Archive

Needs

A World Where the Greater Good Predominates Over Profits

March 16, 2024
Alien tech, Antimatter principle, Article, Business, Collaboration, Community, Compassion, Culture change, Dignity, Economics, Fellowship, History, Joy, Needs, Nonviolence, Organisational effectiveness, Quintessence, Rightshifting, Systems thinking, WhatIf
Leave a comment

A World Where the Greater Good Predominates Over Profits

The Visionary Notion

What if the primary driving force behind commercial and economic endeavors wasn’t the pursuit of profits, but rather benefiting society, the species, Gaia, and the planet? A visionary notion, to be sure, that seems to defy conventional capitalist wisdom. Nevertheless, if we allow our imaginations to roam freely and look back at periods in history where ethical business practices held sway, we can depict a world truly transformed by this paradigm shift.

Profit Motives vs. Ethics and Humanity

Throughout most of human history, the profit motive has reigned supreme in the business realm. However, there have been notable exceptions driven by religious teachings, philosophical movements, and social ideals that prioritised ethical conduct over mere grubby accumulation of more and more wealth. The Quakers, for instance, were renowned for their commitment to honest dealings and consideration of employee welfare, exemplified by the socially-conscious British chocolate makers like Cadbury. The 19th century cooperative movement aimed to create enterprises that equitably shared profits with worker-owners and the local community.

The Beauty of Ethical Business

Would we call businesses truly putting the greater good before profits “beautiful”? At first, such a description may seem like an odd coupling of aesthetics with commerce. But perhaps there is an inherent beauty to enterprises that create sustainable value for society while exhibiting ethical conduct.

Just as we find natural wonders, artistic works, or selfless acts emotionally moving due to their harmony with higher ideals of truth, goodness, and transcendence of ego, so could businesses centered on benefiting all stakeholders embody a different kind of beauty. One not necessarily based on physical appearance, but on being skillfully crafted exemplars of how our economic activities can align with ethical, aesthetic, environmental and humanitarian principles.

This beauty manifests through their products, services, and operations, harmonising with the world rather than undermining it through greed, despoilment, or exploitation. Beautiful businesses are sustainable and circular by design, creating goods to be celebrated and cherished rather than cynically designed for disposability.They invest in creating opportunity and dignity for workers and communities rather than grinding them underfoot for profit margins.

Where today’s shareholder-driven corporations often exemplify grotesque machineries of extraction, ethical enterprises putting people and planet over money could be sublime new exemplars of applied aesthetics – aspiring toward perfection not through profit metrics, but through positively impacting all they engage with. Their beauty would shine through in becoming tightly interwoven threads in an interdependent tapestry, creating joyful, resilient and regenerative systems that elevate our shared potential.

While the traditional business vernacular focuses on the uglyness of lucrative processes, revenue growth, and reputational brand value, a world where ethical enterprises reign would celebrate hallmarks of perfected form: generative models that produce societal good, environmental integrity, attending to folks’ needs, and uplifting the human spirit. Perhaps then, we could appreciate the highest “good companies” not just pragmatically, but aesthetically – as living artworks of conscious, ethical organisation.

A World Oriented Toward the Greater Good

In such a world oriented toward the greater good, companies measure success not just by financial returns, but by positive impacts. Ethical practices like those espoused by certain faith traditions and thinkers are the norm across these industries. Sustainability is prized over short-term gain, with environmental stewardship prioritised over resource exploitation. We’ve seen glimpses of this in recent decades through the rise of corporate social responsibility (CSR), socially conscious investing, and the emergence of benefit corporations legally bound to creating public benefit, not just profits. But such examples have remained the exception rather than the rule in a profit-driven system.

The Global Ethos of the Greater Good

Imagine if this ethos becomes the core operating principle globally. Rather than lobbying for narrow interests, these businesses advocate for the common good. Tax avoidance schemes would be abandoned in a system where contributing one’s fair share is the ethical baseline. Worker rights and equity are vigorously protected, not eroded in pursuit of higher margins. On an individual level, cutthroat workplace could gives way to healthier cooperation, and integration with our personal and community values and family lives. Ethical conduct is rewarded over pure profit-generation at any cost. Kudos is not derived from endless growth metrics, but to positive impacts created for all the Folks That Matter™.

A Sustainable Economic Model

Of course, enterprises still need to generate income to remain viable and reinvest in their social missions. But growth is pursued by creating genuine value for society rather than extracting it. Sustainable, circular economic models replace those premised on endless consumption and planned obsolescence.

A Radical Yet Possible Vision

Such a world may seem naively idealistic to modern sensibilities, conditioned to accept profit as the prime directive. But is it any more far-fetched than an entrenched global system that relentlessly exploits people and finite resources in pursuit of perpetual economic expansion on a finite planet? By orienting business toward the greater good, as past ethical movements have done, we might create an economy that better serves humanity. This may read as a utopian ideal today, but it has been a reality at various points throughout our history. A world where businesses prioritise society over self-interest may not be inevitable, but it is possible if we dare to imagine and build it together.

Do you have even the briefest five minutes to contemplate how things might be different?

Further Reading

Ackoff, R. L. (2011). The aesthetics of work. In Skip Walter’s blog post retrieved from https://skipwalter.net/2011/12/25/russ-ackoff-the-aesthetics-of-work/

Women and the Antimatter Principle

March 12, 2024
Antimatter principle, Article, Business, Compassion, Love, Needs
Leave a comment

Women and the Antimatter Principle

“A man enjoys the happiness he feels, a woman the happiness she gives.”

~ Madame de Rosemonde
from Letter One Hundred and Thirty, Les Liaisons Dangereuse

This insightful quote from Madame de Rosemonde in the classic French novel Les Liaisons Dangereuses highlights a profound truth about the nature of love and human relationships. At its core, love is not about taking or receiving, but about giving. The deepest fulfillment comes not from demanding love and affection from others, but from actively nurturing those around us through empathy, compassion and attending to their needs. And this principle of prioritising others’ needs over narrow self-interest is exemplified in the way many women approach love and relationships.

The Antimatter Principle is the fundamental idea of attending to folks’ needs – putting others’ wellbeing and happiness first through compassion, generosity and nurturing care.

The Feminine Tradition

While both genders are capable of selflessness, tradition has often positioned women as the prime upholders of this radical principle of prioritising others’ needs over our own. From the maternal instinct to subsuming personal ambitions for family, from creating loving homes to knitting together the social fabric, women have long exemplified the art of attending to folks’ needs. It’s the generous aunt welcoming nieces and nephews, the intuitive wife anticipating her husband’s stress, the mother ensuring everyone’s plate is full at the dinner table.

The Source of Joy

In an era of self-absorption, the Antimatter Principle can seem a countercultural relic. An in business, eventhe mention of love can raise hacklesa and foster unease.Yet it is this total devotion to others’ contentment that unlocks true joy and fulfillment, as Madame de Rosemonde suggested. For many women, the deepest wellspring of bliss lies not in being served, but in humble service itself.

The Risks and Rewards

This feminine ethic of radical other-focus can be unstable if unchecked – attending to folks’ needs to the point of self-negation risks dependency and being consumed by the act of giving. But properly balanced, it is a precious fuel source.

The Impact

In our fractured times, reviving the lost feminine way of the Antimatter Principle could be the solution for reweaving tattered social bonds. By recovering the ethic of joyful, unconditional care for others’ needs and happiness, we restore the very matter of love, mutuality and human communion itself.

That Weird Feeling When Someone Attends to Your Needs

February 29, 2024
Antimatter principle, Article, Attendants, Community, Compassion, Culture change, Empathy, Needs, Organisational Therapy, Psychology, Relationships
Leave a comment

That Weird Feeling When Someone Attends to Your Needs

There is often subtle unease or vulnerability when another person identifies and attends to your emotional or practical needs before you ask. Even as they are attending to you, why might you feel strangely rattled or intruded upon by having your underlying feelings anticipated and met in this way?

Expectations

Part of the strangeness seems to be linked to our expectations around emotional autonomy in relationships. It might be because we assume we must self-manage feelings, not burden others unprompted, and disguise any weakness. So when someone sees through our façades and reaches out with support, it can feel jarringly unfamiliar. There is awkwardness adjusting to a new way of relating where masking distress is no longer accepted or expected.

