RE: test

 

 

 

 

From: Randy Park [mailto:rp@lightguidesystems.com]
Sent: April 7, 2022 6:09 PM
To: rp@randypark.com
Cc: rp33.treeFlwer96@blogger.com
Bcc:
Subject: test

test

Read More......

test

test

Read More......

Success is 1% inspiration, and ...

 (Authored August 2015)
Thomas Edison, when describing creativity, is quoted as saying "Success is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration." While that rhymes nicely, I think a more accurate description- one which I came up with for my workshops on creativity and innovation - is that "Success is 1% inspiration and 99% perseverance." Let me explain.
While Edison's version is accurate, in the sense that it takes a lot of effort to see an idea through to completion, in my experience the problem is not that people aren't willing to put in the effort, but that it is hard to maintain motivation when you have had a string of failures.

Most of you who receive these emails know me for workshops and seminars on thinking and making decisions, and some of you are aware of my background in technology. What you may not know is that I continue to do technology design through my company Lightguide Systems Inc.
In the past year, we have been developing two measurement instruments for the sport of curling. The first is relatively simple; its design had some technical challenges, but there was never any doubt that it could work.
The second product has been a different matter. This world first, patent pending device is designed to measure the effectiveness of sweeping. It does this by pushing a curling rock across the ice and measuring the change in friction when someone sweeps in front of the rock. (If you are interested in more details, see "SweepTracker" below.)
There was a lot of uncertainty many points along the line, the first being "can a reasonably sized, battery powered device accelerate a 20 kg rock in a reasonable distance?" There were questions about rotating the rock, measuring friction, and many other aspects.
We went through numerous calculations, prototypes, and modifications in the past 9 months. (And finding curling ice in summer for testing was another challenge!)
There were also numerous times I considered throwing in the towel. At one point I called the patent lawyer and said "put it on hold." But one thing that kept me going was asking the question from the "Think About It!" worksheet: "What do I know for certain?" We know for certain that sweeping has an effect that should be measurable using the device, so I persevered. Near the end of July, up in Gravenhurst, I had the first definitive indication that sweeping changed the measurement. (I called the lawyer and said "go for the patent.") And in the past two weeks over several test sessions in Waterloo (fortuitously with the Ontario Men's under 21 champions) we were able to assess differences with different people sweeping, different brooms, and so on. There is still a lot of refinement to be done, but there is also a lot of interest from Olympic-class coaches, Curling Canada, some of Canada's top curlers, and others.
You may not be designing technology products, but I suspect that you often see creative ways to improve your own work or your workplace. Or you encounter changes in your work. Often when these are pursued it seems like they won't be successful. You, or others, may be tempted to quit. But perseverance can be a magical thing. If the idea or project is sound (and the "Think About It!" worksheet can help assess that) and you know there is a benefit, keep at it.
It turns out that two of Edison's lesser known quotes speak to this situation:

"Many of life's failures are people who didn't realize how close they were to success when they gave up." and "Our greatest weakness lies in giving up. The most certain way to succeed is always to try one more time."

And if you're a curler, watch for clinics this season to measure your sweeping!

More information on SweepTracker:
Measuring sweeping effectiveness has been considered from many angles over the years: infrared cameras to measure temperature change and brooms that measure pressure and sweeping speed are two attempts. But up until now, no one has directly measured the change in friction - something that can only be done by measuring the force required to keep the rock moving at a constant speed. SweepTracker is a motorized, battery powered device that cradles the rock and pushes it over the ice while measuring the force. It has a separate motor to keep the rock rotating. As it runs, it provides both audio and visual feedback of the effect of sweeping. Initial plans - as SweepTracker is being refined - is to offer sweeping clinics where teams can bring equipment and try different techniques to find which is their most effective approach. The latest information, and a photo, is posted on www.SweepTracker.ca.

Read More......

Catching up on blog posts

I don't know about you, but there are often things I start that then fall by the wayside. Blogging has been one of those; not that I haven't been writing "tips", it's just that they've only been going to my email list (send an email if you'd like to subscribe.)
So a few blog posts will catch up on the best email tips from the past year, starting with my experience from a trip to Japan a little over a year ago:

I just returned from Tokyo  - my first trip to Japan, and I was very impressed for many reasons. Aside from very polite people, they really do think things through. Three simple examples from my hotel: the elevators tell you which one will arrive next several floors before it arrives; the tracks for the curtains overlap in the middle (one curves behind the other); and in the morning as you are walking down the hallway they play pleasant bird sounds.

 

None of these are earth shattering, but they all make the experience a little bit more pleasant. And none require any significant amount of extra work. Elevators these days are all controlled by one building computer, which knows in advance which elevator it is sending where. The curved curtain tracks allow you to easily close the curtains tight (it gets light there early.) And bird sounds playing - simple.

 

When I mentioned these examples to my host, he said they were examples of  "kaizen". In North America,  "kaizen" usually is used to refer to continuous improvement in the sense of making things more efficient. But Wikipedia defines is simply as "good change", the idea of thinking things through.

 

A thought for you - what simple examples of "good change" could your organization implement to provide more value to your customers?

 

Read More......

Being clear about your clients

It is popular these days to imagine everyone having a "client" for their work, whether you work directly with customers or not. The imagery of an "internal client" can be useful in framing questions such as "what is valuable to our client, and what is not?" In associations, the equivalent is "what is valuable to our members?"

But those seemingly straightforward questions have some big assumptions built into them, especially if more than one person is involved in the evaluation: the words "client" and "member."

Both those questions imply that we 1. have a clear picture of "client" or "member" and 2. that our pictures are the same. But since we have different filters, odds are our pictures will be different.

