Create More Moving Ideas by Moving Your Ideas

In my first association job, sharing drafts of projects you were working on with the entire the team was the norm: everyone had voice into our major initiatives.  Feedback would range from correcting typos to suggesting major shifts in strategy.  Ultimately, you decided the best path forward, but it was now informed by others' perspectives.

In those days, you routed a paper draft of your project plan through everyone in the office to get their input.  And while technology now allows us to track changes in Word documents and do online discussions and collaboration boards, I think there is much to be said for gathering input low tech every now and then.  So if you want to generate great ideas, ones that will truly move people, might I suggest you try moving your ideas to other people?  Literally?

Imagine a corkboard or whiteboard on which you post your idea.  It could be a text outline or description, a mindmap, or even a collage of images and headlines.  Just make it substantial enough that people get the sense of what you are trying to accomplish.  Be sure to include the goal to be achieved or problem you're trying to solve and any specifics about the input you would most value.

Now roll the Roaming Idea Seeking Input into someone else's work area (preferably when they aren't around so you surprise them) along with a posted note: "Hey, I'm an idea in search of input to make me better.  Can you help?  Please take 5-10 minutes to share your thoughts.  Then pass me on to someone else whose perspective you think would be helpful.  Just return me today by 5 p.m. to ____."

The whiteboard gives people a place to gather engage individually or in a small group that is quite different than receiving a Word document to review: your physical engagement is more significant, the scale of what you are reviewing is more substantial, and you can scan all the information at once instead of flipping through individual pages. Instead of your idea being one more attachment in a folder or one more paper in a stack on a desk, it has presence that is potentially more inviting  And if it was me, I'd attach a bag of candy or granola bars to the board so people get a snack while thinking how to improve upon your idea.  Finally, there is something fun about deciding who to roll the idea to next, whose input you want to encourage.

If you like this approach, consider other variations: initiate an Idea Input chain letter (I know not everyone will like this) sending it to a few individuals in your network and ask them to in turn share it with five more people in theirs, again with a deadline for input.  Or create an Idea Graffiti Board (Corkboard.me is an electronic option) and park your rolling whiteboard (or the same info on flipchart paper or newsprint) in an office common area where people can gather and post input throughout the day.  Instead of a specific idea post a weekly question to the graffiti board such as "What's one thing we could do to operate more efficiently and save time?"

Regardless of the approach, we each need to incorporate more time and more techniques to tap into the collective wisdom of colleagues.  As Steven Johnson notes in his recent book Where Good Ideas Come From, a lot of innovation happens through the cross-pollinating of ideas and accidental discoveries from informal sharing.  Similarly, in his book The Medici Effect, Franz Johansson asserted the importance of The Intersection, a place where people and ideas from different perspectives and disciplines can connect and create with each other. 
 
What other habits could you embrace to increase the likelihood of that happening in your own efforts?

What's it worth to you?

The yogurt shop near my home is packed most days right now.  In December?  Not so much.  Try to snag a last-minute seat on a fairly full flight and you're likely to pay far more than the passenger who booked months in advance.  But walk into a hotel at 10 p.m. and you might just negotiate an unbelievable rate since the room is about to go unsold.  And that $4 bottle of water at the outdoor concert in 95 degree heat provides value that makes you momentarily forget about the outrageous mark-up you are paying.

Books abound on pricing strategy for products and services, but ultimately what something is worth depends on how an individual calculates value.  Next week I will be joining 4500 other professionals who work in or care about the association profession for our annual meeting being held in St. Louis.  I have no doubt that I will benefit from my participation: renewed connections, new relationships, fresh thinking from educational sessions, and maybe some new speaking or facilitating opportunities.

That being said, I was intrigued to see how the sponsoring organization, the American Society of Association Executives (ASAE) calculated why someone should attend because the emphasis was almost exclusively on cost to make the case for value, and even then not all of the relevant costs were calculated.  Since several of my association colleagues will not be attending because they don't perceive enough value, I wanted to dissect this calculation a bit.  I think what we discover has merits whether you are involved in pricing or just everyday purchasing of products.

