I am borrowing again from Amantha Imber at Inventium because I actually tried this in a Create and Innovate workshop and it worked beautifully!
How many times have you been in a meeting and someone has piped up and said, we are going to brainstorm, and you either think oh no not again or right, I have to turn on the brainstorming part of my brain and hope it works...
There is a chapter in one of Dr Amantha Imber's books titled Brainstorming is Bollocks. It's based on the idea that if you don't have a great idea or at least think you have a great idea, you will be more inclined to keep your mouth shut at any brain storming session! What if you sound stupid, or sound like you have no idea, or worse still - make a mistake!! Shudder! Dread! Cringe!
Or - what if what you are feeling is inhibited or pressured? Haven't we already established several times over that we get our greatest inspirations or best ideas when we are in a relatively neutral, even quiet thinking space - you know - shower, just before we nod off, riding a bike, on a walk etc. etc. etc.
Let's face it - some people don't generate their best ideas in a group scenario.
That's where Shifting comes in.
This was apparently developed by Robert Epstein from Harvard University (want a great resource - go to http://drrobertepstein.com/downloads/CREATIVITY_FOR_CRISES-e-booklet-c_2009-Dr._Robert_Epstein.pdf). Shifting combines individual AND group idea development and goes like this...
1. Work on the idea/problem individually
2. Work in a group building on the individually generated ideas
3. Work again generating individual ideas
4. Build on these new individually generated ideas
If you want a bit more detail you'll have to get the book by Dr Imber -http://www.thecreativityformula.com/author.html
So in a controlled study, with a traditional brain storming control group and a shifting group, Epstein found that the shifting group generated more ideas and broader ideas.
The shifting concept encourages continued discussion around the ideas generated. These discussions can take place with friends or colleagues or both, and actually give permission for the ideas to grow. You aren't locked into an answer. The idea is fluid. The idea continues to morph into a solution - and after all, isn't that what we are after from Brain Storming Sessions?
As I said, I tried it in a workshop! Instead of coming away with a list of mediocre ideas and solutions - we came up with a series of actions. I'll let you know how things develop...
Sunday, 2 September 2012
Friday, 3 August 2012
How Effective is Micro Management
Well I had a little chuckle to myself as I headed to Wikipedia for a definition of micromanagement. Chuckle soon turned to choke as I read it, eyes widening and mouth gaping! I shuddered...it was spot on...see for yourself (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micromanagement). And here is another comment those who have been micromanaged will certainly relate to...micromanagers risk disempowering their colleagues. They ruin their colleagues' confidence, hurt their performance, and frustrate them to the point where they quit... resonating with anyone?
There has been plenty written about micromanagement and still I can't seem to find much on any benefits! The benefit of micromanagement most written about is advice to a micromanager to micromanage themselves out of micromanaging everyone else! I think for me the m word just replaced the f word!
So how does it feel to be on the receiving end of micromanagement? Frustrating, annoying, debilitating, exhausting, inhibiting, suffocating, strangulating....And what effect does it have on productivity? It's stifles all creativity and innovation, promotes tentative behaviour, encourages lack lustre performance, disengages employees, destroys confidence, splits teams, promotes an environment of anger and distrust - need I go on?
Why would you micromanage if these are results of micromanagement? If you are Richard Branson or Steve Jobs and you have the ability to see both the big picture (otherwise known as macro management) and take notes to improve the detail but get the balance of delivery right and therefore your employees don't feel like you are hovering over their every call, their every email, their every move - then it might be OK to micromanage. And unless you want to go from Productive to Disempowering in 5 seconds - make sure you can do both!
Innovation requires risk taking! It means taking an existing rule and bending it to create a new one. It means support and trust and empowerment and fun and achievement and nurturing. It's a no brainer that this won't happen under micromanagement.
To those of you who experience positives at work - go forth and innovate and make sensational contributions to your world. To those at the mercy of micromanagers - somethings gotta give - make sure it's not your sanity or your health...
There has been plenty written about micromanagement and still I can't seem to find much on any benefits! The benefit of micromanagement most written about is advice to a micromanager to micromanage themselves out of micromanaging everyone else! I think for me the m word just replaced the f word!
So how does it feel to be on the receiving end of micromanagement? Frustrating, annoying, debilitating, exhausting, inhibiting, suffocating, strangulating....And what effect does it have on productivity? It's stifles all creativity and innovation, promotes tentative behaviour, encourages lack lustre performance, disengages employees, destroys confidence, splits teams, promotes an environment of anger and distrust - need I go on?
Why would you micromanage if these are results of micromanagement? If you are Richard Branson or Steve Jobs and you have the ability to see both the big picture (otherwise known as macro management) and take notes to improve the detail but get the balance of delivery right and therefore your employees don't feel like you are hovering over their every call, their every email, their every move - then it might be OK to micromanage. And unless you want to go from Productive to Disempowering in 5 seconds - make sure you can do both!
