Thursday, January 22, 2015

Why No One Cares About Your Lousy eLearning

It's 2015. By now, almost everyone reading this post has taken some form of self-paced online learning, aka "elearning," either by choice or under duress. Perhaps you got a speeding ticket and had the option of taking online learning to reduce the $300 ticket. Maybe you've accessed a software tool's online tutorials to get up to speed. Or maybe your company has compliance requirements that make you take a few hours of required eLearning every quarter. 
Whatever the case, you've probably experienced some lousy eLearning along the way. But the truth is that most eLearning out there gives the rest of eLearning a bad name. What do most of these eLearning programs get wrong, and what are they really telling their learners? 

Wednesday, January 21, 2015

Join Me! Learning Insights for the New Year [Jan 29 Webinar]

We're a month into the new year. Let's take some time to reflect on 2014. How have learning technologies and learning methods changed over the past year? What challenges are organizations having, and how can we solve them? What changes do we need to implement over the next year in L&D? 
Join me and Chip Cleary on Thursday, January 29th, for a webinar to discuss and examine the findings from Kineo's latest Learning Insights Report

Friday, January 16, 2015

David Kelly "Building a Learning Strategy from an Ecosystem of Resources" #ATDTK

These are my live blogged notes from David Kelly's concurrent session here at ATD TechKnowledge, happening this week in Las Vegas. Forgive any typos or incoherencies.

A shift in the ways we define learning strategies within our organizations.

Why don't orgs have a learning strategy? Some orgs the l&d as a team is a new idea -- they're just hitting the low hanging fruit and there's no strategy in place.

A shift happened a while ago -- we went from being training orgs to learning orgs.  Nothing really changed though.

Most orgs - if they have a strategy -- have a training strategy. Not a learning strategy.

A training strategy - there are needs in the org and we address them via training.

A learning and performance strategy -- orgs care about what people can DO and not what they KNOW.

What is an ecosystem? Generally has a nature connotation (the rain forest) - it's a specific scientific thing.  "A community of living organisms in conjunction with nonliving components of their environment, interacting as a system."

Lots of factors go into helping people learn and perform -- and only part of that is training.

Let's take this definition of an ecosystem in nature and apply that to the workplace.

So what is a learning and performance ecosystem? It's an organic entity that evolves over time. It's finding the resources all around that support performance (not just training!). We've got multiple systems in our orgs -- in a well-run org, those systems are all connected.

It's a new mindset for those in L&D and training.

How do we interrupt work the least? Providing the least disruptive support to help people and give them what they need.


Technology -- the systems we use that impact our performance -- may not be a training issue, but we have to factor that in.

What are the incentives for employees to perform?

Culture is huge.

Training tends to be delivery of community and information and not partners in performance.

How much time do you waste trying to find something on your company's Intranet -- and it takes too long and so you just saw "I'm just going to Google it." Can I access what I need on this device, that's appropriate for this device, when I need it? How much time is wasted because I can't FIND something.

Are you using your LMS to its full advantage? Most LMSs can do more than just push out courses. Are you taking advantage of that? Do you know what's available to you and how you can use it better?

A learning and performance ecosystem has a PURPOSE.

You don't CREATE an ecosystem within your org. It exists. It's there. It may not be strong or effective, but it is there. There are a lot of resources out there already.

A Learning and Performance Ecosystem is a community of people in conjunction with the processes, information, and technology of their environment, interacting as a system supporting development.

This definition is different than training.

In a natural ecosystem, you have producers, consumers, and decomposers.

Producers: create and add to the environment
Consumers: use that stuff, they consume it
Decomposers: get rid of the stuff that's no longer used

In an learning and performance ecosystem, the producers are from all over the place. Not just training/L&D. But you need to understand WHERE your producers are.

L&D may not need to create that content anymore, they just need to help people connect to it.

Who are the consumers? Is what is produced what people actually need and can they get to it?

You're sitting with a customer and need info. You're not going to log into your LMS, look for that course, and track down the info on page 32. You need the info you need and when you need it.

How do we decompose things that have lived out their usefulness? How are things removed from the ecosystem? In nature, this happens. The dead tree -- the fungus that breaks it down. If there's stuff out there in your system that no one is using, get it out of there. Don't confuse people with outdated content.

This is not just the training department's role. We can help facilitate activities that are going on in the environment.

The environment needs to be nurtured. This is essentially about culture. Removing barriers. Helping things grow.

