Posts Tagged ‘Knowledge’

The Power of Pull

Wednesday, June 16th, 2010

This is not a review.

This is an appreciation.

PoP_CoverJohn Hagel III, John Seely Brown, and Lang Davison’s new book, The Power of PullHow Small Moves, Smartly Made, Can Set Big Things in Motion, describes the business environments most of us are living in these days:  fluid, complex, generative, with networks, not machines, as their framework.  The book itself reflects this.  Its structure mirrors the structure of a network.  Its concepts are expressed as a matrix.  This gives the Power of Pull depth and perspective that asks quite a bit of the reader.  I had to go through the book twice to even begin to grasp its concepts and their implications to business.

The reading expands as you’re reading, as if you could stop at almost any page in the book and use it as a lens to zoom in on some aspect of business in the 21st Century.  What will it be like?  How will it change us? How can we change it? Who will prosper? What will hold us back? What’s the relationship between chaos and control? Between core and edge? It’s a lot to ponder.  This is not some fluffy recipe for feeling good about the future.  This is an important assessment of the work to be done.

The Power of Pull labels this evolution ‘The Big Shift.’  Make no mistake, The Big Shift is a life-altering change of game.  It is the tornado to Oz.  It is the jump to hyperspace.  It is the event that turns everyday turtles into Ninjas.  Prepare to be transformed by what you read.

Here’s a small sampling of the many concepts expressed the book that can make the difference between survival and prosperity in the networked era of business.

Push vs. Pull. ‘Push’ business models are (the GameChangers term for it) ‘Industrial Age’ models.  They are machine-like, hierarchical, heavily scripted, and emphasize planning over preparation. As one manager told me recently, “We are supposed to plan for every contingency, but you can’t plan for every contingency.  It’s impossible.”  ‘Pull’ models, by contrast, are dynamic, nimble, and emphasize preparation over planning.  In the Pull model, plans are designed to evolve, and deviations from the norm are seen not as failures but as opportunities to learn and grow.

Stocks vs. Flows. Push models treat knowledge as a scarce commodity.  A stock.  A ‘Push’ manager says, “I know but I can’t tell you.”  Pull models treat knowledge as an abundant resource.  A flow.  A Pull manager says, “Here’s what I know that can help solve the problem.”

Fast Learning. Push models called for standardized institutional learning.  Everyone worked off the same playbook.  In the networked world, there’s no time to transfer knowledge from edge to core, have it interpreted, codified and re-distributed to the edge as institutional dogma.  By the time the core has reacted, the opportunity to put the knowledge to use has been lost.  Because they treat knowledge as abundant and not as a scarce commodity, Pull models are free to direct flows of knowledge not just to the core, but to wherever in the enterprise there is a problem to be solved.  This is a far more efficient way for a company to apply its knowledge than the old Push model.

Small Moves. As improvisers we learn that the little things can make the biggest difference to performance, because the little things that have the ability to expand into big things, and the audience loves this.  Big things, by contrast, can only get so big as to be unmanageable, or be broken down into manageable chunks.  The small moves have manageability built into them. Networks are designed to knit together small moves into significant phenomena.  When communication is significant, markets move.   And when markets move, money gets made.

Serendipity. (I neglected to include this in the original post, and it’s important.)  Serendipity is an unforeseen positive outcome.  Because networks contain infinite potential for serendipity, it is essential to take it into account in the Pull model, as Hagel III et al certainly do.  Improvisation can influence serendipity in two ways:  First, because unforeseen positive outcomes are what improvisers intend in every scene, it invites serendipity; second, it is a process for turning the unforeseen events into positive outcomes.   Push models automatically regard what is unforeseen as negative.  Pull models (and improvisers) greet what is unforeseen as an opportunity to make something positive happen.

What JSB, Hagel III and Davison describe in The Power of Pull is a kind of magnetism.  The cover of the book shows iron filings aligning along magnetic fields.  This is my one quibble, what I’d call a slight disconnect in their narrative:  If The Power of Pull is, in fact, meant to describe magnetism, then the concept of Push can’t be discounted or discredited quite so much as the authors seem to want.  Magnetism involves both Pull and Push, attraction and repulsion.  There is a relationship between the two.  Just because we are divorcing Push to marry Pull doesn’t mean we’ll never deal with Push again.  We had kids with Push.  We built some wealth together.  As the authors themselves point out in the book, without a core there can be no meaningful edge.  Push will never be entirely out of the picture.

There is a whole new language coming into existence to describe business in the networked world.  This language invokes new rules, like the 140 characters rule; and defines new ways of collaborating, like the crowdsourcing game.   The Power of Pull freshens the lexicon by describing how and why business is changing, must change, to prosper in the new realities made possible by networks.  If, as I believe, this is magnetism we’re talking about, the work of realizing the new realities will consist in equal parts of rejecting the negative, attracting the positive, and not messing with the in-betweens.   Push, Pull or Get Out of the Way!

