Monthly Archives: June 2022

First Principles Are the Building Blocks of True Knowledge

GUEST POST from Farnham Street

First-principles thinking is one of the best ways to reverse-engineer complicated problems and unleash creative possibility. Sometimes called “reasoning from first principles,” the idea is to break down complicated problems into basic elements and then reassemble them from the ground up. It’s one of the best ways to learn to think for yourself, unlock your creative potential, and move from linear to non-linear results.

This approach was used by the philosopher Aristotle and is used now by Elon Musk and Charlie Munger. It allows them to cut through the fog of shoddy reasoning and inadequate analogies to see opportunities that others miss.

“I don’t know what’s the matter with people: they don’t learn by understanding; they learn by some other way—by rote or something. Their knowledge is so fragile!” — Richard Feynman

The Basics

A first principle is a foundational proposition or assumption that stands alone. We cannot deduce first principles from any other proposition or assumption.

Aristotle, writing[1] on first principles, said:

In every systematic inquiry (methodos) where there are first principles, or causes, or elements, knowledge and science result from acquiring knowledge of these; for we think we know something just in case we acquire knowledge of the primary causes, the primary first principles, all the way to the elements.

Later he connected the idea to knowledge, defining first principles as “the first basis from which a thing is known.”[2]

The search for first principles is not unique to philosophy. All great thinkers do it.

Reasoning by first principles removes the impurity of assumptions and conventions. What remains is the essentials. It’s one of the best mental models you can use to improve your thinking because the essentials allow you to see where reasoning by analogy might lead you astray.

The Coach and the Play Stealer

My friend Mike Lombardi (a former NFL executive) and I were having dinner in L.A. one night, and he said, “Not everyone that’s a coach is really a coach. Some of them are just play stealers.”

Every play we see in the NFL was at some point created by someone who thought, “What would happen if the players did this?” and went out and tested the idea. Since then, thousands, if not millions, of plays have been created. That’s part of what coaches do. They assess what’s physically possible, along with the weaknesses of the other teams and the capabilities of their own players, and create plays that are designed to give their teams an advantage.

The coach reasons from first principles. The rules of football are the first principles: they govern what you can and can’t do. Everything is possible as long as it’s not against the rules.

The play stealer works off what’s already been done. Sure, maybe he adds a tweak here or there, but by and large he’s just copying something that someone else created.

While both the coach and the play stealer start from something that already exists, they generally have different results. These two people look the same to most of us on the sidelines or watching the game on the TV. Indeed, they look the same most of the time, but when something goes wrong, the difference shows. Both the coach and the play stealer call successful plays and unsuccessful plays. Only the coach, however, can determine why a play was successful or unsuccessful and figure out how to adjust it. The coach, unlike the play stealer, understands what the play was designed to accomplish and where it went wrong, so he can easily course-correct. The play stealer has no idea what’s going on. He doesn’t understand the difference between something that didn’t work and something that played into the other team’s strengths.

Musk would identify the play stealer as the person who reasons by analogy, and the coach as someone who reasons by first principles. When you run a team, you want a coach in charge and not a play stealer. (If you’re a sports fan, you need only look at the difference between the Cleveland Browns and the New England Patriots.)

We’re all somewhere on the spectrum between coach and play stealer. We reason by first principles, by analogy, or a blend of the two.

Another way to think about this distinction comes from another friend, Tim Urban. He says[3] it’s like the difference between the cook and the chef. While these terms are often used interchangeably, there is an important nuance. The chef is a trailblazer, the person who invents recipes. He knows the raw ingredients and how to combine them. The cook, who reasons by analogy, uses a recipe. He creates something, perhaps with slight variations, that’s already been created.

The difference between reasoning by first principles and reasoning by analogy is like the difference between being a chef and being a cook. If the cook lost the recipe, he’d be screwed. The chef, on the other hand, understands the flavor profiles and combinations at such a fundamental level that he doesn’t even use a recipe. He has real knowledge as opposed to know-how.

Authority

So much of what we believe is based on some authority figure telling us that something is true. As children, we learn to stop questioning when we’re told “Because I said so.” (More on this later.) As adults, we learn to stop questioning when people say “Because that’s how it works.” The implicit message is “understanding be damned — shut up and stop bothering me.” It’s not intentional or personal. OK, sometimes it’s personal, but most of the time, it’s not.

If you outright reject dogma, you often become a problem: a student who is always pestering the teacher. A kid who is always asking questions and never allowing you to cook dinner in peace. An employee who is always slowing things down by asking why.

When you can’t change your mind, though, you die. Sears was once thought indestructible before Wal-Mart took over. Sears failed to see the world change. Adapting to change is an incredibly hard thing to do when it comes into conflict with the very thing that caused so much success. As Upton Sinclair aptly pointed out, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” Wal-Mart failed to see the world change and is now under assault from Amazon.

If we never learn to take something apart, test the assumptions, and reconstruct it, we end up trapped in what other people tell us — trapped in the way things have always been done. When the environment changes, we just continue as if things were the same.

First-principles reasoning cuts through dogma and removes the blinders. We can see the world as it is and see what is possible.

When it comes down to it, everything that is not a law of nature is just a shared belief. Money is a shared belief. So is a border. So are bitcoins. The list goes on.

Some of us are naturally skeptical of what we’re told. Maybe it doesn’t match up to our experiences. Maybe it’s something that used to be true but isn’t true anymore. And maybe we just think very differently about something.

“To understand is to know what to do.” — Wittgenstein

Techniques for Establishing First Principles

There are many ways to establish first principles. Let’s take a look at a few of them.

Socratic Questioning

Socratic questioning can be used to establish first principles through stringent analysis. This a disciplined questioning process, used to establish truths, reveal underlying assumptions, and separate knowledge from ignorance. The key distinction between Socratic questioning and normal discussions is that the former seeks to draw out first principles in a systematic manner. Socratic questioning generally follows this process:

Clarifying your thinking and explaining the origins of your ideas (Why do I think this? What exactly do I think?)
Challenging assumptions (How do I know this is true? What if I thought the opposite?)
Looking for evidence (How can I back this up? What are the sources?)
Considering alternative perspectives (What might others think? How do I know I am correct?)
Examining consequences and implications (What if I am wrong? What are the consequences if I am?)
Questioning the original questions (Why did I think that? Was I correct? What conclusions can I draw from the reasoning process?)

This process stops you from relying on your gut and limits strong emotional responses. This process helps you build something that lasts.

“Because I Said So” or “The Five Whys”

Children instinctively think in first principles. Just like us, they want to understand what’s happening in the world. To do so, they intuitively break through the fog with a game some parents have come to hate.

“Why?”

Here’s an example that has played out numerous times at my house:

“It’s time to brush our teeth and get ready for bed.”

“Why?”

“Because we need to take care of our bodies, and that means we need sleep.”

“Why do we need sleep?”

“Because we’d die if we never slept.”

“Why would that make us die?”

“I don’t know; let’s go look it up.”

Kids are just trying to understand why adults are saying something or why they want them to do something.

The first time your kid plays this game, it’s cute, but for most teachers and parents, it eventually becomes annoying. Then the answer becomes what my mom used to tell me: “Because I said so!” (Love you, Mom.)

Of course, I’m not always that patient with the kids. For example, I get testy when we’re late for school, or we’ve been travelling for 12 hours, or I’m trying to fit too much into the time we have. Still, I try never to say “Because I said so.”

