Now see what ‘I’ really stands for

Your comments—priceless

Don’t miss a post, subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Image credit: Gilles Tran & Jaime Vives Piqueres on WikiMedia Commons

There are many types of technology; Going Green brings together those active in what is called green tech and clean tech. Those fields are of critical interest for many reasons, to I prevailed on Chris Blackman to attend and share her impressions with you.

About Chris

Chris is a strategic consultant specializing in the positioning of clients for the acquisition of capital – private and public sources of funding – in the green and clean technology sector. Chris is a graduate of Columbia University having studied Political Science and International Relations. To date, Chris has written proposals in the green and clean tech space for a variety of water projects but is interested in a wide variety of topics. Her interest is piqued when there are projects at the intersection where green and clean tech meets the infrastructure.

Chris will be looking especially hard at these pressing questions:

• What is being done in the green and clean tech space?
• Who is financing the new startups and which kinds of startups are receiving funding?
• What will be the impact of funding clean tech companies in the United States?

About the conference

AlwaysOn’s Going Green, founded by Tony Perkins of RedHerring repute, is a three day conference in the San Francisco Bay area that explores who is in the green and clean tech space and who is funding what in its myriad sectors. The conference can be viewed daily for free; if you have a webcam and mic you can be seen, join in and ask questions.

This year’s keynote speaker for the opening ceremony was R. James Woolsey. The former cabinet member of the Clinton administration analyzed the need for green technologies that continue to use existing infrastructure and the importance of developing green and clean technologies, which encourage local self-sufficiency on the community level.

Your comments—priceless

Don’t miss a post, subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Image credit: AlwaysOn

Each year AlwaysOn produces several high profile events. One is the premier technology event Stanford Summit that KG Charles-Harris covers for MAPping Company Success.

But there are many types of technology; Going Green brings together those active in what is called green tech and clean tech. Those fields are of critical interest for many reasons, to I prevailed on Chris Blackman to attend and share her impressions with you.

About Chris

Chris is a strategic consultant specializing in the positioning of clients for the acquisition of capital – private and public sources of funding – in the green and clean technology sector. Chris is a graduate of Columbia University having studied Political Science and International Relations. To date, Chris has written proposals in the green and clean tech space for a variety of water projects but is interested in a wide variety of topics. Her interest is piqued when there are projects at the intersection where green and clean tech meets the infrastructure.

Chris will be looking especially hard at these pressing questions:

• What is being done in the green and clean tech space?
• Who is financing the new startups and which kinds of start-ups are receiving funding?
• What will be the impact of funding clean tech companies in the United States?

About the conference

AlwaysOn’s Going Green, founded by Tony Perkins of RedHerring repute, is a three day conference in the San Francisco Bay area that explores who is in the green and clean tech space and who is funding what in its myriad sectors. The conference can be viewed daily for free; if you have a webcam and mic you can be seen, join in and ask questions.

This year’s keynote speaker for the opening ceremony was R. James Woolsey. The former cabinet member of the Clinton administration analyzed the need for green technologies that continue to use existing infrastructure and the importance of developing green and clean technologies, which encourage local self-sufficiency on the community level.

The New Yorker has a fantastic story on Zappos. I’ve written about Zappos several times previously and I have to say this is one of the best profiles I’ve seen.

“Tony Hsieh, has earned a zealous following by imposing an ethos of live human connection on the chilly, anonymous bazaar of the Internet. He talks about being the architect of a movement to spread happiness, or “Zappiness,” via three “C”s: clothing, customer service, and company culture.

“Eventually, we’ll figure out a way of spreading that knowledge to the world in general, and that has nothing to do with selling shoes online.”

There has been much talk about what will happen to the Zappos culture and its all important focus on happy since it was acquired by Amazon. The culture was even considered important enough that the issue was addressed in an SEC filing—”Amazon vowed to leave Zappos’s management structure intact.”

Hsieh was already rich when he joined Zappos after selling his first company to Microsoft; he had a simple focus…

“What kind of company can we create where we all want to be there, including me? How can we create such a great environment, where employees get so much out of it that they would do it for free?”

Anyone who has seen Hsieh knows he isn’t a fashion icon; everything he wears is no name, moreover he has no interest, “I much prefer experiences to stuff.”

And that is what Zappos really sells, the intimate experience of a leisurely conversation on the phone with a person who is happy to hear from you, doesn’t multitask while talking or rush you because she has to do something else (the current record-holding call went on for five hours, twenty-five minutes, and thirty-one seconds) and, by the way, you get a pair or more of shoes with it.

The article is a fascinating and intimate look at Hsieh and Zappos; I hope you’ll take time to read it.

Image credit: Zappos

In a comment on my September 11 post Kate Lavender said, “I have always believed that quote “we are not made, or unmade, by the things that happen to us but by our reactions to them” – I had lost sight of that of late and your story brings the importance of personal choices being who we are back full force.”

I’m grateful to Kate; it’s good to know my point was made with at least one person.

This is as true for companies as it is for individuals and especially true in the current economic environment.

We can use this economic debacle to change the way we live, do business and innovate; we can stop up-sizing and down-sizing and learn to right-size; we can learn that keeping all our balls in the air isn’t the same as having all the balls existent.

We can start by recognizing that the current mess is substantially of our own making. It started years ago as we turned our personal responsibility over to our leaders, whether political, religious or business. (See Jim Stroup’s excellent post on this subject.)

Along with this abdication of responsibility we chose decades ago to forget/ignore another bit of ancient wisdom, “if it sounds too good to be true it probably is.”

How else to explain the number of Ponzi schemes unraveling, the most recent is 30 years old, not because the good guys caught the bad guys, but as fallout from the recession.

Returning to Kate’s quote, will our reactions to what is going on make or unmake us?

