Image via Wikipedia

Below is a blog post from Harvard Business Review by Polly LaBarre. Do you have a list of questions you think about on a regular basis?

• Would my children (or my employees’ children) want to work in a company like mine?
• What ideas are we fighting for?
• What do we stand for (and what are we against)?
• Why does what we do matter?

The Question That Will Change Your Organization
by Polly LaBarre

Some fifteen years ago, in the early days of starting up Fast Company magazine, co-founder Alan Webber shared one of his rules of thumb with me: “A good question beats a good answer.” That pithy wisdom sunk in and took hold immediately.

The first thing you notice when you have your ears pricked for questions is that most people (especially businesspeople) are more interested in presenting solutions, making assertions, and sharing their vision. This isn’t surprising. School programs us to focus on producing the right answer, and the job description of a leader for the last century has basically been “the person with all the answers.”

That’s why it’s so refreshing (and instructive) to spend time with people who lead with questions rather than answers. Why? Why does inquiry beat certainty every time? Here are just three reasons:

1. Questions are a powerful antidote to hubris, which inevitably arises in a culture that celebrates mastery, values decisiveness, and reveres the top guy (or gal). Genuine questions unleash humility, curiosity, even vulnerability. That turns out to be a powerful approach to leadership in a world of expanding complexity, immense challenges and intense change. No single individual can possibly have all of the answers. But an open and curious one can attract more perspectives, surface more possibilities, and enlist more help than one closed off by certitude.

As Vineet Nayar, CEO of the $3.5 billion global IT services firm, HCL Technologies, puts it: “The CEO should be the Chief Question Asker, not the final provider of answers.” He keeps a list of twenty questions and makes time to think about them on a regular (almost daily) basis. He’s asking for trouble when he wonders:

• Should people who create value be governed by people who control it?
• What things do I control that I should not control?
• Could we throw out the entire company rulebook?
• Would my children (or my employees’ children) want to work in a company like mine?
• What would happen if there was no CEO at my company (or at any company in the world)?

He professes not to have the answers, but one thing is certain: the more disruptive the questions, the greater the chance his organization will create the future — rather than be conquered by it.

2. The best questions are the bedrock of all change and creativity. 
Those classics — Why? Why not? What if? — invite possibility rather than doubt. They are fundamentally subversive, disruptive, and playful — and they switch people into the mode required to invent anything new. Even better, anyone can ask these questions (anyone who has ever spent time in the company of a three-year-old understands this). You don’t have to hold a position of authority to ask a powerful question, and the people with the most powerful questions stand to make the most impact.

That was certainly true for Jane Harper, who spent a nearly 30-year career at IBM asking the kinds of questions most people don’t want to touch. In 1999, she dared to ask: “Why would really great people — the best technical and managerial talent in the world — want to come work at IBM?” In an era when every young, gifted programmer, engineer, or entrepreneur’s first instinct was to write their own business plan or head to a fast-growing startup, life as a foot soldier in Big Blue’s global army was a pretty hard sell. Harper understood that great people want to work on exciting, high-impact projects, with a small team, in a dynamic setting. So she created exactly that in a Cambridge,Massachusetts lab and launched a wholly original and powerfully effective internship program called Extreme Blue, which has since grown into a thriving platform for innovation and talent development.

3. Asking good questions trades control for contribution. A question asked and explored as a group (whether that group is a team, a company, or a community) generates more solidarity, engagement, and progress than a proclamation from on high. Spend any amount of time with Zappos CEO Tony Hsieh, whose organization is celebrated for exuding a powerful sense of purpose and passion from every corner, and you’ll hear him repeatedly refer to “the questions we ask ourselves.”

Questions create conversations — and those conversations are how thriving groups think up their future together and stay true to their core. One enduring and powerful question at the heart of Zappos is: “How do we sustain this culture as we grow? How do we stay true to the core and inspire ever more creativity and energy to tackle the future?” That question is actively explored across the organization and even results in a book — the annual Culture Book — which features the “true feelings, thoughts, and opinions of the employees,” who view themselves as vital custodians of that culture.

Of course, there is no one right question, but one of the most productive questions when it comes to engendering a deeply-felt sense of purpose and inspiring the kind of passion that fuels organizations to do extraordinary things is: “What ideas are we fighting for? What do we stand for (and what are we against)? Why does what we do matter?”

The inevitable corollary to that question is: “Are you really who you say you are?” Unless you’re willing to hold a brutally honest and transparent conversation (both inside the organization and beyond) about where you’re living up to your ideas and ideals and where you’re falling down, those values will become meaningless words on the wall.

What’s your question? Share it here and join the Beyond Bureaucracy Challenge to share your stories, ideas, and practices about what it takes to make our organizations more inspiring, open and free.

Polly LaBarre is editorial director of the Management Innovation Exchange

Alan M. Webber has an op-ed in today’s USA Today comparing the disparity in Spanish soccer to the income inequality that’s resulted from Republican fiscal policies. A sample:

This year Spain’s professional soccer league almost closed down. Some 200 Spanish players weren’t paid for several months; by the time a deal was reached, they were owed roughly $70 million in back pay. And about half of Spain’s 40 professional soccer teams are in bankruptcy.

The problem? Think of it as an exercise in Republican economics. That’s right: If you want to see what’s wrong with the way the United States has been handling economic policy, tax policy and employment policy, largely under the guidance of first the George W. Bush administration and more recently the Republican leadership in Congress, you need look no further than the sad story of Spanish soccer.

Spanish soccer collects $800 million in annual revenues. Half that money goes to two teams-Real Madrid and Barcelona-while the other twenty league teams struggle to make ends meet.

Webber says this is reminiscent of growing U.S. inequality. He points to the richest 1% of American earners, whose income increased 176% from 1979-2004. The bottom 20% only saw a 6% wage increase during that period.

If we just raise taxes on the rich, all will be well. “President Clinton raised taxes on the wealthy in 1993…the rich got richer under Clinton, but so did everyone else,” Webber writes.

