culture category archives

"Super Size Productivity Now: 3% Automation, 97% Leadership" by Kathleen Brush talks about how organizations can create more real productivity - and it's nearly all down to leadership.
What is "culture?" Patrick Dunn asks that question in "Culture eats strategy for breakfast - yes! But let's be clear what culture is." Any big change needs to be aligned with the organizational culture.
Trust beyond reason is how I get results beyond hope.
You have to be careful with "culture" discussions because they can lead you down some strange paths. Ana Neves has an interesting discussion around knowledge management, and I see them applying to just about anything that wants a specific culture as part of the strategy.
Jim McGee points to an interesting interview with Jordan Frank on the idea that we have a "responsibility to collaborate" with one another. I see it both from the perspective of the individual and of the organization as a whole.
My thoughts about David Allen's 2009 book, Making It All Work, an extension to Getting Things Done. I also make a connection to some of my other work, beyond the obvious organizing and prioritizing that come from the book.
Maybe it is the turning of the annual clock, or possibly because CES* is happening in Las Vegas that I have seen several articles that say something like Weinberger's, "The future is a gimmick."
Charles Green has a great piece on collaboration and why we don't. He suggests it's all down to fear. I wonder if we know less about collaboration than we think.
Mark Gould has a discussion of "best practice" that reminds me just how important it is to have a regular policy of looking for other examples of how something has been done before doing it myself.
A friend on Google Reader shared this Web Worker Daily article, "Corporate Culture, Not Technology, Drives Online Collaboration" by Will Kelly. I completely agree with the sentiment, but some of the specific examples worried me.
Shocking news everyone: Multitasking doesn't work. Stanford research shows that it doesn't, at least when walking and chewing gum at the same time.
I'm a little behind the curve on this one, but I picked up and devoured Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers, The Story of Success. Now, the question is, what do I do with this information?
Margaret Attwood's op-ed piece from the NY Times (21 October 2008) is an interesting item about what debt and credit mean to the people involved.
Dave Snowden has some interesting comments about trust and what happens when the trust is lost or breaks down.
James Dellow has an item on Being Ruthless with one's information. And then he links to a deeper discussion of the culture of information overload. This gets me thinking about the tools that help combat the problem too.
Bill Brantley has given me a pair of things to think about today. One on the myth about how people retain knowledge, and the other on how trust cannot be trained into people.
There is a running discussion in the blogosphere on layers of a social networks and how trust or value is tied to each layer.
Not my usual reading, but C. Wess Daniels has been doing some thinking on community. "Some Problems with Online Christian Communities | And Why You Should Stay Away."
In the June 2007 HBR, danah boyd was one of the respondents to their case commentary, We Googled You. I highlight boyd's perspective on her own digital identity, as it informs her response.
If I had just read a little more in my aggregator before posting that last item on trust , I would have come across Luke Naismith's article in which he describes trust as an alliterative A-Fram house.
I've been following Sigurd Rinde's thingamy for the last few months, and now he comes up with "organisational hierarchies in practice."
"You can't be additcted to communication," says Keith Hampton. Yes, but you can be addicted to the tools.
Luke Niasmith has a nice pair of images, one from Robinson, and another that reverses the positive effect. They depect 7 Steps to Behavior Change.
Ghost blogging - the process of writing a blog in someone else's place - is just not right.
Forrester's recent report, Social Technographics, has generated some discussion on the web. My first impression is that this may be a new way to think about the "1% Rule" of participation.
Mike Gotta makes an interesting find in a recent item. Specifically, I was pleased to see the link between asking employees to volunteer information. If employee morale is low, the quality of that volunteered information is likely to be quite low.
A review of The Leader with Seven Faces by Leandro Herrero.
I'm always interested in discussions that take the idea of social networks and apply them to something important to the speaker. Nic Brisbourne is seeing the links between all the social networks discussions and The Cluetrain Manifesto.
Matt Homann dug up a 1997 article on Honda from CIO Magazine that has an interesting description of their collaborative environment. I couldn't help think of "what good looks like" as I read the excerpt.
Chicago Tribune business columnist, Barbara Rose, had a piece on the importance of "face time" yesterday.
David Anderson has a great comment on respect and courtesy. Courtesy is the baseline behavior. But without respect, it is difficult to get things done in any collaborative manner.
Jack Ricchiuto says, "People who don't share trust are less intelligent together; people who share trust are smarter together. "
Thingamy founder Sigurd Rinde has an interesting perspective on business and what to do about how we've always done things in his "thingamy manifesto."
Joy Godesiabois at Centrality has posted a link to an interesting study of what characteristics of teams and the people in them make for successful results. The answer is "it depends."
Really. KM is only "hard" if the change from what is happening yesterday to what should be happening tomorrow is significant to the people expected to make the change.
Bruce MacEwen has a nice piece on leadership that takes off from the recent HBR article about Havard's Program for Leadership Development. I picked up on his comment that leaders need to bring people into the conversation by voicing reservations.
Malcolm Ryder just posted an interesting piece on the difference between measurement, performance and management. I think this is relevant to the discussion of reinforcing desired behaviors within an organization.
Two of the Theory of Constraints mailing lists have been discussing (somewhat tediously) the importance of "change" and creating the right behaviors to make the change happen. A recent poster linked to Huthwaite's The Four Truths.
The Out There Presentation (pdf) by Attention Company has been getting some attention in the past week. They discuss the characteristics of people who are active in online conversations and communities.
I don't usually quote the same article for different reasons, but Clay Shirky has done it. In his recent article on expertise, he hits on the interesting subject of change - how people change, why they might not want to.
Okay, I made a mistake, I admit it. The CEO example is not a good one for real What Good Looks Like discussions. Let me give some examples to clarify.
Here is an interesting demonstration of the impact of "what good looks like." I've been using this idea with clients lately who are in the midst of creating a change. Beyond the "big change" there are a myriad of other things that have to change to be in alignment with the new way of doing business.
Shawn Callahan has an interesting list of what he believes about learning. Interesting that his list has very little to do with formal education.
Dave Munger at Cognitive Daily found a fun study about procrastination and deadlines. The short result: deadlines are effective means of reducing the Student Syndrome.
Kimberly Black has a post that suggests something about human psychology, "Remove my fear and get me as a life time customer." Dentists and KM may be closer than you think.
Bren at Slacker Manager is talking about Fostering collegiality with his usual sense of humor.
Stop looking in the convenient places, and do the hard work.
A BBC report shows that internet users don't know much of the terminology they use every day. But why is it important for people to know this terminology?
Last week's technology column by Kevin Maney in USA Today discussed Wisdom of Crowds as an idea and the book. The article seemed fairly well-balanced to me.
Alex Soojung-Kim Pang at IFTF's Future Now has coined "The Nunberg Error" when people think of the future as insufficiently diffferent from today, particularly on a cultural basis. This also includes a reference to the plastic living room.

Note: Only the most recent 50 articles are listed. For more in this category, please search or look through the date archives.

Picture a steaming coffee cup. Better yet, grab one and have a read!

KJolt Memberships

Follow jackvinson on Twitter

View Jack Vinson's profile on LinkedIn

Blogarama - The Blog Directory