If you remove something from the environment, what's the effect on the ecosystem? If I take this resource out of here, what's going to happen? Turns out the population B, C, and D really used that resource that you removed because A was no longer using it.

What effect does introducing something NEW have on the ecosystem?

The importance of bees. They help things grow, they carry things from one place to another. Organizations have bees. They help info move and help ideas extend beyond the org. Who are the bees in your org? Do you have enough of them? Are they free to roam?

Some people are just wired this way. They look to share info and solve problems.

Can you increase your bee population?

Does your culture support the idea of sharing beyond the hierarchy?

Sally doesn't share because she's rewarding for KNOWING everything. So she's not going to change. How do we get her to share?

Change the way we look at the jobs that we do as L&D people.

Find the bees are bring them in.

We typically try and get approval first. Instead, just go out and do it. Set up a wiki tomorrow. You may not have good luck convincing your senior team the benefits of bees. Don't ask for permission for this -- they'll be looking at your role through the filter of what learning has always looked like (school). Instead, do a small pilot wiki and then share the stories of the results and how it helped people do their jobs.

Albert Einstein: "The environment is everything that isn't me."

What is really giving me the support that I need? We can build an infrastructure to support this, but we need to start by changing mindsets. Change your view of your role and what you can do to support this in the organization.

Performance support is part of the equation.

They might not need to learn something. They might just need help doing something.

eLearning Guild Research Report just released on Learning & Performance Ecosystems.

The use of this term might be spreading faster right now than its understood. Don't just change your labels without changing your behavior.

Ecosystems are organic -- you can't buy an ecosystem solution.

Let's put learning into the bigger conversation that it's been left out of.

More resources from David Kelly on his blog.



Thursday, January 15, 2015

Andy Whitaker "Matching Learning Paths w/Performance Using Tin Can" #ATDTK

These are my live blogged notes from Andy Whitaker's concurrent session here at ATD TechKnowledge, happening this week in Las Vegas. Forgive any typos or incoherencies.

Andy Whitaker, Consultant, Rustici Software @tincandy

How can we implement Tin Can (xAPI -- "experience API") in our organizations to get real benefit?

Matching learning to performance with Tin Can

Most "learning activity" is tracked in orgs in an LMS using SCORM.

But if you try to understand how learning is impacting the business, you might be spinning your wheels. It's a cobbling together of reports.

Questions to ask of your org's tracking abilities:

  • Are you able to track (in an effective and efficient way) all learning activities, not just those in your LMS?
  • Are you able to efficiently and effectively evaluate your learning programs?
  • Are you able to understand a learning program's impact on the business?
We're not all the way there, but when we start leveraging this new technology, we can't start answering YES more often.

An API is "a shared language for two systems to talk about the things that a person does." An API helps different apps talk to each other (e.g., Yelp uses Google Maps to find your restaurant using Google's API).

With Tin Can, we talk about an Activity Provider and an LRS (Learning Record Store).

Most orgs aren't currently using tech that supports xAPI -- there's work to do. The hope is in a year, two years, more vendors/products will have adopted xAPI.

A Tin Can Statement = Noun...Verb...Object (and some other stuff)

Examples: 
  • "Andy read employee handbook."
  • "Andy completed new hire orientation."
  • "Tim reviewed Andy."
  • "Andy attended TK 2015."

Log in to your employee internet -- download the handbook -- at that point, a statement can be sent to the LRS, saying that this activity has been completed. You have to have some kind of tech in place when this event happens.

Float's Tappestry app lets an individual log their own learning events: "Andy attended TK 2015." -- that's a real world activity that can be tracked. 

[Cammy's note on this -- there's no verification of this event, however, so you could make up whatever you feel like and recording that you went to the event doesn't mean you actually learned anything or even paid any attention. Perhaps you were too busy gambling!]

So you can funnel LOTS of data into a learning record store. This is the beginning of connecting learning to performance. First you need all that data.
  • Assessments
  • Performance Observations
  • CRM
  • HRIS
  • Talent Management
  • Point of Sale
  • Customer Support
  • Surveys
You want all this data coming into one place...

What does the New L&D Ecosystem Do? (enabled by Tin Can and an LRS) 

[Cammy's sidebar -- "ecosystem" is totally the new industry buzzword. It's everywhere and everyone's using it a little bit differently...]

It makes your learners love you. They get more credit for their learning activities. You don't have to funnel everything through their LMS. It's more modern.performance observations

It helps you do your jobs better. A more holistic view of the learner. ("This group of successful sales people have all read this book." -- maybe you can find trends that really matter.) Program evaluation. 

