The most common question I am asked is whether there is a quick way to spread desired change across groups.
My Nobel Prize entry for answering this question is as follows:
"Yes and No"
The fact you are asking the question means you are in a type of powerful relationship over those with whom you want to interact and change. Namely you want them to do something different/ly and you want them to do it quickly.
The "Yes" answer is dependent on the carrot and stick approach. Pay a twelve year old to clean his bedroom and if the reward is big enough, the bedroom will be cleaned. Pay doctors a reward for meeting a quality target and they will achieve it (evidence the NHS and GPs). The stick approach is less effective but still works. It is no longer common to see anyone on their mobile phone while driving in the England. The stick of a fine and points on your license has worked, combined with appeals to common sense.
The "No" answer comes from asking questions like those listed below. If I get more than two or three "No's" in response then I suggest to the person asking that they have probably answered their own question.
- are you making the change yourself?
- can you describe to me the three main reasons why the person you want to change thinks this will be a good idea?
- do you apply the methods you are proposing in your own work and/or personal life?
- is your reason for this work more than doing a good research project you can publish later
- will the person/group you want to change see the change as coming from somewhere other than yourself?
- do your plans involve more than a communication exercise?
and so on
News, views & challenges from Sarah Fraser. Breakthrough results need radical thinking. Words need to be matched by action. Change starts with the self.
Wednesday, 21 July 2010
Saturday, 10 July 2010
Spending Challenge - HM Government using crowdsourcing
The UK government is using a simple online webpage to gather ideas on how to save money. It is called the Spending Challenge. You can input your idea, some words about how it can be implemented, add a tag or two and then post it. You can read through others' ideas, add tags and ratings. The system allows you to search by tag, new ideas, most commented or highest rated.
This is crowdsourcing at its most pragmatic. I doubt they spent more than £1000 setting up the system. The addition of a rating system gives it power and meaning. Especially as anyone can rate any idea - not just those in power.
In the same month this is launched I've worked with a variety of public sector teams who range from denying the existence of technology, denying they have permission to use anything remotely interfacing the public (or their staff) unless there are controls, or want to create their own thing. Probably worse, some are still working at the level of theory and concept for social movements, mobilisation and networking, running workshops and developing programmes to spread the word of change. By the time they've spent a fortune on their programme, a huge part of the UK population will have been mobilised using simple techniques such as this Spending Challenge one.
I feel that so often we get lost in the theory and concepts, and the need to develop eloquent (and controllable) solutions, that we overlook the most simple mechanisms, complemented with speed and pragmatism.
Well done HM Treasury for getting the Spending Challenge social movement underway.
This is crowdsourcing at its most pragmatic. I doubt they spent more than £1000 setting up the system. The addition of a rating system gives it power and meaning. Especially as anyone can rate any idea - not just those in power.
In the same month this is launched I've worked with a variety of public sector teams who range from denying the existence of technology, denying they have permission to use anything remotely interfacing the public (or their staff) unless there are controls, or want to create their own thing. Probably worse, some are still working at the level of theory and concept for social movements, mobilisation and networking, running workshops and developing programmes to spread the word of change. By the time they've spent a fortune on their programme, a huge part of the UK population will have been mobilised using simple techniques such as this Spending Challenge one.
I feel that so often we get lost in the theory and concepts, and the need to develop eloquent (and controllable) solutions, that we overlook the most simple mechanisms, complemented with speed and pragmatism.
Well done HM Treasury for getting the Spending Challenge social movement underway.
Friday, 2 July 2010
Crowdsourcing shifts us from what to how
"to improve" is a verb. A verb is a "doing word". Improvement is action. Collecting and storing examples of good practice is a displacement for action. Huge knowledge banks where the thing of the 1980's (yes, thirty years ago) and by the late 1990's were largely discredited as a mechanism for helping spread good practice. The few organisations that did manage to leverage the codified knowledge, did so because they institutionalised through clever IT systems, the search and sharing of knowledge. Note, this sharing was linked to the individuals with the ideas and not odd pieces of extracted information. The personal relationship mattered.
What does the modern day action to improve look like when we are aiming to avoid the reinvention of wheels?
a) We crowdsource. We call on the community for their ideas. However, asking for and then collating ideas is not crowd sourcing - it is a cheap way to create an ineffective database. Crowdsourcing works when participants rate ideas, decide which is best. Many organisational leaders fear crowdsourcing because the answers may not be what they want.
b) We get more active in presenting the problems and then asking people to provide answers - as an open call. The joy in this approach is it is not limiting the solution to the thinking and mindsets of employees. This has been around for at least a decade and the are many websites and systems to help make this happen. Some organisations even provide all their data so others, not part of the organisation, can use it to help solve the problem. The first step to making this happen s to give up control and to ask for help.
