People sometimes ask me, “What’s your process? How do you write your books? How do you create your presentations? How do you design your workshops?” And then I might say, “I have no process. My work is a dynamic vortex, not a merry-go-round.”

Il convient d’être particulièrement prudent en cas de déformation anatomique du pénis, ainsi qu’en cas de maladies s’accompagnant d’hémorragies, d’ulcères gastriques, d’arythmies sévères, après pharmacie-express24.com un infarctus du myocarde ou un accident vasculaire cérébral. Vous devez vous abstenir de prendre le médicament si votre tension artérielle est inférieure à 90/50 et supérieure à 170/100.

Sometimes, I spend time defining my context. What are my goals? What are my values? What do I like doing? And what is it that I should be doing?

Sometimes, I talk with people and empathize with their needs. I observe what happens in business, and I ask questions to understand problems.

It often happens that I work on a synthesis of my observations and experiences. I write stuff down, categorize my findings, and try to make sense of the world.

Many times, I have ideas for things to do. I hypothesize about work that could be useful and valuable. And usually, these ideas go on my wish lists or task lists.

Only a small portion of these ideas end up being done. I call this externalizing because it’s about turning an idea into a reality and offering it to others.

Sometimes, I evaluate people’s feedback on my work. And sometimes, I find that too scary. Sensing how others respond to me has always been a challenge.

Finally, I evaluate my work, the systems that I created, and those in which I take part. Improving these systems helps me to do all of the above again, but better.

I don’t organize my daily activities in a sequential manner, following these seven types of work. It’s not like I empathize on Mondays, synthesize on Tuesdays, and hypothesize on Wednesday mornings. On the contrary, I sometimes feel that my work-life is a creative and dynamic mess. I can do any of these activities at any time. It all depends on my travel schedule, my events, my meetings, and yes, my mood. I don’t care about step-by-step sequential processes. I care about doing what’s important at any time, in the most efficient or effective ways.

The Innovation Vortex is a meta-model for iterative processes. I created it as a mashup of Design Thinking and Lean Startup methods. But it also nicely covers Agile and Lean thinking and even continuous improvement frameworks such as the Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle. These processes and models are all useful. But they are not necessary.

Defined methods and frameworks codify the behaviors of talented people who often don’t even consciously think about differentiating their activities into discrete categories. Codifying processes is mainly useful for beginners. The first design thinkers never adhered to a five-step design thinking framework. The original lean startuppers didn’t follow a predefined build-measure-learn loop. These professionals just did whatever made sense to them. With a bit of retrospective coherence, you can probably see that their work-lives are just another messy and custom implementation of the Innovation Vortex.

The Innovation Vortex is a meta-model for iterative work. Some of you may recognize your own favorite process, method, or framework in it. That’s totally fine. The point is, it’s okay when things get messy. It’s a dynamic vortex, not a merry-go-round. Yes, there is a logical order to the seven streams of the whirlwind, but it’s okay to work in several of those streams at a time. Any activity can be the right one at any time.

Don’t allow a process to make you dumb.

Don’t get stuck in a merry-go-round.

The post Your Work Is a Vortex, Not a Merry-go-round appeared first on NOOP.NL.

In a span of just a few weeks, I made some significant changes to my businesses. I pulled the plug on one project; I doubled down my focus on another; I revised my business group strategy, and I’m now in the middle of reorganizing my teams. I was able to make big changes because I am on vacation.

For nine weeks, I traveled across the eastern part of Canada. I visited Montréal, Québec, Gaspé, Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Cape Breton Island, and Toronto. I am now spending the final week of my vacation driving around Ontario. In those nine weeks, I experienced long hikes, road trips, bike rides, ship cruises, and kayak and canoe trips. And from a distance, I stared at the forests, and I reorganized my company.

Firstly, the personal life of a student depends on studies. If there are too many lectures and seminars in the schedule, then you have to choose – a date and absenteeism for a couple or studying at a university and a bad relationship with a girl. At the university san diego personals, you can pay attention to the girl during recess, pick her up after classes, or sit together in the dining room during the “window”.

From a distance, I stared at the forests, and I reorganized my company.

