I have found most of the time I perceive a pattern and later find that someone has defined it and named it (my first recollection was being told “Oh that is Mazlo’s Heirarchy”). It is good to find this confirmation that the feeling you had has actually been defined through research. One day I aim to actually do my own research to confirm (or bust) one of my own myths. In the meantime I will note them down and see if I can cite something along those lines.

The reason I am telling you this is that I had one of those moments the other day and now I’m trying to find if anyone else has looked at it in a similar way.

The hypothesis is that peoples perception of being competent of a skill is being based more on being successful than the amount of times they have done it. I am guilty of this myself. You deliver a project and you then believe that you are a competent project manager. You build a website and now you are  web developer. Hitting at 100. 1:1 success ratio. “Ok what’s next?” – sound familiar?

The parallel I drew with this was with the introduction of video games. The playing of first and second generation video games follows a similar linear progression. You complete a level and move onto the next one. You are not necessarily better. Have you just been successful or perhaps just not failed.

Not failing is not the same as success.

Now you put that behind you and focus on the next level. Has the addition of linear gaming patterns to our culture transferred across into a professional approach where once you have done something once, you finish that ‘level’ and move on? Is it a perception of competence or even a perception of mastery?

There is a notion that mastery comes more from failure than success.

Just because you got it right the first time, doesn’t mean you will get it right every time.

So perhaps the person who plays the game over and over, trying different tactics, trying different levels of difficulty, playing different characters, gains a much broader understanding of what it takes to succeed. Knows the possibilities and the winning combinations. Has a higher competency than someone who gets through a level the first time.

For a person who is conditioned to perform only when they succeed the first time, how do they cope with highly complex problems that are not solvable? Will they stick with it or will they change games?

Of course the basis of recreational gaming has now shifted. Gaming is no longer the domain of the arcade, the PC or even the console. It’s now on my phone and with me wherever I go. And it’s no longer linear. I’m now motivated to go back and perfect each level of a game (three stars/orbs/widgets) if I want to unlock a level or win something special.

How can we now translate that back into our professional lives where we strive to do the same type of thing multiple times to achieve a higher level of competency rather that having a perception of mastery.

Does this make sense to you? Where should I look to see if anyone has been down this rabbit hole?

Thanks

Cory

A change is as good as a holiday.

Not too sure about that but a change it has been over the last couple of weeks.

My time with PB ended in March. A corporate restructure. A reduction of management roles and efforts to reduce overhead costs meant my role as Executive Knowledge & Business Systems no longer existed. I saw this as an opportunity and believed this would free me up to work on some of the bigger challenges facing the organisation, but decisions were made not to pursue such opportunities.

It doesn’t mean that KM has gone away, the KM team is still there doing some fantastic things for the staff and clients, just that it has now been added to the portfolio of the CIO who I know see’s it as very different to existing technology functions, but I am not sure the assumptions others will make will be easily shifted.

So one door closes and another opens. I had been planning on putting my toe in the water and seeing what the market is like for someone of my skills and experience to freelance, just perhaps not so quickly.

Unlike other severances I had experienced in the past (mainly due to foreclosure post dot bomb), I have found myself with enough funds to set myself up and sustain us for a few months. So Kore Business is born and I’m still going through setting up companies, insurance and banking arrangements.

As most of you would know, I am a constant networker so a number of opportunities have come up and I am currently working with a client through Glentworth 3 days a week for the next couple of months.

I have yet to nail down a defined offering but looking at consulting, facilitating, training, coaching and mentoring across IM, KM, business improvement, technology and innovation.

Wish me luck and let me know if you need a hand with anything ?

More to come.

Cory

The space of the conversation relate to the perspective of the subject matter expert, particularly in corporate functions within organisations, and the tendency for them to create what is considered best practice within their field in an organisation without understanding the impact it could have, without understanding the bigger picture.

I have seen it happen with IT, human resources, finance, facilities management, marketing & communications, information management and even knowledge management.

Here is an example of what I have witnessed.

 The recruiting function within the Human Resources department of a midsize organisation sets a standard for the recruitment process within the organisation. this process is based on best practice and is designed to minimise risk to the business in appointing the best candidate for the role. This process usually takes around two months from submitting the request to recruit to having someone start.

The business operates an office in Perth and is providing services into the booming Resource sector. Qualified people are hand to come by and expensive and in demand. Unless you are able to snap up a candidate quickly, someone else will.

The HR department default to the process minimising risk to the business. But even recruiting a reasonable candidate is better than not recruiting anyone at all.

What can be a quite complicated undertaking is over simplified and reduced to a process when an exercise in problem solving applying principles instead of process could provide a better outcome. Allow people to understand the risks and give them the resources to make decisions and hold them accountable for them.

It is something I am reminding information management professionals about at very opportunity. Here is an example.

What's missing?

Here we have a content lifecycle for web content that is a process. Can you see what is missing? Look again.

All right. This is where web content management can actually learn something from records management. In records management they consider the USE of the record to be very important (although sometimes lost in a compliance haze). No mention in this standard of when, how or why the content is used to generate value to the organisation or to the public.

