Gurteen Knowledge-Log

Name Tags: Hello my name is David

Sun, 18 Oct 2009 15:44:41 +0100

By David Gurteen

After a conference, have you ever left your name tag on by mistake and had complete strangers say hello to you.This happened to Scott Ginsberg some years ago and he decided to keep his name tag on. He has been wearing a name tag now 24 x 7 for over ten years and turned it into his trademark.

I wore a name badge once at a talk by Theodore Zeldin at the Tate Modern in London. It was a public event and I wore the badge so other people who were attending whom I had invited but never met would recognise me. I was the only one there with a badge and was surprised at the number of strangers who said hello and started up conversations with me. So I can emphasise with Luke's experiences.

I love it in hotels, restaurants, conferences etc when people wear name tags so I can address them by name. Its just so much more friendly and makes it easier to strike up a conversation. One criticism I have of many conference organisers is that the persons name is in very small print so you cannot read it, or the badge is covered with marketing logos so the name gets lost or those name tags you hang around your neck that always twist away from you so once again you cannot read the name. The best name tags contain the name only as BIG as possible and with the given name larger and in bold compared wit the family name!!

As I love to network and talk to strange, I like the idea of always wearing a name tag much of the time though I am not so sure about 24 x 7. Do I have the courage? LOL! I am not too sure. Do you?

Conversations at Starbucks: Say hello to a stranger

Sun, 18 Oct 2009 15:11:30 +0100

By David Gurteen

I often work in a coffee shop. More often than not a Starbucks. For some tasks, I need peace and quiet, in which case I switch my phone off, drop my internet connection and focus on the job in hand. But for many tasks I find the background noise and the coming and going of a coffee shop or hotel lobby more conducive to say creative thinking. The distractions paradoxically help my thinking process.

And in public places I also get the opportunity to meet people; occasional people I know but more often complete strangers. I like to talk and have developed a few techniques to start conversations with strangers. Asking a parent about a child is always a great conversation starter or something as mundane as commenting on the weather. And its always easy talking with service people such as receptionists, waiters or maids.

But it always strikes me how hard it is for many people (including myself at times) to talk with strangers at conferences or lectures especially when the organisers have given no thought to helping facilitate networking and conversations.

I have spoken about this topic many times in the past, see my comments on name badges, stammtisch tables and Theodore Zeldin's recent Feast of Strangers .

In this article on Starbucks: Whats true cost of a Starbucks latte, Bryant Simon laments about the lack of conversation and community. If he owned a coffee shop it would have a big, round table strewn with newspapers to stimulate discussion.

The article concludes with Bryant saying "People want these conversations, people want to feel connected," he said. "I'm pretty sure about that." I am pretty sure about it too! What do you think?

Speed Hugging

Sun, 18 Oct 2009 12:19:55 +0100

By David Gurteen

Many of you will be familiar with the speed networking sessions I hold at the start of my knowledge cafes and workshops. Its a great way of breaking the ice and getting people talking and engaging with each other.

But what about Speed Hugging!!

I often hug people rather than shake hands though usually only when I know them and more often with women than men. The Speed Hugging post by Steve Pavlina has prompted me to hug more. Its not that difficult even with strangers and like Steve suggests if in doubt I ask first.

I also need to achieve some balance and give hugs to more men. LOL

On best practice and thinking for yourself!

Sun, 18 Oct 2009 11:49:37 +0100

By David Gurteen

Dave Snowden frequently criticises the concept of best practice such as here in this article and in an article in Harvard Business Blog, Susan Cramm questions it too.

Steve Billing in his blog recently added weight to what David has to say. He comments that best practice" ignores the most important factor – the people who are working with the practice or model". He adds that "best practice and its forebear benchmarking both divert attention from the people and the context, focusing entirely on the disembodied prescription or model, as though it can be implemented anywhere and get the same successful result".

I am often asked for best practices in KM though what I discern is that what people really want is a prescription - a recipe they can blindly follow. But as I am so fond of saying "there is no substitute for thinking for yourself!" - in the complex real world of KM - there are no best practices; there are no simple recipes!

