listening and feedback
The right use of innovation-sparking tools
Conducting idea workouts with key stakeholders
Real-time brainstorm facilitation practice
Pre and post session consulting to ensure optimum follow up
http://www.ideachampions.com/conducting_genius.shtml
High Velocity Brainstorming
High Velocity BrainstormingBreakthrough Thinking in the Fast Lane
High Velocity Brainstorming is a deeply engaging, masterfully facilitated creative thinking session that helps aspiring innovators originate and develop breakthrough ideas.
Most people we know — our friends included — claim they already brainstorm. Perhaps they do. But in our experience, there is a often a huge gap between the concept of brainstorming and the act of brainstorming. Indeed, the word "brainstorming" has been totally abused in our culture. Like the words "post-modern" and "natural," it has lost its meaning. Meeting with a few friends to talk about a business deal? "We're brainstorming." Tossing a few ideas around over cappuccino? "Brainstorming." Kicking around an idea or two for cutting costs? "Brainstorming." Well, not really.
What most people call "brainstorming" is, in fact, often just a veiled attempt to influence others, a self-appointed opportunity to sell ideas, peddle opinions, or simply play out a lifelong ambition to dominate a group. "Brainmisting?" Maybe. "Braindrizzling?" Sure. But not brainstorming. Uh uh. No way. Real brainstorming is very different. Real brainstorming is a meeting of the minds — or more precisely, a meeting in the realm just beyond the mind — a place where brilliance and breakthrough wait to be discovered.
Idea Champion's High Velocity Brainstorming service cuts through the fluff of traditional brainstorming by tuning into the five key drivers of successful group ideation:
1. Problem Definition: Long before a session, we'll interview you and a cross-section of key stakeholders to make sure you have identified the real question to brainstorm — not some unreasonable facsimile. (Sometimes our clients' need for output is so strong, they forget to get the input they need to align around a common challenge.)
2. Custom Design: Your team is unique. Your goals are unique. Your company culture is unique. That's why the design of your brainstorming offsite should be unique. Which is exactly what Idea Champions will do as a prelude to your offsite. (FYI: In the past 20 years of leading ideation sessions for all kinds of organizations, no two have ever been the same.)
3. Session Facilitation: Leading a brainstorming session is a lot like herding cats. Participants are usually all over the place. Left brainers and right brainers. Extroverts and introverts. Thirty year veterans and dewy-eyed new hires. And just about everyone is infatuated with their own ideas. (PS: That's why you pay us the big bucks.)
4. Brainstorm Report: Brainstormers love "throwing spaghetti against the wall to see if it sticks." Not that there's anything wrong with that now, is there? Well, not as long as the spaghetti gets collected at the end of the day and made appetizing in some way. Translation? Within 72 hours of a High Velocity Brainstorming session, Idea Champions will provide you with a clearly written, impeccably organized document summarizing all of the ideas generated at your offsite. No consultant speak. No boilerplate mumbo. No BS. Just good, ol' fashioned food for thought.
5. Follow-Up: Ideas, concepts, and intellectual capital are invisible. You cannot see them. You cannot touch them. You cannot measure them. They exist in the Platonic realm of formless possibility. We, on the other hand — the Idea Champions consultants who facilitate High Velocity Brainstorming Sessions — are not invisible. We do not live in the Platonic realm. We live in Upstate New York and we will — with your permission — follow up your High Velocity Brainstorming session in whatever way works for you:
Post-session conference calls with your team
Phone coaching with project champions
Follow up sessions with sub-groups
Free the Genie (virtual brainstorming)
http://www.ideachampions.com/high_velocity_brainstorming.shtml
23 Reasons Why Nothing Happens After a Brainstorming Session
December 04, 2010
23 Reasons Why Nothing Happens After a Brainstorming Session How many times have you participated in a brainstorming session, only to be underwhelmed by the utter lack of follow up?
Unfortunately, in most businesses, this is often the norm.