Raising taxes is in line with the Democratic tradition. Democratic policies help the middle class and provide a safety-net for the poor while Republicans only care about giving tax-cuts to the affluent.

That’s the standard liberal view. Webber attacks Reaganomics, the idea of cutting tax rates to expand the economy and the tax rolls. Liberals call this trickle-down economics and complain the money never trickles down.

This attack misses the point of Reaganomics entirely. Reaganomics focused on 1) cutting government spending, 2) reducing marginal tax rates on income and capital investment, 3) reducing regulations and 4) using monetary policy to squeeze inflation from the economy. It did not highlight income equality. The Bush tax cuts were in line with supply-side philosophy, the underpinning of Reaganomics.

Reaganomics has dominated Republican fiscal policy for thirty years. It helped stifle the stagflation of the 1970s and ushered in a twenty-five year period of unprecedented economic expansion. Sure income inequality grew-but that was a trade-off conservatives accepted in return for a robust economy.

Webber laments the decline of median income during the Bush years. Here, he has a point: Median income was $42,228 in 2001 , the year the tax cut was signed into law; that’s $52,005 in 2010 dollars- and $43,318 in 2003 ,the year the tax cut rates were fully put into place- $51,353 in 2010 dollars. 2010 median income fell to $49,445.

But tax receipts and the economy both grew during the Bush years (as supply-siders said they would). Tax revenue rose from $2.02 trillion in 2001 to $2.5 trillion in 2008. Unemployment during the Bush years remained under 6.3% until October 2008, a month after the financial collapse.

President Obama inherited an economic disaster, no doubt about it. Unemployment on Inauguration Day stood at 7.8%. A month later, he signed his stimulus into law. Unemployment soared to 10% by the end of 2009. It hasn’t dipped below 8.8% since.

On the bright side, the recession ended during the summer of 2009. Tax receipts jumped from $2.32 trillion in 2009 to $2.43 trillion in 2010.

This month, Mr. Obama called for tax-hikes on the rich. That must be music to liberals’ ears. But it won’t do anything to get the economy going again or help reduce unemployment.

Income inequality is a concern that Democrats make Americans aware of. But right now, economic growth should be our primary concern. It’s the only way out of the mess we’re in.

Grow the economy. Get people back to work. Increase the tax rolls.

Reaganomics has done that. Let’s worry about income inequality when it’s taken care of.

“Though Johnson was not by any means our greatest architect, the serene beauty of the Glass House notwithstanding, he was in many ways the most important presence in American architecture for much of the second half of the twentieth century. It is no exaggeration to say that he, more than anyone else, shaped the architectural life of our time, as a curator, scholar, and public presence. His curious energetic, and mercurial mind possessed an almost unquenchable passion for architectural ideas, and when that was combined with his determination to have an impact on the broader culture, extraordinary things happened.”  – Paul Goldberger, excerpt from the introduction to The Glass House, 2011.

Philip Johnson and his partner David Whitney played a significant role in fostering the creative talent that continues to define architecture, art and design in America.

How is creative talent supported today? Are there great advocates? Who are they?

Join the discussion!  Alan Webber, Author and Co-Founding Editor of Fast Company Magazine, kicked-off the conversation with some great comments — read his response and add your thoughts at glasshouseconversations.org!

The 2011 Glass House tour season is open now!  Click here for tour and ticket information.

To learn more about the Philip Johnson Glass House visit philipjohnsonglasshouse.org

The debate is based on the following question:

I recently went to Africa where I experienced the brilliantly designed, environmentally sustainable homes of the Masai in Tanzania, who shape their buildings by hand based on conditions dictated by nature. Would architecture schools be doing their students–and the built-environment–a service by incorporating these methods?

If we consider sustainability, authenticity and human-ness to be important values, would architecture benefit from stepping away from the computer and going back to more hand-drawn design processes?

Join in the online conversation going on now through Friday May 13, 2011 at glasshouseconversations.org!

About Glass House Conversations

The Glass House has been described by architectural historical Vincent Scully as “the longest running salon in America,” as great minds in architecture, art and design gathered in New Canaan, CT at the invitation of Philip Johnson and David Whitney. These conversations are legendary as we recognize their enormous influence on our culture in the second half of the 20th century. Conversations emerged from the original salons of Johnson and Whitney into a series of twelve invitational dialogues in 2008 and 2009, to an ongoing weekly online dialogue brought together in 2010 by multidisciplinary thought leaders for conversations that explore important issues and new ideas.  The 2011 Conversations in Context program is the latest iteration of the Glass House Conversations series. Conversations in Context will tie the on-site salon experience to the online dialogue series, linking the Glass House legacy and the physical site to an online platform connecting new and expanded audiences.

Much of my research at Interpret LLC focused on the new technology disrupting the entertainment industry, but I’m eager to expand that into studying how disruptive technology (and especially social media) are affecting the best business practices in other industries.  The level of research into this area at Altimeter Group is unparalleled so I’m both excited and humbled to join their excellent team at this time.

Of course this means a big move for me personally as I just relocated from LA to San Francisco, so keep an eye out for a post on all the websites and digital tools I used to aid my relocation.

The media has long been known as a gatekeeper of information with a disproportionate influence over its audience. It therefore needs to be responsible in its role of news communicator, advocate, watcher, and participant.

            The major trend in the changes taking place within the media industry is the emergence of alternative media (online news, blogs, and social media) that are competing with traditional media forms (print, radio, and television). Alternative media can be a challenge and a boon to nonprofit organizations as a result of the increase in delivery channels, brevity of content, user-created content, and new leveraged opportunities.

                Neither the mainstream nor alternative media has done justice to the phenomenon of social entrepreneurship, social enterprises, and social innovation. The time is ripe for the media cultivation of a turnaround society, starting with the creation of an online integrated platform that can energize the community of these transformative movements.

