The Media: Numbing Ourselves to Pain And Others’ Suffering


grand theft auto
The purpose of the information media, says Bill Maher, is to make what’s important interesting, So what’s the purpose of the entertainment media? Watch the gruesome stunts on reality TV, the gross-outs and humiliation that passes today for ‘comedy’, and the gut-wrenching fare of cinematic dramas, war, action and horror films, and you could easily conclude that its purpose is to make us numb, to desensitize us, so that it takes more and more outrageous depictions to rouse any response from us at all.

Yet there seems to be an appetite for this. Why would people want to pay money to be shocked, appalled, and grossed out? I used to believe that most people were just insensitive, and required more and more stimulation to get their adrenaline going (which, for some reason, a lot of people seem to like). But when I talk to the fans of this ‘entertainment’, it seems more as if they are too sensitive, and that they are trying to inure themselves to the shocks that they are finding too much to bear. Subjecting themselves to horrific violence is like a self-imposed hazing, or a rite of passage, or basic training, except that it is to equip them to be able to handle the brutality of life rather than the brutality of university or military duty. In some ways it seems to be the mental equivalent of self-administered body piercings and tattoos.

What’s going on here? Why, when we could be going to movies or plunking down in front of the TV to laugh with people, to be charmed and delighted by funny characters delivering clever lines, are we instead going to laugh at people who behave offensively, who act ridiculously, and who insult and demean others? Why, when we could be uplifted by stories of courage and indomitable human spirit, do we instead choose to see stories of unimaginable brutality, anguish, relentless horror and suffering, often without resolution or redemption? Why, rather than piquing our imaginations with what they don’t show, do today’s popular films use grisly hyper-realistic graphics and special effects that leave nothing to the imagination? We’re still coy about the depiction of sex in films, so why are we so blatant and vulgar in the depiction of extreme violence?

When I go to the movies I go to laugh, or to learn, or to be transported by a good story. Perhaps that is a form of escapism, but it is, I think, a healthy one, akin to the pre-cinematic experience of going to see Shakespeare in the park, or a bedroom farce or mystery at the local theatre. Modern ‘entertainment’ media productions, on the other hand, seem to be driven by schadenfreude, the desire to see someone else suffering more than we are, and more akin to watching an execution, or a car accident, or a sensational murder case in court, live. They say that, to the families of the victim, watching the murderer’s execution brings a kind of closure, of relief. But what closure is there in watching the depictions of strangers’ suffering?

So I’m left to conclude that it’s numbness we seek, to be so inured to pain and the suffering of others that we feel nothing. When I imagine the suffering of animals in factory farms and laboratories, of the victims of spousal and child abuse, of child and slave labourers, of wrongly-accused and political prisoners, of rape and abduction and murder victims and their families, of those who struggle every day with abject poverty or disease or looking after someone who can’t look after themselves, with no respite or hope that tomorrow will be better, I can appreciate the desire to be numb, to be unable to feel. But that feeling of anger and helplessness and frustration is not so pervasive and all-consuming that I really want to give up feeling. For all the misery and suffering in the world, life is still wonderful.

But perhaps that’s because I’m 55 years old, and I have some hard-won perspective. My future is pretty-well set. I’m not going to be around to see the collapse of civilization, and may not even see the second Great Depression. I have a pension waiting for me, and a nice home in a great neighbourhood. I’m debt-free. Our kids are independent, happy and well-adjusted. And I know how the world works, and how to cope with it.

If I were in my 20s or 30s, with the uncertainty of a 21st century future still stretched out before me, and lots of debt and no security and no experience, scratching at the bottom of the ladder to make a living, perhaps I would want, at the end of a day of drudgery, at the start of a life of dread, just to be numb, to feel less overwhelmed, to feel less.

Perhaps, at the age of 55, the reason that I do not seek to be numb, and to feel less, is that, in the process of getting to age 55, I already have become numb, desensitized, unfeeling.

No more anaesthetic for me, thanks, Hollywood. I already gave.

Posted in Our Culture / Ourselves | 7 Comments

Do Bloggers Really Care About Their Readers?: A Speculation on the Nature of Relationships

food pyramid
Much of our social life is spent establishing and navigating the undocumented boundaries of relationships. In our astonishingly complex modern world, we are constantly entering into (and breaking off) relationships, and watching them evolve, sometimes in unexpected ways. Each relationship has a ‘contract’, a set of rules that govern what is and what is not acceptable behaviour for the participants in that relationship. Mostly, these contracts are implicit, and the rules follow learned social behaviour: It’s OK to kiss grandma (in fact, it’s expected) but not OK to kiss the person who you just met. Some contracts of relationship are explicit, such as employment contracts and marriage contracts, though in many cases these merely clarify implicit contracts and are designed for lawyers to use when the contract breaks down, rather than for use by the parties directly.

There are, it seems to me, five general types of relationships:

  • supplier-customer
  • co-worker
  • family
  • neighbour
  • friend

Each of these types can be either symmetric (where each party to the relationship gives and receives the same benefits) or asymmetric (where each party gives something different, of approximately equivalent value to the other parties):

Nature of Relationship: What We Offer What We Expect in Return
Asymmetric:
~ employee to employer
~ supplier to customer
~ child to parent,
employee to employer:
labour, knowledge, respect, obedience
supplier to customer:
products, services, useful information, entertainment, respect
child to parent:
personal fulfillment, respect, obedience
money, appreciation, attention
Symmetric:
~ co-worker peers
~ project collaborators
~ family peers
~ friends
~ neighbours
experience, expertise, help,
useful information, collegiality
experience, expertise, help,
useful information, collegiality

Symmetric relationships are generally implicit and sustained by mutual agreement — if one party feels they are not getting what they want or expect from the relationship, they simply terminate it by withdrawing from it unilaterally, and it is ended. Asymmetric relationships are more difficult to terminate: because of the unequal relationship and the fact that there is often an explicit contract with consequences for breach, negotiation is usually needed to terminate (or amend and salvage) the relationship.

It is for this reason, I think, that most of us prefer symmetric relationships where the contract is implicit — they are easier to amend and extricate ourselves from.

The problem comes when a relationship sours and when, because it is asymmetric or the contract is explicit, we are stuck with it involuntarily. All kinds of very human things can cause a relationship to sour:

  • lack of respect
  • feeling of obligation of one party that outweighs the perceived benefits (“it’s more trouble than it’s worth”)
  • an imposed or implicit hierarchy that one party thinks is inappropriate (“how dare you tell me what to do”)
  • a lack of trust or betrayal of trust
  • an atmosphere of competitiveness
  • personality conflicts (one party feels the other is unreasonable, or behaving immorally, or lacking in appropriate aesthetics, or there is just poor chemistry between the parties)
  • a lack of reciprocity (an unrequited or unsatisfied love, want or need)

When this happens, even what would normally be a symmetric relationship suddenly becomes unpleasantly and uncomfortably asymmetric, often to the point of being unbearable. The problem is, the party that wants out of the relationship may be or feel compelled, by explicit contract, by financial needs, by lack of alternative opportunity, or by sense of personal obligation, to stay in the relationship. This is an unnatural and potentially nasty situation, one that anyone stuck in a dead-end or soul-destroying job, or an abusive or suffocating relationship, can attest to.

My reason for laying out this ‘theory of relationships’ is to try to describe the love/hate relationship between bloggers and blog readers (and, in a broader sense, between the media and their audience). This relationship is inherently an involuntarily asymmetric one — the blogger and the blog reader have different ‘skin in the game’, and the commitment of the blogger to the relationship is different (and usually more intense) than that of the reader. This is different even from the relationship of other information and entertainment media ‘producers’ to their ‘customers’: published writers, publishers and broadcasters receive financial compensation from their audience (directly through subscription fees or indirectly through advertising) and, for a lot of producers, that’s all they expect from their audience — so attention and appreciation, when they get it, is just a bonus.

The blogger, on the other hand, generally receives little more from the relationship than attention and appreciation, and that is often fickle because, with no financial investment involved, the relationship, for the reader, is very tenuous and easy to terminate (and there are a lot of other bloggers begging and grateful for their attention). Of course, we say we are grateful for comments and criticisms, and indeed we are, but the truth is that, in the absence of the comfort that people value our work enough to pay real money for it, we live for attention and appreciation — we want to be ‘popular’.

