steelcase blog

People Powered Processing,…

… try and say that five-times in a row.  Last night I watched the conclusion of IBM’s Grand Challenge on Jeopardy,… which pitted IBM’s ‘question answering supercomputer’ called Watson against the best-of-the-best past contestants Ken Jennings and Brad Rutter.  Watson seemed to be playing with the humans at times, but in the end beat them bad.  Beyond the fact all winnings went to charity (nice),… what can we conclude from this battle of man vs. machine…? 

I came away with several conclusions.  First, the amazing benefit we have today as a result of access, instantaneous access to the world’s facts.  Watson used 15 trillion bytes of memory (15X the capacity of the human memory system),… just imagine what would be possible when this doubles, and doubles again in the near future.  Second, that ‘context’ and ‘consideration’ tip the advantage to humans.  For example, how one responds to a question may depend more on who is asking the question vs. the question itself.  We’ve all done it,… answered a question in a way we know the person asking the question will react positively to,… where the computer just states the facts, and nothing more. 

And third,… the contest clearly demonstrated the impact of collaboration in solving problems.  Watson was not just one computer, but 2,800 processors stitched together (can you imagine how fast it would crank a multi-player video game…!).  While each human brain has somewhat similar processing power,… one person’s interests can vary dramatically from another’s, and thus ‘together’ would represent a broader spectrum of potential input  and problem solving ability.  What if Ken and Brad worked together on their answers…?  They still would have lost, though staging a more competitive response.  This is why co-working is such a phenomena these days, and growing rapidly.  Professionals from completely different disciplines physically located in the same space, a space designed to support social exchange and collaborative interaction,… makes all participants much smarter (just like Watson).  Do you Co-work…? 

Me to We …

… I’ve talked a couple times about the accelerating shift in knowledge worker activity, from ‘I’ work (the tasks we do on our own) to ‘WE’ work (the tasks we do with others),… and have labeled this as the rise in collaboration.  Recently I found a new book that looks at collaboration in a different light.  The book is What’s Mine is Yours, by Rachel Botsman and Roo Rogers.  What caught my eye was the books cover, highlighting in bright yellow the ‘ours’ of ‘Yours’ in the title.  Not only was this an effective way to imply a deeper meaning, or double meaning - ‘what’s mine is yours’ and ‘what’s mine is ours’,… but in a very simple way defined the very objective of collaboration; taking the thoughts, ideas, perspectives of two or more individuals (mine or me) and braiding them in a way to create a shared (ours or we) thought, idea or perspective.  So I read on.

The book introduces the term ‘collaborative consumption’,… defined as ‘enabling people to realize the enormous benefits of access to products and services over ownership’, moving from hyper-consumption measured by what we own to collaborative consumption measured by what we share.  While not overly zealous about the environment, we are all sickened by the realities of things like the Great Pacific Garbage Patch,… a floating pile of junk, mostly plastic, that covers an area twice the size of Texas and as much as 100 feet thick.  It is clearly the result of the buy, use and toss habits of all of us (if we are honest).

Sharing not only can reduce much of the negative impact of consumption, but the real value, the real benefit, the real power is the unexpected impact it has on the quality of the experience when one connects with others.  It doesn’t matter if you are sharing a garden (SharedEarth), a washing machine (Brainwash), a place to sleep (CouchSurfing), a bike (BIXI, not Dixie the disposable cup we’ve all used), or a meeting space (Workspring),… the process builds trust, extends community, and more often than not the opportunity to experience a better product or service than you would necessarily be able to afford on your own.  Why not share…?

Making Memories Memorable …

… I know, a somewhat odd statement,… as, by definition, all memories are memorable.  But I believe there is a quality in certain memories that set them apart from just your everyday memories.  It has to do with the depth of detail one can recall,… and the passion with which they recall it.  The human brain holds billions of impressions, but only some for a lifetime.  Why the difference…?  One of my favorite books I’ve mentioned before, Mapping The Mind by Rita Carter, gives us some clues.