In the UK we are experiencing the crowdsourcing as the Government has set up systems to ask for ideas on solving problems. I like the way they are asking the citizens on ideas and not restricting it to Government employees only.
Crowdsourcing gives the vote to the hungry consumers and nto to the turkeys.
Some Crowdsourcing links and resources
1. Wikipedia: for starters
2. IdeaScale is where you can set up your own Q&A and ranking community for innovations. There are hundreds of existing web applications for crowdsourcing so if you are spending money creating your own then let's hope there is am excellent reason for doing so.
3. Fevote - place to make suggestions and get votes on them (great for research and tests of change)
4. Kluster: - stunning group decision-making tool
5. Good blog post on crowd sourcing resources
What does the modern day action to improve look like when we are aiming to avoid the reinvention of wheels?
a) We crowdsource. We call on the community for their ideas. However, asking for and then collating ideas is not crowd sourcing - it is a cheap way to create an ineffective database. Crowdsourcing works when participants rate ideas, decide which is best. Many organisational leaders fear crowdsourcing because the answers may not be what they want.
b) We get more active in presenting the problems and then asking people to provide answers - as an open call. The joy in this approach is it is not limiting the solution to the thinking and mindsets of employees. This has been around for at least a decade and the are many websites and systems to help make this happen. Some organisations even provide all their data so others, not part of the organisation, can use it to help solve the problem. The first step to making this happen s to give up control and to ask for help.
In the UK we are experiencing the crowdsourcing as the Government has set up systems to ask for ideas on solving problems. I like the way they are asking the citizens on ideas and not restricting it to Government employees only.
Crowdsourcing gives the vote to the hungry consumers and nto to the turkeys.
Some Crowdsourcing links and resources
1. Wikipedia: for starters
2. IdeaScale is where you can set up your own Q&A and ranking community for innovations. There are hundreds of existing web applications for crowdsourcing so if you are spending money creating your own then let's hope there is am excellent reason for doing so.
3. Fevote - place to make suggestions and get votes on them (great for research and tests of change)
4. Kluster: - stunning group decision-making tool
5. Good blog post on crowd sourcing resources
Thursday, 3 June 2010
4 kinds of relationships
So much of spreading good, known and evidenced practice is based on social connections and relationships. John Maxwell has four ways in which relationships can be categorised.
1. Some people add things to life (we enjoy them) +
2. Some people subtract something from life (we tolerate them) -
3. Some people multiply something in life (we value them) *
4. Some people divide something in life (we avoid them) /
If a key role of the person who group is trying to influence others to change their behaviour then it might be useful to reflect on the relationship between the "spreader/pusher" and the "adopter/puller".
There are some people I avoid (4) and I am unlikely to even receive the messages they are pushing out, let alone act on them. In a similar vein, those I tolerate (2) I will probably put them low on my priority list and will be fairly sceptical about what they put out. Whether I adopt anything they are pushing will be a matter of personal judgement.
On the other hand, those whose company I enjoy (1) I will probably get to hear a lot about what they are saying, thinking about and pushing in my direction. I will take their information in quite quickly, though may still toss the ideas about before making any changes to my behaviour.
Those I value I will probably not wait for them to send me information. I will be finding ways to connect, listen out carefully and will most likely shift my behaviour quite quickly when they send out behaviour related messages.
So which types of relationships are you creating and endorsing?
1. Some people add things to life (we enjoy them) +
2. Some people subtract something from life (we tolerate them) -
3. Some people multiply something in life (we value them) *
4. Some people divide something in life (we avoid them) /
If a key role of the person who group is trying to influence others to change their behaviour then it might be useful to reflect on the relationship between the "spreader/pusher" and the "adopter/puller".
There are some people I avoid (4) and I am unlikely to even receive the messages they are pushing out, let alone act on them. In a similar vein, those I tolerate (2) I will probably put them low on my priority list and will be fairly sceptical about what they put out. Whether I adopt anything they are pushing will be a matter of personal judgement.
On the other hand, those whose company I enjoy (1) I will probably get to hear a lot about what they are saying, thinking about and pushing in my direction. I will take their information in quite quickly, though may still toss the ideas about before making any changes to my behaviour.
Those I value I will probably not wait for them to send me information. I will be finding ways to connect, listen out carefully and will most likely shift my behaviour quite quickly when they send out behaviour related messages.
So which types of relationships are you creating and endorsing?
