Category: Leadership

Insights from taking my son to work

LeadershipPublished onUpdated on1 Comment on Insights from taking my son to work

During December I created the opportunity for my 11 year old son to join me at work. George has just finished primary school and will be going into Year 7 in a few weeks time. I run my own consultancy business called Dialogic Learning and for the last 6 years have been working as an education consultant.

His mini-internship helped me to discover new insights about my work in education and in business, so I thought I would share these with you. First some information about the context.

Why bother?

I have been travelling as a consultant for 6 years. Leaving my family is a cost we all have to shoulder. I wanted George to better understand the work that I do, meet the people I spend my time with and to appreciate the places I have to visit.

Telling him about these things is a poor alternative to actually experiencing them and so the idea of him joining me was born.

At the end of a school day George once asked me:

Why can’t I just go out into the world and learn?

I am pleased to say I have done something about this and given him the opportunity to get out there.

What was it?

George’s paid mini-internship included the following:

What was the expectation on George?

George and I agreed that he was not just there to make up the numbers or sit in the corner. He understood that the expectation was to be fully involved and to participate as much as he could.

I am lucky enough to work with some great clients here and in Sydney who were all really open to having George join us. We spent some time sharing these expectations as we began our sessions and meetings – this helped George hear them again and for the group I was working with align with our expectation.

For the Sydney trip I wanted George to spend some time talking to the school leadership groups – presenting some ideas on his own. We had the idea to share a short presentation, as a soon-to-be primary school leaver, about some things he would like to change about school.

5 Ideas to Change School by George Barrett

We collaborated on a short presentation that outlined 5 elements he believed are crucial to a successful school. He then used those ideas to develop some questions he put to each of the leadership teams. George ran a short discussion with the leadership teams using the questions as prompts.

[notification type=”alert-success” close=”false” ]If you want a PDF of George’s slides and question prompts we used, sign up for my weekly newsletter and I will share a copy.[/notification]

What did you learn?

School is a bubble

No doubt about it. School can be an important bubble that cossets and protects our young learners, but it is a long way from the world of work and business. Which is OK. That said I think home can also be a bubble.

The whole experience has made me think about how our students might go from home to school, and from school to home. From bubble to bubble. Again that is OK, but for some, at the right time, they need a guided experience of the cities and communities we live in.

Not to participate in a diluted version of what they should expect in 10 years. Not to “get ready” for the world of work. Not as some pseudo-preparation for life. Not to do a project.

But to participate fully as an equal, to experience all the complexity and expectation that might come along with that and to learn by getting out “into the world”.

 

It brought us closer together

We achieved one of my main goals, which was for George to better appreciate the work I do and the people/places I spend my time with/in. We were a team for those few days and we bonded in a completely different way than being at home.

He was able to witness me with business partners and share experiences together. We chatted about the work after each experience, about the people and the way they approached everything. I am grateful for the time we spent together.

Now when I say I am going to Sydney to see Jamie or work with BVN, he knows who and where I mean.

The hidden curriculum is real

This idea has always been on my radar. The hidden curriculum refers to what children learn from school that is not explicitly taught. For example, this might be through the investment in high-quality resources and equipment for sport. Students will read between the lines that “sport is highly valued here.”

This also works in much more negative ways, I just chose a positive example.

Two insights here. One is that George has been highly perceptive of the little details throughout his primary school experience. He shared these with the leadership teams during his presentation and also the shortcomings of those experiences.

I would expect that the student perception of their school and their learning experiences is hugely varied. Importantly though, their perception is their truth.

their perception is their truth

The other insight is about the shared expectation from the people George encountered during his time with me. He experienced adults working in different industries who were open, receptive, respectful, challenging and trusting of him. I know that has had a big impact.

It reminds me to pay attention to my own disposition, the language I use when first starting a session and to remain vigilant to how others are experiencing things.

Student participation in school improvement adds value

The picture of George standing in front of a group of school leaders in Sydney (top image) is definitely a highlight from last year. It has made me think about the way students are involved in the ongoing work of leadership teams.