Self-Image

Additionally, admitting needs may endanger our own resourcefulness or positive self-image. To remain strong and unaffected is easier than acknowledging where we genuinely need empathy or assistance. Conceding our emotional gaps confronts us with difficult realities about ourselves. Having someone respond caringly can dredge up shame before that nurturing registers as comfort. It takes time to overcome our reflexive impulse to deny needs that contradict the identities we aspire to.

Psychological Safety

Beneath the discomfort may also lurk trust issues around vulnerability. Emotions expose our innermost selves. Letting someone in to perceive and attend to that sensitive dimension means lowering barriers and giving up some degree of control. Psychologically, it signals dependence on their benevolence versus total self-sufficiency. With support inevitably comes some loss of authority over how we might want to be perceived. Even caring assistance can seem invasive before safety takes root.

While emotional caretaking intends to heal and bond, the path to welcoming nurture over isolation is not always smooth or instant. The vulnerability of relinquishing façades, acknowledging needs, and opening up to help all disrupt our status quo. By naming these sources of weirdness, perhaps the tensions around receiving compassionate support become less of a bewildering hurdle. Gradually, we learn to receive grace and attend to one another’s emotions without threatening inner resolve or identity. The discomfort slowly fades as emotional interdependence replaces sole self-reliance.

Summary

In essence, the discomfort we may feel when someone attends to our emotional needs often stems from unfamiliarity with true interdependence, unwillingness to show vulnerability, and a cultural overemphasis on extreme self-reliance. We expect to conceal any weakness, deny needing support, and handle distress alone without imposing on others. So when another person perceptively senses unvoiced feelings and reaches out to care for our inner experiences, it can feel weirdly intrusive. Even compassionate emotional caretaking jars notions of autonomy and challenges our reflexes to hide perceived flaws or shortcomings behind façade of capability. Yet suppressing needs creates isolation, and makes it so much more likely our needs will go unmet. Perhaps by better understanding the common strangeness behind receiving others’ attention, we can grow into truer communities where attending to one another’s unspoken needs and hopes is simply what love requires.

Building Method: Creating Shared Understanding of How We Work

February 7, 2024
Antimatter principle, Article, Needs, Quintessence, Requirements, Software development
Leave a comment

Building Method: Creating Shared Understanding of How We Work

With today’s complex business landscapes and rapidly evolving technologies, having a well-defined “way of working” is crucial for software teams to execute effectively. Most organisations adopt processes, frameworks, and methods that they believe will deliver software projects successfully within their constraints.

But how often do teams step back and ask – how well does our method actually work for us? How much have we actively built and shaped it based on our own learning? How much of what we’ve learned about how to build software do we apply to building our method(s)?

The Reality

The reality is most teams inherit an existing software development method or cargo-cult the latest hype they read about. They don’t consciously architect the foundations defining the collective work. Much like constructing a building without an intentional blueprint – the result is disjointed work patterns built piecemeal over time.

This leads to confusion, frustration, and quarterbacking* when team members operate on conflicting assumptions and mental models of how work actually flows. People spin their wheels questioning why things happened when lacked shared reasoning of how decisions get made.

That’s why teams dedicated to continuous improvement migh choose to prioritise Building Method. This means deliberately designing an optimal way of working given your realities – then updating the blueprint as you learn from experience.

Key Steps

Key steps for Building Method include:

  • Surfacing the needs of all the Folks That Matter™ re: the Build Method (old skool: requirements analysis)
  • Facilitating deep conversations about current practices, the good and the bad, what to keep and what to reject
  • Mapping out flows – where value gets created and lost
  • Defining decision rights giving clarity yet freedom
  • Distilling guiding principles for tracking outcomes vs needs
  • Envisioning the ideal configuration of people, process, tools
  • Inspecting then rewiring suboptimal current conditions
  • Embedding rituals allowing reflection and adaptation
  • Surfacing and reflecting on governing shared assumptions and beliefs about how work should work

While external benchmarks provide useful perspective, real transformation occurs when teams consciously architect agreements uniquely tailored for the Needsscape. By investing energy into Building Method you construct a living blueprint that evolves intentionally vs. accidentally over time.

Invitation to Contribute

What does your team’s current method look like – and how intentionally was it built? I welcome perspectives on elevating teams capabilities for effectively Building Method. Please share your experiences in the comments.

Aside

*Quarterbacking is when one person on a team takes on an overly directive role and excessively tells other members what to do, rather than allowing for collaborative decision-making and self-organisation.

The term comes from American football’s quarterback position – the player who calls out plays and commands the offense on each down. Calling someone a “quarterback” on a software team implies they are dominating discussions, assigning tasks, and tightly controlling the work in an ineffective way.

Quarterbacking can emerge when team members lack a shared understanding of role clarity, decision rights, working agreements, and processes. Without clear method or structure, an informal hierarchy forms with the most vocal directing others and disempowering the team.

The alternative is facilitating peer-to-peer collaboration where everyone has agency in creatively solving problems. Avoiding quarterbacking means intentionally designing team interactions that enable decentralised leadership, autonomy, and leverage collective intelligence.

So in summary, quarterbacking refers to overly directive and disempowering behaviour that stems from lack of clarity, structure, and self-organisation on a team. The solution is co-creating method that empowers the broader team.

What’s Wrong with DORA?

January 17, 2024
Antimatter principle, Article, DevOps, Needs
Leave a comment

What’s Wrong with DORA?

DevOps Research and Assessment (DORA) has popularised four key metrics for measuring software delivery and IT performance:

  1. Deployment Frequency
  2. Lead Time for Changes
  3. Change Failure Rate
  4. Time to Restore (1)

According to DORA, optimising these metrics leads to higher productivity, profitability, and market share. But their laser focus on velocity overlooks quality of outcomes. DORA fails to emphasise whether software updates actually meet user needs or deliver more business value. See also: The Antimatter Principle.

Overly Prescriptive Approach

Promoting these four metrics applies a one-size-fits-all DevOps model that may not suit every organisation. DORA’s rigid framework limits flexibility for companies to tailor practices to their unique needs (and the needs of all the Folks That Matter™).

Shovelling Shit Faster

Nowhere does DORA stress measuring if software improves customers’ lives. Their model incentivises shipping code changes rapidly – without considering real-world impact. For example, faster deployment cycles could degrade instead of improve products if quality is not continuously validated.

DORA says nothing about ensuring “done” items provide tangible value to users. And lowering change failure rates matters little for those issues originating from deficient system architectures rather than deployment processes. Faster restoration loses impact without resilient foundations.”.

Quality Metrics

In essence, DORA overlooks a core, fifth metric: Quality of Outcomes. This measures whether frequent code deployments actually deliver business value and satisfy customers. Velocity means little without user-centric data on software effectiveness.

Their models push maximum development speed rather than solutions optimized for needs. Quality cannot be an afterthought. DevOps connects culture, outcomes, and technical execution. DORA would better serve the industry by emphasizing value over velocity.

Questionable Data Analysis

While DORA’s reports reference data from thousands of technology professionals, their research methodology and data analysis comes under scrutiny. For example, their surveys may have sampling issues or lack statistical significance testing of findings. Correlations around improved IT performance are presented as definitive without enough controlled studies.

Narrow Focus

DORA’s reports concentrate almost exclusively on internal software development lifecycle processes. But DevOps success depends on many human and cultural dimensions that DORA largely ignores. Collaboration, security culture, communication protocols, and learning disciplines play key roles as well.

Emphasis on Speed

In striving for faster delivery of technology changes, DORA overlooks the dangers of moving too hastily. Pushing out more deployments is not valuable if quality suffers. And accelerated velocity risks increasing technical debt and architectural risks over time.

Commercial Interests

While positioned as an impartial research organisation, DORA was founded by – and continues to promote – DevOps platform vendors. These commercial interests raise questions around potential bias in their perspectives and findings.

Conclusion

DORA has stimulated valuable conversations around improving development and operations. However, as with any prescriptive framework, organisations might choose to scrutinise its limitations and find the right DevOps model for their own needs. There is no universal approach for DevOps excellence.

Personally, I’d never recommend DORA to my clients.

Footnote

1) “Time to Restore” or “Mean Time to Restore (MTTR)” is one of the four key metrics that DORA highlights for measuring DevOps/IT performance.