And that’s the problem. This is a pretty thin basis on which to build a relationship. Such relationships are almost innately uncomfortably asymmetric, and all seven of the relationship-souring qualities of fragile relationships bulleted above are painfully familiar to bloggers, at least occasionally. Even a Skype or telephone conversation, or a single face-to-face meeting seems to create a much sturdier foundation for a relationship than the anonymity that pervades the relationship between writer and reader. I know columnists and published authors feel this too — they may get paid for a particular book or set of articles, but as soon as the audience strays they are left feeling betrayed and dismayed to have been abandoned by a readership they devoted hours of energy and passion to cultivating, but discovered they really didn’t really know at all.

Of course all writers will tell you that they have to write, and that they don’t really need lots of fawning readers to be fulfilled. Yeah, right. They’ll also tellyou that they don’t need that stuff in the food pyramid cartoon above.

Posted in Using Weblogs and Technology | 4 Comments

Racism: The Republican Trump Card in the 2006 and 2008 Elections

immigrationOne of the things that astonished me about last summer’s new immigrant marches in American streets was the ferocious xenophobia that they stirred among Americans. Survey after survey showed that, far from rousing public sentiment to the plight of illegal aliens and the struggles of new Americans to settle in the Land of Opportunity, these shows of Latin-American solidarity roused fear and revulsion among a wide swath of Americans who generally agree on little: racists, the unemployed and under-employed, crime-obsessed conservatives, white xenophobic homeowners who equate immigration with lower property values, libertarians who equate immigration with more demands on public health and education systems they would like to see dismantled, and even environmentalists who equate immigration with more suburban sprawl, pollution, population pressure on wilderness lands, and resource depletion.

So it’s not surprising that Republicans recognize this xenophobia as an opportunity to get this wide swath out to the polls to support anti-immigration candidates (who are overwhelmingly Republican) and are beginning to whip up hysterical anti-immigrant furor as part if the 2006 fall election campaign strategy. This is a no-brainer for them: They desperately need an issue to detract from the Bush administration’s colossal bungling of every facet of political and economic policy they have touched, and to prevent a rout in the polls this fall as support for Bush and his neocon extremism plummets.

This is an issue they can’t lose by exploiting. By creating a false hysteria about immigrants, they need present no evidence — they just capitalize on popular misconceptions by repeating them as if they were facts on talk radio and in campaign ads. These misconceptions include:

  • That immigration is so vast that whites will soon be a minority in their own land
  • That immigrants are likely to be, or to become, criminals (or terrorists)
  • That immigrants are more likely than other Americans to be ill and burden the health system
  • That immigrants take skilled, well-paying jobs from lifelong Americans
  • That immigrants do not, or cannot afford to, maintain their homes properly (and hence their presence lowers property values)
  • That immigrants are lazy, dishonest, cliquish, and disrespectful of American ‘values’
  • That immigrants, because of their lack of English language skills, burden the education system and lessen the ability of the system to deal with other education needs

As with all exploitable issues, there are a few facts about immigration that are not misconceptions, which can be conveniently blended into the anti-immigrant rhetoric when it veers too close to outright racism:

  • That immigrants often work for less than the minimum wage, accept intolerable work conditions, and are unlikely to complain about employment even when it is abusive or illegal, which makes them almost ideal employees to unethical employers
  • That immigrants constitute most of the net increase in US population and tend, at least for a generation or two, to have larger families than lifelong Americans, and hence contribute disproportionately to the increased demand for land, housing and other resources that makes ‘sustainability’ impossible to achieve

The other facet of the current US immigration issue that is so convenient to anti-immigrant forces is that the majority of Latin-American immigrants (by far the largest group of immigrants) describe themselves racially as ‘white’. So while much of the anti-immigrant furor is overtly or covertly racist (if most of the illegal US immigration was white English-speakers, it probably wouldn’t even be an issue), the fact that most immigrants are self-described ‘whites’ allows racists to plausibly shrug off the accusation. But racism is “discrimination or prejudice against a defined ethnic group”, and that is precisely what Republicans are hoping to stir up and tap into in this year’s and 2008’s elections.

Anti-immigrant, racist hysteria is a common, and successful, tactic of political extremists in times of political and economic turmoil. It was used by the Nazis to great effect, and was also used by governments in most of the affluent nations of the world during the 1930s when that affluence suddenly disappeared and everyone was looking for a scapegoat. When the population is deeply unhappy, as is the case now in the US, there is a natural preference to blame the misfortune that has given rise to that unhappiness on ‘outsiders’ rather than accepting that the blame lies with deep flaws in the systems and values on which the very social fabric of the country is founded.

“If you’re a Republican Party that’s fairing poorly, sometimes you have to win ugly,” Robert Dion, a local political scientist at the University of Evansville, Indiana, recently told PBS’s NOW investigative reporting program, “and in this case, it’s stirring up fears about the menace posed by immigrants.”

Democrats are helpless to defend against such a Republican ploy, because the fears that xenophobic attacks exploit are shared by many moderates and liberals, notably the two fears bulleted above that are justifiable. A well-intentioned attempt to make low immigration a policy plank of the US Sierra Club ended up being misrepresented and endorsed by xenophobic groups and almost destroyed the organization in the process. The whole issue of immigration leaves environmentalists, who tend to be social progressives, on the horns of a dilemma, and, as I have argued before, the only rational answer (which is: no restrictions on immigration whatsoever) is deeply troubling, divisive and massively difficult to defend. It’s a quagmire that could easily be the Democrats’ undoing.

And for that reason, it will, I predict, become the issue in the 2008 US elections, and Republicans will be testing the waters this fall to see how far they can push it. And they will find there is no limit to how far they can push it. It’s their trump card, and as they become more and more desperate to salvage control of at least one body of Congress this fall, they will choose to push it to the limit. Few will admit that xenophobia is the issue that gets them to the polls this fall (just as few admitted in 2004 that homophobia got them to the polls that year) — but if there is a significant spike in turnout this fall, look for a strong xenophobic, racist undercurrent in the results — and a lot of disappointed Democrats.

When politics feeds on hate and negativity, as it does increasingly in these troubled times, everyoneloses, especially the voices of reason and moderation, and the truth.

Posted in How the World Really Works | 6 Comments

Links for the Week – September 30, 2006

fall colours
Fall colours out our bedroom window Friday morning.

A day late and discouragingly full of bad political and economic news, but here’s this week’s line-up.

Politics & Economics

Rushkoff and the Crisis of Confidence: Cultural commentator Doug Rushkoff says his confidence in the veracity of the media and of politicians of all stripes has fallen so far that he no longer believes anything he reads or hears, and now finds what were once conspiracy theories entirely plausible.

Giving Up on Iraq and Afghanistan: A report from rural Iraq makes it clear that civil war has engulfed both countries outside their capitals, warlords, militias and anarchy prevail in most areas, and that continued foreign military presence is futile, provocative and dangerous. Yet still we are not willing to admit we have utterly botched the job. If peace was ever winnable, it is not now.

In the US, The Two-Income Trap Includes Living Without Health Insurance: A new study demolishes the myth that those without health insurance are mostly single parents and the unemployed. Most, in fact, are increasingly struggling two-income families. The two-income trap gets even tighter.

…and Health Care Gets Harder to Find: Meanwhile, as the cost of US health insurance all by itself soars above the minimum wage, fewer companies can afford to offer it. Those of us in countries with universal coverage can only shake our heads and wonder what it will take for the US to wake up.

Protest the US Oil Corpocracy: Buy Citgo: If you don’t want your money to go to Texas oil barons (and hence into Republican election coffers), or to Saudi sheiks, the alternative is to buy Citgo gas, as that company is owned by the government of Venezuela, run (for now) by Bush’s sworn enemy and assassination target Hugo Chavez.

Ted Turner Wants Struggling Nations to Grow Our Fuel: In a controversial turn, media magnate and philanthropist Ted Turner is urging struggling nations to switch from growing food (which is exported at bargain basement prices to compete with massively subsidized North American and European crops and repay foreign loans, while locals go hungry) to growing biofuels (where prices are healthier). I’m not sure I agree, but his argument is worth discussing.

Democrats Capitulate on Bush’s Torture Bill: In a move that will inevitably come back to haunt them, and which shows the cowardice and hypocrisy of the Democratic Party (and the desperate need in the US for a truly progressive third party), many US Democratic members of congress endorsed Bush’s outrageous right-to-torture, right-to-imprison-indefinitely (without charges) bill, which violates the spirit of the Geneva Convention and eliminates the right of Habeas Corpus. Tragic and shameful.

Visualizing How American Democracy & Capitalism Works: Richard Saul Wurman’s Understanding USA site provides wonderful visualizations of important data and analysis of the US political and economic systems. Here’s a sample that shows how corporatist lobbying subverts the democratic process. Thanks to Jon Clement for the link.

