The W. Edwards Deming Institute的动态

This article provides a helpful roadmap for how to learn from failure and use it as a stepping stone to success. It suggests different strategies to shift your perspective and create a culture of "psychological safety" in your organization as also espoused by the legendary Amy Edmondson in her path breaking works (please read The Fearless Organization). 1. Failure can be classified into three categories: preventable, complexity-related, and intelligent. 2. Learning from failure requires acknowledging the incident, diagnosing the root cause, and allocating the resources to prevent repetition. 3. Innovation is the best possible outcome from failure. ??One idea for you is to apply the framework for failure to your own HR practices and see how you can foster a more open and honest environment for your team and most importantly, for YOURSELF. #teamculture #psychologicalsafety #failure #mistakes #innovation #learning

Are we overusing the word "Expert"? Recently, I stumbled upon an old article from Harvard Business Review that delves into the making of an expert (Article link below). The gist is that real expertise demands 10,000 hours of practice or 10 years in the same domain to truly be considered an expert. This made me reflect on LinkedIn, where it seems every other person in their 20s is offering consulting services via platforms like topmate.io, LinkedIn, and Patreon etc. Are they genuine experts in their fields, or are they simply capitalizing on the fact that there will always be someone with less knowledge than them? Does this approach genuinely benefit those seeking expertise? I am 28 with 3 degrees and a well read individual who can strike up a conversation on many topics and concepts, yet I often find myself hesitant to offer these 30-minute to 1-hour online sessions. I believe it might be unfair to provide advice without having dedicated the 10,000 hours or 10 years required to truly master a domain. What are your thoughts on this? I'd love to hear your perspectives and engage in a meaningful conversation about the value of true expertise. #Expertise #Authenticity #QualityConsulting

"I F***'D UP!" ? I never thought I'd see so many F bombs dropped in a webinar by Dr Amy Edmondson (Professor of Leadership and Management @ Harvard and who I like to call the Godmother of Psychological Safety research)… ? Alright full disclosure they were only thrown up on a slide ??. ? Last year I got trained in a psychological safety tool co-developed by Amy. ? This morning I heard her speak about embracing failure. ? On the one hand, failure doesn't help us thrive. ? And on the other hand, it's crucial… ? We shouldn't go out of our way to fail. ? And yet, we can't innovate if we are unwilling to fail… ? There's 3 types of f*** ups: ? ?? Basic (e.g. data input error). What training and standard procedures do we need to minimise/avoid these? ? ?? Complex (e.g. error in complex advisory position). How do we identify and mitigate risk factors in our systems/interactions? ? ?? Intelligent failures (e.g. hiccups in new tech implementation). How do we celebrate, embrace, and learn from these so that we can incorporate these insights into future innovations/experiments? ? ? At an organisational or team level - one way is to throw F*** Up Parties. ? At a leadership level - embrace vulnerability and share your own failures. ? ? At an individual level - show yourself compassion. View failure as feedback for your evolution and growth. F*** Up more (intelligently)... #AmyEdmondson #PeopleTalking #PsychologicalSafety #RightKindOfWrong (Big thanks to Bronwen Downie and kieran white from PeopleTalking for hosting!)

"Anyone can be a manager regardless of whether they studied management or not" Oh, for sure! 'Cause, you know, just about anyone could be a manager; very much like just about anyone could be a neurosurgeon or a rocket scientist. Why bother with years of specialized studying when you can just wing it and the fate of the organizations and people's livelihoods? ?? It's really rather fascinating how we do not apply the same rationale to any other areas. Could you imagine walking up to a civil engineer and saying, "Anyone can build a bridge!" or a psychiatrist and saying, "Anyone can prescribe mental health medication!" Management? Pfft, so easy that a child could do it! Let's ignore, for a moment, that specialization is a thing in much of everything else. We think nothing of specialized degrees for robotics or biotechnology, not to mention environmental law. But managing? Nah, that's just telling people what to do! It's sweet how people boil management down to "bossing other people around." After all, strategic planning, organizational behavior, financial analysis, and leadership psychology are clearly just fancy terms for "common sense." Didn't all of you know that you can master optimizing complex systems and motivating diverse teams during a coffee break? Just the comparison of management with other disciplines is inspiring. If engineers build bridges, then in a related way, managers build and maintain entire organizational structures. Where doctors heal individuals, managers guarantee whole companies' health. Of course, let's imagine you only need to make a roster and send some emails. Maybe, just maybe, we could apply a smidgen of critical thinking before dismissing whole fields of study? Here's an idea: instead of us assuming expertise in things we know little about, we might, I don't know, educate ourselves on the complexities involved? But that would require effort, and it's so much easier to make sweeping generalizations, isn't it? Next time you're tempted to trivialize a profession, pause to consider this: Would I want an amateur making critical decisions that affect hundreds of lives and millions in resources? If the answer is no, perhaps it is time to reconsider that "anyone can do" mentality. Just a thought!

