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...]

Investing in people ? Are you kidding ?

Summary : the knowledge economy rely on people as an efficiency and growth driver. That’s a given. To ensure the competitiveness of businesses in the future, new operating models, frameworks and practices will be needed. That’s understood but not easy to implement. Investing in human and the frameworks that will ensure that the best use will be me made of their skills in the production process is a nonsense, most of all regarding to business and accounting indicators that were designed for other value creation models and lead businesses in the wrong direction. Knowledge accumulation and sharing, collaboration, frameworks based on trust which is essential in this context makes no sense regarding to rules that need change if we want to build a suitable environment that will favor business and employees’ development.

In a previous post, I mentioned that an economy relying on the intensive use of knowledge was, before all, a system relying on accumulation.

- knowledge accumulation : before being reused, knowledge should be shared, so made accessible so be formalized. In other words, if we take the example of an enterprise social platform supporting the way work is done, it will take time before a critical mass of knowledge can be found in the platform to make anyone found a reason to go there to take what they need and even bring their own knowledge.

- trust accumulation : trust is at the center of collaboration frameworks as well as of work models relying on knowledge sharing and exchange. But it can’t be ordered and only come over time, as people interact more and more the one with the other. Trust applies to lots of things : relationships between peers, with one’s manager and subordinates, with the enterprise as a cultural entity, trust in the tools one has to use, trust in the organization and work model. When anyone does not trust one of this elements, the whole system collapses.

- reputation accumulation : reputation is a kind of accelerator for trust because it says a priori that someone is legitimate, skilled, nice to work with, based on peers’ experience, before one starts to investigate to know if one is worth being trusted. It’s not the solution to everything but helps things to start and even accelerates them. But, like reputation, it takes time to build one’s internal reputation on any professional matter.

Let me add one more thing. Such a system also relies on combining. Combining knowledges, expertise and ideas that need to be continuously combined and re-combined to make decisions and solve problems in complex contexts that need a multidisciplinary and transverse approach. Since all these resources are embodied, are stored in people’s brain, it’s also about combining people and their work in an adhoc way, out of static and rigid structures.

Accumulation is nothing new. It was already there in the industrial economy we’re about to leave. It was about the accumulation of tangible capital. The cost for businesses was impressive but they were able to rely on rules that made it easier to follow the economic revolution that was on its way. Amortization with one this rules. Smoothing costs made investment possible. It’s only an accounting trick that made the spending acceptable on the balance sheet, keeping it nice-looking while lot of money was spent to prepare for the future even if the final cost was strictly the same. The only purpose was to make things acceptable without preventing businesses to invest for their future.

That’s the same with combining. When a department buys a machine they won’t use alone, their is a mechanism that makes sharing acceptable : the allocative key. Here again it does not chance anything to the price but makes resource sharing acceptable.

The economy we’re entering, usually called the knowledge economy, needs, to create value, an intensive use of intangible capital made of people, knowledge, relation or social capital that is key to agile and continuously evolving work. [Read more...]

Learning at work ? More proactivity is needed

Summary : considering how fast things change and knowledge becomes outdated, employees can’t rely anymore on the official enterprise training programs that are only relevant for heavy and “structuring’ trainings. Moreover, knowledge and know-how acquisition is not enough : people now have to understand the fast-moving context where they’ll use it all. Beyond training programs there’s a room for awareness ones.

Keeping employees’ knowledge up-to-date is essential for both employers and employees. Everyone has to keep the pace of a fast-moving context and except a few very structuring things, most of what we know as a life durations that’s getting everyday shorter.

Moreover, any knowledge makes no sense without a deep understand of the context. A recruiter, a communication project manager etc… have still been doing the same job for decades and have to master some basics. But if they spent the three last years doing “as usual” they may experience some some troubles in a close future, if not already, because they have too little or even no understanding of the fast-emerging practices and tools.

That’s were the problem is.