Innovation requires risk taking! It means taking an existing rule and bending it to create a new one. It means support and trust and empowerment and fun and achievement and nurturing. It's a no brainer that this won't happen under micromanagement.
To those of you who experience positives at work - go forth and innovate and make sensational contributions to your world. To those at the mercy of micromanagers - somethings gotta give - make sure it's not your sanity or your health...
Friday, 20 July 2012
Best Thing Since Sliced Bread
Bread has been a staple part of the human diet since the Neolithic era...so it's been around for a long time. Bread has been used in religious ceremonies and festivals and culturally, countries can be identified by the type of bread they serve. And once bartering and then monetary exchange began - bread was baked, sold and served in loaves. This continued for many many years until...
In the 1900's an inventor and jeweller (you need to be creative in order to be innovative), Otto Frederick Rohwedder, started toying with the idea of a bread slicing machine. Up until this time, bread was sometimes sliced at the place of purchase, but usually by the lady of the house when the bread made it home. Actually it was also very common for bread to baked by the lady of the house in the house!
Back to the jeweller - Rohwedder owned three jewellery stores, which he sold to raise the capitol to develop his idea of a bread slicer. According to sources, his first prototype failed - it may have had something to do with the fact that the bread was held together by metal pins!
In 1917 he had another set back - the factory that was to produce the first bread slicing machine was burnt down along with the blue prints and the prototype. For the next ten years Otto worked as an investment agent and gathered a few of his own investors along the way.
By 1927 Rohwedder had developed a prototype that not only sliced bread but wrapped it as well, ensuring the bread was kept fresh. He managed to convince a baker friend of his to use the machine and on July 7 1928 bread was sliced and wrapped commercially for the first time. By the way - it was called Sliced Kleen Maid Bread...
I must admit to quietly giggling when I read some of the promotion used at the time;
the housewife can well experience a thrill of pleasure when she first sees a loaf of this bread, with each slice the exact couterpart of its fellows
Priceless! Of course sliced bread then gave a much needed boost to the sales of the pop up toaster which had been invented a couple of years earlier by Charles Strite. I suppose that could be described as the best thing since sliced bread...
In the 1900's an inventor and jeweller (you need to be creative in order to be innovative), Otto Frederick Rohwedder, started toying with the idea of a bread slicing machine. Up until this time, bread was sometimes sliced at the place of purchase, but usually by the lady of the house when the bread made it home. Actually it was also very common for bread to baked by the lady of the house in the house!
Back to the jeweller - Rohwedder owned three jewellery stores, which he sold to raise the capitol to develop his idea of a bread slicer. According to sources, his first prototype failed - it may have had something to do with the fact that the bread was held together by metal pins!
In 1917 he had another set back - the factory that was to produce the first bread slicing machine was burnt down along with the blue prints and the prototype. For the next ten years Otto worked as an investment agent and gathered a few of his own investors along the way.
By 1927 Rohwedder had developed a prototype that not only sliced bread but wrapped it as well, ensuring the bread was kept fresh. He managed to convince a baker friend of his to use the machine and on July 7 1928 bread was sliced and wrapped commercially for the first time. By the way - it was called Sliced Kleen Maid Bread...
I must admit to quietly giggling when I read some of the promotion used at the time;
the housewife can well experience a thrill of pleasure when she first sees a loaf of this bread, with each slice the exact couterpart of its fellows
Priceless! Of course sliced bread then gave a much needed boost to the sales of the pop up toaster which had been invented a couple of years earlier by Charles Strite. I suppose that could be described as the best thing since sliced bread...
The Root of the Problem
It's a no brainer really - isn't this what we all want - to get to the root of a problem? Makes me wonder why then, there is such avoidance at times to doing just that. Amantha Imber from Inventium spoke about this during a webinar a couple of weeks ago. LOVED her examples so I am going to share one of them here - but all credit there - to Amantha. Check out the Inventium Website - they are doing awesome work in the creativity arena. They are after all based in Melbourne!!!
So take the Washington Monument. It's the world's tallest obelisk, built to commemorate General George Washington. It also lines up with the Lincoln Memorial and the Capitol and the Whitehouse...
Problem: The Washington Memorial was attracting too many pigeons, who were pooping too much on the monument which meant that harsh chemicals were needed to clean the monument because you can't have a US monument with poop all over it! Instead of investigating another, less abrasive cleaner, someone had a light bulb moment and decided to investigate what it was that attracted the pigeons to the monument in the first place. Imagine an obelisk, a really tall needle type structure...not exactly an ideal place for a pigeon to rest or nest - not when compared with an abandoned building or even a used one for that matter.