[Innovation - Not Nationalization - Can Again Lead]

By Dr. David Edward Marcinko; FACFAS, MBA, CPHQ, CMP™

[Publisher-in-Chief]

By Hope Rachel Hetico; RN, MHA, CPHQ, CMP™

[Managing Editor]

Ann Miller; RN, MHA

[Executive-Director]

On this 2010 Memorial Day weekend, please allow us to directly reflect for a moment on the decline of the healthcare, banking and financial services industry in America. And; then somewhat indirectly comment on the hopeful emergence of the web 2.0 phenomena of which we all are a part. The competitive applicability to these sectors should be appreciated by the insightful ME-P reader.

Collapse of Command and Control Monopolies and Oligarchies   

Old monopolies everywhere are crumbling because of tougher new competitors and the transparency wrought by electronic connectedness. For example, our old newspaper has to compete with the internet, your electric utility company battles low-cost local start-ups, telephone companies must begin installing fiber optic lines to fend off cable companies; and RIAs and fiduciary focused financial advisors [FAs] will supplant BDs and stock brokers in the financial services sector.

www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.com

The airline industry collapsed a few years ago, the banking industry has just collapsed, and the auto industry is recovering as we pen this post. [We have a particular affinity for the auto sector however, as the son of a UAW member and step-daughter of Michiganders]. Regardless, the rush to more intense competition cannot be stopped. As a doctor, FA or other business competitor; you either keep pace or get crushed by quasi-oligarchic organizations like the American Medical Association [AMA], American Podiatric Medical Association [FPMA], American Dental Association [ADA], American Osteopathic Medical Association AOMA], Financial Planning Association [FPA], Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards [CFP BoS], College for Financial Planning [CFP] or the National Association of Personal Financial Advisors [NAPFA], etc. What have they, and Wall Street, done for you … lately? Scandal, taint, doubt, lost-credibility, a business-as-usual ennui, lethargy and ruin! Enter www.Sermo.com

Link: http://healthcarefinancials.wordpress.com/2009/04/19/calling-for-cfp%c2%ae-fiduciary-status-real-education-and-higher-duty/#comment-4136

Health Insurance Companies

In the last-generation of health insurance companies and related fraternal medical organizations, patients exercised great control over physician selection, had quicker access to specialists and encountered fewer restrictions on care. The reverse was true with financial services. But, because of advancing technology, aging demographics, intense R&D, global manufacturing, and escalating domestic HR costs – competitive market forces against traditional and structured staff model managed care companies – many industry analysts [like us] predicted growth would decline [Yes, greed was also involved as healthcare was presumed a recession-proof sector; and didn’t we all own behemoth big-pharma and HMO stocks in our 401-K, and 403-B plans]? But now, many former stock-brokers and FAs are going rogue; er – independent!

“Although inefficiencies in any business often open up in the short term, and can be greatly exploited by creative and visionary entrepreneurs – as in most business structures – market forces will prevail in the long run”.

Leo F. Mullin, MBA

[Former CEO - Delta Airlines]

Next-Gen with “Fly”

Fortunately, a new generation of enlightened physician and FA entrepreneurs is coming “out-of-the-shadows” as new-wave web 2.0 corporations and RIAs are becoming more flexible, competitive and market responsive. Simultaneously, monolithic and collectivist political ideas keep trying to regulate the medical and financial services workplace with rules, regulations and contracts to control entire populations. Yet, in the new healthcare economy, this new generation of doctors and FAs with “fly,” is headed toward more competition; not less – with more collaboration with patients and clients – regaining self autonomy.

Physician and FA Advocates

Meanwhile, as medical professionals, FAs and patient advocates, we must all choose between staying flexible to ride out tough times – or – adopting a hard, brittle line that will crack under the pressure of competition. We know where we stand at the ME-P, do you?

Flexibility and Virtual Reality

In recent years, many large corporations and top-down business models were not market responsive and change was not inherent in their DNA. These traditional organizations represented a rigid or “used-to-be” mentality, not a flexible or “wanna-be” mindset; according to business columnist Alan Webber. Some financial advisory corporations, and today’s emerging health 2.0 initiatives, may possess the market nimbleness that cannot be recreated in a controlled or collectivist [nationalistic] environment. And so, going forward, it is not difficult to imagine the following new rules for the new financial and virtual medical ecosystem.

[A] Rule No. 1

Forget about “SEC suitability and FINRA rules”, large office suites, surgery centers, fancy equipment, larger hospitals and the bricks and mortar that comprised traditional medical practices or financial product delivery systems. One doctor or niche focused FA with a great idea, good bedside manners or competitive advantage, can outfox a slew of public servants, the AMA, SEC, ADA or FINRA “faux copy-cat examiners”, while still serving the public – and patients – and making money. It’s now a unit-of-one economy where “Me Inc.”, is the standard. Physicians and FAs must maneuver for advantages that boost their standing and credibility among patients, peers, payers, customers and clients. Examples include patient satisfaction surveys; outcomes research analysis, evidence-based-medicine, physician economics credentialing and true integrated fiduciary-focused financial planning.

However, we should also realize the power of networking, vertical integration and the establishment of virtual RIAs or medical practices, which come together to treat a patient, or help a client, and then disband when a successful outcome is achieved. Job security is earned with more successful outcomes; not necessarily a degree, automatic AUMs, certifications or onsite presence. In fact, some competition experts, like Shirley Svorny PhD, a professor of economics and chair of the Department of Economics at California State University, wonder if a medical degree is a barrier – rather than enabler – of affordable healthcare.

Link: http://healthcarefinancials.wordpress.com/2009/01/08/medical-licensing-obstacle-to-affordable-quality-care

Others even presume the establishment of virtual medical schools and hospitals, where students and doctors learn and practice their art on cyber-entities that look and feel like real patients, but are generated electronically through the wonders of virtual reality units. The same can be said for the financial services industry, although much farther down-line given its current slow rate of real education and quasi-professional acceptance.