People hate the “because I said so” response for two reasons, both of which play out in the corporate world as well. The first reason we hate the game is that we feel like it slows us down. We know what we want to accomplish, and that response creates unnecessary drag. The second reason we hate this game is that after one or two questions, we are often lost. We actually don’t know why. Confronted with our own ignorance, we resort to self-defense.

I remember being in meetings and asking people why we were doing something this way or why they thought something was true. At first, there was a mild tolerance for this approach. After three “whys,” though, you often find yourself on the other end of some version of “we can take this offline.”

Can you imagine how that would play out with Elon Musk? Richard Feynman? Charlie Munger? Musk would build a billion-dollar business to prove you wrong, Feynman would think you’re an idiot, and Munger would profit based on your inability to think through a problem.

“Science is a way of thinking much more than it is a body of knowledge.” — Carl Sagan

Examples of First Principles in Action

So we can better understand how first-principles reasoning works, let’s look at four examples.

Elon Musk and SpaceX

Perhaps no one embodies first-principles thinking more than Elon Musk. He is one of the most audacious entrepreneurs the world has ever seen. My kids (grades 3 and 2) refer to him as a real-life Tony Stark, thereby conveniently providing a good time for me to remind them that by fourth grade, Musk was reading the Encyclopedia Britannica and not Pokemon.

What’s most interesting about Musk is not what he thinks but how he thinks:

I think people’s thinking process is too bound by convention or analogy to prior experiences. It’s rare that people try to think of something on a first principles basis. They’ll say, “We’ll do that because it’s always been done that way.” Or they’ll not do it because “Well, nobody’s ever done that, so it must not be good. But that’s just a ridiculous way to think. You have to build up the reasoning from the ground up—“from the first principles” is the phrase that’s used in physics. You look at the fundamentals and construct your reasoning from that, and then you see if you have a conclusion that works or doesn’t work, and it may or may not be different from what people have done in the past.[4]

His approach to understanding reality is to start with what is true — not with his intuition. The problem is that we don’t know as much as we think we do, so our intuition isn’t very good. We trick ourselves into thinking we know what’s possible and what’s not. The way Musk thinks is much different.

Musk starts out with something he wants to achieve, like building a rocket. Then he starts with the first principles of the problem. Running through how Musk would think, Larry Page said in an interview, “What are the physics of it? How much time will it take? How much will it cost? How much cheaper can I make it? There’s this level of engineering and physics that you need to make judgments about what’s possible and interesting. Elon is unusual in that he knows that, and he also knows business and organization and leadership and governmental issues.”[5]

Rockets are absurdly expensive, which is a problem because Musk wants to send people to Mars. And to send people to Mars, you need cheaper rockets. So he asked himself, “What is a rocket made of? Aerospace-grade aluminum alloys, plus some titanium, copper, and carbon fiber. And … what is the value of those materials on the commodity market? It turned out that the materials cost of a rocket was around two percent of the typical price.”[6]

Why, then, is it so expensive to get a rocket into space? Musk, a notorious self-learner with degrees in both economics and physics, literally taught himself rocket science. He figured that the only reason getting a rocket into space is so expensive is that people are stuck in a mindset that doesn’t hold up to first principles. With that, Musk decided to create SpaceX and see if he could build rockets himself from the ground up.

In an interview with Kevin Rose, Musk summarized his approach:

I think it’s important to reason from first principles rather than by analogy. So the normal way we conduct our lives is, we reason by analogy. We are doing this because it’s like something else that was done, or it is like what other people are doing… with slight iterations on a theme. And it’s … mentally easier to reason by analogy rather than from first principles. First principles is kind of a physics way of looking at the world, and what that really means is, you … boil things down to the most fundamental truths and say, “okay, what are we sure is true?” … and then reason up from there. That takes a lot more mental energy.[7]

Musk then gave an example of how Space X uses first principles to innovate at low prices:

Somebody could say — and in fact people do — that battery packs are really expensive and that’s just the way they will always be because that’s the way they have been in the past. … Well, no, that’s pretty dumb… Because if you applied that reasoning to anything new, then you wouldn’t be able to ever get to that new thing…. you can’t say, … “oh, nobody wants a car because horses are great, and we’re used to them and they can eat grass and there’s lots of grass all over the place and … there’s no gasoline that people can buy….”

He then gives a fascinating example about battery packs:

… they would say, “historically, it costs $600 per kilowatt-hour. And so it’s not going to be much better than that in the future. … So the first principles would be, … what are the material constituents of the batteries? What is the spot market value of the material constituents? … It’s got cobalt, nickel, aluminum, carbon, and some polymers for separation, and a steel can. So break that down on a material basis; if we bought that on a London Metal Exchange, what would each of these things cost? Oh, jeez, it’s … $80 per kilowatt-hour. So, clearly, you just need to think of clever ways to take those materials and combine them into the shape of a battery cell, and you can have batteries that are much, much cheaper than anyone realizes.

BuzzFeed

After studying the psychology of virality, Jonah Peretti founded BuzzFeed in 2006. The site quickly grew to be one of the most popular on the internet, with hundreds of employees and substantial revenue.

Peretti figured out early on the first principle of a successful website: wide distribution. Rather than publishing articles people should read, BuzzFeed focuses on publishing those that people want to read. This means aiming to garner maximum social shares to put distribution in the hands of readers.

Peretti recognized the first principles of online popularity and used them to take a new approach to journalism. He also ignored SEO, saying, “Instead of making content robots like, it was more satisfying to make content humans want to share.”[8] Unfortunately for us, we share a lot of cat videos.

A common aphorism in the field of viral marketing is, “content might be king, but distribution is queen, and she wears the pants” (or “and she has the dragons”; pick your metaphor). BuzzFeed’s distribution-based approach is based on obsessive measurement, using A/B testing and analytics.

Jon Steinberg, president of BuzzFeed, explains the first principles of virality:

Keep it short. Ensure [that] the story has a human aspect. Give people the chance to engage. And let them react. People mustn’t feel awkward sharing it. It must feel authentic. Images and lists work. The headline must be persuasive and direct.

Derek Sivers and CD Baby

When Sivers founded his company CD Baby, he reduced the concept down to first principles. Sivers asked, What does a successful business need? His answer was happy customers.

Instead of focusing on garnering investors or having large offices, fancy systems, or huge numbers of staff, Sivers focused on making each of his customers happy. An example of this is his famous order confirmation email, part of which reads:

Your CD has been gently taken from our CD Baby shelves with sterilized contamination-free gloves and placed onto a satin pillow. A team of 50 employees inspected your CD and polished it to make sure it was in the best possible condition before mailing. Our packing specialist from Japan lit a candle and a hush fell over the crowd as he put your CD into the finest gold-lined box money can buy.

By ignoring unnecessary details that cause many businesses to expend large amounts of money and time, Sivers was able to rapidly grow the company to $4 million in monthly revenue. In Anything You Want, Sivers wrote:

Having no funding was a huge advantage for me.
A year after I started CD Baby, the dot-com boom happened. Anyone with a little hot air and a vague plan was given millions of dollars by investors. It was ridiculous. …
Even years later, the desks were just planks of wood on cinder blocks from the hardware store. I made the office computers myself from parts. My well-funded friends would spend $100,000 to buy something I made myself for $1,000. They did it saying, “We need the very best,” but it didn’t improve anything for their customers. …
It’s counterintuitive, but the way to grow your business is to focus entirely on your existing customers. Just thrill them, and they’ll tell everyone.

To survive as a business, you need to treat your customers well. And yet so few of us master this principle.