A way to deal with this challenge is provided by personas. Three years ago when I was on the National board of the Canadian Association of Professional Speakers I spearheaded an effort to explicitly identify our "members." Over the years I had seen many discussions about who our target/ideal members were, and what were their characteristics. Usually the discussions eventually devolved into a debate over "veteran speakers" versus "newbies" or similar terms. 

I expect you can imagine all the different interpretations of the phrases "veteran speakers" and "newbies." But by creating a list of important parameters such as years experience, type of speaking, income level, and so on we created typical member personas from likely combinations of the parameters. We wrote descriptions of their "personalities" and even added photos.

The result was an initial set of nine personas which were then whittled down for different applications. The descriptions and photos resulted in true clarity when people talked about existing and prospective members, and were a real hit!

Are you clear who is your client? And even if you are clear, are your colleagues viewing the same client?

If you'd like to learn more about personas, I am presenting on the use of personas on Tuesday May 27 at the Toronto Product Management Association in downtown Toronto. Details are here: http://www.tpma.ca/events?eventId=758294&EventViewMode=EventDetails

Good Thinking!

Read More......

When is free too costly? And when is big too big?

Google's Gmail application was down this morning for what seems to have been one to two hours. A year ago, that wouldn't have been an issue for me. But Lighthouse Nine Group - which I joined nine months ago - uses Gmail for e-mail service. When I searched the Internet to confirm that Gmail was down, I encountered "helpful" comments saying "don't worry, do something else for an hour." Which is fine, except that while I'm not an excessive e-mail checker, I do usually check first thing in the morning - which is when Gmail was inaccessible.

There is no doubt that cloud-based services can be convenient. You don't have to buy and maintain hardware. There are powerful free applications such as Google Docs that make some tasks such as sharing information easier than any alternative.

Cloud-based services also pose some risks. You have to have working Internet access, which is occasionally a problem. The service you are using has to be up and running; as we saw this morning, this is not always guaranteed. Delaying your E-mail response time by an hour may or may not be important. But what if you had stored a critical document that you needed this morning on Google Docs and you couldn't access it?

Aside from the inherent risks of cloud-based services, the use of Google and similar free services holds additional risks:
1. Because these services are free, there is less incentive for the service provider to strive for the highest level of service; losing a customer doesn't have a direct cost
2. Because Google is so big, there is no way for an individual or even an organization to speak directly with someone about the situation
3. There is still the issue - for me at least - of Google scanning my e-mails to create targeted advertising

Prior to joining Lighthouse Nine, I used a local service provider for my Internet and e-mail services. I still maintain those accounts. In the 12+ years I have been with them, it seems to me there might have been one occasion when my e-mail was down. Additionally, if I ever was having a problem or required help with website issues, they were easily reachable and very responsive via e-mail or telephone.

I often talk about scenario planning or scenario exploration in my workshops. This is the principle of looking ahead to identify where uncertainties may have an important impact on your business. It's not about estimating how likely something is to happen, but examining the impact if it did. In the interests of convenience or saving money, where might you be using approaches that are mission-critical but vulnerable to disruption?

I think it's time to have a conversation with my partners about Gmail.

Read More......

The psychology behind information overload?

There is often discussion - sometimes initiated by me in a workshop - about information overload and how to deal with it. It seems apparent there are generational differences in how we deal with information; what is less examined is why these differences arise. While younger readers will probably have no idea what I'm about to describe, older readers may remember a time when information was difficult to locate.

The most vivid example for me is time spent as a kid looking through card catalogues in the library. (For those of you who have never done this, there are massive sets of small drawers with index size cards, where you physically search for the title or subject of the book you are looking for.) You would find the card of the book you thought was interesting, then walk over to the shelves, find the book, and open it up to see if there was anything relevant. Of course much of the time there was nothing of interest; sometimes there was; and sometimes this book would lead you to a new thought or another book, which meant walking back to the card catalogue, searching through the drawers again, and then walking out to the shelves. (As well, even if you found the index card for an interesting book, you didn't know if the book was in the library until you walked over to the shelves.)

For me, and I expect for many others, this produced a deep seated psychological belief that information is valuable, difficult to access, and in many cases scarce. Thus any information or information source that might be of value in the future should be cherished. The actions that stem from this belief include trying to keep track of all the information flowing into my life, which is certainly not possible. I am a member of several LinkedIn groups, receive a number of email newsletters, as well as print magazines and newspapers. I have now come to accept that there are times - especially when I am very busy - that I may miss something I would perceive to be of value. I balance this with the hope that I will likely be able to locate it again at some point in the future if it truly is important.

I expect those who have grown up with the Internet don't have these filters about information, and that probably makes them better at dealing with the volume of information.

 If there is a downside to relying on Internet searching for information it is a potential loss of context and history, since corporations, governments, and people can instantly change what they have posted. The past can be overwritten by posting new news, which can then dominate search results. As George Santayana said "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." The natural aging of physical books in a library maintains that historical record, and ensures that history can't be re-written very easily.

 For those of my generation, my advice is to examine your filters about information. Are you operating in the Internet age with a "card catalogue" mental model?

For those of the Internet generation, my advice is to be careful about the source of your information. With the abundance of information, it is sometimes harder to find good quality information, and revision of history becomes easy.

Good Thinking!

Read More......

Founder of Davos has interesting comments on capitalism

In what to me is a surprisingly under-reported story, Klaus Schwab (the founder of the annual World Economic Forum conference at Davos) says that capitalism is out of whack.