[B] Rule No. 2

Challenge conventional wisdom, think outside the traditional box, recapture your dreams and ambitions, disregard conventional gurus and work harder than you have ever worked before. Remember the old saying, “if everyone is thinking alike, then nobody is thinking”. Do collective-nistas and nationalized healthcare advocates react rationally; or irrationally? [THINK: Wall Street, medical unions]

[C] Rule No 3

Differentiate yourself among your healthcare and financial advisory peers. Do or learn something new and unknown by your competitors. Market your accomplishments and let the world know. Be a non-conformist. Conformity is an operational standard and a straitjacket on creativity. Doctors and FAs should create and innovate, not blindly follow organization or political “union” leaders [shop stewards, BDs, etc] into oblivion.

[D] Rule No 4

Realize that the present situation is not necessarily the future. Attempt to see the future and discern your place in it. Master the art of the quick change with fast but informed decision making. Do what you love, disregard what you don’t, and let the fates have their way with you. Then, decide for yourself if you are of this ilk – and adhere to any of the above rules? Or, just become an employed [government, BD] doctor or FA shill. Just remember that the political party, or monopoly that can give you a job, can also take it away [THINK: LB, ML, Wachovia, national healthcare, etc].

Memorial Day Considerations

Finally, on this Memorial Day weekend, consider that life and career is a journey, and that in this country we have the choice to ponder or pursue any, and all of the above options, and more. We have the ability to think, cogitate and ruminate, as we have done here today. So – please – thank those who have helped turn this idealistic philosophy, into pragmatic daily reality.

For us personally, we thank Bonze Star Medal Winner Captain Cecelia T. Perez, RN. Now – ponder and consider – who do you thank? If no one has impacted you up-close on this Memorial Day weekend and national holiday, please visit our military channel to reflect, comment and opine.

Link: http://healthcarefinancials.wordpress.com/category/military-medicine

Conclusion

And so, your thoughts and comments on this Medical Executive-Post are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, be sure to subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Link: http://feeds.feedburner.com/HealthcareFinancialsthePostForcxos

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements. Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com  or Bio: www.stpub.com/pubs/authors/MARCINKO.htm

Get our Widget: Get this widget!

Our Other Print Books and Related Information Sources:

Practice Management: http://www.springerpub.com/prod.aspx?prod_id=23759

Physician Financial Planning: http://www.jbpub.com/catalog/0763745790

Medical Risk Management: http://www.jbpub.com/catalog/9780763733421

Healthcare Organizations: www.HealthcareFinancials.com

Health Administration Terms: www.HealthDictionarySeries.com

Physician Advisors: www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.com

Subscribe Now: Did you like this Medical Executive-Post, or find it helpful, interesting and informative? Want to get the latest ME-Ps delivered to your email box each morning? Just subscribe using the link below. You can unsubscribe at any time. Security is assured.

Link: http://feeds.feedburner.com/HealthcareFinancialsthePostForcxos

Rule of Thumb: 経験則｛けいけんそく｝、経験｛けいけん｝に基づいて得られた法則｛ほうそく｝◆ 【語源説-1】大人の親指(thumb)の関節間の長さが約1インチであるため、大まかに長さを測るときに用いられた。◆【語源説-2】昔、ビールの醸造業者がビールの温度を測る際に、親指をチョットつけてみた。この方法は衛生的でなく、温度計ほど正確でもない。しかし、醸造業者の長い経験に基づいたものであるから、それなりに正確である。

副題は「自分を失わずにビジネスで勝つための５２の真実」。。。。。ハーバード・ビジネス・レビューの編集者を経て、45才のときにパートナーとイノベーション、起業家論をテーマとした新しいタイプの雑誌ファースト・カンパニーを立ち上げたアラン。新著には約40年間にわたるキャリアから導き出した５２の「智恵」が満載されています。

明日２２日、当協会で行われる新著の出版記念講演会に先立ち、３月で行われたオンライン・インタビュー（英語ブログ）の一部日本語にしました。

Ｑ：このような本を書くことになった動機を教えてください。昨年秋の金融危機以来、今までのビジネスの経験則が全く通用しなくなっている中で今回の本は非常に良いタイミングで出版される気がしますが。。。。

Ａ：この本を書くことになったのは、ほとんど偶然の産物で少しだけ先見の明があったと言えるかもしれません。一年ほど前に大企業のＣＥＯと重役50人を前にスピーチをしたときに、プログラムの最後にＣＥＯが出席者全員に「今の米国で道徳的権限を持っている人は誰か？」と問いかけました。そこで皆シーンと静まり返ってしまったのです。きっとみんな頭の中でデータ検索をしてビジネスの世界、政府、宗教で一体だれが当てはまるか考えたと思うのですが、だれの名前もでてこなかったのです。そのときに私は、明晰なものの考え方や、究極的には仕事と生きるための新しいルールを生み出すための源が必要だと思ったのです。そう思った途端に私は、過去30数年にわたり　－　オレゴン州ポートランドで働いていた時代、ハーバード・ビジネス・レビューやファーストカンパニー誌時代、そして今わたしは自称「グローバルな探偵」として活動しているのですが　－　貯めてきた記事、スピーチ原稿、エッセーが詰まっているファイルを見直しはじめました。そして私は今までに出会った卓越した人々と一緒に働き学んだことをまとめあげ、この本にしたのです。「経験則」がこの本のバックボーンとなっています。この時代が来るのをなんとなく予測していてこの本が生まれたという言い方もありますし、このような時代だからこそこの本が生まれたともいえます。

Q:ポスト情報化時代では、コンテンツではなくコンテクスト(文脈)の方が重要であるといっていますが、一方で新しいリアリティは新しいカテゴリーを必要していると書いてあります。過去数ヶ月の間に、世界経済が突然大きく変容し、コンテクストが変わってしまいましたが、このことがイノベーションや新しい価値の創出にはどのように影響を与えるのでしょうか？

A:過去３０年を振りかえっても、米国そして世界でこれほど対話が求められている時代はないかと思います。旅行をすると、－一番最近では私はデンマークを訪れたのですが－人々が、昔からの問題をどのような新しい方法で解決できるかを話したがっているかがよくわかります。今までのやり方には制限されない方法により問題を解決しようと思っているのです。今ビジネス・イノベーションの世界では、また、ソーシャル・イノベーションの世界でもいえるかと思いますが、新しい方法で働き、生き、人生の意味を見出そうとしている動きがでてきていると思います。