The primary comparison being made is between a webinar you can watch in your office and the multiple-day face-to-face meeting asserting that you get far more value for your registration fee for the St. Louis meeting when compared to the costs of a webinar.  It's an interesting choice because while many organizations still charge a decent price for webinars (including ASAE at $195), I receive several invitations a month to register for a free program, many featuring high-quality content leaders.  So for some, the webinar has already been commoditized and is seen as a freebie, potentially invalidating the entire premise of the calculation being used.

But even if the webinar comparison holds true for you, not all of the costs of attending the Annual Meeting are included in the calculation provided.  A webinar doesn't require me to get on a plane, stay in a hotel, take a cab or light rail to/from the airport, drive to my home airport and pay for parking.  Those costs for me in St. Louis will amount to $1200.  Add that to the $895 registration fee being used for comparison and now instead of saving me money compared to a webinar, Annual Meeting attendance is costing me a small amount.   Ironically, the chance to meet with hundreds of business partners in the exhibit hall is labeled as priceless. But some attendees (including a few of my non-attending association colleagues) deem it worthless because it is not an activity in which they need to engage.  They view the dedicated exhibition hours as time when they aren't getting education that might actually be of value to them.

Completely absent in the calculations are the increased time, energy, and  psychological costs anytime we are away from work or family for multiple days: falling behind while you are gone or trying to stay caught up late in your hotel room each night, depending on your partner or spouse to assume all family household responsibilities, and much more. So the way the case is calculated for Annual Meeting attendance actually backfires when focusing primarily on cost comparisons, but it does raise several questions any organization has to consider when trying to see you on what's something worth:

• What are the total costs someone might associate with the purchasing decision you want them to make?
• How does your target audience calculate value and how can you use their calculations in making your case?
• What would your product, program, or service have to be like to provide so much value that its actual cost would be hardly considered?

For a large organization investing $2000/person to attend the major industry gathering of the year may be less of an issue, but for a small organization that could reflect a sizable percentage of the annual professional development budget for the entire staff.  $2000 for one person to attend one meeting or 10 webinars (using the ASAE price) per the course of the year in which the entire staff participates?  Understanding the criteria your intended purchasers use when making decisions is where the real insight into your perceived value can be found.

So three closing thoughts:

Our communications should focus on the real value that might be obtained from our programs or services even though we must craft our message with an understanding of the true and total costs involved.  After all, if you get one idea in an educational session and it could save you $5000, you just made a huge profit on your $2000 conference costs.

Consider adding one question to your valuation form that assesses perceived value in relation to total costs expended. The answers provide a simple metric about the overall state of your meeting that could be very useful in year-to-year comparisons and trend analysis.  

We have to ensure that value literally oozes in every single aspect of every single thing we do.  Publications should be edited ruthlessly to eliminate any text that is not meaningful. Meeting design must ensure that every educational session is top quality; that networking opportunities lead to true connections and problem-solving; and that social events are inclusive, welcoming, and make people proud to be a part of our community. 

And though it probably goes without saying, let me say it anyway: the very thing that once was invaluable at almost any cost probably isn't going to remain that way for much longer if you don't invest in refreshing, revamping, or reinventing it.

Leadership Limerick: Generate Commitment Instead of Enforcing Compliance

Every Monday, I offer a leadership limerick, highlighting an idea or strategy about effective leadership in limerick form. Searching for leadership limerick will identify previous posts.

To commit goes beyond to comply

It means that you believe in the why

Compliance is to follow the rule

Like the speed limit or attendance at school

And people do so with a very big sigh

A squad car on the side of the road gets most people to slow down.  That reflects a desire to avoid a fine and ticket more than a commitment to the speed limit.  As author Peter Block notes in his book The Answer to How is Yes, “If my commitment is conditional on your response, or on your delivery of a promise, then it never really was a commitment. It was a deal.”

When it comes to getting your kids to do what you want, "because I said so" is always an option you can try to enforce.  And while the same holds true in the workplace, it puts you as a manager or leader in the position of being the enforcer, the squad car on the side of the road.  Colleagues jump to attention and do the right thing when you're in range, but then revert back to their normal routines as soon as you are out of sight.

Compliance therefore is temporal, in place when the threat of punishment is present.  But long-term effectiveness requires a self-enforced commitment to a strategy, policy, or routine.  It's less about "have to" and more about "want to." I do something not merely because I was told to or because I am afraid of getting in trouble if I don't.  I do it because I believe it is the right thing to do. And that conviction requires an understanding of the purpose and relevance behind the practice. It more likely develops through discussion and dialogue, not a manager's monologue or mandate.