Driven from an outcome perspective (completed process) as opposed to a value perspective. Is it a quantitative versus qualitative scenario?

More thoughts as I cogitate on the some more.

Cory

I had previously been involved on the review panel and presented at Share 2010 and 2011 in Sydney and was invited to share again at Share 2012 in Jo’burg. The conference will be featuring in April 2012 in Atlanta (best of luck!).

There were a number of highlights for the conference for me that I wanted to share:

1. The crew at Eventful really know how to produce a great conference.

Notice I didn’t say ‘run’ or ‘put on’, I used the word ‘produce’. That is because it was a production. From the early research undertaken through round-tables with practitioners to identify the key themes to focus on,  then review and selection of speakers to share their experiences, to the great atmosphere that was created by setting up a great venue with awesome lighting and AV with good food and ample socialising opportunities which really got people in the mood and sharing. They have a talented and highly capable team who deliver in spades. Well done guys and girls! I look forward to our next time together. (Steve & Greg: I will always treasure our quality conversations about the Pony…)

2. A great bunch of speakers.

I was honoured to have the opportunity to present with some wonderful people at this event. It was great to meet and socialise with the likes of Dux Raymond Sy (@meetdux), Paul Culmsee (@paulculmsee), Sarah Haase (@sarahhaase), Ruven Gotz (@ruveng),  Jan Skjøy (@janskjoy) and Veronique Palmer (@VeroniquePalmer).

3. An awesome group of practitioners

I thoroughly enjoyed the questions, conversations, discussions, debates and jokes with the great people out there trying to make a difference in their organisations by leveraging the SharePoint platform. Good luck on your journeys.

If you are interested in seeing what I shared at the conference, you can see copies of the presentations titled The Bigger Picture and Core Business,  and stay tuned for future posts going into more detail.

Thanks again for a great time in Jo’burg!!

Cory

Today I was inclined to pursue a title called Change by Design by Tim Brown, CEO of IDEO.

Now imagine my amazement when I visit the page and find this:

So my options are to buy the Hardcover edition for $16.83 USD. Or the Kindle edition for $20.86 USD.

That is nearly 25% more for the electronic book than the hardcover! Perhaps I should count myself lucky as the RRP is $27.99 and I am getting a 25% discount. Yet the Hardcover also has a RRP of $27.99.

How does this happen?

Obviously this is something I need to take up with Harper Collins as there is a nice little disclaimer on the Kindle edition page that states:

I had a chat with a group of change management people at Qld Health yesterday, talking about the concept of communities of practice and what they are capable of.

During the discussion I wheeled out a phrase I have used before to assist people in understanding the value of knowledge sharing and collaboration.

How can you give yourself a better chance of success?

This got me thinking that instead of talking about risk mitigation and critical success factors, could we boil it down to something basic that people can easily understand.

What are the odds of you succeeding?

What can you do to improve those odds?

Far to often we find ourselves treating symptoms instead of the problem. Trying to make sure things don’t go wrong instead of making sure things go right.

Maybe a bit or appreciative inquiry slipping in here

How could you twist the language you use and the approach you take to focus on getting it right instead of not getting it wrong? Succeeding instead of not failing?

Thanks

Cory

We won the Gold Award for the program that has been delivered over the last 5 years. A big thank you to the team of Christine Harding, Sarah Crealy, Deborah Houlahan, Bridie Sampson, Erin Hamalainen and Jody Chant as well as David Kent and Mark LePla who started us on this journey several years ago and the staff at PB who have come to realise the value in leveraging and sharing what they know.

Article on actkm.org

Thanks

Cory

Just wondering what your ideas are for online learning resources and how to make them a sought after commodity? #### has an immense library of “stuff” but no one goes there…

Without going into the pros and cons of elearning as a vehicle, I put together the following response. They are more around the change, motivation and engagement than the actual material itself.

One thing and two ideas

The thing is motivation. You need to think about what motivates people in the organisation. Importantly: this is not an assumption made by HR people or Managers. You have to ask the people.

Now the two ideas.

1. Alignment

• If they have a development plan then showing them how the courseware helps them achieve that can be a motivator.

2. Gamification

• Make it a competition.
• Make it fun.
• Score points.
• Have a variety of leaderboards.
• Make up silly awards. E.g. Most courses taken on a train; completed a sequence ( full house, straight, royal flush etc…)
• Or you have to build up ‘credits’ to ‘level up’.
• Allow people to exchange credits.

3. Accessibilty

• Make sure people can get to the stuff offsite.
• This allows them to fill in time anywhere with a learning activity.
• Make it convenient.

4. Go viral

• Constrain access.
• Go for scarcity.
• You can only do a course by being invited by a colleague or earning credits.
• Allow people to recommend courseware to colleagues.

As you noticed, I can’t count. What can I say? I’m an ideas person.

What have you done to improve the takeup?

