7 Things You Don't Really Need to Know About Me

Carey Pohanka and Glen Westbrook recently tagged me on Twitter in their posts to do a seven things list, so I want to do my best to follow through with their request. Here are 7 things that you don’t really need to know about me.

1. I am the proud father of two beautiful adopted children. Abbie is almost six years old and Sam is two and a half years old. Both were born at the same hospital, Augusta Medical Center, near Charlottesville, VA even though they have separate birth parents.
   

2. I am a Christian and an active member of Fellowship Community Church in Salem, VA. My family and I have been going there since we moved. Its not that you don't need to know, but I do want you to.
   
3. 

   I raced bicycles all over the east coast on several Pro/Am teams, and for VA Tech, for about ten years. I got to know a bunch of great guys and even won the VA State Best All-Around Racer award twice. I also got to race against Lance Armstrong, and no I didn't beat him. But hey, it was fun just to be there a few times.

4. I am the first person in my family to graduate high school. My brother was the second. I never even thought I would go to college. I was even encouraged to pick up a "skill" by the guidance counselor. But after my best friend was made to go to a local community college by his father, he talked me in to it. Now I am hoping to start a doctoral program in a year or two.

5. I love Coffee. End of story. I can tell everyone around me knows how much I love coffee by the number of coffee mugs I have been given over the last few years. I should also invest in Starbucks since I go there almost every day.

6. You know the books most people have to read for a class or by their company. I enjoy them and actually seek them out.I am usually reading three or four books at a time and journal some of them. You can see some of those journals on the right of this blog. I don't post all of them, just the good ones.
   

7. I stay up way too late and have done so every since I finished my Administration Degree (is there a correlation?) usually reading and journaling or playing cards online. I don't really need that much sleep. If I get at least four hours a night I am good to go.
   

Now to pass the torch to some of my Twitter PLN - people from whom I learn, laugh and grow every day! To those that read the post, enjoy. To those that are tagged, go for it.


@jj_white
@caroy
@PamelaMartin
@stephaniedoyle
@billbird
@LMAshton
@elemitrt

You Are Here, Can You Get Others There?

"People will do something-including changing their behavior- only if it can be demonstrated that doing so is in their own best interests as defined by their own values."

Marshall Goldsmith

Most of us are looking for a way to make information sharing a more viable part of our work environment. We want to learn from others and we want others to learn from us, but we cannot force people to work together. We cannot force people to share with us. So if we cannot force people to work together, then what the heck can we do? We can start by affecting the only person we can control- Ourselves. We need to first change the way we attempt to change minds.

It is important to understand that before a person will change a behavior, they have to want to do so. The thoughts that most profoundly affect a persons' behavior are composed in mini maps of cause and effect. This means a person will have to be exposed to something that helps them think differently, because people choose their behaviors based on what they think will happen. The problem is many thoughts are incomplete or inaccurate, leading people to the inconvenient behaviors that cause some of the problems they currently experience. Our interpretations of events trump the facts of any situation. So remember that when we expose our colleagues to new ways of interacting they first ask two very simple questions:

1. Is this worth it to me?
2. Can I do this thing?

If we want to help people be more open to the idea of collaborating, we will need to change one or both of these expectations to YES! But how?

The most common tool we use to influence others' expectations is the use of verbal persuasion. When people trust our knowledge and our motives, they generally are open to our requests, but when a person is resistant to our ideas verbal persuasion rarely works. Whenever we use forceful persuasion to convince others to see things our way, they're probably not listening to what we are saying. Instead they are looking for every error in our logic and every mistake in our facts, all the while constructing counterarguments. So then what?

The great persuader is personal experience. Personal experience is the mother of all cognitive map changes. If this is not possible, then create a surrogate for actual experience. Create a vicarious experience. By watching what happens to others, people are able to experience the outcomes almost as if they were their own. If we want people to change their persistent and resistant view, drop verbal persuasion and come up with innovative ways to create personal experiences. This type of modeling is one of the most accessible influence tools a parent, coach, community leader, or executive can employ. It then becomes important to share these needed experiences with the right people.

Jim Collins speaks of the flywheel effect when starting the ball rolling and this concept is also true in creating a collaborative effort. We must begin to gain momentum by getting the informal power players within our circle of influence involved and excited about collaboration. They will become the salespeople that will help champion our cause within our schools or companies. Why? Because others value their opinion and are willing to listen to what they have to say and are more willing to follow their lead. Getting these informal leaders on our side will take time in the short-term, but will help the collaboration flywheel gain greater momentum for the long haul. By changing how and who we influence, we will be on our way to opening the lines for collaboration.

