The vanilla problem

image

Vanilla is the dried pod of a rare orchard and the second most expensive spice after saffron due to the huge amount of labour in its production. Vanilla is a truly rich, delicious and subtle spice. Despite its exotic origins, vanilla is a very popular flavour and scent. As a result, vanilla is our usual metaphor for things that are plain, common and ordinary.

I meet a lot of people and organisations who have the ‘vanilla problem’. They have truly exotic skills, unique capabilities and create great value, but they seek to present a common, plain, everyday front to the world. They invest a lot of labour in building their skills but don’t get noticed.  These individuals are competing so hard to fit in and to be like others that they miss the opportunities to stand for something unique.

It can feel safer to take the advice and run with the pack.  However, when you don’t take advantage of your rich difference, you don’t get noticed. You can’t share the other great things that make you uniquely valuable and opportunities are lost.  We don’t love vanilla because it is popular and common.  We love vanilla because it is rich and exotic.

The best way to solve the ‘vanilla problem’ is to start living your unique purpose. Make a dent in the universe. Connect with others who share your point of view. Celebrate the difference of others.  Collaborate with them to realise your goals. Do. Do again.

You can’t tell people that you aren’t vanilla. There’s far too much talk in this world for that to cut through the chatter. You can only show people your difference. Let them feel it.

Celebrate your rich and unique talents in the best way possible. Use them boldy. Use them in pursuit of your purpose.

Beware of small signals

Disruption

Networked disruption often involves exponential change. One of the reasons traditional organisations are challenged by the threat of networked disruption is that they tend to struggle to interpret small changes in their markets.  

Exponential change can see small changes blow out to large scale change while organisations are still trying to determine whether to react. This effect is multiplied if the organisation experiences a lot of volatility in its performance. The impacts of small disruptive competitors might get lost in other movements.  

Often small changes are lost because many companies do not have a complete view of the growth of the industry. The effect is most dangerous for an organisation that may not even factor new disruptive services into its industry definition. These organisation can be quite satisfied with their growth and fail to see the initial market share loss to a small disruptive competitor 

Coming from nowhere

If a smaller competitor, grows exponentially it can quickly explode. Let’s consider the example of a new disruptive competitor that is doubling customer growth every quarter. The new competitor might hit the large companies radar when it finally hits 1% of market share. The next quarter it is at 2%. These numbers might well be able to be explained away as short-term effects or an appropriate outcome for a niche. At 4%, management of the traditional organisation might begin to feel impacts and need to explain the change in the market. However by now they only have 90 days to respond before the disruptive competitor is at 8% and 180 days to 16%.  There are not many organisations or industries that can afford to cede 8%-16% market share to a new competitor having to go through the distracting processes of cutting costs or dealing with capacity in their system.  

Facing disruptive competitors growing exponentially through network effects too many organisations wait to respond until they have to respond. As we have seen in the music industry, photography and newspapers that is often far too late.

The situation is complicated further if the new business model fundamentally changes industry economics. These changes or market share losses may impact cashflow and might bring on issues in financing the business. Adjusting business models and financing under the pressure of disruption can take far longer in a mature business, particularly if the path forward is uncertain.

Beware of small signals

To guard against exponential change from networked competitors, organisations need to adopt a few strategies:

  • use your customer’s market definition, not your own: Your customers ultimately decide who your competitors are. Make sure you understand who they see as viable substitutes. Make sure you are influencing those views. Engage in the networks where your customers are connecting. If a customer would consider that competitor as an option, they need to be on your radar. Make sure your achievement of sales targets and growth is not masking customer share loss.
  • treat small signals with respect:  Take the time to regularly look in the edges of your industry and related industries. Consider startups. Look at home and abroad. Evaluate each new threat with respect and on the assumption that they are as skilled and effective as your team. Assume your competitors are rational and have a path to success.
  • don’t count on barriers to entry: Innovation is about breaking down barriers to entry in markets. Always assume a new competitor is targeting a way around the barriers that have made you safe today.
  • don’t disregard competitors because they are small, underfunded or uneconomic: Once they have traction with your customers, they will have solved these problems.
  • leverage your own networks: start to leverage network effects in your business. How can partners, customers and others help you to grow and beat the threat.
  • build the capability to respond quickly: There is no point working out how to respond quickly once the threat arrives. Build a capability to experiment and respond while you can. Plan scenarios and work through what you would do in each threat. The exact option is unlikely to occur but having worked through the scenario can help the business to recognise the signals and cut the arguments later.

Infrastructure of culture

Culture eats strategy for breakfast – Peter Drucker

Enterprise social networks are a new form of communication in organisations. Culture is the outcome of how we interact. New interactions will change the culture of our organisations over time. Managing culture changes is critical for organisations coping with disruption.

