Keeping the Beat with Jump Rhythm Jazz Project

My association with Jump Rhythm Jazz Project (JRJP) extends to early 1998 when Billy Siegenfeld and a cadre of JRJP dancers performed in Lakeway, TX at a Leadership for INstitutional Change (LINC) workshop sponsored by the W.K. Kellogg Foundation1. The purpose of their performance was three-fold. First, make rhythm and dance integral in the design of the leadership workshop as an appeal to the auditory-musical and bodily-kinesthetic intelligences of attendees, à la Howard Gardner and his theory of multiple intelligences. Second, act as a disruptive force among attendees and prompt them to consider a different line of thinking about leadership – followership and changing roles and responsibilities within a dynamic community. Third, provide a divertissement that would be engaging and entertaining.

The JRJP performance and subsequent question and answer period exceeded all expectations. Those who were intellectually (and physically!) asleep came to life. Those who had difficulties crossing the boundary separating their realities and the views of reality imposed by the dominant culture found a bridge. Those who believed that the most effective leadership was one that exercised control and focused choices were introduced to an open, participatory alternative that obviously worked. To this day, attendees at this workshop comment on the powerful effect JRJP had on them – it was transformational.

At the heart of JRJP is rhythm – the beat. Organized human endeavor is a pattern of communication or sustained conversation through which people give voice to what is important to them, achieve understanding, reach agreement, and garner commitment. Patterns, even conversational ones, have rhythm and voice – who is in what conversation about which topic. Changing an individual or an organization means changing conversations. Effective leaders change rhythm patterns to change conversations; over time, the people within the organization, and eventually the organization itself, change.

Because dance plays heavily on certain dimensions of human intelligence, it is a medium through which societal problems are addressed and different responses considered. A great dance presents a problem or situation for the audience to consider that is within their realm of experience and influence – a type of Theater for the Oppressed as conceived by Augusto Boal only in the form of dance and music. Through these the audience is invited to join the dancers in deliberating on social issues and exploring alternative approaches (recent examples in the JRJP repertoire include “Sorrows of Unison Dancing” and “The New from Poems”).

Building on rhythm and voice, JRJP displays a choreographic technique and musical score that is approachable and familiar. The dancers and the dance are engaging and invite participation by the audience. It is democratic in its purest sense. Democracy, though, carries certain responsibilities. As an organization, JRJP was forced to learn about these democratic principles in the context of its own behavior so that what was demonstrated in the performances was a true reflection of its own experience. The more that JRJP has found this touch point in itself the more engaging it has become with audiences worldwide. But getting there was not simple!

In July 2003, JRJP board members, staff, dancers, and close friends participated in a series of moderated conversations at a planning retreat. The intention was to drill down into what it meant to be members of JRJP and what JRJP needed to do to sustain itself into the future. The outcome of the retreat was the realization of three key points: first, JRJP was a great experience for most, but not all – surprisingly, Billy being the one experiencing the least joy; second, participating in the good things that JRJP had to offer was not associated with a commensurate level of shared responsibility – some, like Billy, had far more to do than others causing him to feel overwhelmed and living a life out of balance; and third, JRJP was heavily dependent on Billy; if he stopped doing what he did JRJP was at grave risk – sustainability was in question. This realization led to several actions including seating an Executive Director so that Billy could focus on being the Artistic Director, expanding the board membership to get more outreach to funders and supporters, defining and strengthening staff positions for distribution of operations among qualified personnel who were adequately paid for their work, and locating a home for JRJP somewhere other than Billy’s condo. These are done. And the level of performance for JRJP reflects this success!

But JRJP is not done. On June 4, 2006 there will be a second retreat. The purpose of this retreat is to make explicit what the company has accomplished, why it was able to do that, how it does what it does, and what that learning means for future activities. While many have experienced the recent changes in JRJP, several are not aware of why those changes happened and their significance for the future. The exercise of participatory democracy as a governing principle rather than hierarchical dictatorship speaks to an effective leadership – followership model. Showing others how to do this through the medium of rhythm, dance, and music is a significant deliverable JRJP can add to its repertoire.