Employing First Principles in Your Daily Life

Most of us have no problem thinking about what we want to achieve in life, at least when we’re young. We’re full of big dreams, big ideas, and boundless energy. The problem is that we let others tell us what’s possible, not only when it comes to our dreams but also when it comes to how we go after them. And when we let other people tell us what’s possible or what the best way to do something is, we outsource our thinking to someone else.

The real power of first-principles thinking is moving away from incremental improvement and into possibility. Letting others think for us means that we’re using their analogies, their conventions, and their possibilities. It means we’ve inherited a world that conforms to what they think. This is incremental thinking.

When we take what already exists and improve on it, we are in the shadow of others. It’s only when we step back, ask ourselves what’s possible, and cut through the flawed analogies that we see what is possible. Analogies are beneficial; they make complex problems easier to communicate and increase understanding. Using them, however, is not without a cost. They limit our beliefs about what’s possible and allow people to argue without ever exposing our (faulty) thinking. Analogies move us to see the problem in the same way that someone else sees the problem.

The gulf between what people currently see because their thinking is framed by someone else and what is physically possible is filled by the people who use first principles to think through problems.

First-principles thinking clears the clutter of what we’ve told ourselves and allows us to rebuild from the ground up. Sure, it’s a lot of work, but that’s why so few people are willing to do it. It’s also why the rewards for filling the chasm between possible and incremental improvement tend to be non-linear.

Let’s take a look at a few of the limiting beliefs that we tell ourselves.

“I don’t have a good memory.” [10]
People have far better memories than they think they do. Saying you don’t have a good memory is just a convenient excuse to let you forget. Taking a first-principles approach means asking how much information we can physically store in our minds. The answer is “a lot more than you think.” Now that we know it’s possible to put more into our brains, we can reframe the problem into finding the most optimal way to store information in our brains.

“There is too much information out there.”
A lot of professional investors read Farnam Street. When I meet these people and ask how they consume information, they usually fall into one of two categories. The differences between the two apply to all of us. The first type of investor says there is too much information to consume. They spend their days reading every press release, article, and blogger commenting on a position they hold. They wonder what they are missing. The second type of investor realizes that reading everything is unsustainable and stressful and makes them prone to overvaluing information they’ve spent a great amount of time consuming. These investors, instead, seek to understand the variables that will affect their investments. While there might be hundreds, there are usually three to five variables that will really move the needle. The investors don’t have to read everything; they just pay attention to these variables.

“All the good ideas are taken.”
A common way that people limit what’s possible is to tell themselves that all the good ideas are taken. Yet, people have been saying this for hundreds of years — literally — and companies keep starting and competing with different ideas, variations, and strategies.

“We need to move first.”
I’ve heard this in boardrooms for years. The answer isn’t as black and white as this statement. The iPhone wasn’t first, it was better. Microsoft wasn’t the first to sell operating systems; it just had a better business model. There is a lot of evidence showing that first movers in business are more likely to fail than latecomers. Yet this myth about the need to move first continues to exist.

Sometimes the early bird gets the worm and sometimes the first mouse gets killed. You have to break each situation down into its component parts and see what’s possible. That is the work of first-principles thinking.

“I can’t do that; it’s never been done before.”
People like Elon Musk are constantly doing things that have never been done before. This type of thinking is analogous to looking back at history and building, say, floodwalls, based on the worst flood that has happened before. A better bet is to look at what could happen and plan for that.

“As to methods, there may be a million and then some, but principles are few. The man who grasps principles can successfully select his own methods. The man who tries methods, ignoring principles, is sure to have trouble.” — Harrington Emerson

Conclusion

The thoughts of others imprison us if we’re not thinking for ourselves.

Reasoning from first principles allows us to step outside of history and conventional wisdom and see what is possible. When you really understand the principles at work, you can decide if the existing methods make sense. Often they don’t.

Reasoning by first principles is useful when you are (1) doing something for the first time, (2) dealing with complexity, and (3) trying to understand a situation that you’re having problems with. In all of these areas, your thinking gets better when you stop making assumptions and you stop letting others frame the problem for you.

Analogies can’t replace understanding. While it’s easier on your brain to reason by analogy, you’re more likely to come up with better answers when you reason by first principles. This is what makes it one of the best sources of creative thinking. Thinking in first principles allows you to adapt to a changing environment, deal with reality, and seize opportunities that others can’t see.

Many people mistakenly believe that creativity is something that only some of us are born with, and either we have it or we don’t. Fortunately, there seems to be ample evidence that this isn’t true.[11] We’re all born rather creative, but during our formative years, it can be beaten out of us by busy parents and teachers. As adults, we rely on convention and what we’re told because that’s easier than breaking things down into first principles and thinking for ourselves. Thinking through first principles is a way of taking off the blinders. Most things suddenly seem more possible.

“I think most people can learn a lot more than they think they can,” says Musk. “They sell themselves short without trying. One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree — make sure you understand the fundamental principles, i.e., the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to.”

This article originally appeared on Farnham Street

End Notes

^[1] Aristotle, Physics 184a10–21

^[2] Aristotle, Metaphysics 1013a14-15

^[3] https://waitbutwhy.com/2015/11/the-cook-and-the-chef-musks-secret-sauce.html

^[4] Elon Musk, quoted by Tim Urban in “The Cook and the Chef: Musk’s Secret Sauce,” Wait But Why https://waitbutwhy.com/2015/11/the-cook-and-the-chef-musks-secret-sauce.html

^[5] Vance, Ashlee. Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Future (p. 354)

^[6] https://www.wired.com/2012/10/ff-elon-musk-qa/all/

^[7] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-s_3b5fRd8

^[8] David Rowan, “How BuzzFeed mastered social sharing to become a media giant for a new era,” Wired.com. 2 January 2014. https://www.wired.co.uk/article/buzzfeed

^[9] What does Elon Musk mean when he said “I think it’s important to reason from first principles rather than by analogy?”

^[10] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-estimate-boosts-the-human-brain-s-memory-capacity-10-fold/

^[11] Breakpoint and Beyond: Mastering the Future Today, George Land

^[12] I am Elon Musk, CEO/CTO of a rocket company, AMA!

Image credits: Pixabay

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

The Ethics of AI in Innovation

Leave a reply

The Ethics of AI in Innovation

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

In today’s rapidly evolving technological landscape, artificial intelligence (AI) plays a pivotal role in driving innovation. From healthcare and transportation to education and finance, AI’s potential to transform industries is unparalleled. However, with great power comes great responsibility. As we harness the capabilities of AI, we must also grapple with the ethical implications that accompany its use. This article delves into the ethical considerations of AI in innovation and presents two case studies that highlight the challenges and solutions within this dynamic field.

Understanding AI Ethics

AI ethics refers to the moral principles and guidelines that govern the development, deployment, and use of AI technologies. These principles aim to ensure that AI systems are designed and used in ways that are fair, transparent, and accountable. AI ethics also demand that we consider the potential biases in AI algorithms, the impact on employment, privacy concerns, and the long-term societal implications of AI-driven innovations.

Case Study 1: Healthcare AI – The IBM Watson Experience

IBM Watson, a powerful AI platform, made headlines with its potential to revolutionize healthcare. With the ability to analyze vast amounts of medical data and provide treatment recommendations, Watson promised to assist doctors in diagnosing and treating diseases more effectively.