It's hard to be truly committed to a what if you don't understand or believe in the value of the why.  You'll have to write fewer tickets to drive others' performance if you focus more on the latter when seeking to correct the former.

Leadership Limerick: The Authentic You

Every Monday, I offer a leadership limerick, highlighting an idea or strategy about effective leadership in limerick form. Searching for leadership limerick will identify previous posts.

Authenticity can take you quite far
If you'll only be who you are

You will hear others' voices
With thoughts on your choices

But let your values be your North Star

It's natural that friends and family have opinions about the choices we make in our lives.  It's helpful to have colleagues and role models worth emulating.  But authenticity ultimately requires living from the inside out, not the outside in.  We have to make choices consistent with our values regardless of whether or not others perceive they are right for us.

It can be tempting to say yes to opportunities not quite consistent with our core because they may offer a benefit or reward that is appealing (money or prestige for example). This is as true for organizations as it is for individuals.

Instead of trying to fit in with the opportunities presented to us, we need to seek the places, the people, and the opportunities that fit. And in doing so, we must ensure that the part we play in our lives is wholly consistent with who we are and that we haven't just become adept at consistently playing a part.

Authenticity isn’t always going to produce easy results, but then neither does projecting a facade or making inauthentic choices. Both have risks. Personally, I’d rather be rejected for who I truly am than be embraced for being someone I truly am not.

For more reading on authenticity, see this article previously published in Executive Update.

Lobby Learning: Not Just for Latecomers Anymore

AJAXWorld Conference and Expo

You know the drill.  You arrive late for a play and theater doors are already closed.  At least you can stand in the lobby and watch a live feed on an LCD monitor until there is a break when you can be seated.

But what if I would rather live in the lobby?  What if instead of sitting in the general session room for a major keynote speaker at the annual meeting, I prefer to watch it broadcast to an alternative location?  What if that location could offer a variety of seating configurations, ones conducive to real-time conversation with others about what the speaker is saying?  What if there was food and drink and beanbags and couches?  

No need to completely wonder "what if?" when conferences like TED and the AJAXWorld Conference and Expo have already modeled the way with their Simulcast Lounges.  Each has featured its own unique combination of the ingredients listed above, and the lounges themselves have often been paid for by sponsors who are able to promote their services in the lounge, essentially using the lounge like the world's largest exhibitor booth.

TED Simulcast Lounge • ted.com

While many meetings and conferences have previously put extra tables in the hallway and broadcast a speaker on TVs, they did so for overflow reasons when the main room was already at capacity.  But what if we stopped thinking of this as a temporary solution to an attendance problem and instead viewed it as a possible innovation opportunity for our main event?  Maybe there ss no general session room with a live speaker, but instead multiple viewing rooms for a speaker broadcast in from a remote location, rooms perhaps targeted for people with shared demographics like job responsibilities or organizational size that make it valuable for them to converse with each other?  This format mirrors typical university distance-learning to satellite campuses or what we do for webinars when registering as an offce, but imagine the possibilities it might hold for a more engaging learning experience at your meeting, as well as potentially reducing speaker costs because of travel time and expense being eliminated?

Yes, there is value being in the same room at the same time with the entire conference community, but that is no less true when we disrupt that norm and try something different. What used to be a temporary solution might just be a source for more permanent and useful value.

Anyone Can: So Why Not You?

Anyone can …

1. ask a question that reframes a conversation.
2. offer encouraging feedback to a colleague.
3. help ensure an organization is more inclusive.
4. look for information to bring fresh insights to a challenge.
5. say what everyone knows knows but is afraid to bring up.
6. propose an experiment or little bet that might yield big rewards.
7. clarify perspectives people hold during a contentious discussion.
8. create a shortcut that makes routine work less time-consuming.
9. clean out the office refrigerator.
10. send handwritten thank you notes to hardworking volunteers.
11. make sure newcomers feel welcome and supported.
12. bring in a healthy snack for what will be a very long meeting.
13. share a website, a link, an article, or other learning.
14. remind people of what matters most in the moment. 
15. do something small to boost everyone's morale.
16. invite those just listening to share their insights and opinions.
17. come up with a breakthrough idea that is a gamechanger.
18. call attention to trends others aren't noticing.
19. ask what's being learned from what's being attempted.
20. suggest that maybe a stretch break is in order.
21. raise the ethical implications of a decision being considered.
22. offer a little humor to break the ice and re-energize a group.
23. research a question that is holding back progress.
24. look for inspiration in unexpected places.
25. share a big dream that unleashes others' passion and energy.