Every once in a while, it is smart to take a few steps back to see the forest from the trees. When you’re in the middle of several busy projects, it is too easy to believe that your involvement is essential and that your input can’t be missed. For sure, your direct attention is often useful to ensure that team members do things right. But more important than people doing things right is people doing the right things.

“Management is doing things right; leadership is doing the right things.”
– Peter F. Drucker

With every type of venture, it is essential that first, you pick the right thing, and then you perform the thing right.

First, I researched all the best places to see in Canada, and then I created an itinerary for visiting them. First, I selected the right friends and family to join me during my tour, and then I discussed with them the best periods, pick-ups, and drop-offs. First, we checked the best available restaurants; then, we started navigating.

As a leader, your first responsibility is making sure you’re building the right company, and then (as a manager) you try to grow that company right. This is not a binary switch. Over time, the more you learn about building the right business, the more you can lean toward building the business right. That’s why the Shiftup Program shows an emphasis on Exploration (seeking the right business) in the early stages of the business lifecycle and a shift toward Execution (growing the business right) in the later stages.

And that’s why my long trip to Canada might have been one of the few right decisions I made as a leader recently. Standing (literally) miles away from my businesses and the problems we are trying to solve helped me to see the forest from the trees. For my team members, it wasn’t always easy to have very little interaction with me when I was enjoying my hikes, swims, and bike rides in Canada. But while they tried hard to do things right, I wondered if we were actually doing the right things. 

And for some reason, tough decisions are easier to make when you’re staring at the forest from a distance while paddling in a canoe on a lake.

The post Leadership from a Canoe appeared first on NOOP.NL.

The Scrum framework, the Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe), the .NET framework, the React framework… The world of software development is full of frameworks. But we don’t need a framework for everything.

Is DNA a framework? Is your government a framework? Is the English language a framework? I don’t think so. They are usually not described as such. Wikipedia describes DNA as “a molecule composed of two chains that coil around each other to form a double helix carrying genetic instructions for the development, functioning, growth, and reproduction of all known organisms”.

A government is “the system or group of people governing an organized community, often a state”. And a language is “a system that consists of the development, acquisition, maintenance, and use of complex systems of communication, particularly the human ability to do so.”

DNA, governments, and languages are examples of dynamic systems of rules. A system of rules enables and guides the creation and evolution of repeatable, cohesive, evolving patterns. It allows for things such as species, cultures, and books to grow and be successful or to wither and die. Many things are possible with a system of rules. The possibilities are almost endless.

Frameworks are a slightly different concept. A framework is a basic, supporting structure. The purpose of a framework is to give form to something and then to constrain how it can grow and evolve. The possibilities are more restricted than with a system of rules.

We cannot capture anything that is boundlessly evolving and changing in a framework. There are no frameworks to constraint organisms, cultures, and books. These complex systems evolve, while guided and not constricted by the simple rules of their underlying systems, which themselves are always changing. Or, to put it more simply:

A framework directs and constrains what evolves.
A system of rules enables and guides what evolves.

The difference seems subtle, but it matters. Continuous transformation seems not possible with a restrictive framework. DNA, governments, and languages are not frameworks. And neither is the Shiftup Program.

Shiftup is a program for continuous innovation. It offers a dynamic set of simple rules and models for organizations to transform themselves continuously. For example, one of its fundamental rules is:

Each innovative idea that evolves into a successful business (either an individual value stream or an entire business model) follows a natural progression of lifecycle stages or maturity levels.

Another rule is:

The iterative and incremental approach to continuous innovation (promoted with Agile, Lean, Design Thinking, and Lean Startup methods) applies to all value streams and business models across all lifecycle stages.

There are more rules in the Shiftup Program, but they don’t matter for now. What matters is that we should stop talking about frameworks because frameworks put limits on what is possible. But innovative organizations should not feel constrained by frameworks. Species, cultures, and books evolve thanks to their dynamic systems of rules. We should similarly treat organizations.

DOWNLOAD THE SHIFTUP PROGRAM VISUAL

The post Shiftup Is Not a Framework appeared first on NOOP.NL.