To do this will require touching these past experiences, giving them voice, and building a confidence in moving them forward for others to learn. A different language will need to be developed that recasts what seems to be the same in the eyes of the uninitiated so that they have a very different understanding of what is going on. It is storytelling of the highest order. Between now and the retreat time and energy will be devoted to telling the JRJP story – both what has happened and the dreams for the future. By the time the retreat draws nigh, there will be a lexicon of terms and phrases incorporated into stories of vision and mission and proposals to funders that broaden the sense of what JRJP is up to for the next 5 years. It is a process of bringing the future into the present and giving it voice. JRJP will persist but will not be the same!

Originally posted to New Media Explorer by Steve Bosserman on Monday, December 5, 2005

  1. Susan Fugate, “Kellogg Foundation Initiative Seeks to Catalyze Change at Land-Grant Institutions,” Journal of Extension 34, no. 5 (1996):https://joe.org/joe/1996october/a1.php ↩

Confessions of a Chocoholic — It’s All in the Bean

A couple of weeks ago I was visiting friends and noticed a Christmas catalogue from a German chocolatier on the table. Thumbing through it my mouth watered with the turn of every page. This visual distraction was converted into a topic of conversation. Soon, the only recourse was to raid the pantry of its Belgian chocolates and indulge our chocolate fetish. Wow!

Beyond the selection of finely-crafted chocolates featured in the catalogue, there was a section on the history of the company, some tidbits about chocolate-making and general comments about the source of chocolate – the cacao bean. I decided to research chocolate a bit further. This turned out to be quite a learning experience.

Information about chocolate is easy to find. Google has 66,500,000 hits on “chocolate” and 3,410,000 on “cacao.”

Wikipedia

The theobroma cacao, which means “food of the gods,” is an evergreen tree, native to the tropical regions of South America. Each tree has 6,000 flowers that produce maybe 20 pods. Each pod contains 20 – 60 beans. It takes 300 – 600 seeds to produce 1 kg of cocoa paste.

Field Museum

There are 592,000 Google hits on cacao production. Like most agricultural products, there is a general production process for cacao that is millennia in the making yet heavily influenced by scientific and technological developments over the past two hundred years. The pods are harvested, cut open, fermented (sweating), dried (cured), and packed in the first phase of processing. Then, the seeds are sorted, cleaned, roasted, cracked, fanned, and winnowed to separate nibs from shells in the second phase. In the third phase, nibs are ground into chocolate liquor (cocoa paste). Then, some of the liquor is pressed to render fat (cocoa butter) and the coarse leftovers are dried and ground into cocoa powder. The remainder of the un-pressed liquor is mixed with condensed milk, sugar, and extra cocoa butter form a crumb which is refined, conched, tempered, and molded into chocolates.

Much of the first phase of processing – harvesting, opening the pods, fermenting, drying, and packing – is done the same way it has been for centuries. It remains labor intensive since mechanization is not possible and several steps can only be done by hand. In addition to the physical work there is considerable human judgment involved in deciding which pods are ready to be harvested, monitoring fermentation, and controlling drying so that the result – the bean – captures the full richness of flavor and quality possible. This requires considerable skill and experience on the parts of those who are involved in this phase.

Designer Traveler

Because the cacao bean, the key raw ingredient required for making chocolate, can only be grown in certain tropical regions around the world, it’s price per pound is exceptionally high. That price is driven up by overseas buyers from Europe and North America who process the cacao but cannot grow it themselves. This is the reason cacao-growing countries like Ecuador don’t have a strong chocolate-making culture despite having the perfect cacao-growing conditions. The cost of the raw ingredients is just simply too high for the local consumption.

The cacao “Nacional” is sold in Europe as an elitist gourmet-product and gets prices up to 50 Euros per kilogram, whereas at the beginning of the production one kilogram costs only 0,58 Eurocents.”1

The post-harvest phases are highly mechanized thereby substantially reducing operating costs and improving consistency of quality and output. Considering a nearly 100:1 ratio of finished chocolate to packed cacao beans, this concentrates revenue AND profits in the later phases. It leaves very little for skilled labor conducting first phase work.