However, the rollout of Watson in healthcare settings raised significant ethical questions. Firstly, there were concerns about the accuracy of the recommendations. Critics pointed out that Watson’s training data could be biased, potentially leading to flawed medical advice. Additionally, the opaque nature of AI decision-making posed challenges in accountability, especially in life-or-death scenarios.

IBM addressed these ethical issues by emphasizing transparency and collaboration with healthcare professionals. They implemented rigorous validation procedures and incorporated feedback from medical practitioners to refine Watson’s algorithms. This approach highlighted the importance of involving domain experts in the development process, ensuring that AI systems align with ethical standards and practical realities.

Case Study 2: Autonomous Vehicles – Google’s Waymo Journey

Waymo, Google’s self-driving car project, embodies the promise of AI in redefining urban transportation. Autonomous vehicles have the potential to enhance road safety and reduce traffic congestion. Nevertheless, they also bring forth ethical dilemmas that warrant careful consideration.

A key ethical challenge is the moral decision-making inherent in self-driving technology. In complex traffic situations, these AI-driven vehicles must make split-second decisions that could result in harm. The “trolley problem”—a classic ethical thought experiment—illustrates the dilemma of choosing between two harmful outcomes. For instance, should a self-driving car prioritize the safety of its passengers over pedestrians?

Waymo addresses these ethical concerns by implementing a robust ethical framework and engaging with stakeholders, including ethicists, regulators, and the general public. By fostering open dialogue, Waymo seeks to balance technical innovation with societal values, ensuring that their AI systems operate ethically and safely.

Principles for Ethical AI Innovation

As we navigate the ethical landscape of AI, several guiding principles can help steer innovation in a responsible direction:

Transparency: AI systems should be designed with transparency at their core, enabling users to understand the decision-making processes and underlying data.
Fairness: Developers must proactively address biases in AI algorithms to prevent discriminatory outcomes.
Accountability: Clear accountability mechanisms should be established to ensure that stakeholders can address any misuse or failure of AI technologies.
Collaboration: Cross-disciplinary collaboration involving technologists, ethicists, industry leaders, and policymakers is essential to fostering ethical AI innovation.

Conclusion

The integration of AI into our daily lives and industries presents both immense opportunities and complex ethical challenges. By thoughtfully addressing these ethical concerns, we can unleash the full potential of AI while safeguarding human values and societal well-being. As leaders in AI innovation, we must dedicate ourselves to building systems that are not only groundbreaking but also ethically sound, paving the way for a future where technology serves all of humanity.

In a world driven by AI, ethical innovation is not just an option—it’s a necessity. Through continuous dialogue, collaboration, and adherence to ethical principles, we can ensure that AI becomes a force for positive change, empowering people and societies worldwide.

Extra Extra: Because innovation is all about change, Braden Kelley’s human-centered change methodology and tools are the best way to plan and execute the changes necessary to support your innovation and transformation efforts — all while literally getting everyone all on the same page for change. Find out more about the methodology and tools, including the book Charting Change by following the link. Be sure and download the TEN FREE TOOLS while you’re here.

Image credit: Microsoft CoPilot

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Cultural Shifts Required for Agile Success

Leave a reply

Cultural Shifts Required for Agile Success

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

In an era of rapid technological evolution and market dynamism, Agile has emerged as the go-to methodology for organizations seeking agility and resilience. However, the successful adoption of Agile is not just about implementing new processes or tools. At its core, Agile requires profound cultural shifts—a transformation in how individuals and teams think, interact, and operate.

The Imperative of Cultural Change

Agile methodologies promise speed, flexibility, and customer-centric approaches. However, many organizations fail to reap these benefits, primarily because they overlook the critical role of culture. For Agile to truly take root and flourish, organizations must embrace several key cultural shifts:

From Control to Empowerment: Agile thrives in environments where teams are empowered to make decisions. This requires a shift away from command-and-control management styles.
From Silos to Collaboration: Cross-functional collaboration is vital. Agile demands breaking down silos and fostering open communication and teamwork.
From Planning to Experimentation: Agile values iterative learning and adaptation over rigid planning.
From Risk Avoidance to Embracing Failure: Creating a culture where failure is seen as a learning opportunity is crucial for innovation.

Case Study 1: Spotify

Spotify’s success with Agile practices is well-documented and provides a compelling case study of cultural transformation. At Spotify, the organization is designed around cross-functional “squads,” each with end-to-end responsibility for their portions of the product. Here’s how Spotify navigated the cultural shifts:

Empowerment: Squads at Spotify are autonomous, empowering team members to experiment and make decisions without needing constant approval from higher management.
Collaboration: Cross-functional nature of squads ensures deep collaboration across disciplines, promoting knowledge sharing and holistic problem-solving.
Experimentation: Spotify encourages a “fail-friendly” culture where trying new ideas is embraced, and projects can pivot or stop based on what they learn quickly.

As a result, Spotify maintains a high capacity for innovation and adaptability, relevant to their fast-moving digital landscape.

Case Study 2: General Electric (GE)

General Electric, a company known for its traditional bureaucratic structure, embarked on an Agile transformation journey in its software development division to keep pace with technological changes and market demands.

From Control to Empowerment: GE overhauled their managerial approaches by adopting Lean Startup principles, which gave teams more autonomy to develop innovative solutions quickly.
Silos to Collaboration: GE’s Agile journey involved creating collocated, cross-functional teams tasked with tackling specific customer challenges, breaking down traditional silos.
Embracing Failure: Teams were encouraged to experiment and iterate, fostering a culture of learning from failure without the fear of repercussions.

While challenges existed, this cultural shift allowed GE to accelerate innovation and better respond to customer needs in their software products.

Navigating the Transition

Transitioning to an Agile culture is not without its challenges. Resistance to change, entrenched habits, and existing power dynamics can hinder progress. Here are strategies to navigate these challenges:

Leadership Buy-In: Securing support from leadership is crucial. Leaders must model Agile behaviors and champion cultural changes.
Change Agents: Identify and empower change agents who can advocate for and facilitate cultural shifts within teams.
Continuous Learning: Promote a culture of ongoing education and training to equip staff with the skills and mindset needed for Agile success.
Feedback Loops: Create mechanisms for regular feedback and reflection, allowing teams to learn and adapt continually.

Conclusion

Agile is not just a process but a mindset—a culture. The organizations that successfully navigate the transition to Agile do so by fundamentally reshaping their organizational culture. As seen in the examples of Spotify and GE, the journey to Agile success is challenging but ultimately rewarding, leading to more innovative, responsive, and resilient organizations.

To truly thrive in today’s fast-paced world, organizations must embrace the cultural shifts that Agile demands, fostering environments where empowerment, collaboration, experimentation, and learning from failure are not just encouraged, but ingrained into the very fabric of daily operations.

Extra Extra: Futurology is not fortune telling. Futurists use a scientific approach to create their deliverables, but a methodology and tools like those in FutureHacking™ can empower anyone to engage in futurology themselves.

Image credit: Pixabay

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

An Innovation Action Plan for the New CTO

2 Replies

Finding and Growing Innovation Islands Inside a Large Company

An Innovation Action Plan for the New CTO

GUEST POST from Steve Blank

How does a newly hired Chief Technology Officer (CTO) find and grow the islands of innovation inside a large company?

How not to waste your first six months as a new CTO thinking you’re making progress when the status quo is working to keep you at bay?

I just had coffee with Anthony, a friend who was just hired as the Chief Technology Officer (CTO) of a large company (30,000+ people.) He previously cofounded several enterprise software startups, and his previous job was building a new innovation organization from scratch inside another large company. But this is the first time he was the CTO of a company this size.