Proof of Life-Collaboration REALLY works

When someone/something is held hostage, those who are paying the ransom to get the hostage back often require "proof of life" that the captive is still alive/viable before payment is transferred so that they can avoid paying for someone/something that is already lost. It seems like teachers and administrators in public schools are waiting for "proof of life" that collaboration is something that they ought to actually embrace instead of just tolerate, or let happen around them but not become engaged with. If you are reading this you have just received your proof of life (you can either click on the title of this post or the proof of life link.)

What you will find is the story of how one of the most respected names in technology hardware, Cisco, has completely transformed the way that it operates and brings products to market. So why is this important in an educational setting? The reason is that the vehicle they have used is collaboration. They have taken all kinds of Web 2.0 tools and used them, internally (for security purposes), and a new compensation system to get rid of all the different executives jockeying for power so that now they are wondering what they can do to help each other out. This sounds like what we do to a limited degree in education already. Teachers share what works and what doesn't, administrators talk about how some process in their building has helped smooth out a rough spot, etc. So where is the difference between education and Cisco?

Cisco has found a way of creating the ultimate PLC, but in the business world instead of in education. In 2008 Cisco's model was able to see a 10 fold increase in new projects with the same or fewer people! What would that look like in education? We could do all of the things that teachers wished we could do, and those that the administration deems important to initiate as well with less stress and higher levels of effectiveness. What does all this take? It takes people talking and sharing in ways that they have never thought about before. Instead of thinking as the 6th grade history teachers at one school, you begin to work as all of the people in the district, state, or country that are interested in a 6th grade history project. You don't put people together based on an organizational chart, but by interest and ability. You truly begin to tap into the potential of the organization as a whole, so that the whole organization can benefit.

But we have tried to do that in the past, but committees like this take up too much time, and people's schedules never seem to match, and its just too much effort. You think John Chambers the CEO at Cisco didn't hear that one a million times while they were going through this shift? He lost 20% of his executives, but the ones that he has now are so effective that where he used to have 2 people in the company that could replace him, now he has like 500. What if you could replicate yourself 250 times within your organization? For most forward thinkers that is one of their greatest wishes (the other is to make sure that some people DON'T replicate!) This level of effectiveness relies on people being able to contribute when they have time, and being able to manage the flow of information and ideas asynchronously (don't have to be face to face.) So think of the best committee you have ever been a part of and then remove the barrier of having to meet all at the same time. Then imagine that committee happening everywhere in your school, district, content area all the time. What kind of service, and oh by the way test scores, could we provide to our students then?

Is Your Organization a Community?

We now are living in the time of technology. There is technology all around us; at home, at work, and even at church. But it is important that while we are still beginning to gain a handle on the implications of all of this technology and how it can work for us, we must not forget that we must work with each other. Juanita Brown and David Isaacs are the co-founders of the World Cafe and in their writings that appear in Peter Senge's book The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook (pp.508-517), they discuss the six C's they believe are necessary to turn an organization into a true community. What follows is a condensed version of their contribution to the book. By developing these core processes, organizations will begin to understand the fundamentals need to create a real-world community at work. The processes needed are:

Capability- Companies need to develop skills, knowledge, and personal qualities to renew themselves and reinvent their future. Do this by encouraging learning and improvement among everyone as a collective undertaking. If intellectual capitol is the key asset in the knowledge era, then the capacity for great conversations about things that matter is essential for breakthrough thinking and collaborative innovation.

Commitment- Commitment builds when people are an active part of the experience of creating something they value together. Many employees are willing to commit themselves to a truly engaging purpose, larger than just personal self-interest. They are willing to give of themselves to help create the collective enterprise. But we live in a free-enterprise system. Therefore, the employees also seek concrete evidence that the collective enterprise is committed to them.

Contribution- Develop ways for people to see clearly how their daily work makes a real contribution to the organization's success. Healthy communities provide opportunities for the full diversity of members' talents and contributions to the community's sustenance, not just in narrowly defined roles. Each person's gifts are unique; each enables the community to continue developing and serving the common good.