This comes from a man who embraces free markets and who for 41 years has been bringing world CEOs and political leaders together for elite brainstorming sessions.

Excerpts from the stories referenced at the bottom:

"I'm a deep believer in free markets but free markets have to serve society," he said in Davos, a ski resort tucked away deep in the Swiss Alps. He lamented excesses and "lack of inclusiveness in the capitalist system."

Other quotes: "Capitalism, in its current form, no longer fits the world around us."

"We have failed to learn the lessons from the financial crisis of 2009," he goes on. "A global transformation is urgently needed and it must start with reinstating a global sense of social responsibility."

The official program: "the necessary conceptual models do not exist from which to develop a systemic understanding of the great transformations taking place now and in the future."

As a systems thinker, this to me is encouraging, and the perfect application for System Dynamics modelling.

"Conventional modes of decision-making have become outdated," he announces, arguing that we must now consider the young, the poor, the unemployed. He insists on "the need to integrate new non-state actors who want to have their say ... we need new models where governance processes on all levels integrate these newcomers in the most collaborative way."

We must "seriously address the social impact of globalization," he says. "Growing inequities within and between countries and rising unemployment are no longer sustainable ... We must rethink our traditional notions of economic growth and global competitiveness, not only by focusing on growth rates and market penetration, but also, equally — if not more importantly — by assessing the quality of economic growth."

Again, Scwab is looking at a systems view, including longer term sustainability.

Schwab wonders, "How sustainable is it and at what cost to the environment? How are the gains distributed? What has become of the family and community fabric, as well as of our culture and heritage? The time has come to embrace a much more holistic, inclusive and qualitative approach to economic development."

And in an interesting comment:

"The success of any national and business model for competitiveness in the future will be less based on capital and much more based on talent. I define this transition as moving from capitalism to 'talentism'."

Kudos to Terry Milewski of CBC and Angela Charlton of Associated Press, and their organizations, for reporting on this important perspective from an influential business leader.

The CBC has covered it, and here is a link to the AP interview.

Read More......

My prediction for 2012

You likely know from my book "The Prediction Trap - and how to avoid it" or by hearing me speak that I think predicting the future is a dangerous idea. That's because once a person or organization has made a prediction, it is natural for them to look for information that supports that prediction and filter out information that contradicts the prediction.

Nevertheless, there is a prediction which I will make for 2012 which I think is not only safe, but helpful. That prediction is:

2012 is going to be unlike 2011 (or any other year from the past for that matter.)

I feel safe in making this prediction because the significant driving forces on the horizon all suggest scenarios in the economic, social, and political arenas that we have never seen before. No matter how these driving forces combine, 2012 will surely look different from past years.

I also feel safe in making this prediction because Mark Carney, the the governor of the Bank of Canada, also recently said similar things in a speech to the Empire Club/Canadian Club. (Jeffrey Simpson commented on this speech in the Globe and Mail.) Carney said that "current events mark a rupture" in the world economy and described in a very frank manner the situation around the world and the uncertainties that exist for the world economy.

I also believe that unlike most predictions, the prediction that "2012 will not be like the past" is a helpful one. If you use this prediction as a guiding principle, then both at work and in your personal life you will not get stuck in "The Prediction Trap." You will continuously question your assumptions, that part of your filter that - while maybe accurate from the point of view of the past - may prevent you from seeing changed circumstances.

Change is a challenge for most people, not because they don't "like" change, but because it takes effort to develop a skill, a process, or an opinion. Change means we need to learn new things, and new ways of behaving, and that takes effort.

But change also offers an opportunity for those willing to invest the effort in dealing effectively with change. We have seen bad decisions from governments in Europe, the U.S., and Canada and from businesses as well worldwide. Many of these this bad decisions were based on the hope that the clock could be turned back, that things could be put back to "normal," where normal looks like the past.

I think there is still a lot of this magical thinking going on; ideas such as borrowing one's way out of debt, or expecting an economy to grow while at the same time introducing severe government cutbacks, or hoping consumers will both save more and spend more at the same time. In fact, the overriding magical thinking in many of these decisions is the idea that growth of anything can continue forever.

So 2012 will be different - you can take that to the bank (though they may not want to hear it.) How will you prepare for 2012?

　

Read More......

Lessons from Greece on decisions

I think there are three key decision-making lessons from the current economic situation in Greece:
1. No one can avoid reality - the Greek financial situation
2. Things may not always be as they seem - the Greek Prime Minister's decision
3. Sometimes in order to get a message through someone's filter, you have to shock them

To elaborate:

1. No one can avoid reality
This one is most obvious. When it comes to decision-making, there is no doubt that Greece has made some bad decisions in recent years. Principally, they failed to address foreseeable realities. Their economy was unsustainable due to high levels of tax avoidance, overly generous government programs, and - the killer for economies based on the currently fashionable, free-market capitalism approach - little prospect for economic growth. One of the principal problems for them now is that the attitudes that led to these decisions are difficult to change overnight. I'm not saying governments shouldn't help citizens, but if they do they have to recognize how they are going to pay for it.