Success with implementing Tin Can comes from starting small. Understand something narrow and then expand on that. Start with questions in mind. What is the end goal you really ant to understand. (e.g. "Does this particular learning program reduce support tickets?")

Real-world examples

Example: Pandora (the bracelet company) 

They wanted to improve sales of a new product through training. They had online journals (through a Drupal/WordPress application), classroom, traditional learning, Cornerstone as their LMS (had to do some legwork to get Cornerstone to integrate with xAPI -- it's on Cornerstone's schedule of summer of 2015 to adopt TinCan - but for Pandora they had to do some additional work. Let your tech partners know that this is important to you! Customer demand will help.)

They wanted to correlate training with performance. Looking at Assessments, mystery shopper, looking at data coming in from their Point of Sale application.

So now we're looking at metrics beyond completions in Excel.

Question -- how do you make sense out of all this data? How do you make the data useful and usable?

Typically -- when an LMS vendor says they support Tin Can, they're using an LRS within their LMS. The statements are sent to the LRS and then they can choose what to do with that data within the context of the LMS. So for awhile, you'll see LMSs supporting data from both SCORM and Tin Can. The LRS listens and collects info from many different systems. "A business intelligence system for learning & dev."  You could still have people going to the LMS for transcript related reports.  In these early days, the LRS is more of a learning analytics system.

Example: AT&T

Their question: What types of content best impacts completion, retention?

If we confirmed the hypothesis, the company would do X. If they couldn't confirm it, they would do Y.

So this was for code of conduct training. They compared modalities: simulation vs. e-learning. Then they looked at the impact on completions, satisfaction, and retentions. Data showed that the higher fidelity content DID improve retention, etc.

Here the end result was not a cost savings. Seeing if it's worth their time to invest in something that would have a bigger impact.

Example: NexLearn (simulation tool)

Helping a 3rd party outfit their tool to contribute statements. 

Innovative and progressive technologies are starting to adopt xAPI. 

The larger LMSs are slower to adopt. 

Why is this? 
  • They haven't heard the customer demand. 
  • The 1.0 version only came out in April of last year -- but the spec will still change -- so the bigger techs don't want to put forth the effort to adopt it if it's just going to change. So the tech community is trying to update the spec without breaking it.
Example: NHS

Tracking formal and informal learning related to dementia care. They were looking at a lot of self-possessed data. Within the lRS they have learning questionnaires. The nurse would log into the LRS and do a pre- and a post-assessments (competence questions related to dementia care). 

They used Bookmarklet -- to report back to the LRS. They curated content from across the web that wasn't living in their system -- so they could report that nurses went to those destinations and links.

If people participated in an activity, they could see what their confidence was after completing the assessment. 

Learning path analysis through accomplishments. Kind of like badging. Gave nurses a path forward for completing.









Tan Le, Measuring Brain Activity: Second Day Keynote at #ATDTK

These are my live blogged notes from the second day's keynote at ATD TechKnowledge, happening this week in Las Vegas. Forgive any typos or incoherencies.

Tan Le, Emotiv Technology (building brain-based computer interfaces), bio-sensing devices that track how the brain responds.

In the Bay Area (San Francisco), a huge rate of change allowing scientists and innovators to tackle new problems. Possibilities that arise at the intersection of cloud computing, big data, mobile devices.

Man's merger with machines. This sounds scary. In the future, most of us will be waring some type of bio-sensing device (that records our movements, our health, our moods). Wearable devices that track personal metrics.

What's missing now: devices that help us track our cognitive, behavioral, and mental health well-being.

Tan Le left Vietnam in a boat as refugee. Ended in Melbourne and knew that she wanted to make a difference and have a purpose. Dreamed of being able to control things with her mind, Star Wars style. "Use the force, Tan."

10 years ago she got back to this. To do something meaningful, that would fire her heart, and captivate her for many years to come. She gravitated to learning about the brain. Its marvel and mystery...

The human brain is an amazing machine that continually reprograms and rewires itself according to how we use it. It's the most adaptive organ in our body; it changes in both positive and negative ways depending on how we use it.

And yet scientists have little opportunity to watch the brain outside the lab.

EEG -- the process of observing brain waves. The conventional EEG requires a dedicated technician, hair gel, a hair net, and minimal movement -- so it's a pretty artificial environment.