I appreciate that George’s participation was different than normal, but what is stopping us have students taking up a residency in the leadership group. Much of what is discussed is about the welfare and experience of students – perhaps there are ways they could be more present.

Little life lessons are everywhere

A big insight I had, as George’s guide, was how much the little things I take for granted were important lessons for him to experience in these new contexts.

  • Shaking hands when you first meet
  • Looking people in the eye when you talk to them
  • Elevator etiquette. “No, you first…”
  • Punctuality
  • Making sure you are ready for the next meeting
  • Taking the time to understand who you are meeting

There were so many different little lessons along the way we experienced together. From social and group dynamics, the way successful dialogue typically unfolds, to planning travel and accommodation.

An important discussion with George was about the cost of our trip to Sydney and how my business earns money. We discussed revenue and cost, his ensuing calculations were much more authentic as it applied to our immediate context and something he was curious about.

—

The whole experience was a massive success for us both and also, based on the feedback (and emails for George), for those we spent time with.

I am keen to explore ways that George can participate in some future work days with me as he gets older. I am sure that it will continue to be a valuable experience for him. He is already talking about taking over the business!

[notification type=”alert-success” close=”false” ]Just a reminder that if you want a PDF of George’s challenge to the leadership teams, you just need to signup to my newsletter and I will send you a copy.[/notification]

Responsive Leadership – leading from the back to the front

LeadershipPublished onLeave a Comment on Responsive Leadership – leading from the back to the front

 

I recently stumbled upon a new label for the behaviours we associate with leadership. In this short clip Nipun Mehta explains a “different paradigm of leadership, which he calls “laddership””.

After rolling the idea around a little I thought I would share some thoughts on how it relates to my experience of leadership and development in schools and beyond.

Laddership refers to the role of the leader. The ladder being like the leader. So that others may climb rungs we might create and reach new heights above us. It reminds me of servant leadership.

This way of thinking is placed in contrast to the “lead from the front” type of ideology, that some might consider to be a traditional leadership paradigm.

In education we can be lulled into thinking that leadership only occurs at the upper echelons of a school administration or in those roles with “leader” in them. The career path is set out in front of many aspiring young leaders and it often only looks like a pyramid. This reflects the typical paradigm of a hierarchy in schools and school systems.

My teaching experience was similar. I was tapped on the shoulder for middle leadership within my first year out of university and the steps up were pretty clear. Maybe you have been presented with a similar direction: “If you want to be a leader follow this traditional path.”

The idea of a ladder for others to progress sits well with me. I now know that such an idea is relevant to anyone aspiring to lead. There are different ways to lead, and many different paths to help others rise above you. Education needs to offer more paths through leadership and not just those that point upwards.

Ultimately we need to put energy into redefining leadership in schools so that more educators understand the impact they can have on others.

I started a blog that shared my ideas, my thinking and my classroom experiences. That helped me understand the impact I could have on others. I realised I could lead in a different way – fast forward a decade and I still keep that idea at the heart of my work. I am leading by creating the conditions for others to progress and develop. It might not say Principal or Headteacher on the office door (I don’t actually have an office door) but I know my work is leadership.

Leadership can be defined in multiple ways depending on the sector or domain it sits within. But also defining leadership within a sector has great contextual dependency too. Education is no different.

The leadership that needs to be shown in the emergency services during the bushfire seasons, here in Australia, is very different to the leadership needed at a K-12 school to develop an innovative culture.

In our attempts to seek out the fundemental truths about leadership perhaps we polarise our thinking too much. We might covet the entrepreneurial mindset in schools and look to business for ideas on development, but we should never forego the intimate understanding of the educational context we work in. Cookie cutters are not a leadership tool.

When we setup Laddership Vs Leadership and suggest a shifting of paradigms, or systems of thought, we create these false dichotomies. So although the idea of creating ladders resonates, I think it is unrealistic to set up competing concepts in this way – a choice we have to make, a move we have to make.