All memory consists of the same essential thing,… groups of neurons that fire in a particular pattern, a pattern that remains encoded in the brain after the stimulation that originally gave rise to it has ceased.  Each time these neurons repeat this patterned firing a chemical change occurs making them increasingly sensitive,… almost to the point of looking forward to repeating the firing again-and-again (just like Lays Potato Chips and their ‘can’t eat just one’ challenge).  The key to how memorable a memory becomes is based on the repetitiveness of this firing process.  And the repetitiveness is triggered by the intensity of the original memory.

Some of the most intense memories are those labeled episodic memories.  They generally are very personal, emotionally engaging, and involve several sensory stimuli.  Sounds like the definition of a great experience don’t you think…?  When we recall these memories they recreate the ‘state of mind’ we were in when the memory was first laid down.  All the perceptions, the thoughts, the feelings, the context of time and space, all bundled into one cohesive recollection,… creating a mega pattern.  These experiences are so impactful that the hippocampus, which manages memory, pushes episodic memories to the frontal cortex,… and replays them over and over while you sleep.  After what can be up to 2-3 years of repetitive dress rehearsals, the frontal cortex can recall the memory without the hippocampus.  Now that’s what I call a memorable memory.  What are yours…? 

Proactive vs. Reactive …

… in the past several weeks I’ve been asked to be on two different panel discussions, both talking about what the future might hold,… with my perspective representing the future of physical ‘work’ spaces.  The first was the Hunter Hotel Investment Conference, where I addressed maybe 400 hotel owners on trends that could affect their future portfolio of offerings.  The second was an IACC webcast to conference center owners/operators/developers/vendors on the impact of advanced technologies on the conference experience.

While two completely different audiences, their underlying interest was the same,… “What do I do to get ready for the changes coming my way?”  And one of their major concerns was investing too much too early, only to find that further changes negate those investments.  I recalled a similar feeling I had back when I was CIO for several years (at the crossover to Year 2000!),… where I questioned if my decisions were on the ‘leading edge’ or ‘bleeding edge’ of technology shifts.  If one obsesses on this too long, they become frozen in time.  Then they wonder why they end up late to the game and chasing a trend,… as opposed to their positioning themselves to take advantage of what’s ahead.

This ‘sense of time’ was reinforced in a book I am re-reading called Future Perfect by Stan Davis (which is as relevant today as it was in ’87 when it was first published).  Stan says “The only way an organization’s leaders can get there (the objectives of the strategy) from here (the current organization) is to lead from a place in time that assumes you are already there, and that is determined even though it hasn’t happened yet.”  Or more simply stated the present is the past of the future.  WOW,… a powerful insight…!

So my talk at these panels was to encourage them, to define their future strategy (based on the trends I shared),… and then make today’s decisions based on the reality of that future.  What time frame are you on…?  Future or Present…?

Drive vs. Driven …

… there is a big difference between these two words, especially as it relates to motivation.  This is described in detail in Daniel Pink’s new book by that same title, Drive.  Pink presents anecdotal evidence that in the past motivation was created through ‘carrots and sticks’,… rewarding activities you want to see more of and punishing those you want less of (managers drive the behaviors they want).  So what motivates workers today…?  It’s inherent in the satisfaction one has with the activity itself says Pink; the challenge the activity presents and the purpose behind its intent (employees are driven to do more).  True for all workers…?  I would say ‘yes’ to a greater or lesser extent based on the type of worker.  As is true of ‘carrots and sticks’, depending on the worker in question.

One size clearly does not fit all,… when it comes to motivation.  It just so happens that while I was reviewing Drive, I was reading a second and equally good book titled Clever by Rob Goffee & Gareth Jones.  It does an excellent job of defining the type of person (a clever) which responds to the intrinsic rewards which Daniel Pink describes.  And how to lead these types,… which I plan to talk more about at a later time.  Goffee & Jones describe clever workers as “highly talented individuals with the potential to create disproportionate amounts of value from the resources that the organization makes available to them.”  Note the catalyst in this definition – the resources the organization makes available.

All three authors talk to the importance of creating the proper ‘environment’ for great work to flourish.  Whether it be the freedom to do what interests them,… the challenge of working on larger than life problems,… the physical setting (spatial considerations) and technological tools (informational considerations) to support their process of design thinking/ideation,… or the opportunity  to work with other clevers (social considerations) inside the company, or more importantly outside the company.  These all matter,… and will determine just how much one leverages the potential of your best employees.  More or Less…?