The End of Canadian Sovereignty: Geoff Olson at Common Ground laments the accelerating loss of Canadian sovereignty — social, political and economic — under the deliberate policies of Harper’s right-wing extremist minority government. Our sovereignty has long been an illusion — we own a minority of our private land, resources and large corporations — but we meekly accede to laws like NAFTA that further erode any control we have over our own destiny. Thanks to David Parkinson for the link.

Energy & Environment

A New Electric Car Battery Promises 5-Minute Charges at 20% the Cost of Gasoline: Business 2.0 reports on the promise of the EEStor chemical-free battery technology. Sounds too good to be true. Thanks to Doug Alder for the link.

Collaborative Software Design Based on Learning from Nature: Ken Thompson & Robin Good published their Bioteaming Manifesto a while back. Now they’re starting to design collaboration software based on its principles. A way to go yet, but promising.

Behind the Spinach E Coli Outbreak: WorldChanging analyzes the underlying problem behind the e coli outbreak in US spinach — the lack of transparency in where their food comes from. That lack of transparency permits horrific animal cruelty, mega-pollution of air, water, soil and food, and political corruption to continue on a massive scale, invisible to the consumer. One could argue, of course, that the consumer doesn’t want to know. Thanks to David Parkinson for the link, and the one that follows.

Monbiot’s Answer to Global Warming: Treehugger reviews George Monbiot’s new book Heat.

Scenario for a Flu Pandemic: An amazing visualization of how the next global flu pandemic could unfold, from Robert Horn. Key message: It’s not the first wave that will do the most damage, it’s the second and third, when we think we’ve got it beat and we’re still reeling from the first wave. Thanksto Jay Cross for the link.

Thought For the Week: This week’s thought needs to come from you. Building on the principles of dealing with complexity by canvassing for and evaluating stories of Most Significant Change, Zahmoo blog is asking for stories that answer the question: What is the most significant change in the blogosphere since you started blogging? I’m saving my answer until more people weigh in.

Posted in How the World Really Works | 2 Comments

Improving Your Capacity for Attention, Resilience, Intentionality & Imagination in Four Minutes Each Hour

presence
Recently I described a four-minute exercise to try to improve my posture, breathing and attention skills. Using a watch set to beep at five minutes to each hour, I did this, an average of eight to ten times per day, for the first three weeks of this month:

  • Self-awareness: check and correct your breathing, your posture; assess your physical comfort, your emotional happiness, your level of intellectual engagement for what you’re doing, and your energy level. Let-Self-Change as appropriate. (1 minute)
  • Nourishment: drink a glass of water, and whatever other nourishment you assess you need. (1 minute)
  • Attention: pay attention and open yourself to where you are, all your senses, and what’s going on around you; make sure you’re paying appropriate attention to the people and animals in your presence; make sure your current work/play environment is healthy. (1 minute)
  • Flexibility & Resilience: do three cat stretches (upper body) and three hamstring stretches (lower body); slow yourself down, let go of whatever you were doing, be in the moment, and ensure you are simply enjoying the passage of time. (1 minute)

Everybody I described it to loved the idea, and quite a few people I know have tweaked it and adopted it themselves. After three weeks of experimentation, I refined and enhanced it to work even better.

The first problem I had with the program above was that within a couple of minutes of checking my breathing and posture I had reverted to entrenched bad habits again (breathing too rapidly and shallowly through the chest; slouching, whether sitting or standing). Once an hour wasn’t enough of a reminder to really make a difference. So now I’m trying another tack with continuous reminders: Each morning I put a piece of tape on my back, just below the collar of my shirt where it’s not visible. Whenever I hunch over or strain my head forward (and often at other times when I shift position, stand up or sit down or move my head to look at something) I feel it, very lightly. That’s my cue for a two-second check and correction of my posture and my breathing. So far it’s working like a charm, though whether I’ll be able to eventually wean myself off the tape remains to be seen.

And, having written recently about the power of both imagination and intentionality, I’ve added a step to my hourly routine to exercise these capacities. With a bit of reshuffling, the four minute self-improvement program now looks like this:

  • Attention: (1 minute)
    • pay attention and open yourself and all your senses to where you are and what’s going on around you; 
    • self-assess your physical comfort, intellectual engagement, and emotional happiness; make sure your current work/play environment is healthy; drink a glass of water, and get whatever other nourishment you assess you need;
    • connect: make sure you’re paying appropriate attention to the people and animals in your presence. 
  • Resilience: (2 minutes)
    • upper body stretches: do cat stretches and neck/shoulder exercises;
    • lower body stretches: do hamstring, abdominal and balance exercises; 
    • let go of stress: slow yourself down, draw yourself away for a moment from whatever you were doing, and do whatever relaxes you, to relieve both ambient stress and any recent ‘surprise’ stresses that are still lingering.
  • Intentionality & Imagination: (1 minute)
    • set your intention: think about what you want to achieve in the next hour (exception: when you first awake, think about what you want to achieve more than anything else in the current day; just before you go to sleep, think about what you want to achieve more than anything else in your lifetime, and what might be the next simple step to achieving it);
    • imagine its realization: imagine the end result, and the joy and accomplishment it will bring to you and others (and don’t think or worry about the process of getting there).

It was only after I’d been doing this three-step program for a day or two that I realized it’s a compressed version of the ‘presencing’ process illustrated in the graphic above: Attention is about sensing, Resilience is about letting go, and Intentionality & Imagination are about realizing, envisioning and letting come.

It’s early, but so far it seems to be working. I don’t worry about skipping the process in hours when I’m in the middle of something, so in 18 waking hours per day I probably do this routine 8-10 times.

I know some people have commented that this seems onerous, too self-demanding, and say I need to give myself a break and stop pressuring myself to ‘improve’. But I don’t find this process onerous at all. It’s only a half-hour total commitment per day, and because it’s only four minutes at a stretch it goes quickly. And the exercises, far from adding to the list of the day’s ‘work’ activities, actually seem to save me time by making the other 56 minutes of the hour more productive.

This seems to fit well, also, with my greatly streamlined Getting Things Done process and list, now that I’ve removed all the ‘urgent unimportant’ tasks from the list. In fact, because the list is so short and everything on it is important to me, I need only glance at it once (first thing each morning) to remind myself of appointments and priorities for the day, and it’s committed to memory and guides myactions for the day.

Posted in Working Smarter | 7 Comments

The Process of Imagining


batA while ago I wrote an article entitled How to Imagine that included these ten ‘rules’ to spur your imagination:

  • Pay attention: Stand still and look until you really see. The more you see, the richer the palette you have for your imagination to draw on. If you want to imagine a monster, look at an insect up real close. If you want to imagine a perfect world, watch the life emerging after a thunderstorm, the droplets of rain on leaves in the sun.
  • Spend time with children: If they’re young enough, the imagination has not yet been pounded out of them by television and games with stupid rules and teachers telling them to stop daydreaming. Listen and play with them and your imagination will come back to you, creaking through the rust.
  • Remember your dreams: Keep pencil and paper beside your bed, and write down what comes to you just as you fall asleep and wake up, or those rare vivid dreams that awaken you in the middle of the night. These imaginary thoughts are more real than real life. They change you. Don’t lose them.
  • Change your point of view: Lie down and look up. Imagine if the shoe were on the other foot
  • Collaborate: Work with other people, ideally those who have imagination, and who think very differently from you. Have fun with it. Open your mind to other possibilities. Strive to produce something greater than any of you could have come up with alone.
  • Transport yourself: Go somewhere different, physically or intellectually. Read lots of fiction and poetry. Visit places you’d never have thought of going. Stay with the locals. Volunteer. See how the other half lives. 
  • Improvise: Explore your mental images. Go with them. Make something out of nothing. Imagine what you’d do if you needed to do something and didn’t have the tools. Look inside the windows of your mind. Briefly, slough off your protective arrogance and be open, submissive, vulnerable. 
  • Break the rules. Or at least change them. Whatever the game, or the business process, or the routine, change it. Don’t always play Texas Hold ’em. Play Countdown instead. Combine stuff. Make stuff up
  • Believe, and make believe: Pessimism kills imagination. See past what is to what is possible. Create a new world, fantastically different from the real one. 
  • Get away from the media: Formulaic television and radio and newspapers and magazines get you thinking that that’s the only way to do these things. Video games are tyrannical, leaving no room at all for imagination. Shun all things linear. Like top 10 lists.

All well and good, one reader wrote me, but what’s the process for imagining — how do you put these rules together into a step-by-step method that will allow you to truly imagine, quickly, consistently and powerfully?

As I’ve said before, imagination is not the same as creativity: You can only ‘create’ from things that are real, while you can imagine things that have never been and could never be real. Imagination, unlike creativity, is not constrained by what is possible.