The root problem investigators discovered the birds were in fact attracted by spiders - lots of spiders - that also liked to chill around the Washington Monument. But why I hear you ask were there lots of spiders there? Because of the moths of course - a gourmet dining delicacy (to a spider at least) that turned up every evening when the monument was lit up for the benefit of all the tourists. SO - at the root of the problem were the lights!
Solution: Turn the lights on a few hours later. Benefits: Less attracting light = less moths = less spiders = les pigeons = less poop! Reminds of the old lady who swallowed the bird to catch the spider to catch the fly...
This theory can be applied to all aspects of life - workplace scenarios, relationships and health - as a matter of fact, there are many people now who believe in treating the root of the health problem and not just the symptom...
So take the Washington Monument. It's the world's tallest obelisk, built to commemorate General George Washington. It also lines up with the Lincoln Memorial and the Capitol and the Whitehouse...
Problem: The Washington Memorial was attracting too many pigeons, who were pooping too much on the monument which meant that harsh chemicals were needed to clean the monument because you can't have a US monument with poop all over it! Instead of investigating another, less abrasive cleaner, someone had a light bulb moment and decided to investigate what it was that attracted the pigeons to the monument in the first place. Imagine an obelisk, a really tall needle type structure...not exactly an ideal place for a pigeon to rest or nest - not when compared with an abandoned building or even a used one for that matter.
The root problem investigators discovered the birds were in fact attracted by spiders - lots of spiders - that also liked to chill around the Washington Monument. But why I hear you ask were there lots of spiders there? Because of the moths of course - a gourmet dining delicacy (to a spider at least) that turned up every evening when the monument was lit up for the benefit of all the tourists. SO - at the root of the problem were the lights!
Solution: Turn the lights on a few hours later. Benefits: Less attracting light = less moths = less spiders = les pigeons = less poop! Reminds of the old lady who swallowed the bird to catch the spider to catch the fly...
This theory can be applied to all aspects of life - workplace scenarios, relationships and health - as a matter of fact, there are many people now who believe in treating the root of the health problem and not just the symptom...
Monday, 16 July 2012
The consumption of assumptions
Creativity can be consumed by assumptions.
Took part in a great webinar a week or so ago. Amantha Imber from Melbourne based company Inventium was talking about innovation and the topic swung around to assumptions. Amantha believes that assumptions can actually toll the death bell for creativity. Why? Because assumptions have the ability to "fence in thinking". At that point I had a eureka moment. Everyone from big business operators to solo operators "assume" outcomes one way or another when attempting to create. The discussion continued with some sound advice - "one way to beat the assumption monster is to identify just what (the assumptions) are and crush them".
Took part in a great webinar a week or so ago. Amantha Imber from Melbourne based company Inventium was talking about innovation and the topic swung around to assumptions. Amantha believes that assumptions can actually toll the death bell for creativity. Why? Because assumptions have the ability to "fence in thinking". At that point I had a eureka moment. Everyone from big business operators to solo operators "assume" outcomes one way or another when attempting to create. The discussion continued with some sound advice - "one way to beat the assumption monster is to identify just what (the assumptions) are and crush them".
And how is this for a great example of how assumptions limit us? Think toilet paper. Think cardboard roll in every single brand of toilet paper that has come out for the last umpteen years...got it? Assume that cardboard roll has to be there right? Makes it easy to put the toilet paper on the toilet holder yeah? WRONG. The Scotts brand have just crushed the assumption. There now exists a toilet paper without a cardboard roll. Just imagine how many trees have just been saved!
Want another example? Think mobile phone pre iPhone. It had been assumed that a phone had to have a certain number of buttons in order to function effectively and dial numbers. Apple killed that assumption in a big way...
But - How do I stop making assumptions? I hear you ask. Amantha suggests that a good way of stopping assumptions from getting in the way of a great innovation would be to list them - as many as possible - and then ask - What if the opposite was true? The suggestions is that this question is enough to stimulate creative thinking and put the focussing on making the innovation possible, rather than impossible.
Common negative assumptions that get in the way could be centred around budget, staff, fear of change, risk aversion supervisors, micro management - I am sure you can come up with several more to add to the list. When they are brought up at meetings simply combat them - bring out the armour - come out swinging, tackle them head on, say them out loud, repeat them - THEN ask - What if the opposite is true? Well - what if it is?
Friday, 13 July 2012
When I grow up I wanna be a Futurist...
Funny how you think about what you want to be when you grow up. At 55 you think I might know.
How dull would that be? I am supposed to be thinking about retirement…spare me!
So…sorry Mum I still don’t know.
But one of these would be fun.
Enjoy…
http://worldfuturetrends.tumblr.com/post/26977197756/futuristlab-the-role-of-futurists
How dull would that be? I am supposed to be thinking about retirement…spare me!
So…sorry Mum I still don’t know.
But one of these would be fun.