Adam Pisoni recently quoted a comment I made at Disrupt.Sydney that enterprise social networks are ‘infrastructure of culture’. The comment was building on Kai Riemer’s talk at Disrupt.Sydney that technology that acts as infrastructure (of connection, of transportation or of communication) is open to novel uses and depends on users to make new sense of the infrastructure. Kai was drawing a distinction with our traditional tool based view of technology where it exists for a specific purpose. This point highlights one reason why we often have an inability to forecast where new communication technologies lead us in terms of changes in interactions and societal change.

Enterprise Social Networking is an Infrastructure for Culture

The culture of an organisations is a sum of the interactions across the organisation. It is the ‘way we do things around here’ or ‘what happens when the CEO is out of the room’.  Culture runs deep and is the outcome of thousands of interactions. Speeches, posters and announcements don’t determine culture. As social animals, people look for guides as to what is acceptable in the stories of the organisation, the daily behaviours of others as they interact and importantly in how moments of crisis or conflict in the community are resolved. What happens when things get uncertain is at the core of the culture of a company.

Disruptive change tests the culture of organisations. Shaped by purpose and values as demonstrated in action, culture has an enormous influence on how the organisation runs and what is possible. Many organisations need new strategies to respond to disruption. However, if your strategy runs counter to your culture you will face challenges and likely fail. In the face of disruption, many organisations have found they simply cannot pivot their strategy because it threatens some deep elements of their culture.

A common goal of launching an enterprise social network to execute a strategy to ‘change  culture’. Looking for more leadership, authenticity, accountability, openness or innovation, organisations assume that the network is a tool to deliver that outcome. These organisations are usually disappointed initially. Culture changes the strategy. All they see at first in the community on their network is their organisation’s current culture, just much more visible than ever before. The good, the bad and the ugly is on display. Even worse, the much vaunted new values from the strategy are often not on display because the community is not yet comfortable with those novel interactions, is waiting for a lead from others or does not accept that they can be arbitrarily imposed from above.

Communication networks are infrastructure, not tools. The change in culture is in the community adopting new behaviours, not the technology. The potential of enterprise social networks to change the culture of organisations occurs over time as the interactions change. Importantly, social networks offer opportunities to accelerate this change.

How do new interactions accelerate change the culture of the organisation?

  • Build common purpose:  Social networks are a place to discuss and connect around purpose. Purpose is not imposed.  It comes out from interactions and work in the organisation. Too often when organisations have a new strategy, it is the executive team who assumes the right to set the purpose and only they understand the context that drives the need for change. A social network allows others to discuss and question this.
  • Empower change agents:  enterprise social networking often appeals to a group of early adopters, your organisational change agents. This group of diverse individuals have been looking for a way to have a larger voice, to connect and to drive change. These early adopters will drive a lot of the initial interactions & innovations.  Their goals are each different but they are often more comfortable with many of the values that organisations seek such as collaboration, openness, innovation and experimentation. The challenge for organisations looking to leverage these individuals to drive change is to authorise their activities and encourage the new interactions in constructive directions. Senior leaders can use their authority to play a key role in ensuring that your network does not become a sub-culture of the broader organisation.
  • Lead and role model: People look for role models and leaders. They will follow their guide in the behaviours that they demonstrate. Build a group of leaders of the community and let them know that they are responsible for fostering constructive interactions. Make sure your hierarchical leaders are playing a positive role and not discouraging change.
  • Share stories:  We learn culture from stories of interactions. Social networks allow us to share those stories in new ways and with new audiences. Encourage story telling and make sure you are looking to draw out the cultural lessons of the stories being told.
  • Make interactions visible:  Social networks are a new medium to see interactions. Remember the majority of people will watch, read and learn. Your culture will be on display and shared more widely than ever before.
  • Create interactions across sub-cultures:  Large organisations are often frustrated by the number of sub-cultures as communities within the organisation develop their own interactions. These sub-cultures often create unresolved conflicts blocking progress. Connect these individuals in one community and let them learn about each others contexts. Building shared purpose, concerns and understanding will build a greater commonality of culture.
  • Create conflict:  If there are values conflicts or other regular interactions driving conflict in your organisation, they will surface in enterprise social networking. The faster you bring these out the sooner culture changes. How you work to resolve these through collaboration will be key to your future culture. Remember it is better to resolve these internally before they leak externally through employees or other partners experiencing the conflicts and sharing them.
  • Allow the creation new interactions:  As infrastructure, an enterprise social network is open to employees, leaders and other participants to create new interactions.  If you encourage experimentation and quickly weed out failures, you will be driving innovation in your culture as each new successful pattern of interaction develops.  Embrace the chaos and you will see rewards as your culture develops.