Q: 経験則４１では、「もしも本当のリーダーになりたいのであれば、本気でリーダーになることに取り組め！」とありますが、今日のリーダーに一番欠けている重要な素質は何ですか？

Ａ：過去３０年の間で、私のビジネス関係のメディアに対しての批判というのは、特にビジネスの世界で、偽りのイメージのリーダーを崇拝する傾向をつくった点です。有名人と同等に扱うような文化が生まれてしまったのです。もしもＣＥＯが権力を持ち、お金持ちになり、有名になれば、それで十分だという考え方です。私がいままで一緒に仕事をしてきて一番印象に残っているリーダー達は、名声には全然興味がありませんした。彼らは、まず第一に自分たちの部下、次に組織、そして果たそうとしている使命に対して非常に忠実です。人生の中で私達は、自分のことしか考えていないリーダーと、協力してともに働こうというリーダーの違いを目の当たりにします。特に、金融危機（そしてこの金融危機は、名声とお金しかないリーダーのせいで起きたともいえます）と、世界的な社会・環境問題から同時に回復しようとしている中で、私達は全く違ったスタイルのリーダーを受け入れる必要があります。私は新著の中で、途方もないナルシストではなく、強力でしかも健康的なエゴをもったリーダーについて書きました。すべての問いに対する答えを持っていると思っているリーダーではなく、正しい質問を聞く術を持っているリーダー達です。自分がどんな集まりの中でも、自分が一番頭がいいと思っているのではなく、才能のあるチーム・メートをまとめ上げる力を持っているリーダーです。私達は往々にして、自分の最大の才能を引きだすことができるリーダーと、肩書きだけはあるのに、ちっとも正しい仕事ができないリーダーの両方のタイプのために仕事をしたことがあるかと思います。

Ｑ私の好きな経験則は５０番の「上昇線のときには、自分の強みに注意を払い、下降線のときには弱点に注意を払う。」このことは人、企業、産業、国すべてに当てはまることができるかと思います。現在の米国経済を鑑みて、オバマ大統領にはどんなアドバイスがありますか？

Ａ：オバマ大統領にアドバイスを聞かれていないのですが、彼はコミュニティ・オーガナイザーのときにこの経験則についてはすでに学んでいるかと思います。コミュニティ・オーガナイザーというのは、自分よりも巨大で、資金力があって、強い敵対者の強みを逆手にとった政治的柔術の使い方を学びます。ですからオバマが米国の問題を解決するために国民に伝えていることは、昔からの価値を思い出させることです。自分の行動に責任を取り、真実を語り、憲法と法を遵守する。そのような米国の強みが無視され、あるいは輝きがなくなってしまい、弱みになってしまったと信じている人々がオバマ大統領のメッセージに共鳴するのは、本来の米国のあり方を思い出させるからです。国であろうと会社であろうと、自分たちの価値を知ることは、再建のためにとても重要なことです。物事を変える余地があるかないかを知ることが大事なのです。というのは、核の部分というのは変えることができません。書き直すことができないルールというのはあるのです。しかし残りの部分つまり問題解決の方法、新しい政策の立案、新しい製品やサービスの開発、物事が先に進むためのルールといったことは議論の余地があるのです。

アランの英文でのインタビューはまだ続きます。続きは、折をみて日本語に訳す予定です。アランの話はとっても面白いので明日の講演会が楽しみです！　（Ｆｕｍｉｋｏ）

]]> http://innovatorsnetwork.wordpress.com/2009/04/01/hello-april-1-a-little-update/ Wed, 01 Apr 2009 22:02:21 +0000 innovatorsnetwork http://innovatorsnetwork.wordpress.com/2009/04/01/hello-april-1-a-little-update/ While I have been diligently twittering away, I have not been such a good blogger. From the tweet I read, I found out Acumen Fund just celebrated its 8th anniversary today! Congratulations! Jacqueline Novogratz was doing a book reading and signing at Tribeca last night. I dropped by to see how it was. There were about 80-90 people in the crowd. I have probably heard her speak more than 10 times, but I am always so impressed by her ability to speak in an articulate and inspiring manner. I am looking forward to her lecture here at JS in May. Prior to that, Alan Webber will be returning to JS on April 22 to speak about his new book Rules of Thumb – 52 truths of winning business without losing yourself - . He is another great speaker, who is a lot of fun and very insightful at the same time. I enjoyed reading his book! Hopefully it will be translated into Japanese. In a couple of weeks, my coworker Betty will be going to Tokyo to organize an exchange titled “Learning from Disaster: Miyakejima and New Orleans”. This is a second part of an exchange program that started last April. Miyakejima is an island about 110 miles off the coast of Tokyo. This small island with several thousand residents has an active volcano. In 2000, the volcano erupted and all residents needed to evacuate. In 2005, after 4 years and 5 months, the residents were allowed to return to their home. A group of people, who were involved with the relief and recovery effort at Miyakejima went to New Orleans last April to meet with like-minded people who are rebuilding the post-Katrina community as members and leaders of the local government and non-profit organizations. The exchange was started as a way to learn from each other’s experience and share wisdom. In turn, this April, a total of 16 Americans including observers, will be visiting Tokyo. Some of them are planning to visit Miyakejima, which is mainly accessible by a ferry. (There are flights, which get canceled frequently due to precarious weather conditions.) There will be a public symposium on April 18 at Meiji University. The outcome of this exchange will be published as a book in Japanese and English. (Fumiko)

New Orleans April 2008

@Ashe Cultural Center April 2008

* Rule #14 You don’t know if you don’t go.
* Rule #23 Keep two lists: What gets you up in the morning? What keeps you up at night?
* Rule #37 All money is not created equal.
* Rule #45 Failure isn’t failing, failure is failing to try.