Because of high labor content, keeping the cost for labor low is an imperative. It can lead to abuse of the workforce without respect for the value and criticality of their knowledge. The most severe form of this abuse is slavery.

Food Empowerment Project2

There are 940,000 Google hits on slave labor chocolate industry. Slavery is not a new problem. Still, it challenges one’s sense of assumed social, economic, and political progress to think that the institution persists.

Dissident Voice

There are 6 hits on Google News about slave labor in the chocolate industry. There is nothing available that shows the current situation in real-time – a ground truth benchmark – but indications suggest the practice continues. It is, as it turns out, an engrained part of a colonial system setup centuries ago to facilitate exploitation. That system will not change easily because it pays-off.

TransFair USA

There are 1,330,000 hits on Google for fair trade certified chocolate. It suggests that if a sufficient number of people buy from stores or sources that sport the Fair Trade Certified label the system will change because the pay-off changes. That means changing the buying patterns of people. This means informing them about critical factors they need to take into consideration when they buy certain products, making the process of buying the products they need and want through alternative channels as easy, or easier, than conventional channels, and assuring availability with competitive prices. A tough call.

Ithaca Fine Chocolates

Equal Exchange

There are 7,900,000 hits for chocolate bars on Google. Two weeks ago I would have taken any of them. Now, I’m keeping time to a different drummer. A system changes one conversation at a time. In this case, it is one chocolate bar at a time!

Originally posted to New Media Explorer by Steve Bosserman on Friday, November 25, 2005

  1. http://www.ecuadorline.com/ecuador/newsletter/Newsletter200501.htm Original article quoted no longer available ↩
  2. http://www.showmenews.com/2005/Feb/20050214Busi010.asp Original article no longer available ↩

Tackling Population Density, Diversity, and Disparity

Dateline: 4 November 2005, a NY Times editorial by Thomas Friedman entitled, “From Gunpowder to the Next Big Bang” outlines how China is grooming entrepreneurs to increase the rate with which business opportunities are identified and acted upon.

Dateline: 28 October 2005, an article by Howard W. French entitled, “China Luring Scholars to Make Universities Great,” describes how China is making a concerted effort to beef up their academic institutions with rigorous, cutting edge research capabilities and open the door to more discoveries, inventions, and innovation.

Dateline: 26 October 2005, an editorial by Thomas Friedman entitled, “Living Hand to Mouth” explains how China is rapidly pushing the limits of sustainability by incurring heavy societal penalties in air and water pollution, deforestation, and loss of arable land to support the growth rate it has enjoyed over the past 10 years.

Other than being about China, what do these articles have in common? They highlight three essential tasks society is required to address as we come closer together as a global community.

First, population density. As the world’s population continues to grow, more and more people will choose to live in metropolitan areas. China has over 40 cities exceeding 1M population with the most populous being Shanghai at almost 10M. India boasts 35 cities with populations over 1M, the most populous being Mumbai at just over 16M. Cairo, the most populous city in Africa, has a population of almost 7M. Sao Paulo, Brazil, with over 10M, is the most populous city in South America; whereas Mexico City, at almost 9M, is the most populous city in North America. More especially, counting the greater metropolitan area for Mexico City, the total population stands at over 17M making it one of the densest population concentrations in the world! How do people have a quality of life in such densities? Certainly, the migration of people to these population centers will only continue. The question begs answers.

Second, population diversity. As people migrate from one area to another in an effort to improve their lot in life, they encounter those from other races, ethnicities, languages, cultures, religions, etc. The United States is a nation forged by those who came to the country in hundreds of immigrant waves across a 500+ year history. The U.S. is not alone. All countries experience migration patterns through emigration and immigration coupled by varying degrees of mobility within their borders that sees people move from one rural or urban location to another. These migratory changes are unstoppable, but not always welcomed. The consequences range from an inappreciation and nonacceptance of difference to outright conflict and bloodshed as incompatible groups find themselves in one another’s space. How do people learn to live together when they come from different places and have differing beliefs? This diversity will only continue. The question begs answers.