2. Things may not always be as they seem
When Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou shocked everyone - including his own cabinet - with the announcement he would call a referendum, I like many others asked myself "what is he thinking?" My conclusion is that maybe, just maybe, this is a brilliant and unselfish act of political suicide designed to save his country's financial situation.
Consider the information we have: Greece is in dire financial straits, and will not survive financially for more than a month at best without external help. This help comes with many austerity strings attached. The Greek people have entrenched expectations of their entitlements and what their government will do for them which are not compatible with the financial austerity. The announcement by Papandreou that he intended to call a referendum prompted the French and German governments to say effectively "it's this package or nothing." The Greek government has a very small majority in Parliament, with a confidence vote set for this Friday. And finally, the fact that no one else, not even his own ministers, knew that Papandreou was going to announce a call for a referendum on the bailout package.
Given that Papandreou knows this financial relief must go ahead, and the alternatives are worse, how can he get Greeks to realize the seriousness of the situation? The answer is to do something not only outrageous but self-sacrificing to emphasize how important and grave is the situation.
My thinking was reinforced this morning when listening to the news. First was the news that some of Papandreou's cabinet ministers intend to vote against their own government on Friday which would trigger an election. Second, and most telling, is the report that Papandreou will be meeting with the Greek President today to offer his resignation. By doing this, he will take the fall and allow the rest of his government to pick up the pieces. But they then can do so with the ammunition that acceptance of the bailout package is Greece's last hope and with the seriousness of the situation emphasized by the fall of the Prime Minister.
Is George Papandreou a bumbling politician? Or is he a noble example of a politician putting his country ahead of his own interests? Given what we often see in politics, this may seem unlikely given the filter many of us have developed about politicians, but things are not always as they seem

3. Sometimes in order to get a message through someone's filter, you have to shock them
And this is why I think the scenario I outlined in Point 2 may be true. Greeks, like all of us, have become used to our current situation. Especially when things have been unchanged for a long time, we expect tomorrow to look like today (The Prediction Trap.) Our filters have developed to see the situation a certain way, and they block information that doesn't align with that view. Just like in some of the exercises I do in seminars, we distort information that may be slightly different from the past and convince ourselves that things are the same as they have been. This is exacerbated when politicians who have to introduce unpopular change try to paint it as a small modification of what has happened in the past.
Sometimes the only way to get information pass this distortion of people's filters is to shock them in such a way that it is impossible to see the situation as anything but a new reality.

What are the practical lessons for you, in your world? First, as I've said many times before, reality always intrudes. We can't avoid, at least in the long term, dealing with reality. Second, things are not always as they seem. We look at a situation, and think we know what is going on, but in all likelihood when people are involved it is more complex than it appears. Third, because people naturally believe that tomorrow will be the same as yesterday, small changes, small variations on situations, incrementally different information may sometimes be missed. Occasionally it takes a dramatic gesture to cause people to pay attention. Sending out one more email, or tucking an important announcement in a regular newsletter, may not get the attention it deserves.

We may never know if the scenario I have outlined is true. But even as a thought experiment, I think there are lessons for the decisions we all make every day.

Read More......

A decision making process?

Over the years, I have had clients ask for "a decision making process." My response used to be "there is no such thing; if there was a universal decision making process, we could program a computer to make decisions and we wouldn't need people" (which in some cases might be a good thing.)

But what I have come to realize is that the tools and approaches I provide in my presentations and books can be assembled into a framework for decision making. Judgement is still needed, but the key is to organize the decision making process in a way that maximizes results.

One limitation in the human brain shows up when you are trying to decide or prioritize between several options. Let's say you're introducing a new product or service, and there are eight different approaches you can use to promote it. If you try to decide between all eight at once, odds are you will lose some details, or have a hard time keeping all options in your head at once.

Another example is getting a group to agree on items for an agenda. There may be 10 items proposed, but only time for three to be addressed. Typically, people will spend a significant amount of time discussing what should be discussed...

A decision making tool that can be used in both these situations is a Paired Sort. The Paired Sort breaks down a "many option" decision into a set of either/or decisions, and then totals the results.

We have had a paired sort tool on our web site for a while, but have not promoted it. Moreover, it would not work on portable devices such as the iPhone or Blackberry. So we re-wrote the program and now it should work on any device. It also can be used for individuals or group prioritization.

Please try it out here and let me know what you think!

As well, as I work on doing a better job of organizing these tools and approaches to make them easier to use, I am looking for examples of the types of decisions you make and problems you face. These can be easy or hard, large or small. My goal is to make decisions easier by helping you identify what type of decision you have to make and presenting the appropriate tools. This may be through a map of decision making or through computer aided questioning. So please send some examples!

Read More......

We're moving, and other news

Blogger,

First things first: we're moving. Our new contact information is

Decision Advancement
14 Shand Avenue
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
M8X 1T5

website: www.DecisionAdvancement.com

My phone and e-mail are:
phone: (416) 567-9540
e-mail: rp@randypark.com

If you haven't received an e-mail from me in a while, the name "Decision Advancement" may be new to you as well. When I started this endeavor, I called it "Thinking for Results". While thinking is still a key aspect of my work, I realized three things:

1. my work is primarily around improving decisions and decision-making
2. recently I've been bringing in tools for organizing information for decisions, especially in complex situations, that aren't directly related to thinking per se
3. these days, thinking sometimes seems to be optional, but everyone has to make decisions!

Thus the name Decision Advancement.

As I mentioned in the second point above, recently I have been working on tools for the capture, analysis, and communication of complex situations. Some of these tools draw on my background in physics and engineering. Many of them are visual tools, which capitalize on strength of the human brain to carry out visual analysis. (There are examples of some of these techniques on our website.) These tools allow people to quickly grasp the essential elements and especially the interconnectedness of situations so they can understand the complexity without eliminating details and losing important information as a result.

Finally, more of my work these days is helping facilitate analysis of systems and situations to enable better decision making. In today's complex world, decision-making is tougher than it has been in a long time. Up until recently, it was possible to be successful by simply doing what had worked in the past. Either you worked on incrementally improving your own processes, or you copied the successful leaders in your situation.