In his new book, Rules of Thumb: 52 Truths for Winning at Business without Losing Yourself, Alan Webber stimulates, inspires, challenges and helps us understand what makes for a life well-lived and work well-done. Co-Founder of Fast Company magazine, award-winning business journalist and a member of the U.S.-Japan Innovators Network, Mr. Webber reflects on 40 years of experience as observer, participant and agent provocateur, illuminating 52 rules of thumb on what it takes to innovate and lead in these extraordinary times. Whether you’re a social entrepreneur, a start-up, an established business leader or just plain curious about how to make the most of your life in these crazy times, 52 Rules of Thumb is the book for you.

Followed by a book signing and reception.

Tickets
$10/$8 Japan Society members/$5 students & seniors

Buy Tickets Online or call the Japan Society Box Office at (212) 715-1258, Mon. – Fri. 11 am – 6 pm, Weekends 11 am – 5 pm.

Reflecting 40 years of experience as observer, participant and agent provocateur, Alan has gathered 52 gems of wisdom on how to lead and innovate in these extraordinary times.

I recently caught up with Alan in cyberspace to talk with him about his new book.

Q: It seems your book is well timed, as it’s abundantly clear the old rules of thumb for business are no longer working.  Inspirational serendipity or calculated marketing?

A: Mostly serendipity–with a dash of foresight. The idea for the book began with a talk I gave a little more than a year ago to the CEO and top 50 executives of a large company. At the end of the formal program, the CEO asked his team, “Who in the United States has moral authority?” There was a long uninterrupted silence. You could see people going through their mental Rolodexes: who in business? who in government? who in organized religion? No one came up with a name. It made me reflect on how much we need new sources of clear thinking–and how, ultimately, we are all going to have to generate our own new rules for work and life. That realization sent me back to my files where I’ve kept articles, speeches, and essays that I’ve written over the last 30-plus years–working in Portland, Oregon, at the Harvard Business Review, at Fast Company, and more recently as a self-defined “global detective.” I was able to crystallize a set of rules that I’d learned from a remarkable group of men and women with whom I’d worked. Those rules form the backbone of Rules of Thumb. So you could say that I saw this current disconnect coming–or you could say that I’m a product of it. Both are true.

Q: You talk a lot about context trumping content in the post-information age. You also say new realities demand new categories. How do you think sudden shifts in context we’ve had in the global economy over the last year will play out in driving innovation and creating new value?

A: I can’t remember a time in the last 30 years when the United States and the world are as ready for a new conversation. Where ever I travel–most recently to Denmark–people are eager to talk about new ways of solving old problems. They’re looking for solutions that aren’t confined to our old categories. In fact, many people agree with my statement in the book that our old categories often allow the problems to persist: the problems have learned how to live in the cracks of our categories. None of this will be easy; old habits, including habits of mind, die hard. But I think you can find examples around the world of business innovation–and perhaps more important, social innovation–that will produce fresh ways for people to work, live, and find meaning in their lives.

Q: You mention books like “In Search of Excellence” (1982) by Tom Peters and Bob Waterman, and “Good to Great” (2001) by Jim Collins. If business leaders have been keen to read these books and hear these people speak, why don’t they seem able to follow their advice?

A: I know plenty of business leaders (and leaders in government and non-profit organizations) who take very seriously the good ideas presented by these two books and many others that offer advice and counsel to people trying to lead their institutions. But inspiration is easier than application: as you know from my book, one of the rules is “Knowin’ it ain’t the same as doin’ it.” Reading advice and following it are two entirely different things. That’s one of the reasons I structured RULES the way I did. I believe that change comes from within–from things we come to terms with as individuals, whether in business or daily life. By sharing some of my own experiences, describing the lessons they’ve taught me, and suggesting that everyone of us is capable of paying attention to the people we meet, the experiences we have, and the rules we learn, I hope to provoke readers to become both committed learners and their own best teachers. Once you embrace something that you’ve discovered yourself, you’re much more likely to apply it.

Q: Rule #41 says “If you want to be a real leader, first get real about leadership.” What are the most important qualities of leadership that are lacking in leaders today?

A: One of my criticisms of the business press for the last 30 years is that it tends to worship at false images of leadership, especially in business. We’ve become a culture of celebrity. If a CEO gets big enough, rich enough, and famous enough to qualify as a leader, that’s enough! The leaders I’ve worked with and who I admire most were never motivated by fame or celebrity. Their first allegiance was to the people they were leading, to the organization they all were part of, and to the mission they were trying to achieve. We all know the difference in our own lives between working for a leader who’s all about themselves and a leader who’s all about the work we’re doing together. Particularly as we simultaneously try to recover from this devastating economic collapse (caused in large part, I would argue, by the first kind of leader, the ones who were only out for the glory and the money) and to solve pressing national and global social and environmental problems, we need to embrace a different style of leadership. (By the way, I’m promoting a new national “day”: Celebrity-Free News Day, I call it. Imagine a day when the news wouldn’t have a single celebrity story! Who’s with me on this?) In RULES I write about leaders who have strong and healthy egos, but who aren’t raging narcissists–who know how to check their egos at the door. Leaders who know how to ask the right questions, rather than assuming that they have all the answers. Leaders who bring together a talented team, rather than presuming to be the smartest person in the room–in any room! I think we’ve all worked with leaders who know how to bring out the best we have to offer, and leaders who have the title but not the feel for doing the job the right way.

Q: One of my favorite rules is #50: “On the way up pay attention to your strengths; they’ll be your weaknesses on the way down”. You say this can be true of people, companies, industries, – even nation states. Given the current state of the U.S. economy, what advice do you have for President Obama?

A: Well, so far President Obama hasn’t asked for my advice! But I suspect he may have already learned this rule from his work as a community organizer, in part: one thing community organizers learn how to do is to practice the art of political ju-jitsu where you use the strengths of your larger, richer, stronger opponent against them. That may be why so much of his communication about solving America’s problems focuses on reminding us of our time-honored values: taking responsibility for our actions, telling the truth and respecting the rule of law and the Constitution. For those who believe that we’ve allowed our strengths to become weaknesses by ignoring them or allowing them to lose their luster, part of President Obama’s message that resonates is a reminder of what America has traditionally stood for. Whether you’re a country or a company, knowing your values is a critical place to start any re-building process. You have to know what is negotiable, and what is not. The core isn’t negotiable–those are rules that don’t get re-written. The rest–how to solve problems, create new policies, develop new products and services, and the rules that can help you do those things–all that is up for debate.