Monday, 31 May 2010
Social Movements and Healthcare; a confused application of theory?
I am perplexed by the rhetoric of applying social movement theory to healthcare. It seems strange to me that those in charge, with the power are creating what they they believe are "social movements". I suspect they are usefully taking some learning from social movements and then applying this learning to improve both project and programme management performance. This is a good demonstration of organisational learning and improved programme management.
My understanding of a social movement is it is started by the powerless, the forgotten voices. These people are united by a common cause and willingness to belong of a group identity. They push against those with power because they believe what the transformation change they desire is morally important, just and necessary. Anyone who opposes the social movement is seen as corrupt and unjust. The social movement wants to change the laws, wants political and social impact.
So when the power-full start to talk about creating a social movement I am a bit at sea. Yes, leaders can be trained to tell stories and speak with more passion (good leadership practice), though I believe the passion that social movement leaders exhibit is one of deep moral justice. This cannot be implanted into someone's heart or soul (let alone by those who hold the power)
Social movements are not narrow interest groups. They seek social transformation. An example in England right now is the EDL (English Defence League). They exhibit all the signs of a social movement. They are organised into divisions, protest, annoy those in power, and have a strong personal sense of what they believe is right.
How do social movements start? I suspect they are not created in the corporate boardroom. Certain events may trigger one as the publicity garners activist together. It could also be a compelling leader who knows how to speak to their people. Or a new generation that no longer wants the status quo. Teachers, writers and evangelists have also triggered movements.
Those power-full who want to create social movements are also perhaps ignoring the messiness and darker side of the process. Movements push against something. It is often not pleasant to be part of a process where the push against the established way of thinking results in a physical, intellectual and emotional battering. However, it is this side of the movements that provides their success. There is a persistency that only passion can bring. Taking just the nice bits and ignoring the other consequences is irresponsible.
Here are some tips if you are the power-full and want to try and benefit from the power of social movements.
a) find out who is doing what already on your area of interest. Can you support, in the background, so they move from being an interest group to something bigger (note, you work through them and don't enrol them into your own power-based program)
b) find out who the leaders are that people listen to, and support them to get their message heard. You will recognise a social movement leader when their rhetoric gets under your skin...
c) build in the story telling and organising principles of social movements into your own programmes, but know, always, that the goals of the program are yours from the power-full and may not be those of the grassroots.
d) If you are a corporation or large organisation then the grassroots are your customers - not your employees
e) when you feel a push against your power, stop, think and listen. In there may be the seeds of the same change you want, just presented differently.
Leave your comments below
My understanding of a social movement is it is started by the powerless, the forgotten voices. These people are united by a common cause and willingness to belong of a group identity. They push against those with power because they believe what the transformation change they desire is morally important, just and necessary. Anyone who opposes the social movement is seen as corrupt and unjust. The social movement wants to change the laws, wants political and social impact.
So when the power-full start to talk about creating a social movement I am a bit at sea. Yes, leaders can be trained to tell stories and speak with more passion (good leadership practice), though I believe the passion that social movement leaders exhibit is one of deep moral justice. This cannot be implanted into someone's heart or soul (let alone by those who hold the power)
Social movements are not narrow interest groups. They seek social transformation. An example in England right now is the EDL (English Defence League). They exhibit all the signs of a social movement. They are organised into divisions, protest, annoy those in power, and have a strong personal sense of what they believe is right.
How do social movements start? I suspect they are not created in the corporate boardroom. Certain events may trigger one as the publicity garners activist together. It could also be a compelling leader who knows how to speak to their people. Or a new generation that no longer wants the status quo. Teachers, writers and evangelists have also triggered movements.
Those power-full who want to create social movements are also perhaps ignoring the messiness and darker side of the process. Movements push against something. It is often not pleasant to be part of a process where the push against the established way of thinking results in a physical, intellectual and emotional battering. However, it is this side of the movements that provides their success. There is a persistency that only passion can bring. Taking just the nice bits and ignoring the other consequences is irresponsible.
Here are some tips if you are the power-full and want to try and benefit from the power of social movements.
a) find out who is doing what already on your area of interest. Can you support, in the background, so they move from being an interest group to something bigger (note, you work through them and don't enrol them into your own power-based program)
b) find out who the leaders are that people listen to, and support them to get their message heard. You will recognise a social movement leader when their rhetoric gets under your skin...
c) build in the story telling and organising principles of social movements into your own programmes, but know, always, that the goals of the program are yours from the power-full and may not be those of the grassroots.
d) If you are a corporation or large organisation then the grassroots are your customers - not your employees
e) when you feel a push against your power, stop, think and listen. In there may be the seeds of the same change you want, just presented differently.