Here's why:
1. The output of the session is underwhelming.
2. No one has taken the time, pre-brainstorm, to consider follow-up.
3. No criteria is established to evaluate the output.
4. No next steps are established at the end of the session.
5. No champions (i.e. process owners) are identified.
6. The champions are not really committed.
7. The champions are committed, but under-estimate the effort.
8. The ideas are too threatening to key stakeholders.
9. No one is accountable for results.
10. The project leader doesn't stay in contact with key players and "out of sight, out of mind" takes over.
11. The "steering committee" takes their hands off the wheel.
12. The next brainstorming session is scheduled too quickly.
13. The output of the session is not documented.
14. No sponsors are on board.
15. Participants' managers are not supportive of the effort
16. It takes too long to document the output of the session.
17. The output is not distributed to stakeholders in a timely way.
18. Participants and stakeholders do not read the output.
19. Bureaucracy and company politics rule the day.
20. Somebody, in the session, is disengaged and sabotages the effort.
21. Teamwork and collaboration is in short supply.
22. Small wins are not celebrated. People lose heart.
23. Participants perceive follow-up as "more work to do" instead of a great opportunity to really make a difference.
What else should be on this list?
http://www.ideachampions.com/weblogs/archives/2010/12/20_reasons_why.shtml
26 Reasons Why Most Brainstorming Sessions Are a Big Disappointment
26 Reasons Why Most Brainstorming Sessions Are a Big Disappointment Whenever I ask my clients to tell me about the quality of the brainstorming sessions in their company, they usually roll their eyes and grumble.
Simply put, most brainstorming sessions don't work.
Not because brainstorming, as a process, doesn't work -- but because they're usually done poorly.
What follows are 26 of the most common reasons WHY -- and after that, a list of what you can do differently to turn things around. Ready?
1. Lame facilitation
2. Wrong (or poorly articulated) topic
3. Unmotivated participants
4. No transition from "business as usual"
5. Insufficient diversity of participants
6. Addiction to the status quo
7. Lack of clear ground rules
8. Sterile meeting space
9. Hidden (or competing) agendas
10. Lack of robust participation
11. The boss is in the room
12. Habitual idea killing behavior
13. Attachment to pet ideas
14. Discomfort with ambiguity
15. Hyper-seriousness (not enough fun)
16. Endless interruptions
17. PDA addiction (Crackberries)
18. Premature adoption of the first "right idea"
19. Group think
20. Hierarchy, turfs, and competing sub-groups
21. Imbalance of divergent and convergent thinking
22. No tools or techniques to spark creativity
23. Inadequate idea capture
24. Meaningless speed. No time for reflection
25. Pre-mature evaluation
26. No real closure or next steps
WHAT CAN YOU DO TO TURN THINGS AROUND?
1. Find, train (or hire) a skillful facilitator
2. Make sure you're focusing on the right challenge.
3. Invite people who care about the topic.
4. Invite people with diverse points of view.
5. Spend time clarifying the "current reality".
6. Start with a fun icebreaker to help change mindset.
7. Ask participants to establish clear meeting ground rules.
8. Design (or find) a more inspiring meeting space.
9. Establish alignment re: session goals.
10. Find ways to engage the least verbal participants.
11. Establish "deep listening" as a ground rule. Model it.
12. Invite participants to name classic idea killing statements.
13. Elicit the group's pet ideas in the first 30 minutes.
14. Explain how ambiguity is part of the ideation process.
15. Tell stories, play music, invite humor.
16. Go off site. Put a "meeting in progress" sign on the door.
17. Collect all PDAs/cell phones. Establish "no email" ground rule.
18. Go for a quantity of ideas. Let go of perfectionism.
19. Encourage individuality, risk taking, and wild ideas.
20. Ask people to leave their titles at the door.
21. Start with divergent thinking. End with convergent thinking.
22. Use tools and techniques to spark original thinking.
23. Enroll scribes, use post-its, have an idea capture process.
24. Create time for individuals to reflect on new ideas.
25. Explain that evaluation will happen at the end of the session.
26. Identify and enroll "champions". Explain the follow up process.
http://www.ideachampions.com/weblogs/archives/brainstorming/index.shtml
All A-B.O.A.R.D to beat Boredom
All A-B.O.A.R.D to beat Boredom
January 13, 2012 | by Deepika Azariah
Every year during finals week, I think of a million and one things that I would love to do after finals. Can’t wait for next week, I think. It’s going to be fun!
Now if you’re thinking that I spend my vacation doing those million and one things productively—well, that may not be entirely true. I’ve used these paradoxical words during vacations; maybe you have too: I’m bored!