Quantum Narrative

Thursday, February 4th, 2010

We create and share stories as a way of understanding the world.   Our ’sense of narrative’ guides us through life.  Narratives are the basis of community.  They inform our relationships.  Characterize our business decisions.  Color our music.  They affect everything from our spiritual beliefs, to the schools we attend, to the products we patronize.CaveWallDrawing2

Storytelling is in our DNA.  You can even say our DNA is, itself, a story as old as life on the planet, told in a language first translated in 1953 by scientist-storytellers Watson and Crick.  Before 1953, scientists knew the story existed, they just didn’t understand the language in which it was told.  Watson and Crick cracked the code and the story has been unfolding ever since.WatsonCrick1

Narratives are the most powerful way we have of organizing information.  They impose structure and meaning on the chaos of communication that flows like a thousand roaring rivers into, through, and out of networks.   They connect virtual experiences to the real world.  They inspire action.  Narratives make sense of it all, and of our relationship to it all.

As you may know, brand narratives designed for the networked world cannot be scripted, they must be improvised.  Much of the work we do at GameChangers involves helping our customers become better improvisers of their narratives, and not focus as much on telling good stories as they do on living good stories.  It is much easier and more cost effective to preach what you practice than it is to practice what you preach.

Here’s a huge distinction between scripted and improvised narratives:

Scripted narratives operate under the laws of Newtonian mechanics (also called classical mechanics).  Call them Newtonian Narratives.  Improvised narratives, by comparison, operate according to the laws of quantum mechanics.

Call them Quantum Narratives.

NewtonianBalls1Here are some characteristics of a Newtonian Narrative:  It is finite, with a beginning, middle and end.  It unfolds in linear time.  It follows a formula or script.  It has a credited author.  It is inhabited by a well-defined and finite number of players.  It is rooted in physical geography.  It is platform specific (even when it is multi-platform).  It is solid, mechanical, repetitive and dependable.  It is immutable.  The book you read today will be the same book tomorrow.  It is causative, that is everything in a Newtonian Narrative happens because of something else.  Events are related to one another according to its formulas.  (”If Peyton Manning endorses it, people will buy it.”)

Another important distinction:  a Newtonian Narrative can only be conjecture before the fact and can only be true (or not) after the fact.  That is, until events have actually transpired, there is no truth to these narratives.  A book cannot be read until it has been written, , a news story cannot be reported until the ‘news’ has occurred, and all our scripts, game plans and predictions are, at best, a positive vision of what we’d like the future to hold.  None of it is our reality.  Newtonian Narratives predict the future and chronicle the past, but they are not ‘alive.’  Examples of Newtonian Narratives are: market research, feature films, sitcoms, print media, TV ad campaigns, style guides and the shopping list on your refrigerator door.

One more characteristic of the Newtonian Narrative:  It places a premium on knowledge, by defining knowledge as a have/have-not concept.  It rewards ‘knowing,’ and penalizes ‘not knowing.’   In the Newtonian Narrative, knowledge is something you earn, or pay to acquire, at which point you are said to ‘own it.’

None of this is to say that the Newtonian Narrative is necessarily bad, or undesirable.  Just like Newtonian mechanics in physics, it has its place, and that place is vital, as Toyota is learning today to its dismay, with all its recalls on defective car parts.  (Something in its process didn’t follow the script its engineers had authored.)

Networks call for a different approach to storytelling.  A quantum approach.  Understanding this difference and acting on it presents a huge opportunity for businesses and brands, and perhaps our best chance for economic growth that is both profitable and sustainable.

QuantumStructure1The Quantum Narrative redefines storytelling by ripping up and recomposing the stuff stories have been made of since the first cave dweller showed her companions how to build a fire (and got thrown out of the cave not long after by another cave dweller who claimed the secret of fire for himself).

Though it literally has existed forever, production of this kind of narrative is still in its infancy.  You can see glimmers of it in transmedia, massive multiplayer games, distributed production models, theme parks, social media, alternate reality games, activist brands, smart badges, business in China, remixes and mashups, augmented reality, micro-loans and the video of your dance in the musical, Hair.

Here are some of the characteristics of a Quantum Narrative:  It has no beginning, middle or end.  It has unlimited numbers of beginnings, middles and ends.  It is generative instead of repetitive.  It is participatory instead of authored.  There’s no traditional storyteller-audience relationship; in the Quantum Narrative, everyone is responsible for creating the story.  It does not foster consumption as much as it invites customization.  This is why participants in these brand narratives are not consumers; they are customers.  Or players.