It refers to the average time it takes to recover and restore service when an incident, outage, or defect that impacts users occurs in production. Some examples:

  • If a server goes down, MTTR measures how long it takes on average to get that server back up and running again.
  • If a new software update causes functionality bugs, MTTR measures the average time from when the defective update was released to when it was rolled back or fixed and normal operation was restored.

So in summary, Time to Restore tracks the speed of recovery from production issues and disruptions. DORA advocates minimizing MTTR to improve availability and reduce downtime impacts on the business.

Workshy Culture: A Top-Down Issue

November 28, 2023
Article, Needs, Organisational effectiveness, Quality, Toxic behaviours
Leave a comment

Workshy Culture: A Top-Down Issue

What Is Workshyness?

Workshyness is not just laziness; it’s a pattern where employees consistently do only what’s necessary to avoid dismissal. Only when we begin to understand this behaviourcan we start to address it effectively. Unlike “quiet quitting”, where employees fulfil their job requirements but don’t go beyond, workshyness involves not even meeting basic job expectations.

Example: The Workshy Employment Advisors

In an employment support office, where the staff’s mandate is to assist the unemployed in their job search, a covert workshy culture is evident through the actions of an advisor named Emily. Emily’s role involves providing personalised career advice, assisting with job applications, and conducting mock interviews. However, her engagement with these tasks is superficial.

Emily’s Covert Workshyness

Emily pretends to review CVs and cover letters, giving the impression of thoroughness while actually offering only superficial and hand-wavy feedback. Her client meetings are conducted with a professional demeanor, but her guidance is often generic, lacking in depth, and fails to address the specific needs and challenges of each individual. She fulfills her duties on the surface, but her involvement falls well short of genuinely empowering her clients in their job hunt.

Subtle Influence on Team and Management’s Lack of Insight

Other staff members, noticing Emily’s approach of maintaining appearances without delivering substantive support, begin to adopt a similar method. They keep up a façade of engagement but shy away from providing the in-depth assistance that clients truly need. This shift is not overt, making it more challenging to detect and address.

Helen, the office manager, perceives the team as functioning well, failing to recognize the lack of depth in their engagement. Without delving into the quality of service being provided, she inadvertently allows this minimalist work culture to continue.

Impact on Service Quality

This covert form of workshyness significantly undermines the quality of service. Clients receive assistance that appears adequate on the surface but lacks the tailored, proactive support essential for effective job seeking. The office, maintaining an exterior of efficiency, falls short of its fundamental mission to empower the unemployed with substantial support. This subtle workshy culture, marked by a lack of genuine engagement from both advisors and management, subtly but significantly diminishes the organisation’s impact and its ability to make a meaningful difference in the lives of its clients.

How Do Managers Contribute?

Management plays a significant role in fostering a workshy culture. Many managers themselves display workshy tendencies, and thus inadvertently set a standard for their employees to follow. This trickle-down effect can create an entire organisational culture that normalises minimal effort. Moreover, as at least part of the managers’ role is to call out workshyness and work on tackling it, when they themselves are workshy their reports have free rein to persist in their avoidance of work.

What Happens When Leaders Are Workshy?

Leadership workshyness is particularly problematic. It’s not always apparent, as their positions often mask their lack of engagement. However, their minimal input and disengagement can severely impact organisational culture and performance. It creates a cycle where workshyness is both a cause and a symptom of a deeper organisational issue.

Why Address Workshyness?

Ignoring workshyness leads to a decline in overall organisational health. It affects productivity, team dynamics, and employee morale. Addressing it isn’t just about improving numbers; it’s about sustaining a healthy, thriving organisational culture.

Strategies for Change

Organisations can choose to actively combat workshyness. This involves rethinking leadership roles, ensuring managers are actively engaged and setting the right example. Companies can also choose to create environments where effort and engagement are expected and valued at all levels. It’s not enough to simply identify workshyness; organisations must actively work to build cultures where it cannot thrive.

In conclusion, workshyness is a systemic issue that often stems from the top. By acknowledging and addressing the role of management in perpetuating this culture, organisations can take significant steps towards fostering a more engaged and productive workforce.

What is Work?

November 10, 2023
Antimatter principle, Article, Business, Culture change, Needs
Leave a comment

What is Work?

Yes, Work is Toxic.But what do we mean by “work”. And how often do folks discuss the subject, and surface their individual and collective assumptions and beliefs on why we work? And the alternatives?

Is Work a Necessary Part of Human Existence?

Work, a common trope in human existence, addresses a variety of needs, each distinct and significant in its own right. This exploration unveils six different needs that work fulfils, highlighting the diverse motivations and purposes behind why people work.

Meeting Economic Needs: Is It Just About Money?

At its most fundamental, work is a means to meet economic needs. It’s the traditional view of working for a wage or salary, primarily aimed at earning enough to support oneself and one’s family. This need for financial security and stability is perhaps the most widely acknowledged reason for working.

Fulfilling Creative Desires: More Than Just a Job?

Work also serves as a conduit for creative fulfilment. Here, work is an avenue for artistic expression, innovation, and creation. Whether it’s in the arts, design, or technological innovation, this aspect of work caters to the intrinsic human need for creativity and self-expression.

Serving Social Needs: A Tool for Connection?

Another critical need addressed by work is social. This includes the desire for social interaction, community involvement, or fulfilling a civic duty. Roles in public service, volunteering, or participating in community projects meet our innate need for social engagement and contributing to the greater good.

Promoting Personal Growth: Just Self-Improvement?

Work also plays a pivotal role in personal growth and development. This encompasses acquiring new skills, knowledge, and experiences for personal and professional advancement. Whether through formal education, on-the-job training, or self-led learning, work can be a journey towards self-actualisation.

Ensuring Survival: The Basic Necessity?

At its most basic level, work is about survival. This fundamental aspect involves jobs or tasks essential for maintaining life’s necessities. It’s a primal form of work that underlines the essential role of labour in sustaining life and wellbeing.

Seeking Status: A Symbol of Success?

Lastly, work often addresses the need for status and recognition. In many societies, one’s job or career is not just a means of earning a living but also a key indicator of social status. High-status jobs or careers are often sought for the prestige and respect they confer, reflecting a societal value placed on certain types of work. This need for status through work can drive ambition, influence career choices, and shape one’s identity.

Conclusions

In conclusion, work serves a multitude of needs, from the practical to the psychological. work is a ubiquitous yet multifaceted concept, perceived and valued differently across individuals and groups. While some view it as a means for economic stability, others see it as a channel for creative expression, social engagement, personal growth, survival, or as a parading of status. The profound diversity in these interpretations often goes unnoticed, even among close colleagues, loved ones, team members, and family. This lack of awareness about the varying perspectives on work can lead to profound impacts, both positive and negative.

On the positive side, these different interpretations can enrich workplace dynamics, fostering a diverse and inclusive environment where multiple viewpoints and motivations are valued. It allows for a broader range of ideas and solutions, driven by the varied needs and experiences that each individual brings to the table.

However, the negative impacts are equally significant. Misunderstandings and conflicts can arise when there’s a lack of recognition of these differing perspectives. For example, a person driven by status might struggle to understand a colleague motivated by creative fulfilment, leading to potential clashes in priorities and work styles. Similarly, in personal relationships, differing views on the purpose of work can lead to tension and miscommunication.

The key lies in acknowledging and respecting these diverse interpretations of work. By understanding that work can mean different things to different people, we can foster a more empathetic and inclusive approach, both in professional settings and in our personal lives. This awareness can bridge gaps, build stronger relationships, and create a more harmonious and productive environment for everyone involved.

Work is such a fundamental concept, and yet so rarely considered or discussed.

Postscript

Buckminster Fuller, a renowned 20th-century inventor, designer, and futurist, had a unique perspective on work and its necessity in society. One of his most famous quotes on the subject is:

“We should do away with the absolutely specious notion that everybody has to earn a living. It is a fact today that one in ten thousand of us can make a technological breakthrough capable of supporting all the rest. The youth of today are absolutely right in recognizing this nonsense of earning a living. We keep inventing jobs because of this false idea that everybody has to be employed at some kind of drudgery because, according to Malthusian-Darwinian theory, he must justify his right to exist.”