Third, population disparity. As people find themselves in the presence of others outside their native groups, they are confronted with a reallocation of power and resources – the pecking order is reordered. Depending on relationships with people new to the mix, this reordering takes away or grants influence. There will be winners and losers no matter what. If the losers are reduced to a point where they can no longer fend for themselves and meet their basic needs for subsistence, they will take extreme measures to assure their survival; namely, destroy the environment for water, food, clothing, and shelter, and increase the birthrate as a hedge. Both of these consequences are disastrous not only for those who are scrounging at the bottom of the power ladder, but ultimately everyone as the environment is compromised by over-population and other ways that adversely affect the whole system. How do people realize that to take so much from others and put lives at stake costs far more to correct than to leave enough so that even the least can enjoy a minimum quality of life? This disparity will only continue unless another course is taken. The question begs answers.

China is a nation dealing with density, diversity, and disparity. And the consequences of not adequately addressing these three are dire. However, as Friedman notes, China’s leaders know the future is not going to be bright for long if these conditions persist or worsen. China is stewing in the questions that beg answering.

Friedman also states that what is needed is an integrated solution. This involves countries and organizations outside China working with institutions and groups inside China. That is where the articles at the outset of this posting have particular poignancy: China is reaching across internal and external boundaries to bolster research capabilities, strengthen academic rigor, awaken and advance entrepreneurial spirit, and direct attention to improving environmental quality and along with it quality of life for Chinese citizens. That degree of focus and commitment, coupled with an abundance of resources to put into the effort, give China the opportunity to learn and gain much. While China will not find THE answers to these questions, the lessons mastered in addressing them will benefit the world. May we all get an “A” in the course!

Originally posted to New Media Explorer by Steve Bosserman on Sunday, November 6, 2005

Ménière’s Disease: Requiem for My Left Ear

This past Friday, my doctor told me I have Ménière’s disease. These two words explained a week of incessant, high-pitched ringing and pulse-throbbing pressure in my left ear, an unsteady gait when walking, and a counter-clockwise swirling of the room following any rapid movement of my head. The only action that seemed to curb it was sleeping, which is what I did. While there was much to be done, I felt like doing NOTHING!

Of course, I indulged in self-diagnosis in between waves of vertigo. Was it the result of too much coffee? Too little down-time? A simple case of the flu? I settled on three possibilities: an inoperable brain tumor (in deference to my mother – may God rest her soul – who believed in establishing an extremely severe alternative no matter how unlikely so that almost any diagnosis made by the doctor would be good news in comparison); an ear infection (where my bets were placed); and wax build-up in the ear canal (I knew this one was a long-shot, but it at least served as a balance to the first choice). Ménière’s disease?! Never heard of it!

“What is it?” I asked. The doctor offered an explanation: no one knows what causes it…could be genetic…could be a virus…there is no cure…it comes and goes unpredictably…you have atypical vestibular Ménière’s disease because you are not experiencing hearing loss in the left ear…long term prognosis is that you probably will have total, permanent hearing loss…severe vertigo can be incapacitating due to nausea and vomiting…can only treat the symptoms…surgery works in some cases to lessen vertigo. In the meantime, here is a prescription for 25mg of Meclizine to reduce dizziness…the side-effects include feeling lightheaded, sleepy, having blurred vision, change in thinking clearly…avoid driving, doing other tasks or activities that require alertness or clear vision. Anything else I can do for you?

I entered into the privacy of the doctor’s office aware of my very real, but unspecified condition. It was real because I physically and mentally experienced its consequences. And in that moment it was mine alone. No one else knew what I had or how I was affected by it, not even my wife who accompanied me. However, the doctor gave it a name. He now knew, my wife knew, and I knew and I was no longer alone with the unknowable.