A Quantum Narrative is not bound by time, space or geography.  As with human DNA, what happened 40,000 years ago is still present and active in the narrative today.  This kind of narrative can transpire in the blink of an eye or unfold over many millennnia.  Or both.  It happens here at the same time it’s happening across the room or the planet.  It resembles the playing of a game by an infinite number of players more than it does the telling of a story by one person to an audience in a room.

A Quantum Narrative is platform agnostic.  You cannot tie this kind of story to a technology or convention, because is designed to liberate itself from such conventions and transcend the media that deliver it.

A Quantum Narrative is present tense, which means that it does not get bogged down by history or saddled with expectations.  This is probably its most important characteristic, because it means that every single action in the narrative holds breakthrough potential.  Breakthroughs are not predicted by the narrative, they are, rather, made possible by it.  It is non-causative, that is, you cannot always know how or why things occur.  Serendipity plays an important role.

Quantum Narratives do not focus on who has knowledge and who doesn’t.  Instead, they begin with the premise that everyone (and everything!) has knowledge, and the fact that we don’t all know the same things is an advantage, not a drawback.  Quantum Narratives are designed to be shared, not owned.  They emphasize interpretation, context, and perspective over a so-called body of knowledge.

Quantum Narratives create the conditions for unexpected collaborations and syntheses of ideas.  They connect what has been scattered, make whole what would otherwise remain divided, and continually evolve.

They focus more on theme than on plot.  They assess performance in terms of consistency (thematic alignment) and inconsistency, not in terms of rightness (on message) and wrongness.  There’s only one way to be right, but there are unlimited ways to be consistent with a theme.  This, too, has huge implications.   It means that Quantum Narratives, in addition to being more adaptive, possess way more potential than Newtonian Narratives do.  It’s the difference between an atomic reaction and a stick of dynamite.

Dear GameChangers

Wednesday, December 12th, 2007

Dear GameChangers,

During the last fifty years, and increasingly so in recent years, so much of business practice has been influenced by ‘new knowledge’ and ‘new theory’ developed within our business and management schools; this often results in ‘new executive education’ or is touted by consultants as the next ‘big idea’. However, do we as business practitioners really believe that these ‘new theories’ help us to run our businesses better, produce more profits, behave ethically and be more socially responsible, make our people happier, build environmentally sustainable businesses, coexist with our stakeholders, give us more fulfilling business lives, etc, etc.?

Many of my colleagues feel that the continual glut of ‘new theories’, and the ever-increasing mountain of books on business and management, often combine with a lack of connection to the realities of business practice, complexities of organisations, and a changing world. Consequently, some believe that this ‘pretence of business knowledge’ is leading to disillusionment amongst many in the business practitioner community. How do you feel about the ‘pretence of business knowledge’?

Thanks,

Kuldip Reyatt

Dear Kuldip,

The art of improvisation has been with us since the first human saw the first spark fly off the first flint and thought, “Yes and…I’m going to make another spark and this time the game is to make it land on that clump of dry grass…” (more…)

Fun With a Purpose

Wednesday, December 5th, 2007

Highlights Cover 1Almost everyone remembers Highlights magazine, and how they remember is usually, “Oh, yeah, from the waiting room in the dentist’s office!” A little jolt of pleasure counterpointing the inevitable pain just a few beats down the road. You might have thought the brand was dormant. Perhaps even defunct. Well if that’s the case, your head is dormant and defunct. Highlights has always circulated (subscription only — no newsstand sales) far beyond the dentist’s office. Today it has has over two million subscribers and its parent company — corporate headquarters in Columbus, Ohio, editorial offices in Honesdale, Pennsylvania — is riding high. A little over a year ago, in October of 2006, the magazine, which was begun in 1946 by husband-and-wife educators and child development experts Dr. Garry Cleveland Myers and Caroline Myers, published its one billionth copy.

I have known the folks at Highlights for a long time. Kent Brown, grandson of the company’s founders and the magazine’s editor-in-chief, has been a friend for over 20 years and advised me on the publication of GameChangers. I’ve met several times over the years with Kent and the Highlights editorial team headed by Christine French Clark, usually about expanding the brand into video. There was always a lot of interest from my Hollywood associates — at Disney, then Paramount, then New Line and Viacom. At one point, I pitched a Goofus and Gallant movie with Haley Joel Osment playing both roles. We discussed doing The Timbertoes as an animated series, and Find the Hidden Pictures as a videogame. We explored the possibility of a Highlights direct-to-video series, which Viacom execs assured me they could sell like eggs on Easter.

Not a ton of business came of it, but the process was always fun and instructive for everyone involved. (more…)