Q: Rule #28 states: “Great design wins.”  How does design relate to quality and making things work?

A: Great design has to work or it isn’t design, it’s just decoration! It doesn’t matter whether you’re talking about the design of a product or service design, winning in the world of competition means using design not only to delight the eye or enhance the experience but also to produce genuine quality and outcomes that work. One company I mention in RULES is OXO, one of the best designers of kitchen products. Their stuff looks great and has excellent quality–but they begin their designs by looking for ways to make something as mundane as a vegetable peeler flat out work better. Fit your hand better, clean easier, and peel better. By the way, one tip I heard in Denmark on my last trip–and the Danes, like the Japanese, think they’ll compete in the future on the quality of their design–is to be aware of service design. As services become a larger and larger part of the economy, we need to be applying the rules of design to the service sector. The companies that do it sooner and better will gain real advantages with customers, who care about their service quality as much, or more, as they do about product quality.

Q: In rule #5 you state: “Change is a math formula.” In other words, change happens when the cost of the status quo is greater than the risk of change. Do you think we’ve reached that point in history on a global scale?

A: No question about it. All over the world in my travels, I encounter people who are willing to try new things. They see the status quo as an impediment to innovation and the search for solutions that work to address problems that matter. At the same time, we’re all still human–and with that comes an attachment to the ways of working and living that we’ve grown comfortable with. Letting go is still hard. But as the severity of our problems increases and the inability of existing institutions and categories to produce viable results becomes more apparent people are looking for new directions and new approaches. I don’t want to pretend that change is fun and easy. But there comes a time when you have to let go of whatever you’re clutching–because it’s an impediment to finding something better. You can see this happening in a wide variety of issues and problems, public and private, around the world. I just read a quote from Sir Howard Stringer, Chairman and CEO of SONY, who said, “What this recession has done is expose the weaknesses in our system that we didn’t want really to admit.” That’s the cost of the status quo suddenly being greater than the risk of change.

Q: Throughout your book, you stress the importance of passion and loving what you do. In rule #39 you talk about how “serious fun” isn’t an oxymoron; rather, it’s how to win. And rule #1 Rule dictates that “When the going gets tough, the tough relax”. How do you teach attitude?

A: This takes us back to your earlier question about leadership. One of the things that real leaders do is to set an example through their personal conduct and their ways of doing business. There are still too many leaders who think that the way to motivate people is through fear. It doesn’t work, it’s never worked, and in a knowledge economy it never will work. People in organizations want to be challenged, they want to be inspired, they want to be given a chance to contribute and to grow–but I don’t know anyone who wakes up in the morning eager to go to work with the idea, “I can’t wait to be intimidated and humiliated today!” So if you’re a leader, your job is to create an environment where people can do their best work. That doesn’t mean you can’t criticize people when they need to have a mistake pointed out–actions do have consequences. But overall, smart and talented people want to work in a place where they can do their best work and feel like it makes a difference. So, to answer your question, if you’re a leader, the best way to teach attitude is to embody it yourself. And if you’re trying to lead from below, the best way to teach attitude is to show the boss how you want to be lead. You can, after all, lead up!

Q: Rule #9 says “Nothing happens until money changes hands.” This rule seems counter to some of the more idealistic rules in your book. Is money always necessary for innovation to occur?

A: This was a rule I learned in my own experience as an entrepreneur, trying to start Fast Company magazine. And it’s a cautionary rule. I know so many smart, energetic, idealistic entrepreneurs who seem to think that their ideas are all they need–that somehow the market will discover them and reward them simply for thinking innovative thoughts. But it’s not an innovation unless it actually gets to the market–until it gets to the market it’s just an idea. The hard truth is, if you want your idea to become an innovation, you’ll need to find the money to make it happen. As I say in the book, entrepreneurs need to have a sign on their desks, “The buck starts here.”

Q: You’ve been a Japan Society U.S.-Japan Society Leadership Fellow and also involved with the U.S.-Japan Innovators Network. How important a role has Japan played in the formulation of your 52 rules?

A: I’ve benefited enormously from being a part of the Japan Society, and the book reflects those benefits. There are rules that come directly out of my experiences with the Japan Society, but even more important is the human network that I began to learn from my Japan Society fellowship and that is the real source of the 52 rules. Behind almost every rule is a person or experience; that awareness of the way our lives interconnect was something my first introduction to the Japan Society impressed on me. So there are specific rules (and people will have to read the book to discover them), specific people, and also the general principle that I trace back to the many years of involvement I’ve had with the Japan Society.

Q: Rule #10 in your book states “A good question beats a good answer”. How’d I do?

A: Daniel, you’ve always asked good questions! That’s one of the reasons there’s an Innovators Network today! We should do this again–it’s always more fun, more engaging, and more valuable to have someone asking great questions!

—-

Rules of Thumb: 52 Truths for Winning at Business without Losing Yourself, published by HarperCollins, hits bookstores April 21.

]]> http://relaxypants.wordpress.com/2008/11/11/the-webster/ Tue, 11 Nov 2008 19:35:09 +0000 Anders Fredsø http://relaxypants.wordpress.com/2008/11/11/the-webster/

Yesterday Nicklas and I had a meeting with Alan Webber, the founder of Fast Company and former Editorial Director of The Harvard Business Review. He is also a former Board Member of The Kaospilots, has a long friendship with Uffe Elbæk and still hold a lot of love for the KP. We had a really nice afternoon meeting in our garden and we shared some views on politics, sustainable development and hopes for the future. Truly a pleasant and insightful man, who we are fortunate enough to know. I warmly hope that he will come to The Kaospilots a do a lecture again soon. Oh, and he has a book coming up, about entrepreneurship and advises on leading a good life.