The mere fact that it was symbolized with letters gave it a virtual existence extending far beyond me and touching the millions of others who have the same condition. This virtualization gives me access to the experiences, knowledge, empathy, and understanding of others; and they to mine. Because of a name, Ménière’s disease, such widespread connectedness becomes a powerful way for me to learn about myself and the result may carry far beyond the bounds of the condition. So, to start…

A Google search on the term, “Ménière’s disease” yields 667,000 results. A search of Amazon generates two pages of books, journals, magazines, even herbal medicines. There are 28 Yahoo! Groups and 3 Google Groups and almost 2700 groups across the Internet dedicated to the Ménière’s-related topics such as tinnitus, vertigo / dizziness, vestibular virus, etc. There are countless variations on how Ménière’s manifests itself and what people who have it do in response. The choices are many, ranging from pharmacological prescriptions to alternative medicines, and from low-salt diets to surgery.

It is almost impossible NOT to get connected. Clearly, I don’t know what’s next for me with Ménière’s — I could have another episode tomorrow or I could never have another one. At the moment I have no vertigo, no hearing loss, no spinning computer screen, no pressure in the ear, only a slight ringing. The prescription for Meclizine is filled, but unused. So in the moment, I go on reading more, asking more, learning more. And even if I don’t have call to use this knowledge for myself, I have it at hand in case others I meet or know are afflicted with similar symptoms and diagnoses. This potential for learning together in the future marks a distinct value of virtualization. If and when Ménière’s strikes again and the realization of the condition hits me hard, I thank all of you in the vast global network in advance for imparting your knowledge and wisdom and making me a better person for it!

Originally posted to New Media Explorer by Steve Bosserman on Saturday, October 22, 2005 and updated on Monday, October 24, 2005

A Wedding Framework

Last week, I had the distinct pleasure of participating in my daughter’s wedding. As typical for fathers of brides, I just showed up and did as I was told so as to contribute as best I could to her having the complete experience she wanted. Obviously, my participation fulfilled an essential role within a “wedding framework” my daughter spent years envisioning. However, it became obvious as the day unfolded that my role was only one of many within a complex blend of activities and sub-routines among people, businesses, and processes over the previous six months that led to the wedding framework “realization” we shared at that time.

This speaks volumes for the necessity of an envisioned framework upon which to define and queue critical activities. It is also a classic example of what happens along a virtualization — realization continuum as a total solution is put into play. As they began their wedding plans, my daughter and her then fiancé chose to get married in a small town along the coast of Maine even though they lived in the Kansas City area. I found out later this is called a “destination wedding,” or as a friend of mine termed it an “announced elopement.” In their case, neither of them lived in Maine, had been to Maine, nor knew anyone in Maine; but that was no deterrent. Enter virtualization!

Successful virtualization relies on three key elements: presence – visibility on websites, blogsites, profiles, and listings wherein a person, business, or organization can be found through routine searches; networking – chatter, buzz, references made by others that corroborate what a person, business, organization claims about themselves; and interactivity – responses in timing and content to emails, voice mails, site comments, etc.

My daughter and son-in-law brought these three elements into play right from the start of their planning. First, they tapped into their personal networks and searched the Internet for information about Maine. Their particular interest was the coast of Maine then small towns on the coast that have white churches in stereotypical settings of rural New England, followed by requisite splashes of fall colors dotting the countryside in early October. A combination of affirmative statements from family, friends, co-workers, and others within their trusted networks who had realized experiences in Maine, what they gleaned from online sources, and what was learned in exchanges of email and phone conversations with people in Maine, the destination was targeted – Camden.

Finding the location was only half the challenge. The second step entailed populating the envisioned overall “wedding framework” with virtualized pieces that nested together to create a whole virtual experience of the total solution. The same networking — web-surfing — loop-closing communication patterns used to find the location were repeated several times over the course of the six-month planning horizon with one critical difference – secondary trusted networks were available.

