-

A Community of Innovators

Social enterprise network platforms are a hobby of mine.  I really enjoy learning all of the corporate options to “go social”

 

Companies can build their own site with MS sharepoint or they can purchase turn-key software being offered commercially.

 

What I find fascinating about this is not the change management that required to get employees to actually embrace these powerful tools.  Nor is it the great options being developed and sold by different companies. What amazes and excites me about social enterprise networking tools is the great potential they offer a company or any organization to get more healthy organizationally.

 

Toxic organization cultures drive me nuts !  I think that I am more sensitive to toxicity than the average employee nevertheless I am a unsympathetic with leadership creating toxic environments by ignoring culture or creating unhealthy environments with their behavior.

 

The behaviors necessary for an organization to become more social are the same behavior changes that an organization needs to become more healthy. Behaviors such as openness, collaboration, helpfulness, selflessness, doing what is right for the organization above personal career ambitions.

 

In general, the same people who will scoff at ever using a social platform are the same people who make organizations toxic and are the same people who behave selfishly in their careers, who keep secrets, who won’t collaborate with anyone outside of their tight circles.

 

For me engagement in social enterprise software is becoming a litmus test. I realize that this may be a bit too soon since we are only in early stages of social enterprise acceptance.

 

I am convinced that organizational health can be helped, can be driven from within partially using social enterprise software.  This is why I feel that organizations should “go social”, a healthy organization is far better to work in than is an unhealthy one.

 

Please comment on this post and connect …

Comments 0
-

Corporate Unnatural Selection

Natural selection is a phenomena seen in nature where animals or plants with non-ideal genetics are selected out of an environment.  I live in the northeast and orange trees might do well here during the summer months here but once our 5 months of frozen overcast hits, the orange tree dies. Apple trees on the other hand are far tougher and manage to thrive and live on to reproduce.  Hence oranges are grown in FL and apples in NY, this is an example of natural selection.

 

A free market also has a natural selection mechanism. Entrepreneurs who work hard, network well, lead well and serve the market tend to beat those who do not. Good behavior is typically rewarded by the market, identity is ignored, hard work and not pedigree is favored over laziness.  Pedigree and elitism is ignored.

 

Unhealthy work cultures I think can begin to set up unnatural selection, it’s why good old boys clubs only allowed their buddies to be promoted and ignored other competent options. In certain organizations there exists layers and cultures where another set of rules are in force. It’s like when people developed a certain breeds of dogs that never would survive in the wild, dogs like our Maltese mix would not develop on its own. Our dog was bred for cuteness and for not shedding fur, he was not bred for staying alive in the wild (free market), not for hunting prowess, not for fighting to live in difficult conditions, they were hand selected for cuteness then given a protected status where food and shelter and warmth and affection are handed to them.  The net results is a net financial loss for the owners, energy must be poured into these pampered pups over their lifetime, my dog would not last much more than 24 hours on their own in the wild.

maltese wolf

Even small predators could take out our dog which was unnaturally selected.  The wolf on the other hand is an apex predator, it needs no help from humans.  It thrives on its own, strengthened by natural selection.

 

I have seen toxic organizations that specifically select its members based on identity, based on certain university attendance, based on gender, based on political beliefs. Hard work, diligence and market service was not as important as certain characteristics that leadership deemed important, finances aside, ideology dominated.

 

I have seen competent team members passed up for promotion based on nothing more than lack of a degree. I’ve seen incompetent employees promoted to leadership because they are able to pass litmus test’s that have little to do with performance or service to the market of the business.

 

Unnatural selection occurs in unhealthy organizations, its one reason why so many entrepreneurs can’t wait to leave certain burecratic corporations, it’s why bureaucracies thrive, it is one reason that companies plateau in their financial growth.

 

Sometimes when certain employees are selected in or out of an organization its like the leader has created a culture where an orange tree can survive in a NY climate.  Sure you can make it work if you go to the expense but it takes a great deal of energy to keep the tree alive in the winter.  The net energy is negative, loss of money, poor performance.  The savvy leaders know how to navigate the needs of being fair and diverse and the financial needs of a company.  A smart leader doesn’t allow the internal forces that would insist on unnatural selection dominate a culture because they know if that toxicity is allowed the flourish the company itself is at risk long term.

 

we should avoid going over board with unnatural selection we should accept that there is a level of ruthlessness in certain markets and not pretend that identity politics fits well into a free market.

Please follow this blog and leave a comment below.

Comments 0
-

The Science Layer

I call the presence of number of scientists in an organization the “science layer”.

 

Quality scientists bring a unique culture to an organization that may not blend well with other employees, setting up an organizational “layer”.  Good scientists are typically highly moved by data rather than persuasive eloquence or political power. Good scientists are well-trained skeptics, are not easily manipulated. Good scientists pursue the facts without bias then spread the facts around.

 

I have noticed in the past few decades that a science layer is forming in high-tech R&D organizations, in our government and even in the media.  As a result of this layer I think that certain scientists and certain theories are beginning to enjoy an untouchable status.

 

Unlike what is happening in the government and media around science I think the presence of a significant number of scientist employees “a science layer” in companies and Universities is a healthy phenomenon.  However, having this layer present in our organization offers unique challenges for leaders within these companies.

 

Below are 3 ways that the presence of a science layer can bring unique challenges to R&D/ Innovation teams.

 

  1. Scientists have a built-in decision analysis tool that many other employees do not, which is their ability to understand things from a fundamental scientific level in their chosen field, any leader who ignores (or doesn’t understand) what the science is saying around their R&D will not easily gain the confidence of his/her team.  This is true regardless of how talented or well-trained the leader is. Sometimes the only type of leader a team of scientists will work with are older promoted scientists who easily speak their “language”.
  2. The majority of scientists are introverts, this helped them to get their credentials, it helps them to focus on study and to learn constantly. However introversion is not always conducive to healthy team dynamics and collaboration, silos can develop intentionally and internal competition is inevitable.
  3. Knowledge has a tendency to cause arrogance, knowledge “puffs people up”, a life-time of study, several decades of University education under academics and earning your living from your intellectual abilities causes many (not all) scientists to develop a stubborn superiority complex, making leading these employees challenging.

 

Creating healthy organizations which have a productive science layer can be challenging but not impossible.  Science layers must be acknowledged, studied and led by the right people. The science layer creates unique cultural traits that should be studied and intentionally molded to maximize the effectiveness of this critical layer in our innovation organizations.

 

What are some other unique challenges of employing a “science layer”?

Comments 0

Stay Up To Date With Email

​-

I use & recommend Bluehost, buy your domain and hosting here!

Get Adam’s From His Side Book Here! Its about Church Transformaton from Institutional Church to Living Ecclesia

Visitors

  • 52,739 hits

Connect on Twitter