Continuity- We need to become more creative about how to build some sources of continuity. Otherwise, the knowledge of mature citizens literally gets lost in the constant "churn" of career movers. Technology supports a common knowledge base that the community can draw on for years.

Collaboration- Interdependence is the essence of effective collaboration in a community. Collaboration does not live in the abstract. It depends, for example, on the web of information which, in thriving communities, flows freely in all directions. When members know what's going on in the (company) and why, they can act together autonomously to achieve common goals without being supervised or monitored.

Conscience- All healthy organizations incorporate processes which could be described as "conscience" mechanisms. The organization finds ways to embody or invoke guiding principles, ethics, and values such as service, trust, and mutual respect. These, in turn, translate into daily actions and concrete decisions. This helps answer the question "To what are we going to be responsible?"

With the increase in social technology it is even more exciting to think of the possibilities of how groups can work together even more efficiently. Social tools, such as Facebook, Twitter, and Wiki's can help increase the speed of work, but until individuals can work together in the real world it will not be any easier in the virtual one.


"Building Corporations as Communities: Merging the Best of Two Worlds"
in P. Senge, et. al. (eds.), The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook (Currency, 1994)

CollaboRelate

“This collaboration stuff is a load of junk - why on earth would I want to go through all the hassle just to help someone else out?” This is a common attitude in today’s society. After all aren’t we supposed to be:
• Individual, free thinkers, who are in control of our own destiny?
• Accountable for our own actions, and rewarded as a direct result?
In the age of the entrepreneurial, cowboy, capitalist this attitude had merit. However, with the shift to the information age, global economies, and a plugged-in 24/7 society the emphasis now becomes maximizing human capital not just physical or investment capital. We move now from independence to interdependence as being the prime mover.

Still skeptical? You should be. The shift towards collaboration is all about establishing meaningful, effective relationships – thus the title of this post CollaboRelate. Relationships are an investment and an exposure to vulnerability, which is a naturally uncomfortable situation. The major benefits come when the relationship provides a benefit to all parties and the effects are focused on the long-term gain, but this only happens when all involved can communicate openly in an environment of trust, and mutual respect. In today’s society that focuses on immediate gratification, quick fixes, and satisfaction of desires, the concept of investing in a relationship with others that takes time, effort, frustration, and often short-term disappointment, this seems like a foreign concept.

Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn – Ben Franklin.

The primary resistance encountered from people relating to collaboration is that they do not want to go through the effort to change. If we look at learning as a process that will bring about a change in the way we think or act, then Ben Franklin’s quote seems particularly descriptive of today’s society. The benefits of collaboration, or interdependence, can be huge: time compounding; learning from the smartest and best thinkers in an organization; working smarter instead of just harder; and a shift from just being effective, to being effective and efficient at the same time. The price that must paid for these benefits is communication and vulnerability.

This sounds like it should be simple, but with the pressures of time, standards, accountability, and the need for immediate results it becomes very difficult to look past the immediate hurdle to focus on the finish line. Fear takes over, and we become so afraid of falling on our face and concentrate so hard on right now, that we forget about what’s right. Are you ready to move from ignorance to knowledge? From independent to interdependent? From just effective, to effective and efficient? Make an investment in others and you might just find that the biggest beneficiary – is you. If we say we are life-long learners this really means we are life-long changers. Change your perception, and you can change your world!

Power Tools and Teacher Sharing

I have been to several conferences and workshops over the years since entering the field of education. They have all been well run, hosted in wonderful venues, and very interesting. I always leave them feeling motivated and inspired by what I have seen and ready to share all of my new findings with the educators within my circle of influence. I then see what can actually be utilized mid-stream and on the fly in the middle of the school year. But as is customary, the regular school day comes back into focus and eventually my grandiose ideas fade as I grind on in the normalcy of daily life within my school. As I attend a workshop at The College of William and Mary hosted by Jan Rosselle and Carol Scearce on their book Power Tools for Adolescent Literacy: Strategies for Learning, I once again am becoming very excited at the information presented to me. Their book is great and the website is full of very useful resources as well, but that is not the only reason that I am excited. I am also inspired by the possibilities that have been generated while here.

Think back to your last workshop and then reflect on the following questions:

1. How much of your behavior has changed since you received new information from a workshop?
2. How much of the information you learned has been put into practice throughout your entire school?