Thanks

Cory

It’s all the buzz (no pun intended) at the moment in internet and social media circles. Google’s latest offering in the social space. Google+ (G+).

You can have a look at the introductory information at G+ and here are some articles from

• Introducing the Google+ project: Real-life sharing, rethought for the web – Official Google Blog
• Google+: The Pros & Cons – Mashable
• Why Google+ Will Make A Splash, Not A Wave, In The Community Pool – FastCompany
• What MySpace’s Tom Anderson Thinks of Google+ – Mashable
• Behind Google+’s Stealth March On Foursquare, Instagram, Gaming, Facebook, Your Life – FastCompany

I’ve got some thoughts that I want to share and where better to do it than here.

Read the Disclaimer

Google+ has come with a disclaimer but many seem to have forgotten this and have criticized the limited release of not fully functioning platform.

Why is Google+ invitation only?

This new service isn’t ready for public use just yet. Google is making the service available for field testing meaning they’d like a handful of regular people to use it and give feedback so they’ll know what to improve and wether there are bugs that need fixing. So once again there’s no point in complaining that you can’t join freely or add people instantly since that’s not the purpose at the moment. This is not a public release.

http://www.google.com/intl/en/+/learnmore/forum/

First Impressions

Google has been working hard on improving the look and feel of some of it’s offerings going back to the iGoogle customisations, Gmail themeing and Priority Inbox, Google Reader modifications, to Google Groups returning to it’s roots as a discussion forum.

What we have seen is a total interface redux thanks to Andy Hertzfeld (original Macintosh UI) and I like it.

Different but good (Going round in circles)

There is a good break from what has become tradition on other social platforms where you would usually ‘friend’, ‘like’, ‘favorite’, ‘follow’ or ‘share’ something.

In G+ a different paradigm has been embedded around the ability to ‘share’ and ‘+1′ (+1 had already been out there but really needed something like G+ or the Google Bookmarks tools for it to truly generate value) and the way you can push that to specific groups instead of them sorting through the stream you produce looking for something useful.

An example at the moment is in Twitter I can share something, but it is shared with all who folllow me. I can help them sort things out by using appropriate hashtags but they still get the lot. With Google+, for each message I can tailor the audience (by selecting one or more people or circles – group of people) or choose to make the post public. I control the audience instead of the audience controlling me (well they can still control me but I can be more selective).

Wishlist

Tags: We have labels in Gmail and tags in Reader & Bookmark. Let’s get it consistent and into G+.

Circles: Allow circles within circles. I need to think more about the idea of public and private circles. Will be interesting if GGroups could be replaced by a circle concept as they have now stripped it back to discussion forums.

Search: Difficult to believe that there isn’t a search feature in a Google product to allow you to search your stream (currently you can only search people). Can Understand that this would be tricky with circles but needs to be here.

Improving Possibility

Integration is going to be key. Integration with the rest of the Google deck of tools but also with third party services and critically I think with the Chrome browser/OS.

I see the potential for a few of the google tools such as Bookmarks, Reader, Buzz and even Groups to be rolled into or taken over by the G+ platform. We are already starting to see a few gaps filled by Chrome Apps and Extensions to improve G+ function. Give me a G+ +1 button in my toolbar and a status indicator and I’ll be happy.

There is potential here as well for integration into Google Sites and Blogger for better social features on sites and blogs.

I am really looking forward to the possibilities for google apps as an improved social business platform with this social glue holding it all together.

Oauth is another aspect. A majority of online and device based apps utilise your twitter and Facebook logins as accounts and authentication e.g. Rockmelt, Klout, Instagram etc.. (some even use Yahoo! – how outdated is that). There are some out there that allow you to use your google login but that will need to increase to gain traction in this space. When the ability to use your google credentials to authenticate is beside the twitter and Facebook options then we’ll know they have cracked it.

3rd party photo app integration will be important so I hope they can improve the picassa APIs to allow the posting of images to G+. A number of third party apps allow you to store in flickr or photobucket etc…

There will be more but if I don’t get this published now it will stay in draft and keep getting added to for ever!

Keen to hear what you think about these ideas and your views of G+?

Thanks

Cory

Wouldn’t it be good if it was that easy.
Just tell people to collaborate and away they would go, knowing

• what to collaborate on
• who to collaborate with
• and how to collaborate (effectively)

Do we make these assumptions?
Do we assume that

• everyone has a consistent perception of what collaboration is?
• everyone is capable of working collaboratively?
• or even worse, we give them collaborative technologies and they know how to use them effectively and productively?

<sarcasm>
Everyone knows how to use social media. Everyone is on Facebook.
</sarcasm>

Call it collaboration. Call it Enterprise 2.0. Call it Social Business. Call it what ever you want.
It’s different. It’s a change. To assume that people will just pick it up and run with it is very risky.

I’ve been sharing a model that hopefully leads people to understand what collaboration is and some of the fundamentals that are needed to give people the best chance of success through collaboration. Here it is. See what you make of it.

In pursuit of collaboration we build up through communication and cooperation.

Communication

Cooperation