But there is now much more uncertainty with respect to the economy, business, political situations, technology, and so on. Capturing the complexity and understanding interactions between the different factors is key to making good decisions. And exploring alternative future scenarios to ensure you are not blindsided by an unexpected event is also crucial to reducing risk and achieving long-term success.

For more information on these topics, please contact me directly, or visit our website for some examples of these tools and approaches.

Whether you're someone who has attended an event where I spoke, or who has read one of my books, or someone I know some other way, please feel free to drop me a line and let me know what you are up to as well.

Best regards,

Randy Park

Direct:  416-567-9540
e-mail: rp@RandyPark.com

Better Decisions, Faster Solutions, Fewer Mistakes

For articles, tips, and further information visit www.DecisionAdvancement.com

Read More......

Optimism and Pessimism about the future

Last week, I had two experiences which caused me to view the future more optimistically. The first was that I attended an event on systems dynamics and systems thinking hosted by Earl Haig high school here in Toronto.

The half-dozen students who organized this event have formed a system dynamics club at the high school, and held this event, complete with guest speakers, to educate their peers about systems thinking. These young people are far ahead of many adults in their realization of the importance of understanding how we make decisions.

The second experience was viewing a video which I learned about through the conference. The video is at: www.watersfoundation.org/webed/mod5/examples/mod5-5-11.html

This video shows three 6-year-old boys using a diagram of a reinforcing loop to solve relationship problems they were having on the playground. I found it incredibly inspiring. It is definitely worth watching.

The pessimism comes from the federal election we are experiencing, and the state of politics in Canada. Two things in particular are disturbing. As someone who emphasizes that the best decisions are made when we recognize our biases, identify our assumptions, seek out accurate information, cooperate with others, and behave civilly I find the behavior of Stephen Harper, our current Prime Minister, to be disappointing. He consistently tries to destroy, not debate, those who disagree with him. He chooses to ignore both scientific and economic experts when it comes to crimes and prisons, drug rehabilitation, and approaches to taxation. And he governs as a one-person show, without input from even members of his own party.

The other disturbing thing about the election is the sometimes irrational reaction that some people have had to the election and the candidates. One newspaper story told of a political science student who said "There's a lot I don't like in all the parties. So why would I pick one?" He intends to spoil his ballot.

I would hope that most voters will think things through a little bit more than this young man, and recognize that there are many decisions we have to make where we don't like any of the options, but we still have to choose. And further that if, like the majority of Canadians, you disagree with the way Stephen Harper conducts politics, that you think things though carefully before you vote on May 2. (If you are looking for practical information on voting strategically there is a website called www.projectdemocracy.ca which has more information.)

I debated long and hard whether to write a tip which contains a political stance. If my objection had been solely because I disagreed with someone's policies, I think I would have kept it to myself. But I'm truly concerned about the future of our country if Stephen Harper's approach to politics becomes the norm in Canada.

My hope is that the young people who are learning techniques for better cooperation and decision making don't lose these approaches when they become "adults."

Read More......

Turning Embarrassment into Inspiration

I had a slightly embarrassing moment two Sundays ago. As part of my new role on the board of the Canadian Association of Professional Speakers I made a short presentation describing factors that affect the success of an association. It was based on a model I created that demonstrates that many factors are linked to member satisfaction. (If you would like more information on how the model helps explain association success or failure, drop me a note.)

The embarrassing part came after the presentation, when an audience member asked "do you have a Twitter account?" I do have one, but I had never seen much use for Twitter, and thus had a grand total of five posts. My response was "yes, but I don't Twitter much" (at which point my grammar was corrected; it should have been "I don't Tweet much." )

But that wasn't the most embarrassing part. The audience member asked for my Twitter username, and there was a long pause before I answered "I think it's thinking_guy."

My mission is to provide people with the motivation and tools to think more deeply and to address complexity rather than ignore it. My filter was that it was not possible to say anything useful in 140 character tweets. But faced with someone who wanted to follow me - presumably to know more than what I had for breakfast - I started thinking again about Twitter.

And this is where the inspiration struck: I realized I couldn't provide answers in 140 characters, but I might be able to inspire people's thinking by asking questions. So as of Monday morning, I started a daily question Tweet. If you like you can follow them at thinking_guy on Twitter. And feel free to respond to them.

The "tip" from this tip? Embarrassment often results when how we are perceived is different than how we think we should be perceived. Addressing it means changing either what we're doing or the perception. It can be a wake up call of a nagging issue we feel we should address, but have suppressed because we haven't figured out how to move forward.

If you have felt embarrassed, do you need to change your perception or your actions?

Good Thinking!

Read More......

You Can Do It!

I had an interesting insight this past weekend. I was down in Arizona at an event for professional speakers as I will be a board member of the Canadian Association of Professional Speakers next year. This weekend workshop was hosted by the American equivalent of our Canadian association.

Brian Tracy, the creator of the Chicken Soup for the Soul series of books and an accomplished speaker, is on the American board and spoke briefly. He told us that in his experience the four most important words for people to hear are "You Can Do It."

Over the years as I have refined and enhanced the concepts and tools that I bring to my work they have typically become more challenging both to understand and to apply. For example, Scenario Exploration and System Dynamics are both challenging but certainly useful approaches when making decisions, especially for the future. Most people in my workshop struggle when they first try to apply these tools. Usually I acknowledge in the session that these are challenging tools. But I realized on the weekend that all too frequently I leave it at that, and don't include the encouragement that people may need to persevere with these approaches. Because although I recognize these tools are challenging, I think they are both necessary and achievable skills for people who want to make better decisions. In so many important areas of both work and society these days, good decision-making is hard work. But it is also certainly achievable for you.