Communities change culture when they adopt new interactions through the role modelling of others and the support of leaders. Enterprise social networking is an infrastructure to accelerate this process through new interactions and innovation. Disruption often demands rapid changes to organisation’s cultures that have been built up over many, if not hundreds of years. Networking the community within the organisation is critical to enabling the organisation to manage that change.

Empower the Audience

The traditional panel has real limits.  Experiments are required for new formats to address disruptive, adaptive and emergent issues.

Yesterday at Disrupt.SydneyBen Gilchriest, Mani Thiru and I ran an experiment with an Anti-Panel.

Why hold an Anti-Panel?

The traditional panel format is broken when the questions being considered are adaptive, complex or emergent.  A traditional panel can be:

  • Disengaging:  The panel supposedly has all the power, expertise and knowledge.  They deign to answer questions from a large group of supplicants.  The audience sits, listens and watches.   A facilitator often shapes the whole event and dominates the discussion. One person speaks at a time.  The tendency is for people to seek to hold everyone’s attention.
  • Lacking collaboration:  Panellist may or may not build on others’ views.  Debates rarely occur or get explored.  The audience has little chance to collaborate with the panel or each other.
  • Lacking diversity:  Only panellists views get heard. Questions are rationed.  Questioning may be intimidating in a large group. Group think can occur with few views on offer. Panels are often very chosen from a limited demographic of expertise.
  • Narrow in contributions: Discussion is limited to verbal questions and answers.  Other forms of interaction are limited and usually very formal.  Feelings and intuition is disdained.  Shallow, concise and entertaining answers dominate discussion.
  • Focused on a correct answer: Panels are heavily dependant on technical expertise.  There is no room for creativity or experimentation.  Reflection time is not available to any participants
  • Linear:  Panels are always ‘moving on in the interest of time’.  Iteration is limited. 
In line with the spirit of Disrupt.Sydney we set out to disrupt the panel model with something more connected, more collaborative, more adaptive and more open to diverse contributions.

How do you hold an Anti-Panel?

The first change is to make the anti-panellists servants of the conversation.  Instead of an audience, there is a room full of participants working together.  The role of anti-panellists is to facilitate the participants to discuss the issues.

Then you need to open up the format.  We used a structure which ran from the personal to the group, explored a number of contributions (visual, emotional, allowed for movement in the room, etc) and iterated the discussion across:

  • opening: to set a common context, understanding and a little role modelling by the anti-panellists of the openness, flexibility and informality of the approach.
  • individual reflection by the anti-panel & other participants to draw what they found significant.  This used drawing to engage another perspective of reflection and to speed later sharing.
  • small group sharing and discussion of the drawings to draw connections & similarities, explore doubts, questions and differences.  
  • a full room discussion of insights, lessons, actions, new thoughts and other connections.  Explicitly in this conversation we asked and encouraged questions to introduce a discussion of feelings and concerns to explore and to widen the conversation to include domains that had not yet been discussed.
  • closing reflections from the panel of any points of synthesis or intuitions that they have drawn and an open invitation for the participants to share their insights.

I suspect each anti-panel would need to be different to be tailored to its participants, time allowance and topic, so I have deliberately left out further details of time allocation, questions, etc.  We found ours changed as we learned what the participants needed.  We would have liked to have included more leverage of digital capture and sharing in the discussion.  That remains an opportunity for a future anti-panel.  

The anti-panellists played a role as participants in discussion, timekeepers, facilitators through open questioning to draw in additional views and tried to keep a perspective of the whole conversation.  Adaptive leadership questions that explore purposes, concerns, circumstances and that drew reflection on elements of the system proved valuable.

At Disrupt.Sydney, this format worked very well for the discussion on the topics of disruption.  The participant feedback was very positive.  We drew a rich range of perspectives from the participants, allowed the participants to shape the discussion and presented many opportunities to build, draw connections or add other elements to the topic of discussion.

More Experimentation Required

Our experience was a worthwhile first experiment.  More will be learned as others leverage a fundamentally different approach to sharing the expertise of a room full of talented people with the passion to engage in a topic.

Let us know what you change and what you learn from your anti-panel.  Post your experiences in the comments.  Open experimentation, collaboration and iteration can only improve the results.

Credit: Credit for the idea of the anti-panel belongs with Matt Moore who helped us plan the session and was sadly unable to join us in bringing it to life.

What’s your manifesto?

The hardest part of disruption is disrupting yourself – R Ray Wang.