Fuller’s viewpoint reflects his belief in using technology and intelligent design to reduce the need for laborious work. He advocated for a society where technological advancements and efficient use of resources could provide for all, reducing the necessity for everyone to engage in traditional forms of employment to “earn a living.” Fuller’s ideas were ahead of his time, aligning with contemporary discussions about automation, universal basic income, and redefining the role of work in society.

Bertrand Russell, the British philosopher, mathematician, and Nobel laureate, shared his thoughts on work in his 1932 essay, “In Praise of Idleness.” Russell challenged the conventional view of work, advocating for a reduction in work hours and emphasising the importance of leisure.

One of his notable quotes from the essay is:

“The idea that the poor should have leisure has always been shocking to the rich.”

In this essay, Russell argues that much work is unnecessary and that modern society could sustain itself with considerably less effort if labour and resources were managed more wisely. He believed that reducing work hours would lead to a happier, more fulfilled society, where individuals would have more time for leisure activities, cultivating their interests, attending to folks’ needs, and engaging in personal development.

Russell’s perspective was revolutionary for his time, questioning the then-prevailing work ethic that equated long hours of labour with virtue and success. His ideas contribute to ongoing discussions about work-life balance, the value of leisure, and the role of work in human life.

Albert Einstein, renowned for his contributions to physics, also shared his thoughts on work and its role in human life. One of his notable quotes regarding work is:

“Man is made by his belief. As he believes, so he is.”

While this quote doesn’t address work directly, it reflects Einstein’s broader philosophical perspective, suggesting that our beliefs shape our realities, including our attitudes towards work and our professional endeavours.

Einstein also expressed views on the purpose and nature of work in various letters and writings. He believed that work should be more than a means of survival; it should contribute to the well-being of humanity and be a source of satisfaction and joy. He often emphasised the importance of creativity, curiosity, and intellectual pursuit in one’s work, rather than mere monetary gain or social status.

His life and work demonstrate his belief in the value of intellectual curiosity and the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake, rather than for practical or financial reasons. Einstein’s approach to work aligns with the idea that personal fulfillment and contributing to the greater good are key components of meaningful work.

Henry David Thoreau: Thoreau, an American naturalist and philosopher, is known for his book “Walden,” where he reflects on simpler living in natural surroundings. He questioned the relentless pursuit of work and material success, advocating for a life that prioritises simplicity, nature, and self-sufficiency.

Oscar Wilde, the renowned Irish playwright, poet, and author, known for his wit and flamboyant style, had his own unique perspective on work. While Wilde did not extensively philosophise about work, his views on work, often expressed through his sharp wit and satirical style, provide an interesting insight.

One of his famous quotes regarding work is:

“Work is the curse of the drinking classes.”

This quip is a typical example of Wilde’s penchant for turning societal norms on their head, using humour and irony. The phrase is a playful inversion of the more common saying that “drink is the curse of the working classes,” which implies that alcoholism is a significant problem among the working poor. Wilde flips this, suggesting humourously that work interferes with the leisurely pursuits (like drinking) of the average person.

Partisanship

November 1, 2023
Actionable Insights, Agile, Antimatter principle, Article, Attendants, Business, Culture change, Lamentation, Needs, Organisational effectiveness, Organisational Therapy
Leave a comment

Partisanship

Does Taking Sides Help?

Supporting Agile is like supporting Hamas, or Israel, or the Palestinians, or Ukraine, or Russia, or the USA, or China, or…

This opening might shock you, but it’s an intentional jolt to invite reflection on how we often automatically pick sides. I’ve spent years criticising Agile, but recent world events have helped my see the folly of this. In the Middle East and elsewhere, any sane person would support PEACE. (Of course, sanity seems in direly short supply, presently). Similarly we might choose to aim for better meeting folks’ NEEDS in organisational practices. Instead of partisan stances, why not focus on what really matters: achieving results that speak to the needs of everyone involved?

Why Do We Rush to Choose Sides?

Choosing a side can feel satisfying. It simplifies complex issues and gives us a team to root for. However, partisanship often blinds us to the nuances that exist in any conflict or approach. Whether it’s in international relations or ways of working, like Agile, blind allegiance and partisanship never results in beneficial outcomes.

What’s the Cost of Partisanship?

The cost is steep. Partisan views stifle creativity and close us off from alternative solutions. We become invested in the success of our chosen side or approach, disregarding other approaches that offer better results. Specifically, pro-agile or anti-agile now seems to me to be highly partisan, and a similar folly. I propose we get off the taking sides bandwagon and move towards attending to folks’ fundamental needs.

What Outcomes Do Folks Need?

Instead of wallowing in partisan mire, let’s focus on folks’ needs. These can vary, but generally include:

  • Products and services that best* meet folks’ needs.
  • A workplace environment, ways of working, and organisational culture that best* meet folks’ needs.
  • [Further suggestions invited]

Each approach, including Agile, has its merits and drawbacks when it comes to these outcomes. By taking a needs-based stance, we can adopt a blend of approaches tailored to specific needs, rather than attempting to shoehorn everything into a one-size-fits-all approach.

How Do We Move Forward?

To move away from partisanship, we might choose to:

  1. Identify whose needs matter, and what those needs might be.
  2. Surface and reflect on shared assumptions and beliefs.
  3. Acknowledge our biases.
  4. Educate ourselves on different approaches.
  5. Align on desired outcomes.

This isn’t just applicable to Agile; it’s a principle we can apply universally. Whether it’s picking a side in a conflict or choosing principles and practices for organisational improvement, we might choose to free ourselves from the limitations of partisanship.

Final Thoughts

Partisanship is a tempting trap, offering the illusion of simplicity in a complex world. But it’s a trap that often leads us away from the outcomes folks need. By acknowledging this, we can pave a more effective, less divisive path forward, whether we’re discussing international relations, social change, or the best* approaches for organisational success.

*Here, may I suggest that “best” means “meets all the needs of all the folks that matter”.

Man’s Search for Dignity

October 11, 2023
Antimatter principle, Article, Dignity, Needs
Leave a comment

Man’s Search for Dignity

What Does Dignity Truly Mean?

In our quest for freedom and justice, we might choose to recognise the innate worth and boundless dignity inherent in each human soul. Immanuel Kant speaks to the heart of this when he implores us to treat every individual not as mere means, but each as an end unto themselves. This is not merely a philosophical concept; it’s the bedrock of human equality, respect, and mutual understanding. More simply put, most people have a deep need for dignity.

Is There a Link Between Dignity and Well-Being?

Friends, while Dan Pink talks of autonomy, mastery, and purpose, and Viktor Frankl speaks of our inherent need for meaning, let’s not forget the soul’s unquenchable thirst for dignity. As Maya Angelou wisely points out, our very sense of self, our emotional well-being, is intertwined with our dignity. We are more resilient, more courageous, and more human when our inherent dignity receives acknowledgement and attention.

Has Dignity a Place in the Temple of Labour?

In the workplace, which Martin Luther King, Jr,. called the ‘Temple of Labour’, we often neglect this divine principle of dignity. We focus on numbers, on productivity, forgetting that we’re dealing with souls with dreams and hopes, just like Nelson Mandela who stood up for dignity in the face of dehumanising inequality. We must understand that our employees are not mere cogs in a machine but human beings. When a man or woman is treated with dignity, they rise to greater heights, not just for themselves but for the community at large.

Can We Find Some Metrics of the Soul?

How do you measure something as ethereal yet foundational as dignity? While quantifying the soul’s yearning is a complex task, Eleanor Roosevelt reminds us that dignity begins in “small places, close to home”. It manifests in lower employee turnover, higher job satisfaction, and even in the very reputation of your organisation. It’s these ‘small places’ where we might choose to set our focus.

Do We Need a Blueprint for Dignity?

  1. Transparent Communication: As the Dalai Lama suggests, the yearning for dignity is a universal human need. Open dialogue within an organisation can foster a sense of collective dignity.
  2. Inclusivity for All: A truly diverse workplace doesn’t just enrich the environment; it elevates our collective sense of dignity.
  3. Just and Fair Policies: Justice is the cornerstone of dignity. We might choose to establish fair policies that helps every man and woman feel valued.
  4. Pathways to Resolve Conflict: An effective and just approach to attending to folks’ needs, to airing grievances and to settling disputes maintains the dignity of all parties involved, allowing for growth and reconciliation.