The traditional corporate training programs have a big downside : they made employees become passive if not assisted. While the enterprise has not said that something is important, trying to know more about it is not worth it. If the enterprise does not say that the context is moving, it means that it’s not moving. With such behaviors, it’s not impossible to see this kind of thing happening : in 2010 the head of communication wakes up and says “we don’t master our message anymore : people talk about us on the we. We have to join the conversation”. Scene of panic among employees. Facebook ? Twitter ? “But we were not told it was important”. “Do businesses have something to do on these platforms ?”…”Oh but there’s no training session about Twitter on the catalog !”.

It reminds me of a friend working at the HR dept at a large company. The conversation took place in 2008. “You know linkedin ?”. “Heard about…”. “It does not interest you ?”. “No, because we’re not using it”. “And what about being the first who wonders how to use it ?”. “No. We don’t use it. Not one of our business tools. Moreover, we have not been trained to use it”.

Enterprises and HR dept can’t do everything, can’t keep the pace of context evolutions, build training sessions for anything. There’s a flow of continuous evolutions that has to be captured, understood in such short cycles that a centralized system can’t meet this kind of need.

But there’s an unfortunate belief according to which :

- all that is not “official enterprise usage” does not exist. There’s nothing to learn by looking by the office window.

- if anything new is needed, then the enterprise will tell and teach and train.

But there’s also a need for awareness, context understanding that have to come before training. Moreover the “learning how to” can also be dangerous : people have to understand what they do and why. Back to the anticipation and awareness need…

The fault is “shared” :

- employees are not enough curious about their work, their job, the coming evolutions. What can explain a kind of fear of the future….

- organizations make everything to prevent employees from being proactive while they would benefit a lot from it. Awareness and watch are parts of anyone’s job and reduce the risk of seeing, one day, a lot of employees being outdated and off topic because “they didn’t know”, “they were not told”, “they did not anticipate”, “they did not see” things were changing that fast and their job was being transformed on a 3 years cycle.

Employees should know they can’t expect everything for the “welfare enterprise”, that they have to care themselves of their knowledge, watch, benchmark, network. They should be told why, shown how and, most of all, not been prevented from doing so.

In addition to training programs, awareness programs would be fully relevant today. knowledge are not only stocks we receive but more and more flows we need to capture.

Many challenges and lots of progress to make for HR according to IBM

IBM recently issued a study after having gathered insights from more than 700 Chief Human resources officers, titled “Working Beyond Borders”.. I let  you peruse this long and interesting document but here’s in a few lines some of my takes from it.

Let’s start with te conclusion. As we could expect, it confirms what many people have been knowing for years : in today’s economic context and makets, HR’s main challenge is to develop work “beyond the borders”. What does it mean ?

  • ability to work out of the enterprise silos and collaborate acrosse functions, departments, countries.
  • ability to work out of the enterprise boundaries with partners, clients
  • ability to work out of one’s own competence boundaries : mobilize expertises one don’t have and acquire new ones in a flexible and responsive way.
  • ability to mobilize out of one’s comfort and authority zone what implies to develop new forms of leadership.

These are creativity, agility and flexibility challenges that CHROs want to address in many ways

  • Develop creative leaders that will tackl challenges and opportunities in a new way that’s more adapted to our times. Kind of “intrapreneurs” able to react in an innovative way and engage people around them.
  • Develop speed and flexibility by simplifying processes and making employees more responsive.
  • Capitalize on collective intelligence by finding new ways to connect people

Even more interesting, one of the many illustrations of the study

It’s the evidence that while there are domains where CHROs find themselves efficient, some remain where about which they acknowledge not being effective although they will be critical in the future : fostering collaboration and knowledge sharing, developing leaders and developing workforce skills.

Now that that’s everybody know in what direction to head…the only thing to do is to work on that. The road seems very long but the amount of opportunities is more than worthy.