This article points out a suffering of many organizations nowadays nl. addition sickness which are the unnecessary rules, procedures, communications, tools, and roles that seem to inexorably grow, stifling productivity and creativity. The first step to get better is is to conduct a good-riddance review . This helps to identify obstacles that can and should be removed. The next step is to employ subtraction tools to eliminate those obstacles or make it difficult for people to add them in the first place. Great read with immediate practical impact !..

Change practitioners often start by communicating a sense of urgency. But remember, "A productive sense of urgency is not the same as a frantic state of emergency!" ~ How We Go Clearly communicating the urgent need for change is important, but it's critical that it does not turn into a false sense of emergency used to manipulate employees into compliance. Here are a couple suggestions from How We Go to help focus on genuine productive urgency without letting it turn into a manipulative state of emergency. 1. "Productive urgency is strategic. Emergency is ad-hoc." ~ How We Go Productive urgency implies a deliberate and strategic approach to task prioritization, where individuals or teams proactively engage with a heightened sense of time sensitivity to optimize performance. This strategic urgency fosters efficient decision-making and resource allocation, aligning with cognitive processes geared towards goal-oriented behavior. On the other hand, emergency situations tend to elicit ad-hoc responses, triggering rapid, often reactive, cognitive processes to address an unforeseen crisis. The organizational neural network adapts differently in these scenarios, with the former showcasing planned activation patterns and the latter relying on rapid-fire, spontaneous cognitive reactions. 2. "Productive urgency is motivated by purpose. Emergency is motivated by fear." ~ How We Go Productive urgency, emanating from a sense of purpose, is a cognitive state where individuals or teams are driven by intrinsic goals and strategic objectives. Purpose-driven motivation activates neural networks associated with goal-oriented behavior, sustained attention, and creative problem-solving. In contrast, emergency responses, propelled by fear, trigger a distinct set of cognitive processes marked by heightened arousal and the activation of survival-oriented neural pathways. The neurobiological response to fear prioritizes rapid decision-making and instinctual reactions, often at the expense of thoughtful deliberation. Learn more in How We Go: https://lnkd.in/gwDE3ShK #HowWeGo #leadership #leadershipdevelopment #leadership #business #workplaceculture

Professors Bob Sutton and Hayagreeva Rao have done it again! After writing a very successful book on ‘Scaling Excellence’ seven years ago, their newest book ‘The Friction Project’, strikes at the heart of the dysfunction of all organizations, large and small : Friction. Too much of it is commonly understood to be bad. Yet, most do not realize that too little of it can also have terrible consequences (spoiler : includes a project I worked on). The Friction Project is the culmination of hundreds of interviews with start-up founders to healthcare workers to public company CEOs. Some great stories in this book include Winston Churchill’s brevity memo during war time - pleading his staff to not fall to ‘addition sickness’ and be trustees of others time, several stories about ‘jargon monoxide’ in healthcare - addressing patients with plain language instead (why complicate it with ‘peripheral edema’ when it’s simply ‘ankle swelling’?), and finally Satya Nadella’s work to bring Microsoft into its current renaissance by repairing broken connections and incentivizing connectors and collaborators rather than empire builders. My favorite, however, is the chapter on ‘Fast and Frenzied’. I am living this in Silicon Valley, where it was cute to ‘move fast and break things’ at tech companies when they were small. The tech industry has matured, and it’s no longer possible nor responsible to just go fast. Without checks and balances, we’ve regularly seen startups collapse under the weight of their own technical and organizational debt (Theranos, Uber, Zenefits). So, what’s one to do with all the friction in all the wrong places? Bob and Huggy share excellent recommendations on how to tackle addition sickness, oblivious leaders, jargon monoxide and broken connections and most admirably, how to honor both the chaos muppets and order muppets that are needed to make any group of people striving to do difficult things successful. This chaos muppet is deeply grateful for The Friction Project. #friction #organizationaldesign #organizationaltransformation #organizationalchangemanagement #stanforduniversity #sustainablity #stvp

At the broadest level, it’s important to have good management because companies, universities, and other organizations face such an open-ended strategic landscape. They must tackle a variety of issues, such as where they should direct their attention, what are the most important things to focus on, and how to deploy resources toward solving certain problems.

Being in inquiry is a skill we can all develop further. It’s one way to build our own capacity and the capacity of the people we work with. One of the best pieces of advice I’ve heard is to let people come to their own solutions. That’s hard to do when we think we already know the answer. In those cases, it’s easy to ask leading questions. However, people can sense when you’re trying to lead them towards an answer and are not authentically exploring a situation with them. If you want to practice asking questions, I encourage you to join HSD’s Inquiry IS the answer sessions. There anyone can put forth their sticky issue and the rest of the group simply asks questions. Quote source: Eoyang, G. H., & Holladay, R. J. (2013). Adaptive action: Leveraging uncertainty in your organization. Stanford University Press.

Good article on the good, the bad and the ugly of organizational accidental and intentional forgetting. #organizationalchange #organizationalbehavior https://lnkd.in/gKtByrx6