With advances in technology, we've got smarter and better and smaller devices. High resolution, multi-channel EEG. The user just needs to put it on.


OMG: I got to go up on stage and try the device and I made a flower open on a computer screen! 

Just call me Jedi Master.

Photo credits: Dan Steer and JD Dillon via Twitter

Some examples of what people are doing with it:
Attention powered cars -- it goes when you're paying attention and slow when you're not. (forthebetter.com.au) - learn more about the effects of attention and distraction on the road.

Getting metrics around engagement, focus, attention.

Doing studies at ASU -- looking at emerging software to see how they can engage in meaningful ways. How do they move social engagement into the learning space? To create an online dynamic that's typically in an in-person environment.

See what these guys are doing: Varier Brain Design (designing chairs to improve kids' attention and focus).

Working with disabled children and adults -- for people who can't move or talk -- giving them the ability to communicate -- giving adults the ability to create music using one instrument: their minds. See more on that project here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyF4ZxGhPHw (really inspiring and moving!)

Making brain measurement easier and more affordable. Providing ways for developers to innovate. Democratizing the space around brain measurement. To empower people to better understand their own brains. Their goal is to get this out there as prolifically as possible -- hundreds of dollars and not thousands. ($299 for the latest model!)

You will be able to use the device and get data on your engagement and attention level while doing certain activities.

Development kits are available. Looking for new ways to use and apply the technology in new and useful ways.

Wednesday, January 14, 2015

Karl Kapp "The Case of the Disengaged Learner" #ATDTK

These are my liveblogged notes from Karl Kapp's session at ATD TechKnowledge, happening this week in Las Vegas. Forgive any typos or incoherencies.

Karl Kapp professor of ID at Bloomsburg University, author of a lot of great books on eLearning, and general eLearning smarty pants. 

The average person checks their cell phone 150 times a day - that's nine times an hour.

Smartphone users spend 2.5 hours a day on their phones, some of that playing games. People are in engaged...but not with our training!

Al Switzer: " a study of 2300 said only 6% of organizations are actually changing employee behavior."

18% of employees are actively disengaged. They exude negativity.  They're not interested in learning and dev. They close themselves out of solutions and organizational problems.  They're just putting in time.

Learners remember facts better when they're in the form of a story -- and NOT a bulleted list. Research shows that humans have an inclination toward stories. Your frontal cortex gets active - it's like your brain is rehearsing what it hears in a story.

Expert vs. novice learners -- an expert has a lot of knowledge to call upon and a lot of stories in their bank already. We can give learners stories and case studies -- because they work really well. It's the closest thing to giving people practice in the experience.

Start instruction with ACTION and not objectives.  Draw the learner in with action and encourage engagement. Make the learner do something. Have them identify something right away; make a decision right away; answer a question. Give them a complicated problem to solve. Confront a challenge. Create a curiosity gap -- something you can do before hand that will raise a question that they want to know the answer to.

Law & Order (the tv) creates open loops -- you HAVE to watch to the end to find out what happens. Leave them on a cliffhanger...it pulls you along.

In ID we create a closed loop: "by the end of this module, you will learn..."  Instead open with "Do you know the #1 method to close sales in our company. Find out in this module."

Start with a question that pulls the learner in - this creates an OPEN LOOP that draws them into the instruction. Don't lead with the objectives (you still need 'em to design your instruction).

Create a challenging experience. Don't make it frustrating, but create some struggle to get to the answer. Our best experiences are when we have that ah-ha moment, that breakthrough.

Create flow. Have an achievable task.

Leaderboards aren't that motivating after the tenth person -- number eleven thinks, there's no way I can do that...

The task should require concentration and have clear goals.

The learner should have some control over their actions. Give them levels of choice, but parameters.

Add novelty. New and different catches our attention. Our brains are programmed to filter out repetitive activities. There's no danger in them, we don't care. It's the novel and new that we pay attention to. Surprise works.

Inconsistency -- surprising stats -- when something turns out to be different than what you think.

People seek out activities that seem complex. And yet we so often dummy down e-learning. Prepare people for the complexity of life.

Give them the Kobayashi Maru of challenges. (OK - Karl is now showing his true nerd colors with this Star Trek reference). "Here's a problem that you're not going to be able to solve." The motivation is intense when you think it can't be done.

Should we put the learner at risk or let the learner safely explore their environment. Put them at risk! If there's no risk, there's no skin in the game. Get the learner involved and put them into a "mock" risk.