(and the cat really liked him – intensively!)

http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2008/05/giving-the-poor.html

Friday and Saturday, April 25 and April 26

8:00 PM, 237 N. East Street, Indianapolis

Friday Night: Rural Route Film Festival:

Some Highlights

Dear Deer
Alan Webber, 2007, 4.5 min., narrative
New York, NY

It’s an alternate take on nature vs. urbanity when a plastic lawn
doe finds herself lost on the gritty streets of Brooklyn, NY.
Survival story, and a folktale of newfound love – the bewildered
deer gets “caught in the headlights” and hit by an oncoming car
while trying to scamper across the street, but is found by a
magical street faerie who nurses it, making bandages, food and
water appear with a magic wand. The doe regains her health, and
wanders back onto sunnier streets. She can’t believe her eyes
when she happens upon something truly special under the
Queensborough Bridge. Features the music of Bright Eyes’ “Make
a Plan to Love Me”.

Snowies
Elliott Kennerson, 2006, 12 min., doc
Flathead Lake, MT

Elliott Kennerson, an MFA candidate in Montana State University’s
Science and Natural History Filmmaking Program, and Jeremy Roberts,
an avid birdwatcher, follow an unusually large group of stunning, allwhite
Arctic Snowy Owls. Intelligent and enlightening, the film is also
honest and funny as we witness the filmmakers missing some of the
best owl shots because they accidentally turn the camera off or
compose their frame wrong. Our guides also become a bit sidetracked
upon meeting a couple of lady birdwatchers, who they believe are “after
them.” A brief and delightful alternative to the often-dry standard
wildlife documentary.

In The Glow (Pick #1 from Lights are On, but Nobody’s Home program)
Stewart Copeland, 2006, 8 min., exp
Interstates and highways between St. Louis, MO and Tullahoma, TN

Part personal film, part pseudo-scientific study and part observational
essay, Copeland’s film explores the banal (yet strangely beautiful)
world of blank billboards. While many creatures (including the filmmaker)
have an attraction to this ‘advertisement free’ light, Webster
University’s Head of Biological Sciences teaches us that the massive
intrusion of mile-after-mile of unnatural billboard light disturbs insect
life cycles, plants, and on up through the ecosystem.

Wanderlust 2: Thunder on the Track
Walter Forsberg, 2004, 5 min., doc
Creelman, Saskatchewan, Canada

Inspired by stock car crash videos, this micro-documentary gives a
1980s glance into the sensational Saskatchewan Lawnmower Racing
Circuit. In the hallowed Winnipeg tradition of image degradation, this
work demeans cinematic imagery into a bygone videoscopic era of the
movies. http://www.winnipegfilmgroup.com

Not only the economic power and the political influence is what Indias heart is set on, but I see little or none interest in keeping the unique Indian culture as the country gains on the western society. More than once has the average Indians response to the question about what they think that Indias current success will bring them been “We are going to be like USA”. By this they mean nothing negative. The skepticism which can be heard from for example Swedes on the same matter is nowhere to be found. But will it be a threat or an advantage for India in their becoming a super power, this lack of skepticism

As India grows more influential the creativity and the strive for equity among the people gets set aside, as it has been in so many countries before when they were in the same position. Including USA.

It seems that when having the opportunity of becoming a super power many other things become less important or is expected to be automaticly equally developed as the economy. Suddenly there is no need of providing for the poor or developing the countrys social safety net. Everyone is getting rich soon anyway, aren’t they?

This may be a well meaning and hopeful reason not to take care of the people. Or it may be so that a super power has to prioritize the citizens that contribute the most and leave the rest behind.<br>Is the well being of the people the necessary sacrifice of a Super Power? Have we ever seen a nation achieve super power status without making these sacrifices?

What makes India unique as a dawning world power is their past. They are not a western country, they have a very different culture from us and they are strong believers in tradition. Therefore India has the opportunity to do this in a different way from what has been done before. But will they? The before mentioned lack of skepticism, will it lead to the fall of true Indian culture? Will it help India join the developed countries? Is this a sacrifice worth making?

Is there another way and will India look for it?

How are India’s people handling the country’s transition into a growing world economic power? Do they feel any change in their status in the world? Is there more economic equity among the people as India’s economic performance grows?   Läs mitt svar under globalization.

Vi har snart betat av alla bra restauranger, alla hippa klubbar och alla lyxiga lounger här. I lördags tog vi Dome som är en fantastisk takterass där man avnjuter solnedgången mad en drink i handen. Tyvärr skulle de behöva en bättre bartender, så går vi dit igen beställer vi nog ett säkert kort som vin istället för att riskera halvtaskiga margaritas och cosmopolitans igen. Senare var vi på Not just jazz by the bay, en jazzklubb med liveband. Ryktet säger även att de har karaoke vissa dagar, vilket måste undersökas eftersom mycket oförlöst sång ligger och bubblar i mig nu.
Jag har sett att det finns möjlighet att skaffa sig en egen sångguru här, och det tänkte jag undersöka. En egen guru, vem vill inte ha det?

Men det här är ju inte semester, och faktiskt så har vi fått läxa. Snart kommer jag att skriva ett inlägg på engelska, och det är redovisningen av en uppgift jag fått. Kända vänner av Kaospiloterna kommer under vår vistelse i Mumbai att ställa frågor till os som vi ska undersöka och besvara i forma av korta artiklar eller blogginlägg. Frågorna rör vårt arbete här och några av våra svar kommer eventuellt att publiceras av Fluid Minds senare. Först ut är Alan Webber, grundare av tidningen Fast Company, som undrar följande:
How are Indias pople handling the countrys transisiton into a growing world economic power?
Do they feel any change inte their status in the world?
Is there more economic equity among the people as Indias economic performance grows?

Snart kommer det alltså upp en liten text här där jag skriver på engelska, och det är vad jag fått ihop på den här frågan. Nu är det dags att interagera med Indien och skaffa mig lite material.