Anyone can.  Perhaps you should.
What are you waiting for? Today would be the perfect day.

Leadership Limerick: The Danger of "What do you think?"

Every Monday, I offer a leadership limerick, highlighting an idea or strategy about effective leadership in limerick form. Searching for leadership limerick will identify previous posts.

While “What do you think? is often inquired
In conflict or debate it can leave people mired

Without shared criteria for each to apply
It's just others’ thoughts being shared on the fly

Unable to decide a group merely grows tired

"So what do you think?" seems like such an innocent question.  Someone makes a proposal.  A new idea emerges in conversation.  A description of a current situation is shared.  Naturally, we want to know what others think or feel.

Gathering people's perspectives is helpful as it lets us know the mix of opinions among a group.  But reaching a decision from a mix of opinions can be difficult without some shared criteria to be applied.  Absent that, individuals may merely advocate their opinion and their perspective which may or may not be based on the same set of criteria that others are using.

Debate ensues.  Conflict emerges.  Tempers flare.  An impasse is reached.  And quickly simply asking others What do you think? leaves you asking yourself What was I thinking?

If we're trying to decide whether or not to invest in a new idea and I'm basing my decision on the perceived risk, you're focusing on the potential return on investment, and others are most concerned about how doable the idea is, we're really not having the same conversation.

To get the best decision-making from a group of people with different perspectives, first determine the key criteria on which to base the decision and the relative weight of each individual factor.  Then let individuals share their thinking, making sure to tie their perspectives to the criteria just established.  This should produce more "parallel processing", wither everyone applying the same decision-making criteria.  You could even let people do individual numerical ratings and then compute the average rating for each factor. 

Do you need to step back before every single decision and create a list of rating factors to apply?  Probably not.  But the more significant the decision, the more helpful it will be to possess a simple set of shared criteria and a common understanding of what the right decision means.

Note
A great book and one of my favorite facilitation resources is the Facilitator's Guide to Participatory Decision-Making."  And if you're interested gaining hands-on practical experience facilitating group decision-making and other efforts, it's your last chance to register for the July 19 full-day Art of Facilitation program I am presenting for ASAE in Washington, DC.  This program's content can also be customized for half-day or full-day facilitation skills development sessions for your staff or volunteers. Contact me to learn more.

Be Careful of Format Fetish

I loved being a part of the IGNITE presentations earlier this year at the ASAE Great Ideas Conference and look forward to doing another IGNITE, Toward a More Sustainable You, at the Annual Meeting in August.  To see the enthusiasm for different content delivery approaches has been great.

But I'm experiencing a slight unease and deja vu as I see some conference planners rush to add IGNITE talks to their conference schedules.

Years ago when Open Space first got mainstream attention, everyone wanted to try it.  Often, however, what people introduced as Open Space was really some inadequately structured time tacked on to a conference or included as part of a workshop.  It had little to do with the true spirit and principles of Open Space, nor did it use its methodology.  As a result, some participants had unsatisfying encounters with what they thought was the Open Space meeting technology when they actually had not experienced it at all.

Meeting professionals, presenters, and facilitators must beware of format fixation or fetish: using a format for format's sake.  Not all learning formats or discussion processes are best suited for all content or every meeting or conference.

• Not every webinar has to include polling.
• Not every panel discussion has to include presentation segments from the panelists.
• Not every general session has to include a keynote speaker.
• Not every conference has to include breakout sessions.

Every content segment can be brought to life in dozens if not hundreds of different ways. Our mantra as planners or presenters needs to be: It's about the learning.

As minimum we must consider if the format is appropriate for the participants, the content, and the overall learning experience we are designing.  We also need to examine if our intended use reflects the format's true methodology and principles, or if what we are planning is really "in name only."  If the latter, we shouldn't use the name.  Showing a limited number of slides for a limited amount of time does not fully equate to an IGNITE or Pecha Kucha experience.