The other difficulty I hear from people regarding thinking deeper is "I don't have time." But I believe it is worthwhile for everyone right up to a busy senior executive to carve out the time for deeper thinking.

So if you're one of those people who has been to a presentation I made or workshop I led, I want to give you this message now: You Can Do It. And if there is any way I can help you with that, please let me know.

Read More......

Blame it on the System

A sad event occurred for me on Monday - the candidate I was supporting and volunteering for in the Toronto mayor's race pulled out. Sarah Thomson had been running third or fourth in most polls but didn't have the resources to continue. In particular she didn't have the money to advertise to get her message out to the voters and since she was in third or fourth place, the press didn't pay as much attention to her as to the front runners.

I bring this up because it is an example of System Dynamics - how a system can influence the outcome of a situation. In all political races, the front runners have considerable advantage because of reinforcing feedback loops: whomever is perceived to be the front runner is accorded more attention by the press, who then publicize the candidate more, which raises their profile and (generally) their support. Polls show the front runners as more popular, so the press pays more attention to them. Awareness of and support for second tier candidates tends to drop. (Of course the added attention can also mean increased scrutiny, which is why political strategists are always afraid of "peaking" too early in a campaign.)



System Dynamics can reveal a lot about the outcomes that result from our organizations. I recently facilitated some sessions of a System Dynamics game - a team based simulation of the manufacturing, distribution, and sale of products played on large table sized boards. Participants place orders and ship products over "weeks" of play, and they we look at what happened. It turns out that no matter who plays the game, the results tend to be qualitatively similar, with their decisions resulting in excesses and shortages of products. These outcomes result from two related factors: the system as designed provides little immediate feedback for the decisions people make, and people don't tend to think ahead and consider what is about to happen. It is extremely rare for a group to do really well; a system designed this way coupled with the way people think and make decisions will invariably give poor results.



Participants tend to take away lessons particular to their situation, but the overall message is that the system produces the behaviour. (The current political environment tends to produce certain behaviours as well; approaches such as simple messages, attack ads, and so on work because the majority of voters are not that interested in deeply exploring complex political issues. This is also a reinforcing feedback loop; as debate degenerates, people are turned off, and want to spend less time paying attention...)

Understanding the effect of System Dynamics can provide powerful insights into strategy, marketing, sales, social media, and many other areas. It often reveals why unintended consequences occur. And a System Dynamics analysis can provide a foundation for better decisions.
The next time you are confronting a particularly thorny issue, it may in fact be valid to "blame it on the system."

Read More......

Volcano Lessons: Preparing for Future Events

The Issue
If you've heard me speak at a conference or another event recently, you likely heard me say that in many important areas no one can predict the future.
So if you don't know what will happen, how can you prepare for it? The solution to this dilemma is that you don't have to predict future events in order to prepare for them.
We have a recent example with the Eyjafjallajokull volcano. Could anyone have foreseen the effect a single volcano could have on air travel around the world? Careful now, because that is a trick question: I am asking if anyone could have foreseen the effect, not the volcano.
The Thinking
People generally are not very good at looking to the future. There are many solid scientific studies detailing some of the failings in human thinking. Some examples: the first information we see "anchors" our expectation; we jump to conclusions; what we see is filtered by our experiences.
These characteristics of the hardware of our thinking result in several common behaviours from many people when it comes to preparing for future events. In order of increasing awareness, they are:
1. They don't look to the future at all, or
2. They look to the future, but decide future events can't be predicted so there is no point spending time on them, or
3a. They look to the future, consider some possible future events, but decide they are extremely unlikely and there is no point spending time on them, or
3b. They look to the future, consider some possible future events, and decide they can predict the future, so there is no point spending time on any other possible future events.
The problem with these approaches, even 3a and 3b, is that they are event driven. And probably the biggest failing of human thinking is that if something hasn't happened to us personally, we find it extremely difficult to conceive it will ever happen. So if you have personally never had a computer fail, or a hard drive crash, it will be tough to convince you that backing up your data is a necessary task. (Having worked with computers since the early days when they were much less reliable than they are now, I have had many such experiences, and thus am probably better than most at backing up my data.)
Instead Look at Consequences
Even the burgeoning field of risk management is often about identifying and quantifying risks, rather than looking at the consequences of the risks and most importantly how to minimize the consequences.
But if instead you look at what the effects would be if you lost some critical systems, you can prepare for future events without necessarily predicting why they might happen.
What would you do if some or all of your business or your work was disrupted? Start by asking simply "what would I need to do?" (You can look at how it might be disrupted, and how likely later on.)
Some specific examples:
Systems: telephone, Internet, loss of a computer, Blackberry, web site, e-commerce site, or electrical power (our power here in downtown Toronto is so reliable, I almost forgot that one!)
People: key personnel - what if someone was hit by the proverbial bus? And remember, almost everyone in an organization has unique knowledge. If you're working to a tight deadline on a project or a proposal, and the one person who knows where to go for the special binding is away, you may miss your deadline.
Suppliers: How vulnerable are you to a supply disruption, either short term or long term? What if a supplier shuts down for some reason? When I have designed electronic equipment, almost invariably there would be several times during the design when a decision had to be made: should we use a unique part which would enhance performance but is available from only one source, or compromise performance but have a design that wasn't dependent on a single supplier?
Customers: what if your largest, or several of your largest, customers went away (for whatever reason)?
In 2008 many financial professionals claimed "no one saw the recession coming" (though I maintain there were many warning signs.) Many investment advisors and investors were caught when they didn't examine what would happen to their investments if the stock market went down. As a result, they lost a lot of money, and some have had to delay retirement. Even without the warning signs, it was possible to prepare for the consequences of a stock market crash. I rebalanced investments in the summer of 2008 not because I predicted the stock market crash, but because I thought about the possible consequences and decided I didn't want to be worrying about which direction the market might take.
Some Examples
The Globe and Mail newspaper had an article discussing how various people who were stranded by the volcano handled the situation. For me, the most instructive example was the News Director from Corus Entertainment in Vancouver who was stranded in London. Corus had developed a process for employees to work remotely in response to the fears of a flu pandemic and disruptions from the winter Olympics. The fact that the system was already in place allowed him to be instantly productive. I'm sure no one at Corus was thinking of a volcano when they planned their remote work capability!
On a personal note, I always carry two laptop computers when going to do a presentation. It makes for a heavy bag when travelling through airports or up and down stairs. Yet after doing this for years, one time the graphic card in one of my computers failed. Without the backup computer, I couldn't have presented my slides.
What Steps Should You Take?
Identifying vulnerabilities is best done as a bottom up approach. Each employee knows their job best; asking them what is essential to the performance of their job is a good starting point. There is a worksheet at the end of this article to assist you with the process.
Sometimes having someone "interview" an employee can help them identify the equipment and tools they take for granted. This can be another employee in the organization, but be careful: unless they are from a different department they may be making the same assumptions as the interviewee.
In consolidating this information, I am a big believer in visual sharing of information. Bringing people together to jointly share their knowledge and experiences is most effective when everyone is looking at the same view.
We use tools such as Mind Mapping, Concept Mapping, and other types of diagrams to record this information. Decision making tools such as the Paired Sort tool can be used to prioritize items.
If you start at the individual level, and work up through departments to the organizational level you can consolidate the information and identify priorities. But remember not to ignore something simply because it doesn't seem likely (remember the volcano!)
Allocating a small but definite amount of time each week to creating and them maintaining these systems avoids the possibility that the effort fades as quickly as everyone's memory of the volcano.
Once the information is in place, taking it to the next level can involve Scenario Planning and System Dynamics to examine and model possible future events.
Conclusions
Back to the first question - while it is unreasonable to expect anyone to have predicted that a particular volcano would erupt in a way that would shut down European air space, it is entirely within reason to anticipate some event that might shut down air travel. (We even have a precedent with the days after 9/11.)
It is not possible to predict future events in many important areas. It is not possible to plan for every single eventuality. But you don't have to predict what will happen to be prepared, just think through the consequences of it happening.
As air travel in Europe returns to normal, I hope organizations will take away the right lesson. The obvious lesson is "no one could have predicted a volcano." The better lesson is "we must examine our vulnerabilities to unforeseen events."