Steve says this "Instead of looking at best practice, focus your attention on the particularities of your situation, trying to understand all the factors at work, not just those prescribed in your model or best practice. Reflect on how your own participation is affecting, and is affected by, the way these factors are playing out in your organisation. That way you can help to make sure your attention is on what really matters so much more than a best practice or model – how you are others are interacting with each other and influencing each other in the process of getting the work done."

In other words "think for yourself!"

On changing people's behaviour

Sun, 18 Oct 2009 11:08:23 +0100

By David Gurteen

A little while back I blogged about the idea that we would do better not to focus on idealistic solutions but to focus on the small, pragmatic things that we could do on a day-to-day basis to move ourselves forward. I drew on comments by Dave Snowden, Stephen Billing and John Dewey.

Well now Johnnie Moore has blogged along similar lines see Behaviour change revisited. His post reminds me of a quote from Alfie Kohn that I oft use in my talks and workshops "An innovative, healthy organization requires that we work with people rather than do things to them."

Pecha Kucha

Sun, 27 Sep 2009 02:47:08 +0100

By David Gurteen

I have just discovered Pecha Kucha - a presentation format in which a presenter shows 20 images for 20 seconds apiece, for a total time of 6 minutes, 40 seconds.

Looks like the driving force was similar to the one that inspired my Knowledge Cafes - a desire to avoid Death by Powerpoint.

I wonder if I could adapt the idea to create a variation of my Knowledge Cafe? But I cannot believe that they have patented the process!

The best defintion of KM yet!

Sun, 27 Sep 2009 00:15:59 +0100

By David Gurteen

The best definition of KM yet and some excellent guiding principals from Dave Snowden in a recent blog post.

The purpose of knowledge management is to provide support for improved decision making and innovation throughout the organization. This is achieved through the effective management of human intuition and experience augmented by the provision of information, processes and technology together with training and mentoring programmes.

Credit: Dave Snowden - Cognitive Edge

Why do I like this? It starts with the purpose; the business outcome that you wish to achieve. And then follows through with the "how". To my mind, all definitions of activity should take this format. So if I ask "What is your KM project about?" The reply should not take the form "We are implementing COPs" but "Our aim is to improve innovation in R&D through the use of COPs". Start with the specific purpose and then the how.That way you don't get to take your mind off what you are really aiming to achieve! Its the "outcome" that is important not the "how". KM is a how not an outcome! That's why I always say "You don't do KM!".

And another reason, I like it? Well in my Knowledge Cafe Masterclasses I say this (influenced and adapted from the words of David Weinberger in the Cluetrain Manifesto):

KM should not be about "knowing more" - it should be about "understanding better". Better understanding leads to improved decisions and innovation. How do we understand better; how do we make sense of the world? Through conversation!

Can you measure personality?

Sat, 26 Sep 2009 23:03:16 +0100

By David Gurteen

You may have noticed that over recent months that I have often referred to Stephen Billing in my newsletter or tweeted some of his posts. I found Steve only a few months back when I stumbled over his blog and instantly liked his work, what he had to say and the values he stood for and so it was a delight to have dinner with him the other evening in Wellington (thanks Stave for such an excellent meal and great conversation).

This is the power of the web ... I get to meet someone in cyberspace literally half-a-world-away and form a relationship that is later, often much later, cemented in a face to face meeting.

Here is another recent post from Stephen Personality Profiles -- Measuring an Inner Essence that Doesn’t Exist?. Its that thorny old issue again ... "What is measurable and what is not and do attempts to measure certain things cause more harm than good?"

Steve is not the only one who does not like the idea of "putting people in boxes". Dave Snowden thinks that a special place in Hell should be reserved for the creators and perpetrators of what he considers the worst of these psychometric tests such as Myers Briggs. LOL

Personally, I find these tests a bit of fun; they do give a glimmer into people's personalities and are great for triggering reflection and conversation but they shouldn't be taken too seriously.

What do you think? There are some views here.