But at the same time, our brain can only conceive by analogy and metaphor from what our bodies can perceive, so our imaginations are very much bounded by the limitations of our senses. That is why imagining a ten-dimensional universe is so difficult, and why most of the creatures in sci-fi are so absurdly humanoid. What’s worse, we are programmed from an early age to believe that imagining is a useless, escapist activity (remember what they did do the daydreamers in your school classes). Imagination is tolerated in children’s play, but we press children to root their imaginings in reality (by virtue of the almost brutal and constraining ‘realism’ of dolls, games and other toys we give them). Children are encouraged and rewarded to direct and restrict their imagination to imitation — role-playing the behaviours of ‘real’, idealized people (doctors, firemen etc.). Soon, their imaginations begin to atrophy from lack of exercise and practice. And they turn into us.

So what is the process for exercising and stretching the imagination so that that capacity returns? How can we regenerate the capacity that allows some to imagine and then create a geodesic dome, invent a truly new language, or conceive of applying the light polarization principles of butterfly wings to anti-counterfeiting techniques for banknotes, the painting of aircraft, or the invention of ecological eyeshadow?

It’s hard to explain what is, to me, an easy and intuitive process, to someone who might find it difficult and not at all obvious (now I appreciate the frustration of the instructors who, throughout my life, have tried and failed to teach me how to swim, to dance, or to meditate!) But here goes:

Preparation & Practice Steps (these are things that, if you do them regularly, will enable you to imagine more easily and powerfully when you want to or need to):

  1. Continually think about possible applications of new learnings and discoveries: Whenever you are learning, reading, or perceiving, allow yourself the time and space to think about how what you are ‘taking in’ might be applied in interesting or important ways. If the character in the novel you are reading uses an intriguing painting or gardening technique, think about how this technique might be applied in forensics (could you write a CSI script around it?) or energy conservation (think: protective coatings) or teaching (think: the power of demonstration and visualization), or how it might apply in any other area that you care about
  2. Play games that encourage and teach you how to make stuff up: Instead of prescriptive games that constrain your imagination, play games like Balderdash that practice and reward the imagination.
  3. Open your senses: By paying attention to what you are really seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, feeling, or even dreaming, and by ‘taking in’ all the details, you are creating perceptual memories that you can later draw on to imagine. Look closely at that blade of grass and you’ll see that it’s actually a little green stick-like insect perfectly camouflaged to protect itself from predators. And describe again how in that dream last night you managed to fly by inhaling hydrogen into your lungs and using the same arm and leg movements that allow you to float on a body of water.
  4. Study nature: The natural world around us has evolved astonishingly complex and effective adaptations to problems, needs and barriers over millions of years. Because our civilized world is so new, so focused on narrow, transient, merely-complicated needs, and largely throw-away, unconcerned with the durability of its products and solutions and their adaptability, this civilized world is one of (by comparison) great imaginative poverty. By spending more time in the natural world and learning from it you will automatically be opening yourself to more imaginative possibilities. You will learn the art of metaphor, which is a springboard to imagination.

Putting that Preparation & Practice Into Action (here’s the actual step-by-step when it comes time to actively and purposefully imagine):

  1. Motivate and energize yourself by setting a bold, positive objective or purpose for your imagining: Direct your imagination to some objective, a positive purpose that you care about. While it’s fun, true imagining is also work, and you’ll do best at it if you have a personal incentive to persevere at it, and to give it time. While dystopias may sell better, we are more inclined to spend time thinking about utopias. And if our imaginative thoughts make us happier, more positive, energized about possibilities, we will give them more time and energy and do a better job imagining as a result. And be bold in setting that objective: You’re not going to stretch your imagination if there’s a short and clear line from current state to your objective. Ending world hunger is not too bold an objective. 
  2. Start with a blank slate: Disconnect your thinking from the ‘real’ world of you and here and now. Our analytical minds start with who, what, where, when, why and how, and are rooted in the current state of these things. The imaginative mind must be free from these mental constraints, especially the inhibiting, grounding ‘why’ and ‘how’. In your imaginings, the ‘who’ can be talking crows whose language we have suddenly learned to decipher, or light creatures who communicate and move telepathically, or a collective intelligence and awareness that takes joy and feels sorrow that is not personal yet is felt personally and profoundly. The ‘when’ and ‘where’ can be any time and place, or out of time in an Eternal Now, or a place where time runs backwards or makes random walks, or a place where you (whoever ‘you’ are in your imagining) are tiny, or huge, or able to perceive with senses that you can only imagine, or a place where the night sky is full of amazing objects changing in a continuous panorama. Whatever these things are that surface when you have made a blank space and time for them, let them come. Direct them towards your objective, but don’t force them to go there if they don’t want to. Make believe
  3. Let your mind wander: Several of Frederick Barthelme’s 39 steps for great story-writing can be applied to any imaginative process. This advice includes: 
Make up a story, screw around with it, paste junk on it, needle the characters, make them say queer stuff, go bad places, insert new people at inopportune moments, do some drive-bys. Make it up, please…Don’t let it make too much sense…Doing odd stuff is good, especially like when you make characters do it in the story, like when stuff is happening to them and they just do this unexpected, even inappropriate stuff, and then somehow it makes a little sense…Don’t let too many paragraphs go by without sensory information, something that can be felt, smelt, touched, tasted…If you’re lucky the idea will keep changing as you write the story..Don’t reject interesting stuff (things for characters to say and do, things to see, places to be, etc.) because the stuff doesn’t conform to your idea. Change your idea to wrap it around the stuff…Also, when doing the above, notice the things you notice in your own “real” life-like what’s at the horizon, how the sun is in the sky, what kind of light’s going on, the way the street, ground, grass, dirt looks, your interest in bushes, what’s happening at the edges of things-buildings and signs and cars, the sounds of stuff going on around the scene-who’s that wheezing? what’s that rattle? are those leaves preparing to rustle? Etc.

I think you can see how this all applies to any process of imagining. It’s all about not forcing it, about not having it go in straight lines, or leading from anywhere or to anywhere specific. Great characters take on a life and logic of their own, and they’ll write your story for you. Likewise many of the ingredients in your imaginings will take you in important, interesting and useful directions if you just let them. You become a vehicle or channel for them, a means for their expression. You are complicit in their emergence. It’s a subconscious process, and that means you need to learn to trust your subconscious — it has a lot of accumulated wisdom that your conscious mind can’t access. It also means you need to trust your instincts. Neither your subconscious nor your intuition are linear processors like your conscious mind. If you can’t free your mind from linearity, consider using drugs (responsibly), or immerse yourself in warm water, or light some incense, or lie down and let it happen just before you sleep or just when you awake, or turn off the lights and visualize, or exhaust yourself, or go for a long walk without any destination, or lie on the ground and look up, or do something else to distract your conscious mind.
  1. Make serendipitous and joyful connections and combinations: Amazing things happen at intersections. Create intersections by throwing things together in your mind. If they don’t stick, if there’s no intersection there, let them go, and bring in something else instead. Have fun with it — pick things that interest you or which you think are important and serendipitously draw them together. This is an improvisational process — you make it up as you go along, and don’t fret about where it goes and whether it could have been ‘better’. Non sequiturs, oxymorons, the juxtaposition of incongruities is funny (it is what makes Finnegan’s Wake such a brilliant work of art and imagination).
  2. Give yourself time and space: Time limits and deadlines will prevent you from letting go and truly imagining. Great imaginings may come quickly or sneak up on you much later, and wake you up in the middle of the night. They will come when they come.

Well, that’s how I imagine anyway. It should be easy, but for most people it isn’t. Let me know if this works for you, or if you have other processes or steps that help and guide your imagining.

Posted in Working Smarter | 2 Comments

The PKM-Enabled Organization

This article is the concatenation and update of three previous articles on Personal Knowledge Management (PKM). It will be published later this year as a chapter in a compendium book on emerging trends in KM.
PKM Enabled Organization
In North America at least, Knowledge Management (KM) budgets are under constant siege, KM leaders’ salaries and department headcounts have been cut back, the Knowledge Director role has been relegated to a subordinate back-office role, and many CEOs are searching for ways to outsource the function entirely. In other words, most executives either do not see KM as strategic to their organizations, or have lost faith that investment in KM offers an appropriate ROI.

It’s time for the knowledge ‘champions’ of the world to get together, and to get our act together. As much as the idea of increasing the sharing and effective use of information and ideas is appealing to just about everyone, KM has not delivered on this promise. I believe time is running out.