Good News and Bad

His good news was that his new company provides essential services and regardless of how much they stumbled they were going to be in business for a long time. But the bad news was that the company wasn’t keeping up with new technologies and new competitors who were moving faster. And the fact that they were an essential service made the internal cultural obstacles for change and innovation that much harder.

We both laughed when he shared that the senior execs told him that all the existing processes and policies were working just fine. It was clear that at least two of the four divisions didn’t really want him there. Some groups think he’s going to muck with their empires. Some of the groups are dysfunctional. Some are, as he said, “world-class people and organizations for a world that no longer exists.”

So, the question we were pondering was, how do you quickly infiltrate a large, complex company of that size? How do you put wins on the board and get a coalition working? Perhaps by getting people to agree to common problems and strategies? And/or finding the existing organizational islands of innovation that were already delivering and help them scale?

The Journey Begins

In his first week the exec staff had pointed him to the existing corporate incubator. Anthony had long come to the same conclusion I had, that highly visible corporate incubators do a good job of shaping culture and getting great press, but most often their biggest products were demos that never get deployed to the field. Anthony concluded that the incubator in his new company was no exception. Successful organizations recognize that innovation isn’t a single activity (incubators, accelerators, hackathons); it is a strategically organized end-to-end process from idea to deployment.

In addition, he was already discovering that almost every division and function was building groups for innovation, incubation and technology scouting. Yet no one had a single road map for who was doing what across the enterprise. And more importantly it wasn’t clear which, if any, of those groups were actually continuously delivering products and services at high speed. His first job was to build a map of all those activities.

Innovation Heroes are Not Repeatable or Scalable

Over coffee Anthony offered that in a company this size he knew he would find “innovation heroes” – the individuals others in the company point to who single-handedly fought the system and got a new product, project or service delivered (see article here.) But if that was all his company had, his work was going to be much tougher than he thought, as innovation heroics as the sole source of deployment of new capabilities are a sign of a dysfunctional organization.

Anthony believed one of his roles as CTO was to:

Map and evaluate all the innovation, incubation and technology scouting activities
Help the company understand they need innovation and execution to occur simultaneously. (This is the concept of an ambidextrous organization (see this HBR article).)
Educate the company that innovation and execution have different processes, people, and culture. They need each other – and need to respect and depend on each other
Create an innovation pipeline – from problem to deployment – and get it adopted at scale

Anthony was hoping that somewhere three, four or five levels down the organization were the real centers of innovation, where existing departments/groups – not individuals – were already accelerating mission/delivering innovative products/services at high speed. His challenge was to find these islands of innovation and who was running them and understand if/how they:

Leveraged existing company competencies and assets
Understand if/how they co-opted/bypassed existing processes and procedures
Had a continuous customer discovery to create products that customers need and want
Figured out how to deliver with speed and urgency
And if they somehow had made this a repeatable process

If these groups existed, his job as CTO was to take their learning and:

Figure out what barriers the innovation groups were running into and help build innovation processes in parallel to those for execution
Use their work to create a common language and tools for innovation around rapid acceleration of existing mission and delivery
Make permanent delivering products and services at speed with a written innovation doctrine and policy
Instrument the process with metrics and diagnostics

Get Out of the Office

So, with another cup of coffee the question we were trying to answer was, how does a newly hired CTO find the real islands of innovation in a company his size?

A first place to start was with the innovation heroes/rebels. They often know where all the innovation bodies were buried. But Anthony’s insight was he needed to get out of his 8th floor office and spend time where his company’s products and services were being developed and delivered.

It was likely that most innovative groups were not simply talking about innovation, but were the ones who rapidly delivering innovative solutions to customer’s needs.

One Last Thing

As we were finishing my coffee Anthony said, “I’m going to let a few of the execs know I’m not out for turf because I only intend to be here for a few years.” I almost spit out the rest of my coffee. I asked how many years the division C-level staff has been at the company. “Some of them for decades” he replied. I pointed out that in a large organization saying you’re just “visiting” will set you up for failure, as the executives who have made the company their career will simply wait you out.

As he left, he looked at a bit more concerned than we started. “Looks like I have my work cut out for me.”

Lessons Learned

Large companies often have divisions and functions with innovation, incubation and technology scouting all operating independently with no common language or tools

Innovation heroics as the sole source of deployment of new capabilities are a sign of a dysfunctional organization

Innovation isn’t a single activity (incubators, accelerators, hackathons); it is a strategically organized end-to-end process from idea to deployment

Somewhere three, four or five levels down the organization are the real centers of innovation – accelerating mission/delivering innovative products/services at high speed

The CTO’s job is to:

create a common process, language and tools for innovation
make them permanent with a written innovation doctrine and policy

And don’t ever tell anyone you’re a “short timer”

This article originally appeared in Fast Company

Image credit: Unsplash

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Rapid Prototyping Brings Ideas to Life Quickly

Leave a reply

Rapid Prototyping Brings Ideas to Life Quickly

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

In the fast-paced world of innovation, turning ideas into tangible products quickly is crucial. This is where rapid prototyping, a method that emphasizes speed and iterative development, becomes a game-changer. By accelerating the development process, rapid prototyping helps innovators test ideas, gather feedback, and make improvements efficiently. Let’s dive into the benefits and real-world applications of rapid prototyping, featuring two compelling case studies.

What is Rapid Prototyping?

Rapid prototyping involves creating a working model of a product with minimal resources to test and validate ideas quickly. By leveraging advanced technologies like 3D printing, CAD software, and digital modeling, teams can produce prototypes more efficiently than traditional methods. This hands-on approach allows innovators to explore concepts, discover design flaws, and receive customer feedback rapidly, ultimately leading to better products.

The Benefits of Rapid Prototyping

Speed: Rapid prototyping significantly reduces the time between conception and iteration, allowing for faster delivery of products to market.
Cost-Effective: Early identification of design flaws leads to cost savings by reducing the need for expensive changes later in the development process.
Customer-Centric: By involving customers early, businesses can ensure that the final product meets user needs and expectations.
Flexibility: Iterative testing and feedback allow for adjustments and improvements throughout the development cycle.

Case Study 1: Tesla’s Approach to Model Development

Tesla is well-known for its innovation in the automotive industry, and rapid prototyping plays a pivotal role in its development strategy. When designing the Model S, Tesla utilized rapid prototyping to test various components and systems. Using 3D printing technology, Tesla engineers quickly produced and iterated prototypes of essential parts like battery modules and interior components.

This approach allowed Tesla to test and refine designs in record time, uncovering potential issues that could be addressed before mass production. Rapid prototyping enabled Tesla to launch a vehicle that met high-performance standards while maintaining cost-effectiveness. As a result, Tesla solidified its reputation for delivering high-quality, cutting-edge electric vehicles.

Case Study 2: IDEO’s Innovative Product Designs

IDEO, a global design and consulting firm, championed the adoption of rapid prototyping in product design. With a focus on human-centered design, IDEO employs rapid prototyping to transform abstract ideas into functional prototypes quickly. A notable example is their work on the Apple Computer’s first computer mouse.

IDEO created several iterations of the mouse using simple materials, such as foam and plastic, allowing their team to explore ergonomics and usability. These prototypes helped identify critical design features and were key in refining the product before its launch. This rapid, iterative approach enabled Apple to deliver a refined, user-friendly product that set new standards in personal computing.

