My Digital FootPrint

This is a response to the filmmaker Jeff Orlowski Netflix documentary Social Dilemma .  If you have not watched it yet, it is worth it.  There are many write up’s,  here are three of my picks one , two three .    However, rather than write another commentary on the pros and cons of the movie, I wanted to reflect on the idea that Social Media is a reflection of society - as this is a core tenant on the work.  The big theme is that all the platforms do is create a mirror reflecting back what society is like.   However, there is more than one type of mirror!   The play in our minds is that a mirror is a mirror and does what it says on the tin, it reflects. If true, job done as such and it makes no sense to read on.  However, we know from CSI and other spy films there are one ways mirrors as well.  If we look at Social Media only through the lens of a reflecting mirror; we certainly can’t blame anyone for any outcome but ourselves.   But we intrinsically know that Social Media is not a

Developing a Framework In this post, I am going to explore the relationship between power, agency and influence. The intent is to unpack each of these words and their relationships to each other. Power, agency and influence can have a constructive or destructive relationship cycle. We will explore how power, agency and influence in a constructive cycle lead to better outcomes and conversely how power, agency and influence in a destructive cycle lead to worse outcomes. We love the analogy about peeling an onion. We peel back one layer to reveal a new similar layer, each layer enabling us to offer a new idea or thinking and adding complexity. Often we use this model for ourselves to get to our inner core and what values drive us. As we peel back each layer of power, agency and influence, we will find there more complexity and interconnectedness; much we cannot grasp in the context of decision making and governance. As we peel back more layers of interconnections, we will find there are

Differences are everywhere and one can always find data to back the story you want to believe or promote.  We know that any story at an extreme makes fantastic click-bate and headlines which are designed to absorb your attention. Extremes make a point, but they also help to (re)-enforce bias which creates gaps, separation and divisions.   Directors are responsible for outcomes but often we get lost in a particular preference for a method, an approach, trusted processes, specific technologies, policies and personal bias. We are blinded and unable to see that we share a common goal or intent, desiring the same outcome. However, we hold on to experience that means we passionately believe we know the best approach.  By way of example, working from home for some leaders remains an unacceptable long term solution.  Preferring workers to be in an office that is paid for and that staff can be managed and seen.  The outcome is that we desire that workers deliver the work that they are given to

A new problem #covid has bought into sharp focus is our loss of connectivity and togetherness. There are some serious consequences for those who are Directors with responsibly. How do you know when someone presenting to you is trying to bluff, mislead, guide, lie, direct or nudge you to a particular outcome. Over time individuals who serve on boards learn the skills of emotional maturity to help determine if they are being guided to a decision or a decision made for them. In truth, unpicking intent was hard anyway even when we all met up in one room, but it is far harder now with video. We have lost access to the face-to-face skills and the experiences we have built up as we are not in the same room. How do we detect the signals again? We need to recognise that we have not (yet) developed all the essential skills for a digital life. This is never more true than when we are making judgement or decisions that matter as they have consequences. We have no eye contact (we look at screens an

I wrote about the original reactions to COVID here , in that post I reviewed how we had responded and the cost to human by examining Burnout and Breakdown.  These are the first two B’s.  Burnout being the rising at 6 AM walking 23.5 steps to the computer, 12 hours of zoom calls. 37 steps via the fridge back to bed and repeat.  A few unable to escape the workload and demands of being able to work from home.  Breakdown being two working adults in a one bed flat with young children, desperate to work but unable. Lacking private space and with a burden or threat of losing their paid role, breakdown becomes a reality for far too many families.   Blue-collar workers have done the same job, the same role, having the same breakfast and lunch, driving the same route to the same office for 20 years.  The repetitive nature leads to call centre levels of boredom.  White-collar workers have lost travel, flexibility, meeting people and all aspects that gave them a spark. We are now all repeating th

Are KPI’s innovations nemesis? Apple’s underlying philosophy is about “ better .” It is likely that if Apple’s executives were leading the response to COVID19, they would not be planning for a “Return to Normal” or creating a “New Normal,” they would be focussed on how to make what we have better! The demands of complex judgment, coupled with changing requirements in a volatile environment, determine that stability is prioritised over change, as risk is already difficult enough to explain and manage.  Outstanding leadership in 2020 is to focus on making one thing better; it must make a difference whilst adjusting other concerns for better outcomes.  Therefore, what is the one stand out priority that demands attention and focus that delivers “ better ?” Throughout lockdown, I have remained focused on how to provide data that has provenance and lineage to the Board, the aim to improve decisions and get to better outcomes.  Central to the thinking was a linkage between measurement, perfo

Organisational fitness is being capable to do the job efficiently and creating growth but fitness does not equally deliver effectiveness, sustainability or long-term survivability.  The latter being characteristics of organisational wellness.  Best outcomes require both fitness and wellness, however, fitness is easier to deliver, measure and reward. Balancing the ease of short-term measurement with long-term consequences is a critical task for leadership. “Fitness” in human terms is a means of doing repetitive exercises with the aim of maintaining or improving physical condition, it is focused on physical health. We can measure a person’s level of fitness. “Organisational Fitness” is an approach to understanding current efficiency and performance of the company based on qualitative measurement. Organisational fitness provides metrics for the critical areas of systems and processes and through KPI’s enable management and reporting by comparison.  Fitness is seen as physical exercise t