Enjoy…
http://worldfuturetrends.tumblr.com/post/26977197756/futuristlab-the-role-of-futurists
Sunday, 1 July 2012
Customer Service - Solutions or Outcomes
I have noticed a huge shift in the customer service being rolled out at Coles. Not that I want this to be an advertisement for a large supermarket chain (I try to support the independents whenever I can) - but they have very much lifted their customer service game.
Which reminded me, in a very round about sort of way, about a chapter I had read in the book (hardcopy not e-book) Managing Creativity and Innovation, Practical Strategies to Encourage Creativity published by Harvard Business Press.
We spend a lot of time surveying customers, asking for feedback about satisfaction levels, what they would like to see improved, customer service, product suggestions etc.etc.etc. I have been asked to complete so many on-line surveys that the whole idea has become quite passe to me (but I still fill them in - you just never know). I often wonder what they will actually do with the results and whether my time has been appreciated. And I have read so many stats that have been interpreted so many different ways that I wonder at their interpretation and validity anyway. The truth is always in the pudding as they say - what are the resulting changes?
And I wonder if we spend time truly listening to what people say. Indulge me for yet another moment while I go on about the difference between hearing and listening. You see hearing is a physical process involving sound waves, auditory canals, villi in the ear canals, brain pathways - I am sure you get the picture. Listening on the other hand is paying attention to, heeding.
And another thing, do we really want to ask our potential clients/customers what products or services they want? A common retort here is that had the inventor of the automobile asked people of that time what they wanted at the time in terms of transport, the reply would have been a faster horse!
The above mentioned chapter suggests instead that we should be asking our customers/clients about the outcomes they desire. What is it that we can offer that would make life better for them?
Tony Ulwick is the founder of Strategyn, a company formed around the principle of Outcome Driven Innovation. He talks in terms of outcomes. He uses as his example the case of music storage. Had you asked music lovers how they wanted to store their music, just a few short years ago, their replies would have included larger CD racks, alphabetical systems, cases that don't crack or break and so on. These are all solutions...
An outcomes approach on the other hand would include suggestions such as access to a lot of songs, a system that resisted damage to the source of the music, something that took up minimal storage space and other similar ideas. Ulwick suggests that this is the difference between outcome and solution based thinking.
Of course, the task doesn't end with the collection of the desired outcomes...the next step could involve prioritising the outcomes according to their importance to customers, and then realising those outcomes into the business or organisation.
BUT - and there is always a but - we also have to beware of remaining too close/loyal to the thinking and ideas of current clients/customers. The risk indicated is the potential to limit innovative options. It's a balancing act really. Thanks goodness the research is out about Trusting Your Gut Instincts...
Which reminded me, in a very round about sort of way, about a chapter I had read in the book (hardcopy not e-book) Managing Creativity and Innovation, Practical Strategies to Encourage Creativity published by Harvard Business Press.
We spend a lot of time surveying customers, asking for feedback about satisfaction levels, what they would like to see improved, customer service, product suggestions etc.etc.etc. I have been asked to complete so many on-line surveys that the whole idea has become quite passe to me (but I still fill them in - you just never know). I often wonder what they will actually do with the results and whether my time has been appreciated. And I have read so many stats that have been interpreted so many different ways that I wonder at their interpretation and validity anyway. The truth is always in the pudding as they say - what are the resulting changes?
And I wonder if we spend time truly listening to what people say. Indulge me for yet another moment while I go on about the difference between hearing and listening. You see hearing is a physical process involving sound waves, auditory canals, villi in the ear canals, brain pathways - I am sure you get the picture. Listening on the other hand is paying attention to, heeding.
And another thing, do we really want to ask our potential clients/customers what products or services they want? A common retort here is that had the inventor of the automobile asked people of that time what they wanted at the time in terms of transport, the reply would have been a faster horse!
The above mentioned chapter suggests instead that we should be asking our customers/clients about the outcomes they desire. What is it that we can offer that would make life better for them?
Tony Ulwick is the founder of Strategyn, a company formed around the principle of Outcome Driven Innovation. He talks in terms of outcomes. He uses as his example the case of music storage. Had you asked music lovers how they wanted to store their music, just a few short years ago, their replies would have included larger CD racks, alphabetical systems, cases that don't crack or break and so on. These are all solutions...
An outcomes approach on the other hand would include suggestions such as access to a lot of songs, a system that resisted damage to the source of the music, something that took up minimal storage space and other similar ideas. Ulwick suggests that this is the difference between outcome and solution based thinking.
Of course, the task doesn't end with the collection of the desired outcomes...the next step could involve prioritising the outcomes according to their importance to customers, and then realising those outcomes into the business or organisation.
BUT - and there is always a but - we also have to beware of remaining too close/loyal to the thinking and ideas of current clients/customers. The risk indicated is the potential to limit innovative options. It's a balancing act really. Thanks goodness the research is out about Trusting Your Gut Instincts...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)