Embracing Rapid Prototyping

To fully harness the potential of rapid prototyping, organizations should integrate it into their innovation strategies. Here are a few steps to consider:

1. Encourage a Prototyping Mindset

Foster a culture that values experimentation and learning. Encourage teams to think creatively and view mistakes as opportunities for growth.

2. Invest in Tools and Technologies

Equip your team with the necessary tools, such as 3D printers and digital design software, to facilitate quick and cost-effective prototyping.

3. Involve Stakeholders Early

Engage customers, partners, and other stakeholders in the prototype testing process to gather valuable feedback and insights.

4. Iterate and Refine

Embrace an iterative process that focuses on continuous improvement and adaptation based on real-world testing and feedback.

Conclusion

In conclusion, rapid prototyping is an indispensable tool for innovators aiming to bring ideas to life swiftly and efficiently. By embracing this approach, businesses can stay ahead of the competition, create products that resonate with customers, and ultimately drive success in today’s dynamic market. Whether you’re a startup or an established company, integrating rapid prototyping into your innovation strategy can lead to transformative results.

As we continue to innovate, let’s embrace the power of rapid prototyping to turn our ideas into reality—quickly and effectively.

Image credit: Pexels

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Managing Cross-Cultural Remote Teams

Leave a reply

Closing the Virtual and Cultural Gap

Managing Cross-Cultural Remote Teams

GUEST POST from Douglas Ferguson

Learning to connect a culturally diverse virtual workforce is an essential part of managing cross cultural remote teams. Faced with the challenge of virtual team building, remote team managers also have to unite their virtual teams across any cultural differences, time zones, and other unique elements.

Recent studies show that 62% of virtual teams are comprised of workers from three or more cultures. Surprisingly, only 15% of team leaders have successfully led cross cultural remote teams. Such statistics show the dire need for improving cross cultural remote teams management.

In the following article, we’ll discuss managing cross cultural remote teams as we cover topics such as:

What Are Cross Cultural Remote Teams?
The Challenges of Cross Culture Remote Work
Closing the Virtual Gap for Culturally Diverse Teams
Essential Skills for Managing Cross Cultural Remote Teams
Improving Cross Cultural Leadership Skills

What Are Cross Cultural Remote Teams?

With the rise of remote work, it comes as no surprise that cross culture remote teams are the reality of today’s working world. Cross culture remote teams are teams made up of the global talent pool. Whether a company pulls freelancers from various parts of the world or hires remote team members within the same country, effectively working together requires a strategic approach to managing such a diverse group of workers.

Remote work experts suggest that culture is defined as the social expectations, customs, and achievements unique to a nation or region. One’s idea of culture frames the way they approach work, life events, and communication. While distributed teams composed of members from various cultures are an effective way to diversify the workforce, the difference in cultures and time zones can lead to collaborative and communication challenges.

The Challenges of Cross Culture Remote Work

Managing cross cultural remote teams come with unique benefits and challenges. Being able to fill your team with the world’s greatest minds is an incredibly powerful way to shore up your company’s talent pool. However, each team member will have their practices, preferences, and ideas of company culture, and as a result, may have trouble gelling with the rest of the team.

Moreover, team managers will experience the challenges of building a team in the virtual world. Without the face-to-face interaction of a shared workplace, cross-culture remote teams are more vulnerable to conflict and communication problems.

Remote team leaders face unique challenges such as:

1. Work Style

When managing cross cultural remote teams, be sure to address the individual work style of your team members. When working with team members from different cultures, it’s essential to acknowledge each person’s work style. This is especially true for team members that are of vastly different cultures. For example, certain work cultures prioritize individual opinions while others expect to follow a leader’s course of action.

2. Information Gaps

In the virtual world, information gaps are a huge threat when managing cross cultural remote teams. Any information gaps can negatively affect processes and data flows. All team members need access to the most appropriate resources to successfully collaborate.

3. Motivation Factors

Team leaders should do their best to analyze how each person’s culture may affect their motivations to better manage their team. Motivation factors for cross culture remote teams are vastly different than that of a traditional company. For example, while some team members may be motivated by a range of tangible benefits like bonuses, others focus on intangible benefits like encouragement and job satisfaction.

4. Influences

When managing cross cultural remote teams. Managers face the challenges of certain factions attempting to influence the rest of the group. If part of the team has the same cultural identity, they may use that to dominate a conversation or outcome, leading to conflict and contentious work environments.

Closing the Virtual Gap for Culturally Diverse Teams

Navigating virtual cross-cultural teams starts with first addressing virtual team building. While your team’s cultural background may play a role in the unique challenges you face, everything comes back to your ability to work together as a team. Level the playing field with an effective strategy to close the gaps and facilitate stronger personal relationships among team members.

By making an effort to strengthen connections between your team members, you’ll be able to bridge initial gaps created by remote work. Moreover, team members that share a common bond will be able to better navigate any cross-cultural challenges that may arise. Consider using intentionally designed games and activities like icebreakers to help strengthen connections between team members.

Essential Skills for Managing Cross Cultural Remote Teams

In the virtual world, company culture is constantly changing. To effectively run a diverse group of remote workers, team leaders must be open to learning the most appropriate skills to bring the best out of their team.

Lead your remote team to success by honing skills such as:

1. Adaptability

Cross cultural management hinges upon the leader’s ability to understand each team member’s work style and make the necessary adjustments. While you shouldn’t completely abandon your leadership style, you will need to integrate other behaviors, worldviews, commonalities, and perspectives to find more relatable ways to manage your team.

2. Self-Awareness

Self-awareness is a key skill for leaders of cross-culture teams. Conflicts can arise quickly in a virtual workspace, so it’s important for you to regularly monitor and manage your own biases as you exercise patience and grace in your communications. Make an effort to frequently challenge your perspective and take a step back in your interactions with team members. This will help you navigate complex cultural challenges as you take note of where your perspective and behavior may require adjustment.

3. Articulation

When working with a virtual team from different cultural backgrounds, clear communication is essential. By prioritizing articulation and careful and deliberate conversation, team leaders will be better able to ensure that every member of their team understands what they’re saying. Similarly, if other team members tend to speak too quickly, don’t hesitate to ask them to repeat themselves or speak at a slower pace.

4. Writing Proficiency

In virtual meetings, calls, or voice notes, words can easily get lost in translation. Team leaders should develop the habit of communicating in writing to make sure all their team members have access to a document they can refer to at a later point in time.

Improving Cross-Cultural Leadership Skills

Remote work opens a world of possibilities in the way of team leadership. As your team expands to include a more culturally-diverse group, your leadership skills should improve as well. At Voltage Control, we offer facilitation courses, remote collaboration resources, and team-building workshops to help you navigate the pitfalls of managing remote teams and connecting culturally diverse groups.

Work with our team of expert facilitators to learn more about managing cross cultural remote teams. With the help of workshops and resources, you’ll learn to expertly lead a virtual session, unite a distributed team, and appreciate and highlight the cultural differences that make your team a well-oiled virtual machine. Contact us to learn more about our custom programs for leadership development, master facilitation certification, and change management.

Article originally posted at VoltageControl.com

Image Credit: Pexels

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Balancing Short-term Gains with Long-term Innovation

Leave a reply

Balancing Short-term Gains with Long-term Innovation

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

In today’s fast-paced business environment, companies are often torn between pursuing immediate profits and investing in future innovations. Many leaders grapple with the challenge of balancing these competing priorities to ensure both short-term performance and long-term sustainability. This article explores strategies for achieving this balance through effective leadership, corporate culture, and strategic decision-making.

