Obviously this is too simplistic.
But I have this question for anyone who’s got some process to manage human beings in organisations. You know the sort of thing… a process to set and manage coaching; a format for efficient meetings; a form for 360 feedback, an assessment “tool” for interviews.
Does this process bear any resemblance to how you actually relate, in your own life, to anyone whom you love? (eg how you chose your spouse, how you treat your children etc etc)
And if not, why not?
A funny game illustrates what we may be missing in many of our meetings
Managing anxiety is a familiar challenge for facilitators.
Managing in a world of uncertainty where people don’t live up to their stated values
I shot this in a single eight-minute take, which is in the spirit of an experience of Ralf Wetzel’s workshop, Leading from the Clown. Clown training is probably the deepest and most challenging work I’ve done. Enjoy.
A casual conversation in a pub makes me pay attention to thinking being embodied
Creating eye contact despite the limits of Zoom and Teams
The power of small gestures and noticing
Exploring the inner dialogue of facilitation
Getting away from grandiosity or solemnity. small p presence is about being open to the life around us
Facilitation is often about small, subtle acts of noticing and experimenting
Seth's Blog: When ideas become powerful I agree. Conversations about innovation are usually about power. And those with it will defend it. Schumpeter: Think different | The Economist – Rules
Does Our Language Restrict What and How We Think? « how to save the world Dave Pollard pulls together some fascinating insights into language and how it frames and limits
John Naughton reports on Dave Winer’s frustration at Twitter blocking one of his accounts. His offence? His tweets being mainly links. John makes a good argument: Dave is right to
I enjoyed this Harvard Working Knowledge paper: Goals Gone Wild: The Systematic Side Effects of Over-Prescribing Goal Setting. It’s an engaging and welcome counterblast to much conventional BS about SMART