  • They might have to start over...you have to get five questions in a row correct. If you don't get them correct, you get five more. Now people pay attention, because they don't want to have to do five more questions.
  • The risk of not solving the problem. the risk is they don't solve the problem and it's an endless open loop.
  • Losing points, losing the game.
  • Answer a question -- why did you answer the question the way you did (social credibility).
In games, failing is allowed. It's part of the process. How much of your learning uses failure as a tool? Think about it - how much of what you've learned is a result of failure. When you fail, you go back and reflect on it.


More tips:

  • Provide multiple scenarios
  • First person thinkers (drop someone into a situation and you have to go solve some problems. Immersively solving problems)
  • Branching stories work really well for novice and intermediate learners. For experts, branching stories don't work that well. Because they wouldn't pick any of the four choices given. Tailor the instruction a little different for experts. Typically they just want the info to move on. They want bigger challenges. They've seen a lot of case studies. It's the nuances that interest them and not the broad concepts. Experts also ask themselves a lot of questions.  "How is this similar to a problem I've encountered before?" "Have i identified the real problem?" "What variables do I need to consider?"
  • Create a learning documentary of how to do a job, how decisions are made and dots connected.  In a reality show you see what someone is doing and then you hear them talking through what they did -- debrief style, talking to the camera. Have them think aloud the process they go through. (But be aware, experts don't always know exactly what they're doing. But in most orgs, no one has tapped the experts' brains...)


Key takeaways:

  • Story/characters
  • Polling/audience input (Karl used Poll Everywhere and other audience input techniques. Lots of questions. Asking questions and typing the crowd's answers into the slides that we were looking at).
  • Humor
  • Mystery/Curiosity
  • Blend story/instruction (he could have just given us this bulleted list -- but Karl's presentation was this detective story and we had to solve the clues along the way -- see the slides at Karl Kapp)
  • Surprise
  • Winners/Teams (during the presentation we all chose a color team through poll everywhere. He asked questions at key points and kept score. The orange team won).
  • Open Loop








ATD Opening Keynote: Aaron Dignan "The Responsive Organization" #ATDTK

These are my live blogged notes from the opening keynote at ATD TechKnowledge, happening this week in Las Vegas. Forgive any typos or incoherencies.

Aaron Dignan CEO of Undercurrent. Digital advisory board of GE, AMEX, Pepsico. Partner to Fortune 100 orgs and startups. Creating Responsive companies for the 21st Century.

He starts off with a story of a 3D printer -- Design guys needed 3D printers to print prototypes. But the printer was too expensive to buy. So they made their own. MakerBots (demand got so high they were using MakerBots to print MakerBots). In 5 years they brought a 3D printer down to $2,000 (from $300,000)...MakerBots then got bought for millions by the company that they originally wanted to buy the printer from...

How can we do this in 1/2 a decade?

It's much easier to bring an idea to life today. (You can raise $ on Kickstarter, you go to LinkedIn/etc to get your team, you get your marketplace on Amazon/eBay). There's so little friction to bring something to life.

It's easier to bring a product to scale.

It's possible today to build a billion dollar business in 12 months. You can reach so many people in such a short time. The platforms are there.  Scale is extremely elastic.

3 things that drive that reality:


  • Moore's Law: More power on a computer chip every 18 months for the same price --double the power every 18 months. No everyone in this room has a computer more powerful than the ones that took us to the moon. This power is almost disposable. Who even knows how many megapixels the camera on their phone has now. It's plenty!
  • Platforms: Products become building blocks for others. Apple, Android, etc.
  • Networks: People have done the work of connecting things that were unconnected. And we can all take advantage of that. Because people built a network of cell towers, you can use it.


Uber -- they didn't invent the mobile phone, the apps, the car, etc. All they invented was this thin layer -- how do we connect supply to demand? And then push this interface out across an existing network of iOS and Android and cell towers...

Any business that doesn't know what their networks and platforms are -- they're missing it...

AirBnB -- a platform that lets you offer up your room for rent. It's difficult to decide where AirBnB ends and the world begins...the whole community becomes a part of that network. You stay in an Airbnb apartment in Paris - on the fridge, a note says to check out the cafe downstairs...It's now the first or third biggest hotel chain in the world (depending on how you measure it) -- with no real estate!

Tesla -- electric cars -- they're now building the networks of charging stations all over the world.  And now Tesla is giving away their IP so anyone can build the car. But they're thinking, the value will be in the infrastructure and power game and transportation. Making platform and network decisions to grow and share in those areas.