The story of KM so far has been, for the most part, a failure — failure to articulate, to imagine, and to implement. We allowed the bold vision of knowledge-sharing to be diminished and appropriated by those who saw it is merely an exercise in automating the acquisition, storage and dissemination of documents. Many IT departments saw it as another facet of technology — as competition for resources and as little more than an extension of the document management and website management functions they were already responsible for. Many training departments saw it as the ‘content’ side of training, and wondered why it didn’t report to them. Most executives saw it as a means to speed up and reduce the cost of the back office, the same way the assembly line had reduced manufacturing times and costs. And the creative people who often had the Knowledge Director thrust upon them conceived of KM as a means for increasing organizational innovation, customer satisfaction and employee retention.

Now, a dozen years after the debut of KM, there has been little significant change in the efficiency, effectiveness or value of information processes or content in most organizations. Many companies that jumped early onto the KM bandwagon have all but abandoned it, while many organizations that waited are now repeating the mistakes of the pioneers. Despite this, interest in KM remains substantial, and this is because, while its promise has not really been realized, its potential is still enormous. And CEOs of many organizations, having studied the lessons of Enron, 9/11, Katrina and the Flu, have a nagging feeling that, no matter how great the cost of investing in KM may be, the ‘cost of not knowing’ is even greater:

Cost of Not Knowing 2

What most organizations essentially did with KM was automate existing information processes. They took the paper ‘stuff’ in manuals and memoranda and newspapers and converted it into digital form. That made it easier and (sometimes) cheaper to maintain, but did not increase its value, which was, if you were to ask most of the people on the front line, pretty marginal anyway. Organizations provided staff with access to the Internet, but most of those who were inclined to use it already had it at home and were using it there, without the restrictions imposed by the company — so that, too, was of marginal benefit. In some cases employees are still forced to shuttle critical information between their work and home PCs.

Most organizations, too, refused to abandon the top-down centralized information model that was already in place, merely institutionalizing it with firewalls, access restrictions, monster centrally-managed one-size-fits-all databases and websites and over-engineered, over-managed collaboration and community-of-practice tools. 

Essentially, neither managers nor early KM practitioners ‘got it’: KM is all about enabling people to obtain relevant, context-rich information, and connection with appropriate experts, easily, when they need it, so that they can be more effective doing their unique jobs.

As a result, the critical business information flows, shown in the top diagram above, are essentially unchanged from what they were a decade ago. There have been some minor changes in the technologies used for these flows, but for the most part these have not been significant in improving front-line effectiveness of workers, and in some cases have actually made work more difficult. Management continues to rely on well-entrenched IS to promulgate instructions and policy decisions and to extract, often annoyingly and disruptively, information from the front lines that it needs to make business decisions. To traditional managers, information is still all about telling employees what to do and making sure they do it.

Customers, outside the corporate firewalls and disinclined to participate in technology initiatives designed for the suppliers’ needs rather than theirs (as most e-newsletters, e-rooms and Extranets are), continue to interact, information-wise, with suppliers the same way they always have — receive (and usually turf) the marketing mail, put in their orders and rely on their ‘relationship manager’ to decipher the former and process the latter effectively. Business as usual, largely unaffected by KM.

Things happen the way they do in organizations for a reason. When people are unable to get the information they need ‘within the system’, they will find workarounds to get it in other ways. This is nothing new, and it is commendable — it shows people care about the quality and effectiveness of their work. The #1 means of getting and sharing information is, was, and probably always will be conversations. Pick up the phone, walk down the hall, use IM (if your company allows it), use Skype (if your company allows it), or, as a last resort, send an e-mail to the people who might know what you need to know.

It would make sense that KM would facilitate conversations, but if anything it has tried to obsolesce them — substituting context-poor databases that purportedly have the information you used to get from talking with people, more efficiently. Not surprisingly, this has rarely worked.

What we in KM need to do is go back to the original premise and promise of KM and start again — but this time from the bottom up:

  • Develop processes and programs, and buy or build tools, that measurably improve the effectiveness of front-line workers in the performance of their unique and increasingly-specialized jobs;
  • Refocus from top-down centralized content acquisition and collection to peer-to-peer content-sharing;
  • Develop processes and programs, and buy or build tools, that measurably improve sense-making: the value and meaning of content in context;
  • Refocus from top-down community-of-practice management to enabling peer-to-peer  expertise-finding and connectivity.

ppi cartoonThis bottom-up approach to KM, directed at the needs of individual employees and their peer-to-peer interactions has come to be called Personal Knowledge Management (PKM). It offers tremendous possibilities, and could finally realize the original promise and expectations of KM, but it can’t be done within the budget that most organizations set aside for KM. It requires a recognition from management that the four sets of activities bulleted above will, if properly implemented, yield huge improvements in the quality and effectiveness of the organization’s people’s work — repaying the investment many times over. The quote at right is what one executive told me when I suggested his company make such an investment. It shows that, in many companies, labour costs are still seen as a necessary evil to be minimized, and an additional investment in people, or knowledge for them, is out of the question.

Fortunately, management of most organizations has more sense than that. The breakeven point for an investment of two hours of personal coaching for each employee in an organization is, after all, a mere 0.1% improvement in that employee’s work effectiveness. And, while some executives may be impatient and disenchanted with the return on their KM investment to date, they still appreciate Drucker’s argument that improving front-line worker productivity is “the greatest challenge of the 21st century” — that the answer isn’t to do as much with less investment, but to do much more with more.
The lower diagram at the top of this article shows what’s possible — how valuable information flows could be enabled and facilitated by PKM. Step by step, here is what we would need to do to realize this potential:

Revamp and upgrade the role of Information Professionals from content managers to personal work effectiveness enablers. Most knowledge workers have figured out how to get the content they need to do their jobs well, without any help from KM. Centralized content management initiatives offer little or no incremental value to them. What they need is hands-on help using the information and technology at their disposal more effectively in the context of doing their own unique jobs. This does not lend itself, in most organizations, to either classroom or computer-based training — it needs to be face-to-face, anthropological: The IP needs to observe how the worker uses technology and information now, and then advise them how to do so more effectively. And at the same time, the IP needs to help each worker organize their personal content so that they can manage it effectively and find (again) what they need when they need it. We need to get IPs away from their collections and help-desks and out into the field helping workers one-on-one. This is the essence of PKM.

Reintermediate Information Professionals to filter and add sense, meaning and value to information content. One of the initial goals of KM was disintermediation — getting rid of the layers between front-line people and useful information. The problem is, most front-line people are now overwhelmed with the volume of information coming at them, and find most of what is available on the Internet too raw for their needs: They need help making meaning and sense of this information. IPs, as reintermediaries, can fill this need in two ways: They can massage raw information using visualizations, maps, tableaux, systems thinking charts, single frames, decision trees and other techniques, and they can add insight by synthesizing, analyzing, organizing and providing context for this information so that, in the hands of the knowledge worker, it is easily understandable, compelling and ready to apply.

Develop simple, automated mechanisms to facilitate peer-to-peer content-sharing with others inside and outside the organization. These mechanisms include:

  • Customizable, easy-to-use, context-rich personal workspaces (similar to weblogs, but with additional functionality, security, and flexibility, while still being easy to learn and use) where all personal information that is shareable with others can reside.
  • Automatic peer-to-peer publishing and subscription mechanisms that allow employees’ shareable content to be accessed by others, and high-value content from the Internet, and from other employees and outside colleagues, to flow automatically to the employee’s desktop.
  • Automatic knowledge harvesting mechanisms that pull employees’ shareable content into a central searchable archive copy, to obviate the need for ‘submitting’ knowledge to central repositories.

Develop mechanisms to enhance meaning and context of information content so that it ‘makes more sense’ and has more value to users. These mechanisms include:

  • Templates, e-mail lists, lists of ‘experts’ and other aids for identifying and asking the right people for the right information on a quick-turnaround basis, in a single, easy-to-use just-in-time canvassing application. 
  • Templates and models for creating high-context stories and narratives.
  • Templates, models and self-study modules for creating visualizations, maps, single frames and other compelling, meaningful representations of information.
  • Templates, models and self-study modules for creating systems thinking charts, structured thinking documents, analytical reports and other insightful distillations and interpretations of information.
  • Templates, models and self-study modules for creating mindmaps, open space events and other support mechanisms that enhance the effectiveness of, and document, conversations.
  • Templates, models and self-study modules for improving observation, listening and attention skills (e.g. cultural anthropology tools).
  • Tools and mechanisms for surveying employees, customers and the ‘informed’ public and otherwise tapping the ‘Wisdom of Crowds’ (including ‘prediction markets’ and decision support applications).