The Horizon of Hope

Friends, let’s be clear: dignity is not some lofty aspiration; it’s the very essence that fuels a society rooted in justice and freedom. Upholding dignity propels us toward that horizon of hope—a realm where each of us is evaluated based on the integrity of our character, devoid of judgments. It’s a realm where the sanctity of human dignity is not a privilege, but a birthright that envelops everyone.

So, how about we channel our energies to manifest this vision? Let’s affirm the innate dignity within ourselves and extend that same attention to our fellow human beings. And in doing so, how about we build our homes, workplaces, and communities as living testaments to this most cherished principle.

 

Right or Popular?

October 10, 2023
Agile, Antimatter principle, Article, Ethics, Needs
Leave a comment

Right or Popular?

What Does “Right” Mean?

When we talk about being “right” in this context, we’re referring to a blend of factual accuracy and logical correctness. It means that your stance aligns with evidence and adheres to principles of logical reasoning. This isn’t about being morally right or wrong; rather, it’s about your position being defensible based on facts and rational arguments.

Why Aren’t Right and Popular Synonymous?

In an ideal scenario, what’s right should naturally be what’s popular. But we don’t live in such a simple reality. Public opinion often sways due to factors such as social influence, emotional appeal, or pre-existing biases. Popularity doesn’t put a premium on factual accuracy or logical validity. Often, a popular opinion gains traction not because it’s correct, but because it resonates with a significant number of people on a different level, be it emotional, ideological or commercial.

Can You Be Both?

Occasionally, yes, you can find yourself in the sweet spot where right meets popular. But increasingly, especially in polarised discussions—be they political, social, or even scientific—the two are mutually exclusive. The more divisive the topic, the more likely that standing on the side of logic and evidence will place you outside the mainstream. Increasingly, rigorous facts and deep insights have been overshadowed by sensationalism, crowd psychology and the might of Mammon.

What’s at Stake?

When right and popular part ways, there are consequences for both individuals and society. For individuals, it might mean less social acceptance or professional opportunities. On a societal level, the erosion of fact-based discourse can have serious implications, from the spread of misinformation to poorly-informed public policies.

How Do You Choose?

It’s a personal decision. If being correct is a core part of your identity and purpose, then there’s no question about which path to choose. However, if your role involves public influence or if your objective is to bring about change, the answer may not be so straightforward. Sometimes, a tactical compromise can serve a larger strategy, even if it means momentarily sidelining what’s right for what’s popular.

Conclusion

Being right and being popular are increasingly becoming mutually exclusive options. While it’s a dilemma that poses challenges both personally and socially, the choice ultimately lies in your hands. What you choose will depend on your needs, your values, and the context in which you find yourself.

Chatbots and Unmet Needs

September 28, 2023
AI, Antimatter principle, Article, Chatbots, Language, Listening, Needs, Organisational effectiveness
Leave a comment

Chatbots and Unmet Needs

What Can Chatbots Really Do?

Chatbots aren’t just virtual customer service agents that can help you book a table at a restaurant. They’re becoming intelligent interfaces capable of nuanced interactions. And yes, they can help uncover and discover the unmet needs of not just customers, but all those who matter in an organisational setting.

Who Are the Folks That Matter?

Before diving into the potential of chatbots, it’s helpful to identify the people whose needs we aim to understand. In most organisations, this includes employees, management, shareholders, regulators, and of course, customers.

How Do Chatbots Operate Without Analytics?

While it’s easy to assume that data analytics play a key role in this process, chatbots can provide valuable insights without delving too much into data sets. The focus here is on real-time interaction, intuitive questioning and active listening, which form the methods by which chatbots can make a significant impact.

Unearthing Employee Needs

Employees often have concerns and needs that go unexpressed. Whether it’s about workload, work-life balance, or specific job functions, these issues sometimes remain buried. Chatbots provide an anonymous platform where employees can voice their needs without the fear of judgement. The direct feedback is not only candid but also immediate, bypassing the red tape that often comes with traditional methods of internal communication.

What’s in It for Management?

Management teams also have a lot to gain. From understanding organisational dynamics to gauging employee morale, chatbots can ask the right questions that elicit actionable responses. Here too, methods like focused questioning make these bots valuable assets in decision-making processes.

Can Shareholders Benefit?

Certainly. Shareholders often seek insights into an organisation’s operations, financial health, and future direction. Although not a substitute for comprehensive reports, chatbots can provide immediate, digestible information that answers shareholders’ queries effectively. This immediate line of communication can help identify needs that may otherwise remain hidden.

Anticipating Customer Needs

We can’t overlook the role of chatbots in understanding and even anticipating customers’ needs. Unlike traditional methods that may rely on extensive data analysis, chatbots engage in real-time dialogue. These conversations can reveal not just stated needs but also anticipate latent needs that the customer might not even be aware of.

What’s Next?

As organisations adopt more sophisticated technology, the capabilities of chatbots are likely to expand. However, their primary function remains rooted in communication. Whether it’s for employees, management, shareholders, regulators or customers, chatbots offer a unique way of uncovering unmet needs without relying heavily on analytics or extensive research. It’s all about asking the right questions and listening—something that chatbots are getting increasingly good at.

Anticipating Folks’ Needs

September 25, 2023
Antimatter principle, Article, Business, Caring, Culture change, Customers, Needs
Leave a comment

Anticipating Folks’ Needs

What is Proactive Attention?

When it comes to attending to folks’ needs, there’s a lot more than just responding to requests or fixing issues as they arise. The best organisations don’t wait for things to go wrong; they actively work on understanding the needs of the Folks That Matter™ well in advance. That’s what we call proactive attention to needs.

What is the Antimatter Principle?

The Antimatter Principle goes beyond simple problem-solving; it focuses on making meaningful connections with others by attending to their needs. Proactively adhering to this principle means looking ahead to prevent issues from even occurring.

How Does Boyd’s OODA Loop Fit In?

The concept of getting inside your customers’ OODA loop can be a game-changer here. The OODA loop—Observe, Orient, Decide, Act—is a framework that describes the decision-making process. By stepping into your customers’ decision-making cycles, you gain insights into their needs even before they’ve fully realised them themselves.

Why Anticipate Needs?

The importance of anticipating needs isn’t just about averting crises; it also sets the stage for better relationships, trust, and eventually, loyalty. A proactive approach signals to your stakeholders that you’re committed, engaged, and focused on their success, not just your own.

Practical Steps for Anticipation

So how do you go about it? You can begin by listening deeply, not just to what people are saying but also to what’s left unsaid. Collect data that provides insights into behaviour patterns, pain points, and preferences. Combine this with active engagement to fine-tune your understanding of what really matters to the people involved.

Results of Being Proactive

Organisations that are effective in anticipating needs find themselves ahead of the curve. They’re able to provide solutions before a problem becomes a crisis, foster positive relationships, and maintain a competitive edge.

Summary: Beyond Reactivity

In summary, being reactively agile isn’t enough in today’s competitive environment. Foreknowledge of who constitues the set of all the Folks That Matter™ and anticipating their needs allows you to make smarter decisions, foster loyalty, and build lasting relationships. So start paying proactive attention to needs; it’s a change that’s worth the effort.

The Manager’s Blinders

September 12, 2023
Article, Business, Management, Needs
Leave a comment

The Manager’s Blinders

What Shapes a Manager’s Limited Perspective?

When managers step into their offices, they see things differently—and sometimes that means they don’t see things at all. The necessity to focus on specific factors like team responsibilities, personal targets, and their own wellbeing can often render them blind to matters in plain sight.

Why the Equine Comparison?

Horses have eyes positioned on the sides of their heads, giving them a wide field of vision but also creating blind spots directly in front and behind them. Similarly, managers often concentrate so intently on particular areas that they overlook what may be obvious to others.

Are Managers Bound by Hierarchy?

Hierarchical dynamics often narrow a manager’s field of view. Busy aligning their decisions with the goals of upper management, they may neglect input from subordinates or peers. Just as a horse may miss what’s right under its nose or behind its tail, managers can overlook what’s happening at other levels of the organisation.

Does Resource Management Limit Sight?

When focused on allocating resources like staffing and budgets, managers may fail to spot emerging needs, interpersonal issues or unexplored opportunities. These blind spots can have repercussions, delaying problem-solving and hampering innovation.

