With the news today about Penske breaking off talks with GM on their deal to buy Saturn, I thought it would be fun to revisit my post on this topic from back in July. Given the over abundance of car brands, and the lack of differentiation in the market, take a look at this idea and see if you want to invest. I really think it could work!
Free advice for GM… er Penske #4
Popularity: 10% [?]
Naive minds find new possibilities
I’m often inspired by my kids. They are my innocence goggles. When I’m stuck on a problem, I can put them on to get truly unbiased views of things I take for granted as an adult. You’ve probably heard the quote from Einstein, “My secret is I remained a child. I always asked the simplest questions. I ask them still.”
The other day I asked my son what air tasted like and he responded by sticking out his tongue to try it. Certainly such innocence can have a down side, so it must be supported and protected. But it is essential as a basis for discovery. So much of what we do as adults leads us to edit or dismiss ideas before they have a chance to be properly “tasted”.
Here, I’m reminded of the great book, Stumbling on Happiness by Daniel Gilbert. In it he describes all kinds of cool research and experiments about how the human brain works. One thing that stood out for me is that we have to gloss over many details of the world just to function. That is, there’s so much going on around us, that our brain has filters that automatically fill in some of what’s real with existing assumptions in favor of more efficient sensory processing.
That works great when you are trying to be efficient, but when you are trying to discover something new, you must look with new eyes and uncover not only your assumptions about what is real, but overcome your perceptions of what’s real.
Try this little experiment that demonstrates how your brain fills in things your eyes can’t see:
Place your mouse pointer on the screen to the right of the JFX logo at the top of my blog (right in front of the word “playing”). Now cover your left eye and look at the JFX logo with your right eye. Gradually move your head closer to the screen until the pointer disappears. Move a little forward and back… see the pointer appear and disappear?
The pointer disappears because there is a blind spot in your eye at the point where your optic nerve is attached. You don’t walk around with empty spots in your field of vision because your brain uses information from around the spot on the retina to construct an appropriate image. Your brain automatically “assumes” what is there and makes you see it. This happens in your memory too. Read the book for more fun examples.
So the point is, our brains are constructed to help us fill in missing information because most of the time that’s a great strategy for us to function successfully in the world. But when you need to solve a difficult problem, it’s better to keep a naive mind. That way you don’t miss the answers that are sitting right in front of you because you are assuming they’ve already been found.
This is not difficult to do, it just takes practice.
Or just hang around a bunch of toddlers and taste some air!
Popularity: 6% [?]
The conventional wisdom on how a team should operate
I’ve been around a lot of teams… and a lot of team building. Enough to be cynical about the whole topic. But something about the potential of people working well together keeps me coming back to explore further.
The famously successful Netflix contest awarding $1 Million to anyone who could solve their movie recommendation problem is a great case to illustrate how creative teams are different than traditional work teams.
The leader of the winning team credits their success to blending different approaches to the problem and coming up with something better. This is one of the things that powers successful design teams at IDEO. That is, teams comprised of diverse perspectives and styles are better at solving complex problems than teams of like-minded, similarly trained members.
One quote in a NY Times article about the Netflix Prize really got my attention:
The sort of sophisticated teamwork deployed in the Netflix contest, it seems, is a tricky business. Having these big collaborations may be great for innovation, but it’s very, very difficult. Out of thousands, you have only two that succeeded. The big lesson for me was that most of those collaborations don’t work.
Tricky maybe, but that’s because much of the conventional wisdom about running a good team is wrong under conditions of uncertainty, not because it’s inherently hard to accomplish. Most people think of teams as a group effort where you divide the workload among a cohesive band of players, led with clear directions from a focused leader. Under this model of teaming, diversity is bad and discontent worse. So with this dominant mindset, it’s no wonder the concept of multidisciplinary teams is so hard to handle.
Given the value created by multidisciplinary teams, there’s a growing body of insights developed by people like Jeff Polzer and Daniel Wilson that show us some of the tricks multidisciplinary teams employ to overcome the barriers of their diversity.
And, if you are working on a creative task or solving a complex problem, the effort pays off. Just ask IDEO.
Here’s some keys to getting multidisciplinary teams to work (pardon the academic lingo, but you’ll get the point)
1. Proactive Self Disclosure: teams effective at solving complex problems must thrive in uncertainty. It’s more functional to share when you are stuck or “don’t know” than it is to pretend you do. Daniel Wilson studied adventure racing teams and found that the “best of the best” quickly share their needs, issues and concerns so the others on the team can rally around them with proper supports and solutions.
2. Conditional Statements: Instead of stating ideas as facts, certainties, or “THE” answer; members of successful problem solving teams share statements with soft edges like, it might be… I’m not sure but… and could it be that? These statements invite others to disagree or add to the comment versus attempt to be persuasive, conclusive and to convince others to go along.
3. Interpersonal Congruence: This means that members of a group view each other the same as they each view themselves (strengths, weaknesses, intentions). Jeff Polzner’s research shows that groups can achieve harmony and produce effective work processes by expressing rather than suppressing the characteristics that make them different.
4. Clarity of Purpose: when all members of a team are clear about the reason they are together, it’s easy for them to “triangulate” away from polarized opinions and use the common purpose to discern the best of each side’s argument. Rather than compromise to reduce conflict, this common purpose (like the Netflix Prize) pushes people to breakthrough ideas.
Popularity: 100% [?]
Stories are a natural way to explain who you are and what you need; and your story helps others connect with you and provide support. In exchange, other people’s stories help you understand what they need and decide if you can help them out. So stories are a great source of connections between people.
As such, you should take great care in sharing your stories and spend time reflecting about them. If you go around saying everything is fine, you are not likely to get a lot of support from others because they’ll assume you don’t need anything. On the other hand, if you are always saying everything is all messed up and you are overwhelmed, it’s like “the boy who cried wolf,” and you will not get much help because people assume their efforts won’t really make a difference for you.
Your story should have gradually more specific versions
Before you lump this post into the “it’s all about me” category of pop culture, consider this: it’s pretty selfish to assume that others will know your story without you offering it. We all know hundreds of people, and keeping track of all of their stories is a complex task. You can make it easier on others by having your own story worked out and sharing it appropriately. And you have to listen and respond to others or you will be seen as a taker, not a partner.
Knowing and sharing your story is not the same as bragging about yourself, this is more about being interesting. I love this blog post by russell davies, where he suggests, to be interesting, be interested.
To get your story together, start by answering a few simple questions:
Think of your story as a nautilus shell with the whole shell being a high level version of you and each compartment being a gradually more specific situational version of you.
Even if you are not sure how to answer one or more of these questions, that tells a lot about who you are and what kind of support you need from others.
Share the answers to these questions in small bits and weave them through your conversations with others… few people really want to hear a long monologue.
Pay attention to how your story comes across to others. Are you always overwhelmed, or frustrated, or stressed out? Over time, people will perceive your self-talk as your personal brand. Be careful that it represents the real you.
An authentic story makes it easier for others to work with and around you, and produces a lot of serendipitous goodness that helps you along your way.
Popularity: 8% [?]