The future of business starts at school. Still a long way to go

Résumé :despite enterprises know they need to change the way they work, they make very slow progress at undertaking a deep change process. The unwieldiness ot their organizational structure is not the only reason to that. People have become the slow factor of change and not only because people don’t like to change. Change implies to re-learn many routines deeply rooted into our minds. If habits are learn young and get rooted over time, we are forced to admit that our education system is key to provide enterprises with a human capital that meet their needs if we don’t want to enter a loose loose game where enterprises struggle to make profess and people lose their added value and their ability to find a job. Enterprises operate in a global context in which they don’t own all the levers and it’s getting essential to build educational systems that favor the learning of collaboration, creativity, mastering a knowledge intensive environment…as well as a proactive attitude toward the emergence of new jobs for people who’ll need to be “oneself entrepreneurs”. Both society and enterprises need new behaviors relying on new values. What means an education system that promotes and teaches them…

Note : This post is mainly bases on my knowledge of the french system but there’s no doubt part of it also applies in many other countries. Those who’d like to know more, laugh or be scares may enjoy this article and all the links it provides.


Despite the fact a wide consensus exists on the need to reinvent the operation and management model, everybody knows it’s far from being easy. In such approaches, people are the slow factor. Their reluctance to change is often mentioned as the main cause but that’s only the visible part of the iceberg. Most of the change process is about unlearning, forgetting wrong reflexes and habits. That’s true for people who’ve been in the workforce for decades but also for the younger. The reason is well known : the “human software” is being programmed from the early years and habits learned young get so deeply rooted that it’s hard to change them afterwards. Contrary, with time, it’s getting harder to acquire new behaviors, most of all when they are the opposite of what has become a part of our unconscious.

In 2006 I wrote on the bad habits we were taught at school, explaining why the damage was already done before people enter the workfoce. Unfortunately, I have not seen any kind of improvement coming and the few smart initiatives are too isolated while we need a critical mass of people sharing the same mindset.

Let’s review some key points.

• Collaboration

I won’t repeat what I wrote in the above mentioned post. But if people are taught young that “one only learns alone”, “knowledge and ideas have to be kept for oneself”, “others should not know what one thinks or does”, it’s easy to understand how they’ll behave once adult. Ok, when we become older, group work is sometimes required by professors. But it’s too late. Rather than thinking together, share and elaborate a common vision, we only divide tasks up according to what each one is better at and the result of the all the individual work is gathered and stacked up instead of being melt. The final result is the sum of all individual skills, never more, what is not what collaboration is about. Of, course, groups form depending on people’s level…a group of good pupils or students will never allow a less talented one to be burden.

• Learning and understanding

In a knwoledge economy, learning, knowing for the sake of knowing is not enough. We need to understand things, make knowledge ours, be able to understand the context to reuse things later, adapt them. That needs exchanges, explainations, discussions, what are the opposite of our model. Of course, writing pages and pages during classes (most of time, nothing more that what’s in the books) may help to learn. But not to understand. Conversations ? Professors know, pupils listen. And the first is infallible so the second should not ask any question implying a answer like “I’m not sure” or “I need to check”.

In the same way, people able to understand the complexity of our world should not be focused on one only discipline, they need of broader understanding of things and their context. Understanding the world, finding relevant models by learning from the past without making the same mistakes needs some historical, economic, geopolitics backgroup…even for future scientists or people willing to spend their lives working with numbers. Our model makes the young starts specializing too young and overlook lots of matters that would help them understand the context around their major.

[Read more...]

Teambuilding and breaking silos only take post-its

Summary : strengthening ties between employees, increasing the membership feeling, learning to collaborate out of silos are challenges organizations try to meet with limited success and at a quite high cost. But, sometimes, things happen by themselves. Lots of parisian workers made the most of the summer decreasing business activity to compete on frescos made with post its on the windows of their offices. Behind what may be seen as a game or triviality, we witnessed emerging spontaneous team building and creativity programs no HR manager would have even dreamed of, with no involvement from their part.

The need for working out of rigid silos, cohesion, collaboration, engagement are matters I discuss a lot on this blog. Most of times they’re addressed through heavy programs, supported by social software platforms that have an organizational and financial cost that can’t be overlooked. Either we talk about enterprise 2.0, social business, or making things change in more traditional forms of organization does not change anything. As I often witnessed : nothing happens online that would have not happened offline. In other words, if employees have no reason or will to talk to each other, exchange, share, collaborate, help one another, the best social platform or the nicest intranet in the world won’t change anything.