In the Design of Business Roger Martin explains a series of ideas related to design thinking and leadership, for example: exploration Vs exploitation; analysis Vs intuition; originality Vs mastery. You can see the others in the image I have added. But the choice is not “either or”. Creative problem solving requires a range and mixture of different thinking modes at different times. It reminds me to consider the balance of different types of thinking rather than such polarised choices.

Design Thinking.005

Adaptive and responsive leadership perhaps describes this best. In certain situations in schools a “lead from the front” style of leadership is the most appropriate. When there is high urgency for change or important processes that need to be modelled and established. Or when we are attempting to shift ingrained habits and behaviours to something different, maybe “follow me” works best.

That same leadership approach should adapt and respond to the context it is in. As Nipun Mehta explains, shifting to the back and allowing others to push ahead and lead the way. Developmental work in schools often needs people to buy in and have ownership. These are good opportunities for intentional and thoughtful design leadership. The best possible conditions for progress and development are (co)created.

When I am working with teams I am attempting to create these conditions. I use a range of protocols that help establish the expectations for the time together. One of them is about how we each need to take responsibility to balance our participation in the session.

Step up and step back is a protocol about session participation but it also has a strong likeness to the idea of responsive leadership. You don’t have to make a solitary choice, you don’t need to operate under a fixed ideaology. Adapt, change and respond to what is in front of you. Increase your awareness of this balancing act.

Nelson Mandela refers to a balance:

It is better to lead from behind and to put others in front, especially when you celebrate victory when nice things occur. You take the front line when there is danger. Then people will appreciate your leadership.

I have presented similar ideas in the past about teaching and learning. Perhaps the true art of leadership is in the complex balancing act between these paradigms. It is not in the extremes.

  • Strike a balance
  • Respond and adapt to what is in front of you
  • Step up and step back
  • Leverage your empathy

The leaders I work with every week wrestle with the tension and complexity of real situations. These constantly demand both the subtle art of nudging others to move ahead, with pointing the direction and inviting others to follow.

In my experience leadership is as much about creating the conditions for others to develop as it is helping to direct that progress.

–

Photo by Daryan Shamkhali

Escaping old ideas and the bias that erodes your creative culture

Creativity, Innovation, LeadershipPublished onUpdated on1 Comment on Escaping old ideas and the bias that erodes your creative culture

I recently discovered the above quote from John Maynard Keynes, an influential English economist, about the challenge of thinking creatively.

It got a bunch of attention on Twitter and seemed to really resonate with people, as it did with me, so I thought I would spend a little longer considering what he is saying.

The creative process continues to be a passion and fascination of mine. What that process continues to rely upon is a creative culture within an organisation. When strong it is supportive of new ideas, when weak it erodes them.

John Maynard Keynes points us to the challenge of “escaping” old ideas, a direct reference in my opinion to two things. (1) The creative culture those new ideas are born into, (2) the mindset of those attached to existing ideas.

A 2010 study by the University of Pennsylvania points to an underlying negative bias towards creativity when we feel uncertainty. New ideas may often be generated in times of change and when things are in flux, and the sense of uncertainty may actually be getting in the way of being open to new ideas. As Maynard Keynes states escaping old ideas is harder and the bias research sheds some light on this.

Our results show that regardless of how open minded people are, when they feel motivated to reduce uncertainty either because they have an immediate goal of reducing uncertainty, or feel uncertain generally, this may bring negative associations with creativity to mind which result in lower evaluations of a creative idea.

Back to thinking about culture. If there is such a bias, implicit or otherwise, we have to mitigate against this within our schools and organisations. Familiarity with constant change and development is key, creating a new norm. If we can reduce the negative bias by increasing our level of collective comfort when faced with uncertainty we might recognise and encourage more creative thinking.

This makes me think of Dear Mr Judgy Pants, my open letter to those judgemental types who shoot down ideas too soon. Those people, and I know many of us have encountered them, are showing a fear of the wider uncertainty that is in fact forcing us to think creatively in the first place.