Leave your comments below
Monday, 22 March 2010
How Twitter can help engage staff by increasing transparency & trust
If you're playing Buzz Word Bingo in the healthcare at the moment then you will know that "Engagement" is a hot word. Nothing new there you say, it's been a consistent buzz word for the last 10 years at least.
Well, there's something new on the horizon. It's a bit scary, you may not like it and it seems to be one way to practically engage some staff. More than that it moves from a passive engagement to an interactive process, which through its transparency leads to increased trust.
Let me explain using a very current example. It is 22nd March 2010 and British Airways is on day 3 of a strike, with another series of strike days looming. It's a mess really, for all involved. As with many crises it's interesting to learn from how companies and individuals manage them to best effect.
I've been following @British_Airways on Twitter. The updates are immediate and a complement to the less frequent and more formal announcements on their website. When I start seeing a string of complaints - or compliments - on Twitter I get a sense of what is going on. I have no idea how many people they have handling the Twitter stream (probably only 1 - if so they need a prize for multitasking while keeping their head about them..). More important than the pattern on Twitter is the manner in which cries of despair, shrieks of delight, moans and queries are being handled. All in public and all is transparent for us all to see. When it gets to personal details they request a DM (direct message). As long as the nice BA person at the end of the Twitter Stream keeps calm I will keep calm. And I'm starting to trust they really will get me to my next destination.
Some hints and tips for using Twitter to engage with staff and customers, especially in a crisis
1) Ensure your Twitter stream is managed by a human and not a computer. Endless feeds of your website will not engage me and will most likely reduce my trust in you.
2) The 3 R's of Regret, Reason and Remedy go down very well. A 140 character Regret is enough of an apology. A quick Reason helps me understand the issue and I then know you also understand what I mean. Then a masterful 140 character or less Remedy will make my day. I don't need 3 page letters within which we all lose the point.
3) Be open. Speaking up in front of the crowd means you need to stick with your tone of voice and content of your speeches. If I know most fo the talk is going on where I can hear it then I will be more trusting. An advantage of the Twitter feed is I can scroll back quite a few days ago to see how the conversation has been going.
4) Allow me to discover people like me. Although the official stuff is importnat, I also like to engage with people like myself. I need to be able to do this without you controlling the place, person and pace./ On Twitter I can see who else is having a problem like me and can contact them to see if they, for example, discovered any easy solution.
Well, there's something new on the horizon. It's a bit scary, you may not like it and it seems to be one way to practically engage some staff. More than that it moves from a passive engagement to an interactive process, which through its transparency leads to increased trust.
Let me explain using a very current example. It is 22nd March 2010 and British Airways is on day 3 of a strike, with another series of strike days looming. It's a mess really, for all involved. As with many crises it's interesting to learn from how companies and individuals manage them to best effect.
I've been following @British_Airways on Twitter. The updates are immediate and a complement to the less frequent and more formal announcements on their website. When I start seeing a string of complaints - or compliments - on Twitter I get a sense of what is going on. I have no idea how many people they have handling the Twitter stream (probably only 1 - if so they need a prize for multitasking while keeping their head about them..). More important than the pattern on Twitter is the manner in which cries of despair, shrieks of delight, moans and queries are being handled. All in public and all is transparent for us all to see. When it gets to personal details they request a DM (direct message). As long as the nice BA person at the end of the Twitter Stream keeps calm I will keep calm. And I'm starting to trust they really will get me to my next destination.
Some hints and tips for using Twitter to engage with staff and customers, especially in a crisis
1) Ensure your Twitter stream is managed by a human and not a computer. Endless feeds of your website will not engage me and will most likely reduce my trust in you.
2) The 3 R's of Regret, Reason and Remedy go down very well. A 140 character Regret is enough of an apology. A quick Reason helps me understand the issue and I then know you also understand what I mean. Then a masterful 140 character or less Remedy will make my day. I don't need 3 page letters within which we all lose the point.
3) Be open. Speaking up in front of the crowd means you need to stick with your tone of voice and content of your speeches. If I know most fo the talk is going on where I can hear it then I will be more trusting. An advantage of the Twitter feed is I can scroll back quite a few days ago to see how the conversation has been going.
4) Allow me to discover people like me. Although the official stuff is importnat, I also like to engage with people like myself. I need to be able to do this without you controlling the place, person and pace./ On Twitter I can see who else is having a problem like me and can contact them to see if they, for example, discovered any easy solution.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)