The Importance of a Balanced Approach

Short-term financial gains are crucial for maintaining shareholder confidence and funding daily operations. However, an excessive focus on immediate returns can stifle innovation, hinder adaptability, and ultimately jeopardize long-term success. Striking the right balance allows an organization to remain competitive in the present while positioning itself for future growth.

Case Study 1: Kodak’s Innovation Myopia

Once a dominant force in the photography industry, Kodak fell from grace due to its reluctance to embrace digital innovation. Despite inventing the first digital camera in 1975, Kodak was reluctant to pursue this technology aggressively, fearing it would cannibalize its highly profitable film business. This short-term mindedness led to Kodak filing for bankruptcy in 2012.

The lesson here is clear: organizations must not allow the pursuit of immediate profits to blind them to the possibilities of transformative innovation. Strategic foresight and a willingness to disrupt one’s own business model are critical in avoiding the pitfalls of innovation myopia.

Building a Culture of Innovation

To maintain a balance between short-term gains and long-term innovation, organizations must cultivate a culture that encourages experimentation and embraces change. Encouraging open communication and fostering an inclusive environment where all ideas are welcome can drive creative thinking and innovation.

“Innovation is not just about creating new products; it’s about cultivating a mindset that embraces change and values learning.” – Braden Kelley

Empowering teams to take calculated risks and learn from failures can significantly boost innovation. Leaders play a pivotal role in setting the tone for this culture by recognizing and rewarding innovative efforts and providing resources for continuous learning and development.

Case Study 2: Amazon’s Disruption Strategy

Amazon exemplifies a company that has successfully balanced short-term gains with long-term innovation. By continuously reinvesting profits into research and development, Amazon has managed to disrupt multiple industries, from retail to cloud computing.

Amazon’s willingness to take risks on new ventures such as AWS and Kindle shows a commitment to long-term innovation. The company prioritizes customer experience and long-term value creation over immediate profits, allowing it to maintain a competitive edge in diverse markets.

This approach underscores the importance of vision-driven leadership and strategic planning in ensuring sustained innovation and growth, without sacrificing performance.

Strategic Decision-Making for Sustainable Growth

Balancing short-term and long-term priorities requires a strategic approach to decision-making. Organizations should implement frameworks that integrate both short-term performance metrics and long-term innovation goals.

This involves setting clear objectives, aligning team efforts with the organization’s vision, and continuously monitoring the market landscape to adapt strategies as needed. Scenario planning and innovation roadmaps can help leaders anticipate future trends and make informed decisions that align with both immediate needs and broader innovation goals.

Conclusion

Balancing short-term gains with long-term innovation is a delicate yet vital endeavor for any organization looking to thrive in today’s competitive landscape. By fostering a culture of innovation, learning from examples like Kodak and Amazon, and employing strategic decision-making frameworks, businesses can ensure they remain agile and competitive.

Ultimately, success lies in embracing the dual imperatives of immediate performance and future potential, thus positioning the organization for sustained growth and impact.

Image credit: Pixabay

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Can You Ever Be a Truly Independent Thinker?

Leave a reply

Can You Ever Be a Truly Independent Thinker?

GUEST POST from Tom Stafford, University of Sheffield

‘It’s important to me that I make my own decisions, but I often wonder how much they are actually influenced by cultural and societal norms, by advertising, the media and those around me. We all feel the need to fit in, but does this prevent us from making decisions for ourselves? In short, can I ever be a truly free thinker?’ Richard, Yorkshire.

There’s good news and bad news on this one. In his poem Invictus, William Ernest Henley wrote: “It matters not how strait the gate, How charged with punishments the scroll, I am the master of my fate, I am the captain of my soul.”

While being the lone “captain of your soul” is a reassuring idea, the truth is rather more nuanced. The reality is that we are social beings driven by a profound need to fit in – and as a consequence, we are all hugely influenced by cultural norms.

But to get to the specifics of your question, advertising, at least, may not influence you as much as you imagine. Both advertisers and the critics of advertising like us to think that ads can make us dance any way they want, especially now everything is digital and personalised ad targeting is possible in a way it never was before.

This article is part of Life’s Big Questions

The Conversation’s new series, co-published with BBC Future, seeks to answer our readers’ nagging questions about life, love, death and the universe. We work with professional researchers who have dedicated their lives to uncovering new perspectives on the questions that shape our lives.

In reality, there is no precise science of advertising. Most new products fail, despite the advertising they receive. And even when sales go up, nobody is exactly sure of the role advertising played. As the marketing pioneer John Wanamaker said:

Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted; the trouble is I don’t know which half.

You’d expect advertisers to exaggerate the effectiveness of advertising, and scholars of advertising have typically made more modest claims. Even these, though, may be overestimates. Recent studies have claimed that both online and offline, the methods commonly used to study advertising effectiveness vastly exaggerate the power of advertising to change our beliefs and behaviour.

This has led some to claim that not just half, but perhaps nearly all advertising money is wasted, at least online.

There are similar results outside of commerce. One review of field experiments in political campaigning argued “the best estimate of the effects of campaign contact and advertising on Americans’ candidates choices in general elections is zero”. Zero!

In other words, although we like to blame the media for how people vote, it is surprisingly hard to find solid evidence of when and how people are swayed by the media. One professor of political science, Kenneth Newton, went so far as to claim “It’s Not the Media, Stupid”.

But although advertising is a weak force, and although hard evidence on how the media influences specific choices is elusive, every one of us is undoubtedly influenced by the culture in which we live.

Followers of fashion

Fashions exist both for superficial things, such as buying clothes and opting for a particular hairstyle, but also for more profound behaviour like murder and even suicide. Indeed, we all borrow so much from those we grow up around, and those around us now, that it seems impossible to put a clear line between our individual selves and the selves society forges for us.

Two examples: I don’t have any facial tattoos, and I don’t want any. If I wanted a facial tattoo my family would think I’d gone mad. But if I was born in some cultures, where these tattoos were common and conveyed high status, such as traditional Māori culture, people would think I was unusual if I didn’t want facial tattoos.

Similarly, if I had been born a Viking, I can assume that my highest ambition would have been to die in battle, axe or sword in hand. In their belief system, after all, that was surest way to Valhalla and a glorious afterlife. Instead, I am a liberal academic whose highest ambition is to die peacefully in bed, a long way away from any bloodshed. Promises of Valhalla have no influence over me.

Vikings had different beliefs to most modern liberal academics.
Shutterstock

Ultimately, I’d argue that all of our desires are patterned by the culture we happen to be born in.

But it gets worse. Even if we could somehow free ourselves from cultural expectations, other forces impinge on our thoughts. Your genes can affect your personality and so they must also, indirectly, have a knock-on effect on your beliefs.

Sigmund Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis, famously talked about the influence of parents and upbringing on behaviour, and he probably wasn’t 100% wrong. Even just psychologically, how can you ever think freely, separate from the twin influences of prior experience and other people?

From this perspective, all of our behaviours and our desires are profoundly influenced by outside forces. But does this mean they aren’t also our own?

The answer to this dilemma, I think, is not to free yourself from outside influences. This is impossible. Instead, you should see yourself and your ideas as the intersection of all the forces that come to play on you.

Some of these are shared – like our culture – and some are unique to you – your unique experience, your unique history and biology. Being a free thinker, from this perspective, means working out exactly what makes sense to you, from where you are now.