Shiny new technologies or formats will always catch our eye, and we most definitely should be looking for them and experimenting.  But choosing to adopt or apply them needs to serve the learning experience we are trying to create and the needs of the participants we seek to engage.  Otherwise we do a disservice to ourselves, the participants, and ultimately to the format or technology itself.

Leadership Limerick: Traditions Matter

Every Monday, I offer a leadership limerick, highlighting an idea or strategy about effective leadership in limerick form. Searching for leadership limerick will identify previous posts.

Traditions unite many as one
They can be somber, serious, or fun

Community is the ultimate aim
Diverse people experiencing the same

Passing on meaning is what has been done

Fireworks.  Holiday caroling.  Tossing the bride's bouquet.  Lighting the Menorah.  Hunting Easter eggs.  Saying Grace before a meal.  Putting flowers on a grave.

Regardless of (or perhaps because of) one's faith or cultural background, everyone at some point in their life experiences traditions, common activities shared with others across generational and geographical boundaries.  Traditions and rituals play a valuable role in creating community because they provide shared language, experience, and meaning.  Having that common connection allows individuals to feel part of something bigger than themselves.

The longer a tradition has existed, the more reluctance there may be should anyone want to change it.  "But that's the way we've always done it" is an oft-repeated cry of resistance.  But not every routine act serves a ritualistic purpose.  Not every tradition is meant to exist in perpetuity.  Whereas routines can become ruts, but rituals are rites of great meaning and significance that reflect values a community holds.

What is most important to preserve is the function of the tradition, the unifying role it can play, not necessarily its form.   Meaning and understanding is the heart of a true tradition or ritual.  That is what they try to preserve and transmit.

Changing rituals or traditions (legitimate or otherwise) has to be done with great care given how embedded they may have become in the identity of an organization or community.     But we can preserve the meaning behind the tradition even if we might modify the method through which it is achieved.

Toward a More Sustainable You: Alternative Belief to Consider #4

Our beliefs and mental models deeply influence the choices we perceive available to us and the expectations we need to meet.  In a new workshop entitled Toward a More Sustainable You, I've been offering four of the current beliefs that I believe inhibit our effectiveness and four alternative beliefs that, if adopted and implemented, could lead to a personal and professional life that is robust, yet more sustainable.

For the past three weeks, I explored one of these beliefs and its alternative with a Friday post. This is the concluding post in this brief series.

Belief #4
I don't have any choice.

Alternative belief #4
I always have choice even if the consequences may not be ideal.

It's a phrase you often hear: I don't really have a choice.  And at first, it rings true.  Any of us can find ourselves in a situation in which it seems as if we have no options except the undesirable one we lament.  But closer examination reveals that's not really the case. 

We must change the conversation we have with ourselves if we ever hope to change the conversation we might want to have with others.  Example:  Let's say you feel your boss micro-manages you and your work.  Your decisions are often second-guessed, and you are asked to report in great detail about your daily activity.

You could choose to see this situation as one in which you have no choice but to put up with your supervisor's management style.  But that really isn't the only option available to you.  You could throw a tantrum, ignore your boss's request for information, or even quit, but let's not go that far.  Another option is to have a conversation with your boss that could go something like this:

I know you want me to do the very best job possible for you.  I'm feeling a bit hampered in doing that by all of the reporting and checking in that is being asked of me.  In order for me to contribute at the level I know I am capable of doing, I need more freedom and discretion when it comes to decision-making and reporting.  But I also know you are held accountable for everything that is occurring and need to stay informed.  Can we talk about how we might honor both these positions?

Your language might vary, of course.  The point is, we always have more options available to us than we might initially realize or accept.  For some, the conversation above might seem risky, and indeed it might be.  But it is an option available.  As is quitting.  Now you might say, "I could never quit as it would next to impossible to find another job, so I'm stuck here."  Totally understood.  But quitting remains an option, even though it is one with undesirable consequences.

It is too easy to create a world for ourselves in which we opt to believe that we have no options.  Ultimately, portraying ourselves as helpless is rarely very helpful. If we don't acknowledge that we indeed have freedom of choice, we essentially choose to never be free.