Month: September 2016

Hi folks,

My early academic career was, um… less than stellar.  Actually, I’ll just let Mark Twain sum it up:

But in recent years I’ve looked back on my school years as a missed opportunity – I passed up on a lot of knowledge.  So I’ve begun trying to fill in some gaps by reading classic novels for which I only read the cliff notes and by dabbling in some online courses.  And while I’ve stuck mostly to course offered by the big MOOC platforms like EdX and Coursera, I’m really intrigued by the potential of Khan Academy.

Khan Academy was founded on the development of online micro lectures to help students understand math and science concepts.  The organization eventually developed a more robust education model where kids engage in passive learning – listening to lectures – at their own pace after school and school hours are reserved for working problem sets and collaboration activities.  I don’t know if this model would have helped engage my adolescent self, but it sounds awesome to my adult self.

There’s an opportunity to apply this philosophy in the workplace, too – specifically with meetings.

All too often we use meetings as a means to broadcast information – verbal, face-to-face versions of emails.  But it you don’t need or expect an interactive dialogue to accompany your announcement, email is a far better medium.  It’s instantly scalable, provides a written record, and encourages a crisp, concise articulation of thoughts.  In the spirit of the Khan Academy, an email announcement also allows the recipient to process the information at their own pace, enabling them to develop more thoughtful, useful responses.  And finally, it saves our precious face-to-face time to be used on activities we can’t accomplish separately – collaborations, working through problems together, etc.

We all should reevaluate how we use meetings.  Are we using them for useful, collaborative engagement with our stakeholders and partners?  Or are we defaulting to them as a broadcast mechanism that could easily be replaced by email?  If it’s the latter, let’s change our mindset and save meetings for exciting awesomeness that requires the active participation of all attendees.

Rex

Hi folks,

If I say “Fist to Five”, what comes to mind?  The latest indie band?  Violence?

Hmmmm.  Maybe.  But in this case, Fist to Five is a model for evaluating and building consensus in a group setting.  And it’s pretty awesome.

There’s a number of variations to the model, but the gist is this: for any proposal or decision, each individual on the team gets to vote.  To vote, they hold up one hand with 0-5 fingers.  The number of fingers indicates their level of support (or lack thereof):

• 5 fingers – This decision is amazingly awesome and I totally agree 100%.
• 4 fingers – I like this and I’ll support it as is.  Any reservations I have are minor and not worth discussing.
• 3 fingers – I have some reservations worth discussing, but I can support the decision as is nonetheless.
• 2 fingers – I have some reservations that need addressing or clarification before I can support this decision.
• 1 finger – I have strong reservations with this decision and/or suggested changes.  I can’t support the decision as is.
• Fist – What you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

More or less.

If everybody has three or more fingers raised, then you have consensus.  If not, you work with the folks who raised fewer fingers to try and adjust the decision to bring them on board (without inadvertently alienating any of the folks who are already supporting the decision).  You adjust and vote until you get to the magical, happyland of a consensus.

That’s it.  Pretty simple, but it gives people the opportunity to voice gradations of consent or dissent while still pushing towards agreement.

Fist to Five – a phantonym and a model for peacefully solving disagreements.

Rex