If your answer to one or both of these questions is very little don't feel bad, you're not alone. It is a more common result than you know. Most people don't readily change their behaviors even after a very uplifting presentation because they do not feel a true relationship to the information. This is where crowdsourcing could definitely play a part in working with the knowledge gained in similar situations. People are more likely to continue their efforts of working with new information long after a conference or workshop is over if they feel they have a place to turn to that is designed to help them share how they are using new information effectively. By utilizing Web 2.0 technology as a way to create a fluid resource site on the internet, presenters can create a following based on their information and in turn the followers would have a place to be recognized for their efforts. This motivates followers to continue to be engaged with the information while at the same time increase the viral effect of the content, thus increasing the number of followers over time. It is a win-win situation for everyone and in turn we would see the creation of a greater product over time. This would help everyone change their answers to the previously posed questions and help educators become an even stronger team of collaborators.

A Model for Interaction and Influence

Being able to communicate what we are attempting to accomplish in our job is very necessary, but if no one is listening then we will accomplish very little. A lot of us have great ideas and/or great communication skills with people outside of your circle of influence because these are "fly-by" sessions of interaction. These types of meetings are very good to allow us to bounce ideas off of other people but do very little to drill down and get to the underlying concerns within a long-term goal. It is the people that we work with on a regular basis we need to have stronger interactions with and if we do not have the ability to influence them, then we have no significance and no followers to influence in the first place.

In order to be effective with others in our circle, we will need to work on becoming significant to them. Remember, even as a collaborator, we will not always be automatically significant just because we are working with a team on a common goal, nor will we ever become significant with every person. That is ok as long as interactions with them do not disrupt the overall flow of the whole. But the importance of gaining a respected voice is still important and it is for that reason to become familiar with a model of interaction to follow in order to make sure we are as effective as possible with the people we come into contact with. This model is not designed to be able to abuse the beginning knowledge on how relationships work, rather it is a way to first become more attuned to others and then carry on a more meaningful interaction based on where a relationship may be with a person within the steps of the model. This is a work in progress and it's sure to change as I learn more about how relationships work and how levels of influence are established.

Model of Interaction

As a collaborator I need to:

1. Listen first- observe and file what I see taking place.
   
2. Build a relationship with individuals- through positive interactions over time I will be able to talk more freely with this person.
   
3. Have knowledge or capabilities of value to others- if I appear to be incapable or lack necessary knowledge then the relationship will not grow.
   
4. Beginnings of significance- I have value as a person to another and my ability to have influence is likely to increase.
   

Any similarity in this model to other peoples work is coincidental and is unintentional, but is simple enough that I am sure others much smarter have developed something similar and/or better. The point is, effective collaborators work on making sure that significant relationships are established before establishing a voice within a team. This is not to say we will not offer guidance and direction, but effective collaborators know not to focus on negative or unneeded comments during early interactions in areas that will diminish a persons own self perception when uncalled for. By knowing where we are when interacting with an individual in a group setting we lessen the risk of a seemingly simple interaction turning into a crucial conversation.

Thoughts from Crowdsourcing?

I a m currently reading "Crowdsourcing" by Jeff Howe and want to come back to something I read very early on in his book. On page 54 Howe talks about open source and its meaning to computer software development. He states "The open source software movement has been as much about advancing a philosophy as it has been about developing software. Proponents of the open source model value transparency for its own sake, not simply because opening up the development process to outsiders happens to produce better code." He then proceeds to relate the terms to the human process of interaction by stating "put another way, a large and diverse labor pool will consistently come up with better solutions than the most talented, specialized work-force. This is as true in fields such as corporate science, product design, and content creation as it is in software, and it is one of the central principles of crowdsourcing."

Open source is not just a philosophy to be practiced in terms of transparency within software development. The point really is that People need to be the ultimate form of the open source philosophy. We must allow ourselves the opportunity to openly and honestly share our ideas and innovations in order to produce greater gains. Yes, there will always be times when intellectual property will need to be protected, but Eric S. Raymond is quoted in Howe's book to say "Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow". Michael Sampson said in his blog on Being Collaborative (Aug 15, 2008) "The fundamental precursor to collaboration is the recognition that another person has something to add, or something that they can withhold, that will contribute to the success or facilitate the failure of an initiative. If they do add their support, they can contribute to success. If they withhold their support, they can facilitate failure." By opening up our ideas to more eyes, all flaws become more obvious based on the group level of intelligence. We must always remind ourselves that people help people and WE>me.