To Join the Conversation subscribe to Richard’s Newsletter
When pressure is high, short-term decisions take precedence over long-term sustainability. Quick wins deliver a rapid lift and a sense of progress. Yet, to realise long-term viability, it pays to do the deep work to learn the consequences and assure survival before applying high-powered solutions.
My first career breakthrough came when Jim Crompton, then Chairman of the Defence Research Laboratories in Adelaide invited me to work with him. To be his first-ever, executive assistant. Crikey. I wasn’t a scientist, or a technologist. I thought of myself more as a managerial ‘jack of all trades.’
When I stood outside his office, there in my late 20s, my nervousness must have been obvious. Jim’s secretary Phyllis said, “Richard, he’s only a man. And, he’s good at answering questions. So, don’t assume anything, just ask.”
Great advice from Phyllis. It wasn’t too long before Jim said to me, “Richard, you always ask the hard questions. And, if you want an answer you’ll have to go to Canberra.”
After 30 years of asking hard questions, I was working in Canberra as part of a 3-year reform program. You might have noticed how, as reform takes shape, details accumulate until the accumulated detail takes over. Each segment of reform builds a life of its own. People become their organisation and one story becomes many stories. Well, that’s where we were.
The questioner in me dared to ask, “What’s the narrative here? How do these things fit together now? And, why can’t the leaders answer me?” This time, the questions were thrown right back at me.
Do we live with perennial hope of technology saving the planet from the pollution of the industrial revolution? That somehow the fourth industrial revolution will save us.
On 23 September, the 2019 Climate Summit meets in New York to “showcase a leap in collective national political ambition and it will demonstrate massive movements in the real economy in support of the agenda. Together, these developments will send strong market and political signals… ” It’s highly ambitious, and perhaps it needs to be so.
At the last Climate Summit in Paris, Australia’s message pinned hope that “environmentally friendly technology and innovation will be the force to arrest climate change.”
Reductionist thinking is killing us and much of life on the planet as we know it. And while we know we need to change the way we’re thinking , I was reminded today that “we cannot take the salt out of the broth ” – reductionist thinking is here to stay. So, how do we add to it to reduce the “salinity” of how we’re acting and thinking?
What then to make of the Hawking Challenge?
The Hawking Challenge : disprove Professor Stephen Hawking’s hypothesis that humanity has 100 years in which to leave Earth and colonize another planet in our galaxy.
In Article 2019-001, I explored why he might be challenging us to disprove his hypothesis.
Do you ever wonder why pre-school kids always ask why, and do it irrepressibly so? Yet, somewhere along the way we forget the value of that most fundamental question, and we stop asking it.
At the outset, let me be clear. This is not another post about “finding your why”. As fashionable as that is right now, “my why” is as contextual to me as yours is to you, and unless and until we share the same context, it’s likely not to be helpful to you. I believe there's more value in exploring the practice of asking why, and why 'asking why' seems to be sliding off the scale. And, ask what we can do about it.
There’s a sliding scale and it’s a slippery slope
As a parent of two wonderful daughters and grandparent of four (ages 12-19), I reckon I’ve seen a sliding scale of development that goes something like this.
Professor Stephen Hawking predicted that humanity has 100 years in which to leave Earth and colonise another planet in our galaxy. Otherwise, we will join so many other species of life and become extinct. He made this prediction just before he died on 14 March 2017 reducing by 90% his previous prediction of 1,000 more years of human existence on Earth.
Whether we choose to believe Hawking or not, his predication poses a great question: what is our time to extinction? Is it the 4 generations of This Century? Or, the 40 generations of This Millennium?
Will time prove Professor Hawking right? Or, will humanity change to prove Professor Hawking wrong?
These questions trouble me and many others. With deference to the scientific approach, we must seek to disprove his hypothesis. Not prove it.
When #innovation and #governance collide on the management agenda, the leadership question falls to what boundaries need to be set and how to design a system of controls to drive the business. This week’s Business Leaders Forum considered these questions with these three takeaways.
#innovation and #governance for #longterm #value, better #outcomes and #results
Are you agile? Or do you do agile? The first goes to a competency for human interaction and the latter to a software development process that is becoming well practiced in how organisations make progress. Good organisations take a people centric approach to agile processes. This issue and two others were my main takeaways from the conversation on competency in a Business Leaders Forum I chaired in Melbourne this week. (posted from New York City)
#agile #business #competency for #longterm #strategy #communication #values for better #outcomes and #results