Read More......

Avoiding Bad Decision Making

Avoiding Bad Decision Making

By Randy Park, Foresight Facilitator

As 2010 is unfolding, whether you are optimistic or pessimistic about this year, here are
some questions to consider:

What does bad decision making look like in your organization?
Here is a practical definition: a bad decision is a decision made by an individual or agroup in your organization that could have been avoided, and that results in a lower total value (present and/or future) of your organization. Each organization will end up with a slightly different definition, based on what they value (i.e. money, reputation, morale) and how far into the future they plan. But the key principle is that bad decisions could have been avoided, through better decision making.

How much does a bad decision cost your organization?
Of course, that will depend on the situation. For example, is it:

• one person with little influence making one bad decision? (low impact)


• many people with moderate influence making the same bad decision? (high impact)


• one person, or a small group, with high influence making one bad decision? (high impact)

Why do bad decisions happen?
There are several contributing factors in bad decisions, but two which are almost universally present are not considering important information and not examining the assumptions being made. The economic collapse of 2008-2009 (and other events in recent years) presented many examples of these two mistakes when decisions were made:

• assuming that ratings agencies were doing their jobs


• auto companies ignoring the relationship between auto sales and gas prices, while


• assuming that oil prices would not rise significantly


• companies incenting the sale of mortgages to people who would be unable to renew


• assuming that housing markets would always go up, ignoring the possibility of default


• ignoring U.S. trade and budget deficits


• assumptions about currency exchange rates

Most of these are big picture factors, but I expect you can think of some examples in your organization where decisions were made based on untrue assumptions or while ignoring available information. These can be decisions made by individuals, or they can be "groupthink", where a group of people all make the same assumptions and resultant bad decisions. And of course, this continues to happen.

Do you need a crystal ball to predict what will happen in order to avoid bad decisions?
Although I often use a crystal ball in my presentations, sometimes even making predictions and demonstrating "psychic" phenomenon, I maintain that crystal clear thinking is more useful than crystal ball thinking.

Are bad decisions always about making mistakes?
Not necessarily; bad decision making can also result in missed opportunities. This most often shows up due to filters such as "we always do it this way" and "we've never done that before."

How can you help your people make better decisions?
The first thing to understand is that the process people use when making bad decisions is the same process often used when making good decisions. It is natural, automatic, and works most of the time. The goal is not to eliminate this type of thinking, but make sure people recognize its limits and know when to shift their thinking style.
Better decisions require a better thinking process. It is natural for people to make assumptions, ignore information, think short term, jump to conclusions. Unless you have approaches and tools that specifically account for shortcomings in the way people think, you will get mistakes, especially when looking to the future.
I also believe that helping people understand their own natural tendencies in thinking convinces them of the value of these (and other) tools and approaches. In my presentations people learn this experientially, through exercises, optical illusions, brain teasers, and the crystal ball.