I just wanted to let you know that there are thousands of idea headstones carved because of people like you. We mourn those precious little sparks, those little glimpses of something new, different and unexpected. We still think about those ideas and the fleeting moments we had with them.

James L. Adams refers to the “Inability to tolerate ambiguity; overriding desire for order; ‘no appetite for chaos’” as one of a number of emotional blocks to creativity. When it comes to complex development and problem solving the ability to tolerate some chaos is vital.

You must usually wallow in misleading and ill fitting data, hazy and difficult-to-test concepts, opinions, values, and other such untidy quantities.

 The key thing I have been pondering on, since I shared that tweet, is about better understanding the people in our organisations and so better understand the creative culture.

Perhaps if we were to extend the research to create a measure of people’s tolerance of ambiguity <a> and compare this with a measure of their propensity for divergent thinking <b>, we would have an interesting +/-differential <c> that we could explore further.

If we were able to gather individual or collective measures we might be able to better understand the collective creative culture and make plans to support and encourage positive change.

Of course we can easily hypothesise that those individuals who are able to generate new ideas and have a high level of divergent thinking, coupled with a high level of tolerance for ambiguous and uncertain developmental states, may prove to be the most innovative.

Across an organisation these values may be carried by different people at different times and the make up and balance of our teams is something else to consider.

As much as it may feel odd to attempt to measure the artful design of innovative culture, I think there is huge value in exploring the science of it too.

1*QblRRfaaTurDWoEROQ62Vw

Maybe a further thinking matrix or framework might look like this.

I am grateful to have had the provocation from that quote this week to think more deeply about the individual contribution we make to a creative culture. As always, let me know what you think and how you help yourself and others “escape old ideas”. I think that is the next step to consider, what are the practical tools that allow us to escape.

Name Your Perspective

Discussion, Leadership, Learning, ThinkingPublished on1 Comment on Name Your Perspective

If you have spent any time with me in small group development sessions you will likely have heard me talking deliberately about perspective. I am always keen to make explicit what can often be an implied understanding or concept. Trying to name up front and from the outset assumptions we might be making is a handy habit to get into. The same is true about the perspective we might be taking towards a discussion or dialogue.

I think one of the challenges we face is in our ability to zoom in and out in terms of our thinking and when in collaboration or discussion with others.

When I say “zoom in” I mean taking heed of the “Micro” perspective, the daily grind the specific, concrete things that might be happening in the classroom. Paying attention to the “Individual” would also be common with a “Micro” perspective. With this lens we are paying less attention to the larger more abstract goals at play and focusing on the concrete decisions and actions in the classroom. When we zoom in we might be asking “How” or “What” questions.

“Zoom out” to a wide angle lens and we bring into view the “Organisation” level goals and aspirations. They might be much less concrete to allow many people to get on-board, so our perspective is more abstract. We are thinking less about ourselves and the concrete stuff that might get in the way of whole school progress. When we zoom out we ask “Why” questions to get to the drivers of our actions and decisions. We have to be more comfortable dealing in a more abstract currency.

I typically signal the perspective I am taking to help set the expectations about a particular part of a discussion. I think it helps me make explicit my choice of perspective and also allows a group to quickly appreciate the expectations that come with that perspective. Micro = details, Macro = drivers.

“Let’s zoom out for a second and consider the reason why this programme needs to change in this way.”

“If we think about a wider lens for a moment we can see that this decision fits with what we are choosing to do across the school.”

“OK now let’s zoom back into what this means in terms of the day to day. How could we explore this everyday?”

“What about the learners experience of this? Let’s jump back into the classroom for a second and consider how this concept would be evidenced in the classroom.”

In most discussions we might move fluidly between the concrete and the abstract. So perhaps start with why but keep returning to it. By doing so we continue to rationalise our actions or ideas and ensure they are connected to a bigger picture.