Is Accountability a Double-Edged Sword?

While being accountable adds a layer of caution to managerial decision-making, it can also instil a sort of tunnel vision. Concerns for their own wellbeing may overshadow the broader needs of the team or the organisation, obscuring potential pathways for collective growth.

What Soft Skills Are Overlooked?

Even if they value soft skills like empathy and emotional intelligence, managers can still miss the human element in their daily operations. Wrapped up in tasks and targets, they may neglect the well-being of their team members, failing to notice signs of burnout or disengagement.

How Does Adaptability Affect Perception?

While adaptability is crucial, constantly shifting focus can make managers prone to missing consistent patterns or long-term issues. In their bid to adapt and survive, they may not notice that they are perpetuating systemic problems or missing out on stable solutions.

In Summary

Just as a horse’s unique vision serves it well but also leaves it vulnerable, managers too have their own blind spots. Despite—or perhaps because of—their focus on hierarchy, resources, and accountability, they may miss things that are glaringly obvious to others. Recognising these limitations isn’t just beneficial; it’s essential for the growth and cohesion of the team and the organisation.

Needs Matter

September 12, 2023
Antimatter principle, Article, Business, Culture change, Needs, Organisational effectiveness, Organisational Therapy, Quintessence
Leave a comment

Needs Matter

What is the Antimatter Principle?

Let’s cut to the chase. The Antimatter Principle encourages us to “attend to folks’ needs.” This tenet, often discussed in the realm of organisational change and agile methodologies, has stirred debate. Is it a means to achieving a successful business? Or is it an end in itself? We’ll dissect both perspectives.

A Means to Success?

Many argue that focusing on needs is instrumental for business success. In essence, happy employees are productive employees. When needs get attention, job satisfaction improves. This, in turn, has tangible effects on the bottom line. Customer satisfaction often follows suit; when staff feels valued, they’re more likely to extend that value to clients.

Higher productivity and increased customer loyalty often translate to business growth. In this light, the Antimatter Principle serves as a powerful tool for achieving strategic objectives.

Or an End in Itself?

Contrastingly, some argue that the principle isn’t merely a stepping stone to success—it’s a noble end in its own right. After all, isn’t the pursuit of a humane, empathetic workplace an objective worth striving for, regardless of economic outcomes?

Fulfilling human needs can be seen as the ultimate goal of any organisation. That’s because an organisation, stripped to its core, is a community of people. If this community thrives, doesn’t that mark a triumph irrespective of financial gains or losses?

What’s the Verdict?

It’s not a black-and-white matter. The Antimatter Principle can serve both as a means and an end, depending on one’s perspective. Yet, most would agree that it holds intrinsic value, irrespective of its impact on a business’ financials.

The question then isn’t whether the Antimatter Principle is a means to success or an end in itself. It’s how you choose to employ it within your organisation that truly counts.

The Clock Is Ticking on Embracing the Human Element

September 1, 2023
Antimatter principle, Article, Business, Capability development, Culture change, Needs
Leave a comment

The Clock Is Ticking on Embracing the Human Element

Happy business people laughing against white background

The Elephant in the Conference Room: Ignoring People’s Needs

For far too long, organisations have viewed employees as cogs in a machine rather than as human beings. This reductionist approach not only hampers productivity but also affects mental health, employee engagement, and overall job satisfaction.

The Antimatter Principle: A Revolution in Organisational Thought

The Antimatter Principle posits a radical idea: attend to folks’ needs. It’s as simple as that! Introduced by software development philosopher Bob Marshall (FlowChainSensei), this principle points out that the most effective, efficient, and humane way to get things done and make decisions is by attending to the needs of all involved.

This approach invites us to consider what people actually need to perform their jobs more effectively and to feel more engaged and satisfied in their work. The Antimatter Principle encourages organisations to actively listen to employees and other stakeholders, which can lead to new, innovative solutions that might have otherwise been overlooked.

The Invisible Hand of Market Forces

Historically, organisations have been slow to adapt, mainly because they’ve been focused on short-term gains and immediate metrics. However, we’re seeing a growing body of evidence that suggests businesses who invest in their people perform better over the long term. These organisations report higher job satisfaction, lower turnover, and increased innovation.

But when will attending to folks’ needs become the norm rather than the rarest of exceptions? This is a difficult question to answer definitively. Market forces such as competition for talent and increased consumer awareness around company ethics are nudging businesses in this direction.

The Slow Wheels of Change

Even with this shift, it might take a few more years or even a decade for the majority of organisations to adopt people-centric approaches like the Antimatter Principle fully. It’s worth remembering that organisational change is often slow, and embracing a new philosophy involves multiple layers of complexity, from C-level executives to entry-level employees

It must be considered that there is nothing more difficult to carry out, nor more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to handle, than to initiate a new order of things.

~ Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince

This ubiquitous quote encapsulates the essence of why change is often slow to come, particularly in organisations. Machiavelli highlights the challenges and risks inherent in initiating change, which can explain why many organisations are hesitant to adopt new approaches like the Antimatter Principle, even when such philosophies could lead to more engaged employees and better business outcomes.

Paving the Way for a Paradigm Shift

To speed up this process, it’s essential for industry leaders and visionaries to champion the benefits of attending to folks’ needs. The more case studies we have that prove the effectiveness of such strategies, the quicker we’ll see a widespread adoption.

The Final Countdown

So, when will we routinely see organisations realising the benefits of attending to folks’ needs? While no one has a crystal ball, the winds of change are undoubtedly blowing. Whether it’s in five years or fifteen, the adoption of philosophies like the Antimatter Principle seems less a question of ‘if’ and more a matter of ‘when’.

Further Reading

  1. Marshall, R.W. (2013, October 12). The Antimatter Principle. FlowChainSensei. Retrieved September 1, 2023, from /2013/10/12/the-antimatter-principle/
  2. Marshall, R.W. (2013, October 13). The Antimatter Principle: The Metaphor. FlowChainSensei. Retrieved September 1, 2023, from /2013/10/13/the-antimatter-principle-the-metaphor/
  3. Marshall, R.W. (2013, October 14). A New Frame. FlowChainSensei. Retrieved September 1, 2023, from /2013/10/14/a-new-frame/
  4. Marshall, R.W. (2013, October 15). Roots. FlowChainSensei. Retrieved September 1, 2023, from /2013/10/15/roots/
  5. Marshall, R.W. (2013, October 16). A Finger Pointing at the Moon. FlowChainSensei. Retrieved September 1, 2023, from /2013/10/16/a-finger-pointing-at-the-moon/
  6. Marshall, R.W. (2013, October 20). Poka-Yoking the Method. FlowChainSensei. Retrieved September 1, 2023, from /2013/10/20/poka-yoking-the-method/
  7. Marshall, R.W. (2013, October 25). One Principle, One Agendum. FlowChainSensei. Retrieved September 1, 2023, from /2013/10/25/one-principle-one-agendum/
  8. Marshall, R.W. (2013, October 26). The Tyranny of Method. FlowChainSensei. Retrieved September 1, 2023, from /2013/10/26/the-tyranny-of-method/
  9. Marshall, R.W. (2013, October 28). Who Needs Retrospectives? FlowChainSensei. Retrieved September 1, 2023, from /2013/10/28/who-needs-retrospectives/
  10. Marshall, R.W. (2013, October 28). Who Needs Kanbans? FlowChainSensei. Retrieved September 1, 2023, from /2013/10/28/who-needs-kanbans/
  11. Marshall, R.W. (2013, October 29). What Are Needs? FlowChainSensei. Retrieved September 1, 2023, from /2013/10/29/what-are-needs/
  12. Marshall, R.W. (2013, October 31). Pointless. FlowChainSensei. Retrieved September 1, 2023, from /2013/10/31/pointless/
  13. Marshall, R.W. (2013, November 7). Looking After Each Other. FlowChainSensei. Retrieved September 1, 2023, from /2013/11/07/looking-after-each-other/
  14. Marshall, R.W. (2013, November 8). For the Rational Folks. FlowChainSensei. Retrieved September 1, 2023, from /2013/11/08/for-the-rational-folks/
  15. Marshall, R.W. (2013, November 13). Breadcrumbz. FlowChainSensei. Retrieved September 1, 2023, from /2013/11/13/breadcrumbz/
  16. Marshall, R.W. (2013, November 15). The People vs. System Conundrum. FlowChainSensei. Retrieved September 1, 2023, from /2013/11/15/the-people-vs-system-conundrum/
  17. Marshall, R.W. (2013, November 21). The World as One. FlowChainSensei. Retrieved September 1, 2023, from /2013/11/21/the-world-as-one/
  18. Marshall, R.W. (2013, November 30). Our Mutual Friends. FlowChainSensei. Retrieved September 1, 2023, from /2013/11/30/our-mutual-friends/
  19. Marshall, R.W. (2013, December 2). Change, Kotter, and Antimatter. FlowChainSensei. Retrieved September 1, 2023, from /2013/12/02/change-kotter-and-antimatter/
  20. Marshall, R.W. (2013, December 4). Finding for ƒ. FlowChainSensei. Retrieved September 1, 2023, from /2013/12/04/finding-for-%c6%92/
  21. Marshall, R.W. (2013, December 11). It’s Mutual. FlowChainSensei. Retrieved September 1, 2023, from /2013/12/11/its-mutual/
  22. Marshall, R.W. (2014, January 28). A Vocabulary for the Antimatter Principle. FlowChainSensei. Retrieved September 1, 2023, from /2014/01/28/a-vocabulary-for-the-antimatter-principle/
  23. Marshall, R.W. (2014, March 17). The Antimatter Decision Filter. FlowChainSensei. Retrieved September 1, 2023, from /2014/03/17/the-antimatter-decision-filter/