One more point to conclude :

I think there’s nothing to add. Just do it…

Thoughts on social learning

What’s social learning ? The word comes more and more often in lots of conversations, everyone understands what’s behind and yet everyone has his own definition. That’s the reason the idea formed at Ecollab to ask some experts what was their vision and to gather all these views into a whitepaper. And for once I have a good news since both the site and the whitepaper exist in both french and english.

I’d like to thank Frédéric Domon and Harold Jarche who managed to get us on the project and coordinate our work.

People who contributed : Harold Jarche, George Siemens, myself, Frédéric Cavazza, Clark Quinn, Cédric Deniau, Jay Cross, Florence Meichel, Charles Jennings, Frédéric Domon, Julien Pouget, Lilian Mahoukou, Christophe Deschamps and Anthony Poncier.

Your knowledge helps you more than your productivity

I’ve always had an ambiguous feeling about productivity. In the one hand, doing more or faster with the same amount of resources is a significant improvement. In the other hand, with hindsight, we have to admit that productivity continuously increased these last decades, that whenever a hard time everything is done to increase it even more, but despite of that, companies don’t seem to have improved their overhall financial performance. We also have to add to this the fact that, a time when enterprises rely not on machines or peopeale repeating endlessly the same tasks but on people managing information and solving problems, thinking that any business can run a 100m run in zero seconds is hare-brained.

Months ago, the idea came to me that productivity has to be rethought in order to shift from a mechanical concept to a human one, an from something that could be improved at the individual scale to something that has to be improved at a collective, systemic scale.

I’ve been neglecting this issue untill I came across this article that remembered me of it. Please have a look at this meaninful chart stolen from it :

Image 2

Despite an ongoing improvement in productivity, ROA collapsed on the same period. Why dit it happen ?

According to the article, it’s due to a total disconnect between enterprises et their current environment. Till now, businesses used to increase their size to create more value. Today, in an interconnected economy, value is not created anymore by increasing size but by multiplying information flows. The difference between the most and the less performant companies can be found in their participation to knowledge flows, both internally and externally, dynamics relying on social software. Focusing on “traditional” productivity only benefits to clients, not to the enterprise that doesn’t create more value.

In brief, the good old scalable efficiency is not enough anymore and companies should now focus on scalable learning.

The gap between the potential of any company and the benefit drawn from it is doomed to increase unless companies decide to take the most of their digital infrastructure supporting  knowledge flows and actively participate to these flows, both internally and externally with other businesses, and implement a voluntarist innovation policy.

Performance improvement will require the adoption of a logic of exchanges and innovation within ecosystems which is the only way to significantly improve things. It will make possible for anyone to improve one’s own performance through a creative problem solving process which implies the ability to connect among peers inside and outisde the organization. Contrary to the previous century when things used to come from the top, these new dynamics will be driven by people.

All that takes us back to a well known topic. The only way to bring a real and perenial improvement is to take the most of both knowledge capital and digital infrastructure. If not, the gap between investment and results will become wider every day.

The day when employees will find answers instead of waiting for them to come

I just found interesting numbers on the fact french employees don’t have an intensive use of internet at work[fr]. Although, in countries where employees use it more “it has been the source of a notable part of productivity improvements since the mid 90′s”.

I share the author’s analysis : either while our studies or at work, we’re taught to kindly way for solutions to fall from above right into our hands rather than finding it by ourselves. “High position” of the knower facing learners that are not supposed to be able to judge par themselves ? Whatever, school doesn’t teach us how to become efficient workers.

As a result, the same model is replicated within the enterprise. As  writen here, problem solving and the acknoledgment people can use judgmenent are away from management models.

The point is not school or businesses have to improve things : both have to ! If they don’t it will be harder and harder to face daily business issues.

Two solutions in order to start : teach students how to build their own information supply chain and find what’s relevant for their needs (it’s possible : some already do that). And managers, even if they have the answer, must make their teams find it by themselves, on a deductive mode. It takes some time at the beginning but helps saving more in the future.