What gets in the way of your people making better decisions?
Expecting people to make good decisions without the awareness, training, and tools to do so. And if you add incentives (such as bonuses or stock options, or avoiding conflict with their superior) that reward people when they make "bad" decisions, people's abilities to filter out important information are exaggerated.
Moreover, no two people are looking at a situation the same way. The each have their own experiences, beliefs, education, and assumptions that are filtering how they see the situation and the decisions they make. You have your own filter too, and unless you are aware of it and take it into account when making decisions, two things will happen:
1. you may make decisions based on incomplete or inaccurate information
2. you may think you are communicating clearly to others, but they may interpret things differently
This also points out the need for a clear definition of what your organization values, so individuals can evaluate their decisions against a standard.

What is anticipact™?
Anticipact the name of our program to improve organizational decision making. Anticipact is anticipating, then acting. The anticipating refers to both external factors and internal factors in decision making.
Externally, in the big picture view, it is using tools such as Scenario Exploration and System Dynamics to examine and differentiate between driving forces where the future is uncertain and those that can be predicted. Day to day it can be as simple as thinking through decisions and anticipating how customers or co-workers might react to something you are about to say.
Internally, it is knowing how you and your colleagues think and make decisions and anticipating how your decision making strengths and weaknesses will affect your results. It is about examining and monitoring how your experience, education, opinions, beliefs, values, and assumptions will affect your decisions.
Anticipact is about making crystal clear the factors and the processes used in decision making. It enhances collaboration by incorporating all relevant experience; it speeds decision making by reducing disagreements based on opinions and assumptions; it capitalizes on your people's strengths and knowledge. And it is the most effective approach to planning and executing for the future, especially during times of uncertainty.

How does anticipact™ fit with existing tools you are already using?
Maybe you are using decision making tools such as SWOT, Force Field Analysis, Cause and Effect, Six Thinking Hats, or others. Anticipact does not contradict nor replace them. It augments these tools and makes them much more effective, because now the users understand the value and necessity of the tools. Rather than simply going through the motions (for example, in SWOT analysis, filling in boxes for Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) they see how the tools enhance their thinking. They are more able to identify their particular talents and accept the different talents of others.

How is anticipact™ delivered?
Each Anticipact program is customized for your needs. The core concepts of Anticipact are often delivered in a plenary presentation, a workshop, or a facilitated discussion on their own or in conjunction with an already planned event. Scenario Exploration and/or System Dynamics work is carried out with your input and feedback, in advance and during the process. Other components of the program include pocket reminder/reflection cards, private web pages on our site that are customized for your organization, and more.

Read More......

Randy Park will appear on Global TV in Toronto talking about New Year's Resolutions.

Read More......

The Market Momentum Myth

It's a mistake to ascribe property of physics to human behaviour
With last week's drop of stock markets, has the market momentum "stalled?" Randy Park, author of “The Prediction Trap - and how to avoid it” (and a physicist) says that question is silly.
"Markets, or political fortunes, or other human behaviours don't have momentum - they don't have physical characteristics," says Park. "Where people are involved, ‘momentum’ cannot be used to predict the future."
When people talk about momentum, they are referring to something more accurately described as a herd mentality. "It's more than a matter of semantics," says Park. "Think of the behavioural differences between avalanches and antelopes." By ascribing momentum to human behaviour, people mislead themselves and use extrapolation to predict that situations will continue as they have in the past. This leads to decisions based on bad assumptions, as we have seen in both economics and politics.
While herds may have strong tendencies to continue in the same direction, a small surprise can cause an almost instant change in direction. What's more, if the same stimulus is repeated, it may cause a totally different response the next time.
Where does this inclination come from? "Whether you look at the evolutionary picture, or the development through childhood, people see momentum and extrapolation in everyday situations. A rolling ball continues in a straight line." People see this physical behaviour and incorrectly apply it to other situations.
Some argue that human behaviour can be predicted, and in some ways it can, if the important factors are exactly the same. Yet markets and political campaigns have so many complex, interacting variables, that the situation is never the same. And even if it were, people never see the same situation twice - the second time they have experience, which will modify their decisions.
The other key danger with using metaphors like momentum is the effect they have on our decision making process. "When people have an expectation in their head, they filter incoming information and look for information that supports their point of view," says Park. He listed some of the key differences in the thinking process when predicting a single future versus anticipating different possible futures:
Predicting - closed minded, only looking for supporting information, ignore facts, miss both obstacles and opportunities. Anticipating - more open minded, open to all evidence, see opportunities as well as obstacles.
A major newspaper provided an example of the danger of prediction just yesterday. With the recent release of economic data showing essentially flat economic performance, two articles appeared, both analyzing the information and presenting rational, logical arguments for their predictions. The problem was they were predicting opposite things!
"There are practical approaches that can be used to improve decision making and avoid these thinking traps," says Park. For business, he describes the use of System Dynamics, an approach which examines the structure of situations, including feedback loops, delays in information, and hidden influences. System Dynamics then uses mathematics to model the behaviour of the system. "System Dynamics can give a window into current and future performance, but its more valuable use is to reveal assumptions, and enhance communications and understanding in a group," says Park. System Dynamics can also provide input into exploring future scenarios.
Recently, Park was in Ottawa working with a group discussing the future of traffic management in the city. There were 30 people in the room. Now what would be the most important factor affecting future transportation? Gasoline prices. Yet everyone had different expectation of where gas prices would be fifteen years from now.
"We all operate with pictures in our head. When we communicate, we use words like 'up' and 'possibly'. Yet we each have our own interpretation of what these words mean. And even our own interpretation may change from day to day."

Read More......