And there’s a whole passel of other Antimatter Principle posts, right up to the present date. You can find them through the WordPress categories feature, using the link: /category/antimatter-principle/?order=asc

Dr. Deming and the Antimatter Principle

September 1, 2023
Antimatter principle, Article, Culture change, Management, Needs
Leave a comment

Dr. Deming and the Antimatter Principle

Evaluating the Assertion

Dr. W. Edwards Deming posited that the most important act a manager can make is to understand an individual’s needs. Could this insight be the cornerstone for a more reciprocal, mutually beneficial management style? Let’s explore in the context of the Antimatter Principle.

The Principle of Mutuality in Management

Management isn’t a one-way street. The idea that managers should attend to the needs and priorities of their staff isn’t merely an altruistic approach; it’s a strategy that pays dividends. When employees feel that their personal needs and goals are being attended to, they’re often more inclined to reciprocate by aligning themselves more closely with the needs of managers, other teams, and the organisation at large.

Beyond Self-Interest: A Two-Way Street

This isn’t just about individual benefits or personal motivation. It’s about creating an ecosystem of mutual respect and collaboration. When managers take the time to understand what’s important to each employee, a reciprocal relationship often develops:

  • Employees are more likely to buy into company goals and objectives.
  • Greater willingness to go the extra mile when the team or company requires it.
  • Enhanced collaboration among team members, born out of a mutual understanding of each other’s needs and priorities.

The Virtuous Cycle of Understanding

When the principle of mutuality is applied in management, it often creates a virtuous cycle:

  1. Manager Understands the Individual: This means taking the time to learn about what truly matters to each team member, be it work-life balance, career growth, or specific project interests.
  2. Individual Feels Valued: This sense of understanding often translates into the employee feeling valued and respected, which in itself can be a powerful motivator.
  3. Reciprocal Engagement: A natural outcome is that the employee is likely to be more engaged and committed, not just to their own roles but to the wider needs of the team and organisation.
  4. Organisational Alignment: With this heightened level of mutual engagement, there’s often a better alignment between individual and organisational needs.

Summary

Dr. Deming’s notion, that understanding what is important to an individual ranks as a critical managerial act, can be viewed as a catalyst for a management style rooted in the principle of mutuality. It’s not just about the manager understanding the team, but also about the team understanding—and thereby better serving—the goals of the manager and the organisation.

The Fluid Needsscape

August 30, 2023
Agile, Antimatter principle, Article, Attendants, Culture change, Customers, Needs
Leave a comment

The Fluid Needsscape

Addressing the needs of various stakeholders is at the heart of any business operation. The term “Needsscape” encapsulates this complex and ever-changing matrix of needs within an organisation. Crucially, it refers to the evolving set of stakeholders, known as “Folks That Matter“, and their ever-evolving sets of needs. Understanding this needsscape isn’t just beneficial; it’s essential for making informed decisions and prioritising actions.

What Makes Up the Needsscape?

The needsscape comprises a range of needs, from financial obligations to emotional requirements:

  • Financial needs of owners, shareholders, and employees
  • Customer needs addressed by products and services
  • Supplier revenue needs
  • Societal needs like commerce, social cohesion, and wealth distribution
  • Emotional needs such as self-worth, accomplishment, and compassion among staff and executives

The Imperative for a Dynamic Approach

Being tied to this ever-changing landscape of needs means that businesses can’t afford to have static assumptions, beliefs, or solution strategies:

  1. Assumptions: The basic tenets that guide the organisation’s actions must be regularly checked and updated.
  2. Beliefs: The core values that form the organisational culture might need to shift to align with changing needs.
  3. Solution Strategies: The methods used for problem-solving should adapt to meet the current and future needs of stakeholders.

The Power of Visualisation

Visualising the Needsscape can serve as a powerful tool for understanding and adapting to this dynamic environment. Real-time or near-real-time visualisations can provide immediate insights into the current status of various needs and how well they are being addressed. This allows for quick, data-driven decisions, sets the stage for proactive rather than reactive strategies, and minimises the amount of wasted (non-value adding) effort. Useful Needsscape visualisations will also present historical trends and accomplishments in attenting to needs – and even future projections of needs, too.

Practical Steps for Adaptability

  1. Monitoring: Implement metrics tracking to constantly evaluate the needs of stakeholders and the organisation’s effectiveness in attending to and meeting them.
  2. Open Dialogue: Create an environment where discussing the changing needsscape and its implications is not just acceptable but encouraged, even required.
  3. Regular Reviews: Incorporate frequent check-ins to assess and adjust the organisation’s assumptions, beliefs, and strategies.

Summary

To sum up, organisations might choose to understand the benefits of recognising that the dynamic nature of the needsscape is a key element for their success. This understanding influences all aspects of operations, from foundational assumptions to day-to-day strategies. Using visualisations can further refine this adaptability, offering immediate, actionable insights into how well the organisation is addressing the constantly evolving Needsscape.

Management Decisions: A Love Affair with Status

August 17, 2023
Article, Business, Management, Needs, Status
Leave a comment

Management Decisions: A Love Affair with Status

The world of management can sometimes resemble a theater where different players don various masks. Underneath the mask of ‘decisiveness’ or ‘authority,’ there lies a deeply rooted human emotion: the desire for status. Many of our actions, especially in the realm of management, stem from this very sentiment. Let’s delve into how a management’s affection for their status influences their decisions and behaviors.

The Siren Call of Status

Since ancient times, humans have been driven by the need for status. From tribal chiefs to modern CEOs, the pursuit of status, power, and recognition is deeply ingrained in our psyche. This isn’t necessarily a negative trait. In many ways, it’s a survival instinct. Being in a position of authority or having high status meant access to resources, protection, and other benefits.

However, in today’s corporate landscape, this love affair with status can sometimes overshadow genuine relationship building qualities and long-term vision.

Fear of Losing the Crown

With status comes the fear of losing it. For managers and executives, this fear can manifest in various ways:

  1. Resistance to Change: A manager who’s achieved success with a particular strategy or approach will inevitably resist new approaches or technologies. The unspoken reason? If the new approach fails, their competence, and thus their status, might be questioned.
  2. Suppressing Innovation: Employees with revolutionary ideas can be seen as threats to a manager who’s more invested in maintaining the status quo. Such a manager might sideline or even suppress these innovations to maintain their position.
  3. Credit Hogging: A manager deeply invested in their own status might take undue credit for team successes, further alienating team members and damaging morale.

Short-Term Thinking

A love affair with one’s status can lead to short-term decision-making. Instead of considering what’s best for the company five or ten years down the line, a manager might focus on immediate gains to boost their image now, at the expense of future growth.

Micro-management

Fear of losing status might make a manager involve themselves in every tiny detail. This not only stifles team autonomy and creativity but also indicates a lack of trust, which can corrode team dynamics.