So I came up with the B.O.A.R.D. formula to avoid vacation boredom!
B: Book of Ideas
Get a “book of ideas” or a small journal in which you jot down ideas, to-do lists, fun date plans, etc. that race through your mind at the randomest of times. If you’re like me, then whenever you’re meant to be focusing on something else, that’s when the best ideas pop into mind. Don’t let this frustrate you. Sometimes our minds might mull on an idea—causing distraction—because we’re afraid that if we don’t think over every aspect of it right then, we’ll lose it. Try this: as soon as a great idea pops into mind, write it in your book of ideas. That way, you’ll know that the thought isn’t going to slip and that when the time is right, you can get back to it. I’ve tried this, and it’s amazing how well it works. Then, when you’re bored in your free time, you can go down the list of ideas and you’ll have a bunch of interesting and useful things to do—and the time to do them. Plus you’ll find yourself accomplishing a lot of goals that otherwise could be neglected.
O:
Organize
Every time you deep-clean or deleaven your room, don’t you find a lot of neat items? I do. A lot of them are great cures for boredom: an old glove and baseball, an unfinished stamp collection, a bookmarked novel, yarn, etc. When you feel you are on the verge of boredom, try this: organize! You’ll find a bunch of items in your room that can help you beat the blahs. After all, you bought them in the first place because you thought they would be useful to you. Now could be a great time to finally get to them. (Or you could give them away and purge them—but that’s another story.)
Guess what? Others get bored too. There is a saying that misery loves company—you could apply that to boredom as well, in a different way. Finding people to do things with you is a wonderful way to beat boredom, help someone else and build stronger friendships. Ask around to see if someone would like to go to the library for an afternoon, or play catch with that mitt and ball you just found buried in your closet, or play Monopoly with you in your tree house. Seek others out whom perhaps you’ve not had as much time to get to know before and use a sport, a toy or an occasion as an icebreaker to get to know them better. You’ll have something to do with your time, and building that friendship might open up new things to do in the future should you get bored again.
R:
Read
A majority of us love to read—hey that’s why you’re reading this article. Reading sparks ideas, introduces you to hobbies, encourages travel, builds creativity and teaches you a lot about a lot. When I was a preteen, I loved reading the Five Findouters. It was a mystery book series about five kids and a dog who went on great adventures solving mysteries. One tiny, almost insignificant detail about these books always fascinated me: The Findouters usually had their meetings in a barn in the afternoons over scones and tea. After reading these books, I used to spend probably an hour at home in the afternoon eating biscuits and drinking tea. (I didn’t have my first scone until I came to America for AC.) That kept me busy even after the book. Another book that sparked an idea in my mind was when I read Anne Frank: The Diary of A Young Girl when I was around 10 years old. It got me hooked on journaling, which kept me entertained for hours each week. You get the idea. Books really can encourage ideas and activity.
D:
Drive
In his book, The Seven Laws of Success, Herbert W. Armstrong wrote about drive. “An inactive person will not accomplish,” he wrote. We need to really work hard to get out of the boredom “rut.” We all need to prod ourselves to do more with full-hearted effort. I’ve often noticed that when I sleep in real late on Sundays, it’s hard to get much else done for the rest of the day with any amount of zeal. That’s because I’ve forsaken drive and set myself up for a lazy outlook! Then I feel bored. Ever felt that way? Now of course it is good to get a few hours of extra sleep on the weekends to recuperate. But my point here is that just as with lazy Sundays, we can sometimes set ourselves up for just being plain lazy in everything we do—and be in a constant state of boredom as a result. By adding drive in your life—constantly prodding yourself to accomplish more, being positive about accomplishing the near-impossible, trying a new sport —you can set yourself up for a life of constant activity and accomplishment, and squelch out the boredom.
I’ve come to realize that when I think I’m bored, I’m not really being honest with myself. After all, I haven’t tried everything under the sun and am now out of ideas. That makes me go back to my B.O.A.R.D. formula and find some wonderful things to fill my time with. Right now I’m trying to finish up a blue scarf I had started knitting a few winters ago. I’m not bored anymore.
http://www.trueeducation.org/2012/01/13/all-a-b-o-a-r-d-to-beat-boredom/