What do you think?

Your comments—priceless

Don’t miss a post, subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Image credit: ZedBee|Zoë Power on flickr

Silos kill, no question about it.

They kill innovation, retard product development, and encourage reinvention of the wheel.

Some companies encourage silos; some have no clue on how to break them down; and a very few don’t have them.

Instead, they have collaboration across not only departments, but also divisions.

3M is such a company, with collaboration embedded deep within its DNA.

3M is one of the few companies in private industry that is still active in basic research; it pays off because the results are immediately available to the R&D groups.

What’s the secret to fostering this kind of culture; to getting disparate individuals and organizations working together?

Collaboration doesn’t happen by accident.

• The company maintains a “…database of technical reports written by the more than 7,000 scientists at the company. Those scientists are spread between a corporate lab devoted to basic research, 40 division labs that essentially form a bridge between that basic science and the market, and 35 international labs.”
• It enables “TechForum, an employee-run organization designed to foster communications between scientists in different labs or divisions.”
• “Three years ago, 3M also created the “R&D Workcenter” networking Web site, which Mitra describes as a “LinkedIn for 3M scientists.”

But 3M knows that all the technology, all the meet-ups and all the talk aren’t always enough—the wrong kind of competition will quickly kill collaboration.

“Such sharing of resources is almost impossible when different units of a company feel they are competing against each other to deliver better financial results or the next breakthrough technology. But at 3M, employees are expected to collaborate—and are evaluated on their success.”

3M clearly tells its employees at all levels that they are expected to share across all boundaries, but just telling people doesn’t always work. It’s easy to share information without the added intelligence that makes the information truly valuable.

So they measure the success of the effort, not just the act. That is very different—it puts the money where the mouth is and taps into employees’ vested self-interest.

Image credit: Wesley Fryer on flickr

Leadership, people either covet it, are tired of hearing about it, ignore it or some, like me, see it as an abdication of personal responsibility (let the leader decide).

By definition, if you are a leader you must have followers, and Dan McCarthy over at Great Leadership wrote a terrific post listing 10 actions required to be a great follower.

I hate to disagree with Dan, but he’s wrong saying they are for followers when, in fact, the 10 actions he listed are just as important for the designated leaders—or for any human interfacing with others.

But nobody would be interested in 10 Ways To Be a Great Employee/Boss/Teacher/Student/Parent/Kid/Etc./Etc.; plus it would be lousy SEO and it probably wouldn’t sink in.

Now, Dan is a terrific guy and I have enormous respect for him, but I also couldn’t resist having a little fun by using his post to illustrate my point, which is this.

Skill and action lists aren’t just for the group described as the target audience. Yes, they may need to be tweaked a bit to fit your own particular situation, but they can be applied to anyone.

Maybe they should all be titled along the lines of ‘<whatever> To Be A Great Mensch’, but that wouldn’t fly with Google.

Your comments—priceless

Don’t miss a post, subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Image credit: dwogen on sxc.hu

See all mY generation posts here.

When it comes to eloquent proverbs filled with insightful wisdom nobody comes anywhere near the Chinese, not in more than 4000 years.

This is especially true when it comes to learning.

Think about it, is there any question what is meant by “A closed mind is like a closed book; just a block of wood” or any doubt about the truth of it?

Anyone who has ever expended effort in imparting their knowledge to another knows the truth of this saying, “Teachers open the door, but you must enter by yourself.”

Not just teachers, but every trainer worth their salt will agree with this sentiment, “Tell me and I’ll forget; show me and I may remember; involve me and I’ll understand.” It is why they use role-playing, why apprentice programs work and why there is no substitute for OJT (on-the-job training).

In today’s image conscious culture too often people avoid asking questions for fear of being laughed at or worse. I know there have been times I didn’t ask, usually on subjects that fell in the “any idiot knows that” only to find out later that the answer was neither well-known nor obvious. The Chinese call it ‘losing face’, but their ancestors knew the truth. “He who asks a question is a fool for five minutes; he who does not ask a question remains a fool forever.”

Last, but definitely not least, is the proverb that has been the basis of my life. It is what I’ve held onto every time my world has turned upside down—more times than I like to remember. “Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.”

Your comments—priceless

Don’t miss a post, subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Image credit: seesky on sxc.hu

Most of you know that I write a feature every Thursday called Leadership’s Future; it’s the outgrowth of articles written by CandidProf, who guested regularly last year, and is written around education, kids, parents and Millennials.

The trouble is that I find far more articles than I can write about, so today I’m giving you links to the best of them. I hope you take the small amount of time necessary to click through and read them, because they are important to y/our future.

First is a question that has been asked for decades and still has no real agreement. Do advanced degrees in education make for a better teacher or just a higher paycheck? But below the surface of this question lurks a larger problem—what happens when the schools conferring the degree has a second rate, or worse, program?

Next is an article about “effortful control” in toddlers and the value of guilt, or what the kids call “a sinking feeling in the tummy,” with a link to the actual study. The researcher also spells out the substantial difference between guilt, doing something bad, and shame, being a bad person—guilt is productive, shame is destructive.

Third is Boston Public Schools has reinstituted their Parent Academy after killing it earlier this year in the midst of budget cuts. Call it a parent engagement project and they are sweeping the country. The one in Boston cost between $50-100K, a cheap price for getting parents actively and positively involved in their kids education.

Last is an update on an article that CandidProf wrote last year regarding the dismal graduation statistics resulting from tying funding to college recruiting. Now the results are starting to show. “The United States does a good job enrolling teenagers in college, but only half of students who enroll end up with a bachelor’s degree.” Only Italy has a worse record; pretty sad. Be sure to read the comments for a number of interesting views.

Your comments—priceless

Don’t miss a post, subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Image credit: nono farahshila on flickr