Building Genuine Relationships

For companies to thrive, we might choose to recognise and address the pitfalls associated with a management team that’s too enamored with their own status. Some ways to do this include:

  1. Promote a Culture of Growth: Encourage an atmosphere where failure is seen as a learning opportunity, and the primary goal is collective growth rather than individual glory.
  2. Foster Open Communication: Allow employees at all levels to share feedback and ideas. This breaks the ‘ivory tower’ syndrome and helps in keeping managers grounded.
  3. Training: Regularly train people to build genuine relationship skills. This can include recognising and managing their biases and fears.

In conclusion, while it’s natural for individuals, including those in management, to cherish and protect their status, it’s crucial for the long-term health of an organisation to recognise when this becomes a driving force behind decisions. After all, true relationships aren’t about clinging to a title, but about guiding a team towards a brighter, shared future.

How to Carry a Conversation: The Art of Social Interaction

August 6, 2023
Article, Conversations, Culture change, Dialogue, haiku, Listening, Needs, Nonviolent Communication, Quintessence, Teambuilding
Leave a comment

How to Carry a Conversation: The Art of Social Interaction

Introduction

This is a blog post I’ve needed to write for a long time. I’m not sure just why it’s taken me so long to get round to it, but here it is at last. 🙂

Conversations are central to human connection. They provide a platform for us to express our thoughts, relay experiences, and foster relationships with others. However, carrying a conversation, especially with unfamiliar individuals or in unknown settings, can be challenging. To “carry a conversation” means to maintain the flow and interest of a discussion, ensuring it doesn’t falter or collapse, especially during potential lulls, and meets the needs of all involved.

Imagine a conversation as a series of peaks and troughs. The peaks represent those magical moments when both participants are engaged, sharing ideas, and feeling connected. The troughs, while inevitable in most conversations, are where one might experience moments of silence, discomfort, or disconnect. It’s during these troughs that the true skill of a conversationalist shines through.

The good news is, the art of conversation is a skill that can be acquired by all, and refined with practice and the right techniques. In this post, we’ll delve into methods to enhance your conversational abilities and discuss the profound benefits that accompany this skill.

Personally, engagiging conversations tick most of my boxes. And PS: Chats and conversations are entirely different things AFAIC.

The Benefits of Proficient Conversation Skills:

  1. Strengthening Relationships: Whether friendships, familial ties, or professional connections, adept conversation can enhance these bonds.
  2. Personal Growth: Diverse conversations expand your perspectives, challenge pre-existing beliefs, and augment your knowledge base.
  3. Professional Advancement: Effective dialogue can facilitate opportunities in the professional realm, from networking to job interviews and client communications.
  4. Boosted Self-confidence: As you become more adept in social interactions, your confidence in your ability to communicate and understand others increases.

One-to-One Conversations:

Engaging in a one-to-one conversation can be both intimate and intense. It offers an opportunity for deeper connection and understanding. Here are a few techniques tailored for such settings:

  1. Maintain Eye Contact: This displays attentiveness and interest, fostering a sense of connection.
  2. Personalise the Discussion: Tap into shared experiences or explore topics of mutual interest.
  3. Offer Validation: Let the other person know you value their thoughts by acknowledging their feelings and viewpoints.
  4. Avoid Distractions: Turn off or put away your phone to show that you are entirely present.

Conversations with More Than Two People:

Group conversations can be dynamic and diverse but might require different strategies:

  1. Be Inclusive: Make an effort to involve everyone, ensuring no one feels left out.
  2. Moderate when Needed: If one individual dominates the conversation, raise the issue so others can express their feeling of the matter and invite remediation.
  3. Track Multiple Threads: With multiple people, various subjects may arise. Be adept at keeping up and weaving between topics. Flag bifurcations so participants have the opportunity to express their needs and adress remediations if needed.
  4. Acknowledge Different Opinions: Groups often have people who express varied viewpoints. Invite participants to acknowledge these differences and act together to keep the conversation on track (just which track lies in the hands of everyone, together).

Techniques for Effective Conversations

  1. Make it Mutual: This is crucial. Unless the conversation heads where BOTH parties (or all parties) need it to, it can falter, degenerate, and potentially collapse. WHich, by the way, may be for the best. Make regular check-ins during the conversation to assess how others are feeling, and gauge the extent to which everyone’s needs are being met.
  2. Folks have to NEED the Connection: Understand that conversation provides invaluable opportunity for connection. With an inherent need for connection, y’all will naturally seek ways to foster and continue the dialogue. While pauses are natural, inevitable, and perfectly acceptable, always strive to pick up the thread and carry the conversation further.
  3. Engage in Active Listening: Beyond mere hearing, active listening involves being truly present. This entails understanding the other person’s perspective and demonstrating genuine interest.
  4. Don’t be Overly Concerned with Active Listening: Fake it till you make it, as they say. The continued conversation is the thing.
  5. Carry the Conversation at All Costs: Take the initiative in ensuring the conversation flows. While it’s essential to listen, it’s equally important to drive the conversation, especially in moments of silence or potential stagnation, rather than let it peter out beforew everyone has got their conversation-related needs met.
  6. Pick Up The Pauses: Each time a break in the flow happens, try restarting the flow with an innocent question, possibly from the Clean Language canon.
  7. Pose Open-ended Queries: Instead of questions that yield a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’, opt for ones that necessitate more comprehensive responses. For instance, rather than asking “Did you enjoy your holiday?”, consider “I’d love to hear about the standout moments of your holiday. Would you be willing to share?”
  8. Demonstrate Empathy: Convey understanding and compassion. When someone shares an experience, express empathy with phrases like, “That sounds challenging for you”.
  9. Ensure Equitable Participation: Ensure that the conversation isn’t one-sided. Allow the other individual(s) ample opportunity to participate.
  10. Stay Informed: Being aware of current affairs, literature, or cultural events provides a wide range of topics for discussion. However, be mindful of potentially controversial subjects, and irrelevancies.
  11. Mind Your Body Language: Maintain appropriate eye contact, lean in subtly to indicate engagement, and ensure your posture remains open and approachable.
  12. Recognise When to Adjust: If you detect a lack of interest or discomfort, it’s advisable to flag your noticing, and invite action to e.g. transition the topic or guide the conversation in a new direction.
  13. Share Relevant Anecdotes: Personal stories, when pertinent to the conversation, can captivate and engage the listener. They can also bore and frustrate. Beware – and remain attentive to the conversation-related needs of all participants (including your own).
  14. Avoid Listening to Reply: If you’re continuously concerned about crafting the perfect response, the natural progression of the dialogue might flounder. Focus on the present exchange and understand that occasional pauses are natural.
  15. Practice Makes Perfect: As with any skill, the more you intentionally engage in conversation, the more adept you’ll become. Interact with a variety of people in diverse settings to refine your abilities and skills.

In Conclusion

Mastering the art of conversation is an ongoing journey. It’s about forging genuine human connections, not achieving perfection. With patience and regular practice, you can evolve into someone who not only carries conversations but also deeply values the meaningful connections they cultivate. The essence of the matter is, it’s not about being the most intriguing person in the room, but the most interested in and considerate of your fellow conversationalist(s). And remember, it takes everyone to have really rewarding conversation. As with many things, it’s the environment / system / context that matters at least as much as individual conversational skills.

Haiku

Hearts deeply listen,
Talk flows, turning into art,
Timeless bonds are born.

Further Reading

For those interested in delving deeper into the intricacies of conversation and the art of dialogue, consider the following works:

  • Bohm, D. (1996). On Dialogue. Routledge.

David Bohm’s “On Dialogue” is a foundational text that explores the nature and purpose of dialogue, highlighting its transformative potential. Bohm discusses the barriers that prevent true dialogue and offers insights into fostering genuine and meaningful communication. It’s a must-read for anyone seeking a profound understanding of conversation and human connection.

  • Isaacs, W. (1999). Dialogue and the Art of Thinking Together. Currency.

William Isaacs’ “Dialogue and the Art of Thinking Together” delves into the transformative potential of dialogue in personal and professional settings. Isaacs presents a compelling argument for the need to foster genuine dialogues, emphasizing the value of collective thinking. He offers practical techniques and principles to facilitate more meaningful communications, inspired by his experiences and research in the field. An essential read for those aspiring to enhance their communicative prowess and cultivate deeper connections in group settings.