Develop mechanisms to enable peer-to-peer expertise finding and connectivity. These mechanisms include:

  • Simple, one-click virtual presence applications for connecting person-to-person with people (individually and in groups), with full audio (including ability to record), video, whiteboard (see what others in a conference are looking at and doing) and application sharing capabilities.
  • Simple, intuitive collaborative workspaces and worktools (enhanced, simplified versions of wikis, BaseCamp etc.)
  • Well-designed, automated people-finding applications and directories.
  • Simple presence-detecting and peer-to-peer introduction applications (enhanced, simplified versions of Dodgeball etc.)

The following table contrasts the traditional, top-down, just-in-case content-and-collection KM approach with the bottom-up, peer-to-peer, just-in-time, reintermediated, context-connection-and-sensemaking PKM approach:

KM Program Objective: Traditional KM Approach: PKM Approach:
Knowledge ‘User Training’ Enterprise application training
(classroom, CBT and newsletters distributed top-down)
Personal Productivity Improvement (PPI);
Personal Content Management (PCM)
Content Sharing* Top-down collection in central repositories;
Formal submission process
Personal Shared Workspaces;
P2P Publishing & Subscription;
Automatic Content Harvesting
Sense-Making & Context Enhancement (not addressed) Just-in-Time Canvassing;
Stories & Narratives;
Visualizations;
Insight Analyses;
Conversation Support;
Observation Support;
Surveying, Predicting & Decision-Making
Connectivity* Community of Practice management;
Network mapping
Virtual Presence;
Collaborative Workspaces/Tools;
People-Finders;
P2P Presence Detecting and Introduction
Role of Information Professionals Repository Management
Website Management
Personal Work Effectiveness (PPI + PCM);
Sense-Making & Context Enhancement

*Content sharing and connectivity tools are collectively known as ‘social networking’ applications.

C2-1a
Executives preoccupied with risk and cost minimization will continue to wait on the sidelines for pioneers to show them that the risks and costs of such programs are far outweighed by the benefits of better productivity, more engaged, informed and insightful employees, better connectivity, more context-rich knowledge-sharing and improved collaboration among employees and outside experts.

I first got interested in the idea of bottom-up personal knowledge management, focused on the unique needs of each front-line employee, in 2003, my last year as Global Director of Knowledge Innovation for a major professional services firm. I’d been asked to investigate a leveling-off of use of the firm’s award-winning centralized knowledge resources, and decided to do the research through personal interviews with non-users, rather than the usual user surveys. We did about 100 interviews, and tried to get at the root causes of the problems and concerns they cited. So for example while many interviewees said they ‘couldn’t find’ what they were looking for, we tried to discover why this was: Was the tool too complex? Was the training inadequate? Was there too much content to wade through? Did they just not know where to look? Was the content badly indexed? Was it in the wrong format for convenient (re-)use? Or perhaps what they sought didn’t exist at all. Or worse, they weren’t motivated to make the effort to look for it.

In describing this work I’ve used three of the interviews that were especially illuminating. One of these was a corporate finance practitioner who confessed he’d completely stopped reading newspapers because ‘general’ knowledge was unnecessary for his work, and used his PC only for e-mail and business valuation spreadsheets. A second was an audit manager who said she couldn’t ‘afford’ the intrafirm charge for research work and simply had no time to do such research herself, so she did without; she also confessed that she’d never been taught how to find stuff on her own PC and could never find what she needed on her own hard drive. A third was a tax partner who delegated all ‘knowledge work’ to subordinates or assistants, even printing out and routing his e-mails. When I asked him about Instant Messaging, he said he ‘handled it the same way’. Ouch!

My conclusion from the interviews was that most of the firm’s front-line people didn’t use the knowledge resources because they didn’t know how. I had been reading about a KM process that entailed one-on-one coaching of front-line people to use knowledge and technology effectively, and named this (for internal selling purposes, and with a tip of the hat to Drucker) Personal Productivity Improvement (PPI). When I proposed PPI as the solution to ineffective knowledge use, however, my boss said he was doubtful that, if they weren’t willing to take the time to attend the firm’s courses or computer-based training on the use of knowledge resources, employees were just as unlikely to make time for PPI. He sent me back to find out why practitioners didn’t know how to use the resources effectively.

When I went to conduct the second round of interviews, it became clear that some of the interviewees had given me the answers they thought I wanted to hear because they didn’t know the real answers. They were also blunter and more forthcoming when I went back to suggest that perhaps their ignorance of use of the firm’s knowledge resources was partly their fault. This time, the corporate finance practitioner told me he was paid for his specialized technical knowledge, not for his understanding of business issues. He described the powerful, integrated newsfeeds and personalizable news profiles, the paintakingly populated databases, and the collaborative spaces we provided as “nice to have, not need to have”. He was, he said, “unmotivated, so far” to learn more about what we had made available.

The audit manager pulled out an independent consultant’s report that listed in the criteria clients used to select a professional services firm. In order they were (1) strong pre-existing relationship with someone on the team, (2) fit and likability of the pursuit team, (3) senior face time spent with client key decision makers during the pursuit process, (4) technical competency and experience of the pursuit team, (5) understanding of the client’s processes and organization, and (6) understanding of the client’s business and industry. There is just no time, she told me, for stuff that clients don’t think very important. If she had more time, she said, she would be spending it out at clients building relationships, not at her PC looking for knowledge. [I later interviewed some clients who somewhat sheepishly corroborated the findings in this report, and said this audit manager was wise in setting her priorities.]

And the tax partner grabbed me as I passed near his office, whisked me inside, and told me how delighted he was that, after I’d mentioned it, he’d got his assistant to show him how to use Instant Messaging. “If a client calls me on the phone with a question, sometimes I can IM a staff member and get confirmation of the answer while the client is still online, so I save research time and the client is very impressed”, he told me. “It’s stuff like this IM that really makes you guys valuable, not those giant repositories you build.” If that weren’t distressing enough, he confided that he was concerned that some of those ‘giant repositories’ were accessible to everyone in the firm, and could we please restrict access to these to tax practitioners only? He patted me on the back. I sighed.

So my conclusion this time around was that the centralized content we spent so much time and money maintaining was simply not very useful to most practitioners. The practitioners I talked to about PPI said they would love to receive PPI coaching, provided it was focused on the content on their own desktops and hard drives, and not the stuff in the central repositories.

Subsequently I met with a number of the firm’s competitors, and KM leaders of several other organizations that have experienced some frustration with the performance of their KM programs, and almost all of them expressed substantial interest in (and sympathy for) these findings and this approach.

From these interviews and subsequent discussions with leading KM gurus, notably the UK’s David Gurteen, emerged the concept of Personal Knowledge Management (PKM). Some of the PKM elements are starting to be used, at least in part and in pilots, in quite a few organizations.

Here’s a primer on how some of these elements can be introduced in your organization:

Personal Productivity Improvement: (leading practice: Ernst & Young, KPMG)

  1. Pre-interview each employee in the organization to understand their job, what knowledge and technology they use and how they use it.
  2. Pre-assemble a file of possible ‘leave-behinds’ — ‘cheat sheets’, step-by-step instructions, FAQs, bookmark lists etc. that the employee is likely to find useful, based on your previous PPI sessions with others with similar jobs or learning styles.
  3. If you don’t already have a personal content management program (see below) get this set up for the employee first.
  4. Schedule about an hour face-to-face with the employee. The first half-hour should be spent observing and asking questions of the employee to identify significant productivity problems. The second half-hour should be spent showing the employee more effective ways of doing their work, stepping them through the leave-behinds, answering questions and getting feedback from the employee on the value they feel they have received from the session.
  5. Compile a list of observations and systemic problems that PPI cannot resolve, and present them to senior management for them to address.

Personal Content Management:

  1. Work with each individual employee to help them organize and index their ‘My Documents’ and e-mail folders in a way that makes sense for them. A standard firm-wide taxonomy is rarely appropriate and with current technology it is no longer necessary. Each person’s files should be set up the way they would set up their personal filing cabinet if the documents were all hard-copy. Rather than by subject-matter, the most effective organization scheme is often ‘taskonomic’ rather than taxonomic — indexed by how or when it will be (re-)used.
  2. Deploy Google Desktop or some other fast, simple, powerful desktop search tool.
  3. Use RSS feeds to simplify ‘publishing’ and ‘subscribing’ to others’ content, and show employees how to use them and how to integrate this content into their personal taxonomy.
  4. If you have canvassing and/or harvesting programs (see below) show employees how to use them and how to integrate this content into their personal taxonomy.
  5. Develop and disseminate (with simple one-page instructions or FAQs) routines and practices for effectively capturing, filing and finding relevant knowledge in the context of what it is to be used for.