As the Industrial revolution changed society and new communication technologies were born, the western world experienced an age of revolution. Manifestos flew from the printers as advocates for changes in society sought to draw people to their causes and changes to society and economic activity. The passion for manifestos quietened after the shocks of two world wars. By then massive change had occurred to the level of social support, to the structure of the economy and to the power of social classes. Society had adjusted to new social models that mitigated (or in the case of totalitarian states suppressed) issues of the prior disruptions, our corporate business models were relatively static and a long boom drove western and global economies.

A new age of manifestos

We could be entering a new age of manifestos. With new communication technologies, disruption to traditional corporate models and the economic activity, change is required but we are not yet clear on what that change means. In recent weeks we have seen

The new manifesto is personal

If we learn one thing from that last age of manifestos, it should be that nobody should surrender themselves unthinking to a cause. The quote above captures the challenge of this new adaptive age. We need to disrupt ourselves as much as we need to disrupt the organisations, economies and societies we make up.

So what is your manifesto? Your changes are unique. You have a unique purpose. The changes you will drive will need to be social but before you join a movement be clear on what you want to see done. Make sure you are shaping the movement to your causes.

Take some time to reflect but start to write down your own personal manifesto. Feel free to beg, borrow and steal. Practice your new manifesto. Live your new disrupted self.

Adapt and change your manifesto as you learn from the work. Adaptation is not just a challenge for organisations it is a personal challenge. Will you have the capabilities required for the future of work? Will your role and your passions survive the changes ahead? You won’t know unless you adapt, experiment and change yourself.

The more you live your manifesto the clearer it will be, the more power it will have and the better guide it will be for others.

Start today. Others are waiting to see your contribution to the new age of manifestos.

The Responsive Organization Manifesto

I am very honored to be ranked as an influencer and quoted in the manifesto by the Responsive Organization movement. Excited to see so much enthusiasm for making organizations more innovative, more agile, more connected, more focused on customers and community and ultimately more human.

Success of these changes will depend on building new cultures, new capabilities and new leadership.

The Responsive Organization Manifesto

Texting while leading

texting while driving

This morning, a car passed in front of me as I drove through the traffic.  The driver’s head was down looking a phone. An example of a driver taking risks by distracting their attention from a complex system in a rapidly changing environment. A driver who assumes that things aren’t going to change much and that the car can continue on business as usual while their attention is elsewhere. Importantly, they chose to put their attention somewhere that they can’t have much impact while driving a car. 

We know driving and texting is dangerous.  Studies show it impedes performance of drivers more than alcohol.

Do we ever consider how dangerous it is to lead while using a smartphone?

  • Others notice your lack of attention to the issue that was worth your presence and that changes their attitudes and behaviour
  • Things aren’t going to stay the same while you are distracted because the environment is complex and challenging.  That’s why the issue was worth your presence
  • You made the issue more challenging and complex by changing people’s attitudes and behaviour to the issue at hand.
  • Great leadership requires presence and attention to others and to the detail of the situation.
  • Great leadership is purposeful.  Responding to emails, texts and calls is shifting from your agenda to the agenda of others.
  • You can’t usually do much that has a meaningful leadership impact about the emails, texts and calls but you are surrendering a huge leadership impact on the task you have at hand.

So next time you feel tempted to pull out the smartphone while leading, ask yourself:

‘Is it really safe?’

Seek out criticism

An absence of criticism is not a good sign.  Seek out the feedback that you are missing.

If you are not receiving regular criticism, then you may be missing out on valuable feedback.  For a leader or an organisation, a lack of feedback usually means one of three things needs to be checked:

  • Listening to the right people:  Talking to fans and supporters is usually easy.  They approach you and are eager to share their praise.  You may need to seek out critics and the disaffected.  Broaden your conversations and start asking for feedback.  Look at the margins and look for information that is being discarded because it is incomplete, inconsistent or inconvenient.
  • Encouraging feedback: We all recognise the signs of a leader or an organisation that asks for feedback but doesn’t want any criticism.  It can be a simple as praise being recorded by you but all complaints must be put in writing by the other person. People know how to respond with caution when they see those signals.  Make sure that your behaviours, systems and processes encourage and celebrate negative feedback as a learning process.  Show how you have responded positively to negative feedback and made changes.  Otherwise negative feedback will be actively concealed or actively discouraged.
  • Stop pleasing everyone:  You can’t satisfy everyone.  People are dissatisfied with every change and every business. Everyone expect you to have a specific & unique point of view.  There is a real danger that you don’t stand for anything, that you might not be taking enough risks, that you aren’t targeted enough and that you are sitting in the safe middle ground.  Hearing the right criticism is an important sign that you are achieving your specific plan.  Being generally good won’t get you where you want to go. 

Voice is a critical component to guide our actions.  We all need to encourage as much positive and negative feedback as we can.