I keep thinking of this quote:

A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works. The inverse proposition also appears to be true: A complex system designed from scratch never works and cannot be made to work. You have to start over with a working simple system. 

John Gall, The Systems Bible

My startup needs to pivot because our product doesn’t work. We tried many things and worked hard for two years, but nothing we did resulted in good enough traction among users. I know there are many things we did wrong. And I will be happy to talk about all my failures another time. But there’s one thing that’s on my mind each day. We didn’t start with something small that worked.

I have often compared product development with building cities. Every city that works was once a town that worked. Every town that worked was once a village that worked. And every village that worked was once just a handful of houses that worked. Sure, you can try to design and build a city from scratch, but you will find it very difficult to get people to like it. With products, it’s the same.

Perhaps the biggest mistake that we made is that we didn’t grow something that worked. At first, we made something small that didn’t work. Then we added things, hoping that the slightly bigger product would start to work. And when that didn’t happen, we added even more stuff to try and make things work. This went on and on for two years. Now, we have something big that doesn’t work.

The only way to get out of this mess is to start from scratch, with something small that works.

Fortunately, not everything is lost. In fact, I did find something small that works! Ironically, I only discovered this little thing because of our two years of struggle. I found a success thanks to all our earlier failures. This immediately brings to mind another famous quote that I often refer to:

The way to get good ideas is to get lots of ideas and throw the bad ones away.

Linus Pauling

I thank everyone for their contributions. They helped me to find a good idea, finally. I now have one house that works. From here, it’s a matter of growing it, step-by-step, into a village, then into a town, and then a city. I finally have a real chance of making something large that works.

By reading this article, you made progress toward your Agility & Innovation Qualification. Report your evaluation here and collect your experience points!

The post First, Make Something Small That Works appeared first on NOOP.NL.

Ever since I started my company Agility Scales, my vision has been pretty clear: organizational change through gamification and new technologies. I had no idea how to achieve this vision, but I knew that the idea made sense. When I hired my first team members, I told them it was like climbing a mountain but not knowing on which side to do that. The destination was clear, but the paths were missing.

Over the last two years, we experimented with many ideas using our Mind Settlers app and website. We tried step-by-step guides, tracks and journeys, marks and value tracking, and Q&As with remote coaches. Each of these paths seemed promising in the beginning, but then we stumbled trying to get enough traction. And each time we had to patch our plans and revisit our tactics. We kept believing in our strategy of monthly subscriptions (in the short term) followed by free and professional programs (later on) because we had plenty of users asking for more.

Patch: A change in tactics without a change in strategy.

Sadly, none of the patches worked. Our key metrics were always disappointing. We kept backtracking along various paths, but we didn’t reach any higher. We knew where to end up, but we couldn’t figure out how to get there. Along the way, we learned many things and explored a vast terrain. However, none of that matters when the terrain doesn’t offer a path to the top.

It’s time to stop patching and start pivoting.

My vision is still the same. I firmly believe that continuous organizational change will require a good amount of gamification, assisted with modern technologies. But my business needs to explore another side of the mountain. I should approach my vision with a different strategy.

Pivot: A change in strategy without a change in vision.

A pivot is a more significant bigger change than a patch. A pivot means throwing out a large portion of your (failing) business model, holding on to everything that you learned, and starting all over with a new perspective in the hope that another side of the mountain offers you better access to the top.

Pivots are very common among startups. And they are very painful. There are probably not many successful scale-ups in the world that didn’t experience one or two pivots along the way, mostly in their early days. That knowledge won’t make it any easier for my team and me to deal with the decisions that we need to take. But we can’t grow as people without acknowledging our failures and learning from them. Agility Scales has failed (so far) in how it has developed and operated its Mind Settlers app and website. There, I said it.

But we’re not dead yet.

On the contrary, in the last few months, I did some explorations on my own on another side of the mountain. And the paths look much more accessible there! We still have plenty of opportunities to find the top. We need a few weeks (maybe months) to regroup as a team, to reorient ourselves, and to plan a new trip up the mountain. I’m sure the views will be spectacular. Stay tuned.

The post No More Patches, Time to Pivot appeared first on NOOP.NL.