Personal Shared Workspaces, Publishing & Subscription:

  1. Educate the project team.
  2. Identify the pilot group: There are three constituencies in organizations who will more readily see the benefits of using personal shared workspaces and who are therefore natural pilot groups: (a) subject matter experts who are inundated with requests for information and advice, who could benefit from having their ‘electronic filing cabinet’ accessible to and browsable by others in the organization, (b) those in the company who are already publishing newsletters and similar regular bulletins, and (c) those who are coordinating community of practice networks.
  3. Develop a starting personal ‘taskonomy’ and starting personal content archive for each pilot group member.
  4. Select and adapt a commercial weblogging tool and/or develop your own personal shared workspace tool.
  5. Get the IT subteam to: Convert personal content archives to HTML & ëbulk publishí them, create a personal TOC for each group member, and develop a password protection scheme.
  6. Offer everyone in the firm a brief seminar on personal shared workspace publishing & subscribing. Let interest in using these tools spread virally.
  7. Talk up personal shared workspaces outside the organization.
  8. Set up a personal shared workspace help/monitoring group.

Automatic Content Harvesting: (leading practice: Hill & Knowlton)

  1. Create separate Public and Private ‘My Documents’ and e-mail folders on each employee’s hard drive.
  2. Whenever users ‘save’ or store a document or message, prompt them to decide whether the document should be stored in the Public (shareable) or Private folder.
  3. Establish an automated mechanism like RSS to regularly ‘harvest’ the Public folder information, to a central mirror site that other users can browse, and/or in response to just-in-time canvassing searches (see below), peer-to-peer.
  4. Encourage people in the organization who maintain the most valuable context-rich content (e.g. subject matter experts, network coordinators and newsletter editors) to use personal shared workspaces (see above) to post and archive their content as part of their Public folder.

Just-in-Time Canvassing, and People-Finders: (leading practice: Lend Lease corporation)

  1. Use social network analysis (mapping or interviewing) to identify the de facto networks of expertise and trust in the organization.
  2. Use these to identify network coordinators, the ‘people to go to first’ on key subject matter areas for your organization.
  3. Have these coordinators create, maintain and publish Canvassing Lists (e-mail groups) with e-mail, IM, phone and other contact information for the people in these subject matter networks, so that anyone in the firm who wants to canvass people in a network can do so with one click. These lists should include experts outside as well as inside the organization.
  4. Create Canvassing Templates, forms that people can fill in quickly and simply to describe what expertise they’re looking for, and then send them to one or more Canvassing Lists.
  5. Devise a simple one-page instruction sheet/FAQ on how to effectively use the Canvassing Lists and Templates, which communication media to use in different circumstances to contact them, and how to deal with telephone tag, non-responses and other situations when canvassing response is inadequate. It should also deal with appropriate etiquette and protocols to ensure the canvassing process isn’t abused.
  6. If you also have an Auto-Harvesting program (see above), consider putting experts’ weblogs and other context-rich resources in the Canvassing List to use as a surrogate for people who are unable or unwilling to respond to canvassing requests personally.

For many organizations, the traditional approach to KM is no longer a viable option. I believe PKM offers a sensible alternative, one that draws on some of the success stories in social networking and some pioneering programs of some of the world’s leading knowledge-enabled organizations. It also resonates with the ways in which we have always shared what we know most effectively: through conversations, stories, just-in-time inquiries through those we know and trust, learning by watching others, and copying others on documents, messages and learnings we believe they would find valuable.

This is a complex system approach to KM: It respects that things happen in organizations the way they do for a reason, and that people will find workarounds whenever processes, including knowledge processes, work suboptimally. Rather than trying to impose new processes and infrastructure on people, PKM attempts to support and reflect the ways we intuitively learn and share what we do. It adapts technology to people’s behaviour, rather than forcing behaviour to adapt to new technology.

What is missing, still, is more pioneers. Cost reduction, outsourcing and risk management are the strategic issues of the day in the corner offices of most organizations, and improving employees’ work effectiveness and the quality of their work are not as high on the priority list. The onus is on us as KM champions to create new, compelling value propositions for KM (and specifically PKM), to produce business models that measure what’s important and come up with astonishing ROIs for investment in PKM activities, to stress the Cost of Not Knowing without scare-mongering, and to continue to do small-scale experiments and share the results of our experiments with each other. That’s the only way to get the attention of senior executives, and get them to startinvesting again.

And this time, once we do get that attention and investment, we’d better learn from past mistakes and do the job right.

Posted in Working Smarter | 8 Comments

Intentionality

prison
The birth of the de-centered self can be profoundly disorienting, it is transcendental and often involves a heightened sense of awareness and connection. The analytical ‘localized’ self can find it fragile, frightening and impossible to grasp…There is a sense of being present to what is seeking to emerge, with intentionality. If you follow your nature enough, if you follow your nature as it moves, if you follow so far that you really let go, then you find that you’re actually the original being, the original way of being. The original being knows things and acts, does things in its own [intuitive?] way. It actually has a great intention to be itself, and it will do so if you just let it. (– from the book Presence, chapter on Letting Go, Letting Come)

Those who advise people to follow their passion, no matter where it leads, are believers in intentionality*. Many meditation programs that advise that imagining ‘success’, what one wants to happen, is the first step towards its realization, are believers in intentionality (the second step, they will tell you, is acting in accordance). Those who will tell you that having the courage to ‘real-ize’ what you were always intended to be and do, by living on the Edge beyond the reach of civilization’s safety net, is the only sane way to live, the only hope for us as individuals and as a culture, are believers in intentionality. And so are the ‘power of positive thinking’ and ‘appreciative inquiry’ proponents.

With all these different groups of people advocating intentionality as the catalyst for Let-Self-Change, and as something that has almost mystical power of direction and self-realization, why is it that most of us remain so skeptical that intentionality is either a sufficient or necessary condition for realization of anything? Have our hopes and dreams been shattered so often by harsh reality that we no longer believe that aspiration matters? Does power, influence, money, ruthlessness, deceitfulness, have more to do with successful achievement than knowing what you want and having the passion and sense of purposefulness and single-mindedness to pursue it, even against all odds?

It is hard, sometimes, not to come to this conclusion. We watch corrupt politicians with enormously powerful and wealthy connections steal elections. We watch horrifically destructive mega-polluters lie and deny in hugely influential media, media that they have bought with their ill-gotten gains. We watch corporate, political and celebrity criminals literally getting away with murder. We watch churches and other social organizations turned into astonishingly effective propaganda arms of devious extremist political groups, in both affluent and struggling nations. We watch psychopathic fear-mongers trump impassioned voices of reason in the war for public opinion. It is easy to get discouraged, to believe that mere intentionality, no matter how impassioned, rational, altruistic and intuitively sensible it may be, is no match for the clout of those that care about nothing, that seek only the soulless acquisition of even more wealth and power, for its own sake.

But then we realize that, in today’s immensely complex world, where the levers of power are increasingly ineffective against multitudinous and asymmetric opponents, and where neither social nor ecological systems can be managed, predicted, analyzed, or even significantly steered, no one is in control. Our world is like a vehicle accelerating ahead on its own momentum and careening wildly from side to side, with no braking or steering mechanism available to the powerful bullies and rich gamblers who still believe themselves to be in the driver’s seat. The rich and powerful are failing in nine out of every ten things they try to do. Their attempts to gain popular support are universally backfiring in the court of public opinion, as the truth comes out despite their machinations to obscure it. Every time they think they have a new ploy or a new technology that will accomplish their goals, its implementation instead creates a dozen new unforeseeable problems that they cannot constrain or even influence, and which takes them even farther from their intended objective.

And we realize, too, that the only person who has influence over our personal ability to Let-Self-Change is us, the lonely, disconnected bag of skin and organs that is the individual. To the extent we let others make our decisions for us, that too is ultimately our choice. And even though our minds are principally in the service of the organisms that comprise our body, and our decisions are mostly made instinctively and subconsciously by them for their benefit, still we have significant influence over what we do.

The word intention literally means stretching toward. The word aspiration means breathing toward. We have the capacity to do these things, to take ourselves away from a life of learned helplessness and addiction to consumption and debt, from relationships that are abusive and stifling, from the ruts we have stuck ourselves in. We have the capacity, by first imagining better possibilities and then by stretching and breathing towards them, to become someone different, someone real-izing those better possibilities.

I believe that my Gift and my Passion and my Genius is imagining those possibilities and helping others to imagine them for themselves. That is why I’m here, in this world where so many live in horrific imaginative poverty, live their entire lives so narrowly, so ‘safely’, with such little variety of experience that they cannot conceive or perceive of what they are missing, of what underlies the terrible emptiness that they instinctively feel inside.