Perhaps the challenge is not just zooming out to think in an abstract way or zooming in to consider the concrete actions, but more precisely how effectively, fluidly and quickly we can move between those perspectives. Another layer to this is of course how synchronised our perspective is with others we are with.

By explicitly naming a perspective in dialogue we are forming good mental cues to ourselves and external cues for others to gain a better understanding. I think we can all benefit from solid thinking habits that tether our concrete ideas to the drivers and the broader rationale.

—

If you enjoyed this please sign up to my weekly newsletter here, for more insights about learning, creative culture and feedback. Don’t forget to say hi on Twitter as well, just watch out for the American politician who goes by the same name.

Nobody told me what to do

LeadershipPublished onLeave a Comment on Nobody told me what to do

For maybe three years now I have been listening to a particular Daft Punk track and mulling over the lyrics. Whilst I am writing now I have the track on, take a few moments to listen to it.

https://open.spotify.com/track/0oks4FnzhNp5QPTZtoet7c

Giorgio by Moroder is a documentary song about the early life and musical influence of the Italian musician Giovanni Giorgio Moroder. It specifically refers to his pioneering work in electronic music composition and use of the synthesiser. He refers to his choices in creating a “sound of the future”, about adding a synthesised click on a track, a choice which eventually heralded a new era in music.

It is his latter comments (4:58) that are captured on the track that have, in turn, captured my attention for so long.

Once you free your mind about a concept of harmony and of music being correct, you can do whatever you want. So, nobody told me what to do, and there was no preconception of what to do.

It is this fascinating reference to a deliberate freeing of his mindset which resonates with me so much. The awareness of the “correct” musical theory and deliberately unshackling himself from it in order to be creatively free.

The final words uttered on the track are also telling and seemingly refer to a lack of precedent, an untrodden path yet to be explored. Moroder explains there were no leaders in those moments, no plans to follow, no guidebook — just rules to break.

1*F1F1JkJJ1Ijy3fYlEyK NA
New ideas may come from others but trying new stuff can still be isolating

It reminds me of something Phil ‘dm’ Campbell recently shared about his desire to not be a repeater or relay station, but to find something in himself that is powerful and true and unique.

Being a repeater or relay station is holding you back from tapping into your true self and creative core. I firmly believe that.

Perhaps Moroder was able to strip away the reference bias others were relying on and steer clear of relaying and repeating musical styles. He made creative choices with no precedent, choices that took music to a different place. Not just repeating, relaying or even remixing.

Phil goes on to challenge us all.

So ask yourself, what moment today could you have changed to instead of relaying and repeating could you have done something that was really worth relaying or repeating, something that came from your core of concern.

Let’s temper some of this with a different perspective, a comment from John Hegarty and his book Hegarty On Creativity, There Are No Rules:

the truth is that everything we create is based on something that’s gone before. It has to be. Nothing happens in a vacuum, least of all creativity and ideas.

Maybe for Giorgio in his creative exploration he had discovered a vacuum. An ill defined musical space that was ready for better definition. He was the first there, when everyone else was repeating, remixing and relaying something else. It would make sense that in the 70s there were fewer musical ideas and so more vacuumous space to discover.

It takes creative courage to be in such a place on your own, to test ideas with little or no waymarkers or sense of correctness. It is both freeing and burdensome, as you know, soon others will follow.

I wonder about how that creative isolation is true of other breakthrough ideas or pioneering souls.

Just a footnote about the Daft Punk track I discovered from the associatedWikipedia article:

When Moroder arrived in the studio to record his monologue, he was initially perplexed that the booth contained multiple microphones; he briefly wondered if the extra equipment was a precaution in case one of the microphones broke. The recording engineer explained that the microphones varied with origin dates that ranged from the 1960s to the 21st century, and that each microphone would be used to represent the different decades in Moroder’s life. The engineer added that although most listeners would not be able to distinguish between each microphone, Thomas Bangalter of the duo would know the difference.

Now that is attention to detail.