Businesses invest a lot in programs aiming at improving cohesion, in team building activities etc…and are far from always being paid back. But, sometimes, things happen by themselves, like a miracle.

In the first days of July, we saw lots of frescos flourishing on the windows of many offices buildings in Paris. All were made of post-its. According to “historians”, Ubisoft was the first to start the game. Of course, such an initiative is not very discreet as it can easily be seen from the streets and surrounding buildings. So, employees from companies in the neighborhood reacted to show they could do the same. We could even see “well done” written on some windows to congratulate the neighbor company that had made a great fresco. And, day after day, post its started to cover the windows of lots of offices buildings.

Blogs and even traditional media mentioned this phenomenon that quickly become famous as the “post it war”. [Read more...]

Meeting Rex Lee : collaboration, problem solving and innovation on the programme

I took advantage from my trip to attend Webcom Montreal to make a flying visit to Toronto. The main purpose was family but it was also the occasion to meet Rex Lee in person at his Toronto’s office. For those who don’t know him, he’s collaboration director at Bell Canada and, although less mediatized than many others, he’s blog is one of the most relevant on collaboration and social computing.

First step in the office, a wide open space, white boards all over the walls, a call for creativity. A “cross” space, as the team that makes it live, where people from all parts of the company can be gathered in order to improve the way they collaborate.

[Read more...]

Is creativity the only answer to complexity ?

Basically that would make sense. In an industrial economy everything is product-centric : we know what it is, what it’s made of, of which pieces it’s composed, there’s one and only one to produce and assemble them, and everyone knows exactly what he has to do. It’s a system based on infinite repetition of totally scripted actions whithout any deviation : each production has to be the exact clone of the previous one.

In a knowledge based economy, things change. Most of times, the product consists in “finding a solution to a problem”. That makes things much more complex. Each steps depends on the the result of the previous and the product (ie the solution) is unknown at the starting of the production.

So there’s no suprise to see projects failing when people try to apply them what used to work before.

But we can get throught that : let’s see how.

[Read more...]

Reinventing management according to McKinsey

After having published some studies about the “soft ROI” of organizational performance and informal networks, McKinsey brought out something very interesting about the need of reinventing management.

Before going into the document, a few things about all those relevant analysis from McKinsey :

- McKinsey treats a lot of problematics in direct relationship with enterprise 2.0…without mentioning this concept. It’s the very evidence that, regardless of tools, people who work and think hard on those topics are heading in the right direction.

- The future of enterprise is not enterprise 2.0 (if you consider that enterprise 2.0 is only about using web 2.0 tools within the company) but a company that decides to really face its challenges and adopt the right kind of organization will found in 2.0 tools what’s needed to power it.

- At the end it backs me up in my idea : everything starts with a strategic goal, then with organization, then with management and process, and at the end you have to provide the needed tools. Tools don’t make the enterprise but serve it.

So let’s have a closer look…

[Read more...]

Discussions about innovation must be public

boiteWe all have ideas…and wha do we do with ? We propose…but at one and only condition : manager must be informed but my colleagues must not know what I’ml thinking about and what I suggest.

Said differently: does making propositions public favor innovation ?

At first sight we may think it’s harmful. Because, to be able to dare to make a proposition, we prefer other people not to know it in order they wont’ judge us. I’ll be much more creative if I don’t have to face other people’s opinions.

But, at a second glance, we have to realize that privatizing the process, the discussions, does not favor innovation and creativity at all. Sometimes you don’t have ideas, nothing to suggest, but we can react to other’s suggestions and then have something new to birng in the debate. It doesn’t matter if your suggestion if not quite perfect because one could improve it. And, last, making the proposal process public makes it visible. Hinding it may not make people feel like participating, even though innovation comes from the diversity of expression and discussions about many point of view.

There are activities, like creativity or innovation, which are made valuable by the amount of contributions and ideas. Avoiding confrontation, discussions, exchanges, is counter-productive. So, the whole process has to be public, because what one says could help the other to improve his suggestion.

Unilateralism and privacy have nothing to do with innovation.

I’ll finish with this excellent example seen here[fr] . In his company they used to have a book where everyone could give ideas, discuss…it was not quite organized ut it embodied a living process. And it used to create proximity between those who suggested and the managers who answered.

They replaced it with an anonymous box where everybody droped his suggestion. It this time people stopped suggesting improvements…it was unpersonal and make improvement process look like a sum of individual secret proposal, not a collective process.

So nothing came from the box.