What people do with the possibilities I help them imagine is not really my business. I am here only to unlock the doors. What I am learning, though, is that it is easier to imagine possibilities for others than to enable them to imagine those possibilities for themselves. It is like trying to describe a life of freedom to someone who has spent their whole life in a prison — to them it is frightening. What must it take for such a person to suddenly acknowledge and come to grips with the poverty of their entire life, the shame of not knowing that there was so much more, the agoraphobia of the vast outside, and especially the humiliating realization that all this time the key to escape the prison was in their possession?

I am, of course, my own first and worst customer, still hovering at the exit doors, trying the key again and again and being astonished that it opens so easily, that there is nothing holding me back except me. How much safer and more comfortable it is for me to instead show others the keys in their possession, and to tell stories of how they could be living outside the prison that is their lives!

I convince myself that I am still at the Let-Self-Be-Aware stage that precedes Let-Self-Change. I’m thinking and planning and imagining and worrying. Like all those I’m goading to free themselves to real-ize their possibilities, I’m afraid to let go. I’m stretching toward and breathing toward becoming someone different, but I’m terrified of what lies ahead, outside. I want someone else to go first, and pull me out with them, make my Let-Self-Change somehow partly their responsibility. Don’t try to do anything alone, I keep admonishing others, using my own advice as my excuse for holding back, for not real-ly intending to Let-Self-Change. Break the large, imposing tasks down into manageable chunks, I tell everyone, and take it one small step at a time — that’s the key to intentionality.

But there are steps and there are steps, and the important steps, even the small ones, are bold ones, with no turning back. These are the steps that we only take when we must, when we have no alternative, when the pain of going forward is less than the pain of staying where we are. Those who profit from our inaction, our lack of true intentionality, our fear, are counting (with good reason) on the fact that, for most of us, we have not yet reached that tipping point when we must act, must Let-Self-Change. They keep us distracted and addicted and comfortable enough with our prison life that escaping is never urgent enough.

My weblog is, more than anything else, a diary for talking myself into practicing what I preach, for convincing myself that I must act. Help convince me, it says to my readers, who are impatiently hoping for me to convince them. How to be a model, I write. Won’t somebody be a model for me, I am asking, to those who want and rightfully expect me, the advocate of Let-Self-Change, to be the model for them. My audience is dwindling as so many get tired of all-talk, no-action. So we sit here, by the exit doors of the prison, talking about possibilities and trying to talk each other into real change, to make each other bold.

But despite what the self-help pundits of all stripes say, intention is not enough. We do what we must, then we do what’s easy, and then we do what’s fun. We are not yet persuaded that we must take that first bold no-turning-back step, and we know that step won’t be easy and that it may not be fun.

We will only leave the prison when someone, probably inadvertently, with the best of intentions, or accidentally, sets it on fire. Maybe that’s what we’re all waiting for.

* The discipline of philosophy has appropriated this word and given it a limited, passive meaning of ‘aboutness’. I mean it instead in the sense of’purposefulness’ — having an intention.

Posted in Collapse Watch | 11 Comments

PucPuc

PucPuc‘PucPuc’ is as close as I can get to the gentle, almost inaudible purr/coo/cluck sound that our friendly neighbourhood ruffed grouse makes, so that’s what I’m calling her. On Saturday she climbed on my shoulder as I did the trimming around the edges of the back lawn. When I moved to the front yard she jumped up into the tree above me, andthen came down onto the deck rail for a tummy rub.
Posted in Creative Works | 2 Comments

Self-Experimentation: What the Numbers Say

Wellbeing Mindmap
This weekend I ran some correlation analysis on all the data I have been compiling since the onset of my ulcerative colitis and my self-experimentation program to deal with it. The mindmap above shows the statistically significant (>0.7) correlations between the variables I’ve been tabulating:

  • My self-assessment of overall well-being (scale of 1-10) correlates strongly with four other variables: a positive mood. absence of pain, absence of other digestive ailment symptoms (you don’t want to know), and my sense of resilience to stressful surprises.
  • My self-assessed overall positive mood (scale of 1-10) in turn correlates strongly with six variables: my physical appearance, aerobic and musculo-skeletal fitness level (posture etc.), overall energy level, level of exercise and quality of diet*, and (since the disease onset) dosage of 5-ASA (mesalamine, a non-steroid anti-inflammatory) and dosage of prednisone (a steroid). This would seem to confirm my begrudging acknowledgement that the steroid has ‘mellowed me out’, and that as I taper off it I will need to find other means to sustain this ‘high’.
  • My physical appearance correlates strongly with how close my weight is to my ideal (140 lbs.), which in turn has been affected by exercise and by my Shangri-La Diet program, and also correlates strongly with how rested I feel (which is not always the same as how much sleep I’m getting). My fitness level is a function of both my exercise and diet, and my new yoga, meditation and physiotherapy programs. My energy level is also a function of exercise and diet, and also the amount of iron I am consuming (both dietary and supplemental).
  • While I was using codeine to deal with the early colitis pain, the data clearly shows that the 5-ASA was effective in reducing pain but the prednisone was not. Likewise, the data provide compelling evidence that the 5-ASA and the substantial Omega-3 I am now consuming (both dietary and supplemental) have alleviated the other colitis symptoms, while the prednisone has not.
  • My sense of resilience to stress (I’ve had three significant pieces of bad news since the disease onset, though none nearly as bad as the news that precipitated the disease symptoms in the spring) correlates strongly with three variables I’ve been tabulating: my consumption of Omega-3, my ‘ambient’ level of stress at the time the news occurred, and the amount of rest I had been getting. I described my program to lower my ambient stress level in an earlier post, and it appears that exercise, diet, B12/folic acid consumption and my yoga, meditation and physiotherapy programs have been most effective at lowering this stress level.
  • The amount of rest I’ve been getting correlates strongly with the absence of insomnia, though it is not the same as the amount of sleep I’ve been getting. Here lies the paradox of prednisone — insomnia is a very common and serious side-effect of this drug, and when you’re also suffering from pain and other serious disease symptoms the insomnia is intolerable, enough to drive you mad. But the prednisone, as noted above, also mellows you out (by suppressing adrenaline production), so in the absence of other symptoms you can actually feel very rested with only three to five hours of light (dreamless) sleep spread over a 24-hour period. In my case, on balance, I strongly believe taking the prednisone was a mistake, and I’m getting off it as quickly as possible (six more weeks of tapering). I’ve also found, as Seth Roberts did, that working standing up (especially when I’ve been working outdoors) is tiring in a pleasant way, and increases ability for both relaxation and sleep.
  • Strangely, there is no strong direct or indirect correlation between my overall sense of wellness and (a) amount of time I’m spending in social activities, generosity activities and ‘fun’ activities (b) amount of time I’m spending listening to music, (c) amount of time I’m spending in nature (including time with a certain wild grouse), or (d) my consumption of probiotics or multi-vitamins. The first three of these are important ‘stress discharge’ outlets, and I’m going to continue them regardless. And it’s possible that (because I started taking them at the same time I started taking high doses of Omega-3) I’m giving too much credit to Omega-3 and not enough to probiotics and vitamins for the improvement in my digestive system and stress resilience. I’m going to continue all of these things anyway, even though the (statistical) jury is still out on their benefits.

The purpose of all this is to try to find drug-free ways to dealing with colitis flare-ups, to prevent those flare-ups from occurring, and ultimately to help others find a diet and life-style that will enable them to avoid getting this, and perhaps other autoimmune hyperactivity diseases (AIHDs) and autoimmune deficiency diseases (AIDDs) in the first place, despite the toxins in the air, water, soil and food, and the nutritional paucity of the modern industrial food system, which would seem to be behind the epidemic growth of these diseases.

Of course, the challenge is that we tend to change our diet and life-style only when we must. Taking preventive wellness steps, it seems, is not in our nature.

* I’m using a variety of exercises: A 5 km run two days out of three, lots of walking, my brief hourly stretching routine, etc. In addition, my yoga, meditation, physiotherapy, and my new habit of working standing up four hours per day provide some important and diverse additional exercise. I have not changed my diet since I cut out caffeine, artificial sweeteners, soft drinks and most alcohol and processed foods, and greatly increased the variety in my diet, in the spring. The mindmap confirms the common sense that exercise and good diet are integral to wellness and programs to restore it. The irony is that (perhaps because my body was anticipating and preparing me for the onset of colitis) I had (subconsciously?) implemented these changes a month before thedisease first presented itself. A little too late, I guess.

Posted in Our Culture / Ourselves | 2 Comments