You can’t – and shouldn’t – ignore outside influences, but the good news is that these influences are not some kind of overwhelming force. All the evidence is compatible with the view that each of us, choice by choice, belief by belief, can make reasonable decisions for ourselves, not unshackled from the influences of others and the past, but free to chart our own unique paths forward into the future.

After all, the captain of a ship doesn’t sail while ignoring the wind – sometimes they go with it, sometimes against it, but they always account for it. Similarly, we think and make our choices in the context of all our circumstances, not by ignoring them.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Image Credits: Pixabay, Shutterstock (via theconversation)

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Diversity as a Catalyst for Innovation

Leave a reply

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

In today’s hyper-competitive global market, organizations are continuously striving for innovative solutions to complex challenges. With the world growing more interconnected, the concept of diversity and inclusion has become not just a moral obligation but also a strategic advantage for innovation. A diversified workforce brings varied perspectives and skills, fueling creativity and driving transformation. In this article, I explore how embracing diversity serves as a catalyst for innovation through insightful case studies and evidence-based practices.

The Power of Diverse Perspectives

Diversity comes in many forms, including but not limited to race, gender, age, cultural background, and professional experience. Each aspect of diversity contributes unique lenses through which problems can be viewed, thus sparking fresh ideas and innovative solutions. It allows organizations to empathize with a wider array of customers and respond to their needs in nuanced ways.

Case Study 1: IBM’s Diversity Initiative

IBM is a leading example of how diversity can drive innovation. Recognizing the wealth of different perspectives afforded by a diverse workforce, IBM instituted “Diversity 3.0.” This initiative aimed not just to hire diverse talent but to embed inclusion into the very fabric of its operations.

By creating diverse teams tasked with innovation projects, IBM discovered that such groups were able to solve problems more effectively and create products that resonated globally. For instance, the formation of a multicultural team led to the development of IBM Watson’s language translation services. Through the team’s varied backgrounds and insights, IBM was able to refine Watson’s capabilities, making it a powerful tool across different languages and cultures.

Case Study 2: The LEGO Group’s Diverse User Base

The LEGO Group showcases how embracing diversity can influence product development and innovation. Traditionally, LEGO had focused on a narrow demographic. However, by engaging with a more inclusive user base, LEGO discovered untapped potential in diverse customer insights.

LEGO’s creation of the “LEGO Ideas” platform, where fans of all ages and backgrounds could submit and vote on designs, allowed the company to leverage this diversity. It resulted in innovative sets that appealed to a wider audience, such as the “Women of NASA” set. This initiative not only boosted creativity and market reach but also reinforced the brand’s commitment to inclusion.

Strategies for Harnessing Diversity

Inclusive Leadership: Leaders must create a culture where diversity is valued and where different voices are heard. This involves not only recruiting diverse talent but also ensuring they feel empowered to contribute.
Cross-Cultural Collaboration: Encouraging collaboration among teams from different cultural backgrounds can foster creative problem-solving and lead to innovative breakthroughs.
Training and Education: Providing continuous learning opportunities about the benefits of diversity and developing skills to manage diverse teams can pave the way for sustained innovation.

Conclusion

Diversity is no longer just a metric to be achieved, but a critical driver of innovation. By fostering an inclusive culture, organizations can draw on a broader spectrum of ideas and perspectives, leading to groundbreaking innovations. As the world continues to change at a rapid pace, those who embrace diversity as a catalyst for innovation will not only survive but thrive.

Let us commit to weaving diversity into the strategic fabric of our organizations and unlock the full potential of our collective creativity.

Image credit: Pexels

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Selling To Generation Z

Leave a reply

This is What They Want

Selling to Generation Z

GUEST POST from Shep Hyken

Gen-Z is not your typical generation. By the way, neither was the Millennial generation … or Gen-X, etc. Each new generation has interesting differences, desires, likes and dislikes. Each generation poses its own problems and opportunities, depending on how you view the challenge. A recent report created by Gongos (part of InSites Consulting) shared some interesting information relevant to companies that do business with Gen-Z.

Gongos surveyed more than 1,000 U.S. consumers and compared Gen-Z to older generations. Gen-Z’s were born between 1997 and 2011, and their habits, views and behaviors are quite different than the older Gen-X and Baby Boomers. The oldest Gen-Z’s are about 24 years old, and they are quickly becoming an important consumer group that will change the way brands market and sell. Here are some of the findings, followed by my commentary and additional stats and facts.

Gen-Z Wants Brands to Challenge Social Issues – Forty-three percent of Gen-Z appreciates brands that take a stand, especially in the areas of sustainability, inclusiveness and racial transparency. And they put their money where their mouth is:

69% will pay more if employees and suppliers are treated fairly.
66% will pay more if the brand tries to have a positive impact on society.
61% will pay more if the brands use inclusive practices.
60% will pay more for a business that practices sustainability.

Gen-Z Loves Personalization – For all of the marketers reading this article, note that Gen-Z will pay for personalization—not always with money, but instead with their personal data. They aren’t nearly as protective of their personal data as Gen-X and Baby Boomers. Gen-Z pays more attention to brands that create a personalized experience or allow them to create a custom product. Consider the shoe manufacturer that lets its customers design their own shoes. Or the cosmetic company that allows its customers to create their own formulas. Offer them a personalized experience, and they will go out of their way to do business with you. More stats to consider:

50% pay attention to brands that offer personalization and co-creation.
52% look for brands that understand them.
51% allow brands to create products that reflect their identity.

Gen-Z Fights Injustice Through “Click-Tivism” – Social media has made it easy for anyone to have a megaphone that is heard by the world. Older generations (Boomers) might protest with sit-ins and picket signs. The younger generation has embraced social media as the place to call attention to what is important to them. “Gen-Z is clicking for change.”

29% follow social media accounts on social justice.
26% use social media to voice their opinions.
15% participate in online protests.

Gen-Z Fights for Social Inequality – Gen-Z is, according to the study, the most ethnically diverse generation in history. Diversity and inclusion are not just hot topics in the HR department, but some of the hottest topics for this younger generation.

59% consider racial and ethnic diversity as beneficial for society.
48% consider racism a top global issue.
49% recognize that gender identity can change over time.
48% know someone who prefers to be addressed with gender-neutral pronouns (they, them, their, etc.)

Gen-Z Engages in Metaverse Activities – Many people still don’t understand the metaverse, which is blending the physical and digital worlds we live in. According to the study, “No generation will embrace and shape the metaverse more than Gen-Z.” Eighty-three percent of Gen-Z engages in metaverse activities. They hang out with friends in virtual worlds and spend money on virtual merchandise. They also are looking for brands that are “seamlessly integrating the online and offline worlds.” If you do not understand the opportunities the metaverse is offering Gen-Z (and other generations), you might find yourself playing catch-up with a competitor who does. Some metaverse findings:

48% participate in online gaming.
29% created an avatar to use on the metaverse.
20% have paid for digital products.

There are approximately 65 million Gen-Z’s in the U.S., which accounts for almost 20% of the U.S. population. These are your up-and-coming consumers and financial decision-makers. They have expectations that are quite different than older generations. While many of today’s Gen-Z’s are still very young (as young as 11 years old), don’t think they aren’t making a major impact on companies’ current and future plans. The customer experience will have to change to reflect the values of Gen-Z. Their opinions and habits are going to cross over to older generations, especially with their parents, who support this young generation’s ideals. Are you ready for a new generation’s expectations? If not, it’s not too late to start to change.

This article originally appeared on Forbes

Image Credit: Shep Hyken

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.