One of the outcomes of the initial round of site selection was the discovery, “testing,” and subsequent addition of those who passed the test into their trusted networks. These new members were local to Camden. Of course, those Camden locals knew others in their trusted networks who had the necessary qualifications and availability to fill-in the missing blanks on the wedding framework. As a result, church, pastor, bed and breakfast rooms for guests, photographer, baker, florist, marriage license office, etc. were found, their roles clarified, and their commitments sealed – the virtualized total solution was completed slightly ahead of the realized form. As a backup, the local trusted networks had sufficient redundancy that in the event of failure with one of the contracted parties another was quickly available to step in at the moment of realization to assure success.

My daughter and son-in-law had a wedding framework in mind from the start. They went through the steps necessary to find and integrate the people, businesses, and organizations required to first virtualize, then realize their “total wedding solution.” Such an integration role is central in putting together and carrying out any complex project or initiative. Successful “integrators” build new, penetrate existing, and connect interrelated networks. This skill enables them to take a framework of their or another’s making, organize it into a latticework of interconnected cells, and then pull from dense webs of resource networks to “fill” each cell with multiple layers of possible responses. It is a skill that is becoming THE key differentiator among those who are seemingly equals. It is one that my daughter and son-in-law executed flawlessly.

Just as “beauty is in the eyes of the beholder,” my description of a virtualization — realization process that was wonderfully done means nothing unless the one it is about agrees with the result! When describing the experience as her wedding day was winding down, my daughter said, “It was PERFECT!” There is nothing sweeter to the ear for a dad than to hear his daughter say this. So, indeed, it WAS perfect!

Originally posted to New Media Explorer by Steve Bosserman on Friday, October 14, 2005

A Solutions Triptych, Panel III: Value Proposition Redefined

The virtualization-to-realization continuum introduced in Solutions Triptych, Panel II portrays two different sets of activities on either side of a portal through which identified opportunities for solutions are met by packaged and delivered solutions. The graphic below expands on this concept by highlighting adjoined, three-dimensional “conversational spaces” representing virtualization and realization separated by a porous “communications grid.” The portal acts as a conduit between them directing the flow of conversations taking place on either side and through the grid.

The forums and agendas within these two conversation spaces are highly interdependent. While the virtualization characteristics (intuitive – intelligent – integrated) and realization characteristics (cost – quality – schedule) are certainly different, they are of mutual interest to the customer and the solution provider. Both strive for improvements in cost, quality, and schedule and both see the direct benefit in terms of better realization performance from wider adoption of virtualization characteristics.

The forums and agendas for solutions-focused conversations and the subsequent flow of solutions through portals are also shaped by the type of solution considered. The diagram below illustrates the three solution types introduced in Panel II – product, system, and total – positioned in the conversational spaces. Also captured in each type are the order and distance between the “point of virtualization” (PV) and “point of realization” (PR). These relationships have a direct bearing on the way in which conversations are conducted and their results.

fe118d5a-67bb-4dee-b6f1-a47860a459ad

 

A customer’s negotiation with competitive businesses in the selection of a product solution is not the same negotiation when choosing a system solution or total solution. In other words, the value propositions are not the same requiring different formulas to reach a decision. The defining factor for a value proposition is who is doing the integration and why.

In product solutions, the customer is the integrator. The customer is the only one who knows the context in which the product solution being proposed fits. As a result, the customer is in control of the integration of multiple product solutions into more complete and comprehensive system and total solutions.

In the opposite case, a business playing the role of integrator delivers a total solution to the customer. The business is in control of the integration. This assumes three conditions are met: the business understands the context in which the customer operates; second, the business is capable of delivering a better, more cost effective total solution to the customer than the customer could have done alone; and third, the customer has viable options for spending time and energy other than doing integration. Missing any of these three conditions and the value proposition crumbles resulting in unmet expectations for all concerned.

As is often the case, the truth rests in the middle as with the center graphic where the customer and business share integration responsibilities and co-manage expectations. This middle ground produces opportunities for businesses to check contextual understanding and for customers to play with integrative alternatives. The resulting value proposition grants businesses the latitude to “virtualize” an array of system solutions before building inventories of realized product solutions that may or may not be sold and turned. Meanwhile, customers are able to experience system solution alternatives in virtual space before making a buying commitment to a set of product solutions that may or may not integrate effectively or truly be responsive to actual needs and wants given the context.