A whole lot of companies thinking this way: Netflix (60% of Internet traffic these days!), Spotify, Google, Zappos -- trying new approaches to the way they work, the way they organize. They're experimenting.

Today - the average lifespan company on the S&P index. in 1960 you'd be on it for 60 years. Today the average lifespan is 15-18 years.  For most companies that don't have that level of success -- 5 years.

It's really hard to stay big and important. The world turns a lot faster. A kid in a basement with his friends can really hose your category if they don't have that 3D printer they want.

We're up against complexity plus the urgent need to change at scale.

A ton of wisdom today in saying "We don't know." Uncertainty is the new black.

Complexity Science. Go to Complex Adaptive Systems page on wikipedia. Dozens of systems in nature that have to deal with lots of change and are incredibly adaptive. We need to build our teams to thrive in that kind of system. How to we build this into our leaders? It's a mindset shift.

Most people are in love with a 20th century mindset -- because it's comfortable. It feels safe.

Ants:
Ants are pretty simple, but create a pretty complex system.
Some are exploring the core business.
Some are exploring the periphery (the new business).
Once the find something, they will coalesce around that.
When information is low, more experimentation. When info is high, less experimentation.

Immune Systems:
Most of our companies have a handful of competitors. Your immune system has unlimited enemies. It doesn't know. Uncertainty of competition. If you don't have certainty, you experiment. Every day your body produces millions of lymphocytes -- each one slightly different - to react to different pathogens. They all go out in the system. And once in awhile, one finds a pathogen. "I've got product market fit. I've got a customer." Then they get sucked into your lymph system and they make a ton more (like the VC community). Lots of volatility and uncertainty. But when there is signal, there's a lot of alignment. Your body does a budget every hour.

Internet:

In a model where things are certain, you focus on profit. Where things are uncertain, you focus on purpose.

Good talent can choose where they go to work. It's not just for salary, it's gotta be about purpose. Purpose is our weapon -- to create a galvanized community of membership. If you don't have that commitment, then you won't succeed.

Hierarchies vs. Networks:  Think about the business itself as a network and not a hierarchy. Break down -- need self organizing behavior so we can regroup quickly. Networks help us working in new ways. Blurring ideas of the inside and outside.

Planning vs. Emergence: Most people love a good plan. You make a plan and see what happens. Plans are lies committed to paper. Pull out the plan from last year and walk me through how it happened. The reality is: THINGS CHANGE. It doesn't mean we should scenario plan, have goals, have a sense of where we're going -- that's all good. But having to stick to the plan dogmatically is not good.

Emergence says we don't know. Let the plan emerge, using simple rules.

Let's clean the room.
1. Write a big plan for how to clean the room. But then if something changes, that plan will be useless.
2. Have one simple rule coming in the door. "If you're coming in the door, I have to trust you." The simple rule is -- leave the room as you found it. Now you can adjust as you need to.

Efficiency vs. Adaptivity
In the old model, you put your plan in place and you want to get in and out as quickly as possible. Six Sigma. Get all the defects out.
But what if things start to move and change? You need adaptivity. (Tesla built their cars to be adaptive with all the time wifi access so you can change the car on the fly -- no recalls needed).
Adaptivity is almost always more beneficial.

Controlling vs. Empowering
In a world that doesn't change very fast, control works. Send out the orders! But when things change faster, the info doesn't get back to the top quickly enough and due to complexity, that person can't know everything that's going on. There's too much. So you have to push authority out to the edge. You try to run the play, but as things change, each individual has the power to change things.

Privacy vs. Transparency
This is one of the hardest. In the old world, info is valuable if you keep it secret. People hoard info. The problem is that if you hoard it, you're making a judgement about what you think will happen -- and you might be wrong. In a transparent org, we work in public. We don't know what info people will need in order to be brilliant. Transparency about everything...

Purpose: are we in pursuit of something meaningful?
Networks: are we leveraging, growing and serving networks of people and tech?
Emergence are we planning too much and not testing and learning enough?
Adaptivity are we over-engineering things?
Empowering: are we pushing authority to the edge of the org? Is it clear who has it? The leader's job is to set the stage.
Transparency are we letting info flow? is it improving our decisions?

[Cammy: Really interesting keynote! How do we change our own ways of working and move the needle within our organizations? This is easier, clearly, at a small company that works more like a start up. How do you change this mindset in a big org?]