This suggests that customers and businesses give strong consideration to three sets of questions within the conversational spaces separating them as their negotiations begin:

Business: What is the customer’s context and how do I describe it so the customer knows I know?

Customer: What is the scorecard I follow that lets me know a business truly understands my realities?

Business: What can I do to make the customer’s virtual experience with solution alternatives more intuitive, intelligent, and integrated?

Customer: What can I do to make the real experience fit within the cost – quality – schedule parameters I have?

Business: What alternatives can I offer that capture the interest, curiosity, and commitment of the customer in lieu of doing integration?

Customer: What are the unrealized opportunities I can pursue if I had the time, energy, and capacity to do so?

These question sets constitute new agendas for businesses and customers to use in their conversations with one another as they BOTH learn to adapt to rapid changes in information and communication technologies. In fact, this learning about, with, and from one another – business and customer – is an essential feature of the shift gradual, but inexorable, shift to total solutions. Then again, isn’t learning the point behind whatever we are doing, or if it’s not, shouldn’t it be?

Originally posted to New Media Explorer by Steve Bosserman on Friday, October 7, 2005 and updated on Saturday, October 8, 2005

A Solutions Triptych, Panel II: Virtualization and Realization

Solutions, as they are defined and delivered in response to identified needs and wants, are manifested along a continuum of virtualization-to-realization. In the graphic below, the uncolored image of the portal diagram from Solutions Triptych, Panel I becomes the background over which the dynamics of virtualization and realization are shown. The portal acts as a lens to focus that which is conceived virtually in preparation for its eventual realization in physical form at a later time.

As information and communication technologies extend their capabilities, three key characteristics of virtualization will accelerate the pervasiveness and rate of adoption for these technologies:

  • Intuitive – human interaction with them will become easier and more transparent
  • Intelligent – they will become more human-like in their functioning so that people are able to engage in other activities rather than tending to the technologies or what the technologies are designed to do
  • Integrated – interfaces between one technology and another and one component in a system with other components will be designed so that the components in a system can be upgraded and the system’s overall functionality and effectiveness improved without having to replace the entire system

In fact, as people become more experienced with and confident in virtual solutions meeting or exceeding their needs, their expectations for more intuitive human factors, more intelligent functioning, and more integrated features will grow. The result will be a decided pull from customers for business investment to continue in developing even more powerful virtual solutions.

However, that which is virtualized must be realized at some point either with the means to experience the solution satisfactorily in virtual space or with tangible goods. The flipside to the three virtualization characteristics is another set for realization. These are extensions of what is commonly experienced within most manufacturing operations, namely:

  • Cost – related to the business providing the realized solution and to the customer who is “investing” in it
  • Quality – how well the realized solution performs according to specifications and for how long under diverse / changing conditions
  • Schedule – when the realized solution is available from the business and when it is needed by the customer

The perennial challenge within industry is how to balance these three realization characteristics. The rule of thumb in management is to emphasize any two of the three depending on the tolerance of customers then develop strategies based on those and letting the third “float.” This is not an ideal circumstance in which to manage, but a conundrum of significant familiarity with those in industry!

Through rapid and marked increases in virtualization techniques and capability, the formulae for managing the realization characteristics have changed. The diagram below illustrates some of these dimensions.

At the heart of the virtualization-to-realization transition is the spatial and distance relationship between the point where the solution is virtualized and the point where it is realized. For instance, in the bottom relationship one product solution goes to many customers. The “point of realization” (PR) precedes the “point of virtualization” (PV) as inventory is produced then presented to the customer through virtual presentation in hope that sales are forthcoming, inventory is quickly turned, and the cycle repeats. The customer has little influence on the specification and utility of what is represented by a particular business. Instead, the customer exercises choice by cost – quality – schedule comparisons among competitors offering similar solutions.

In the middle relationship, a system solution is packaged using components from “some” providers then delivered to a well-defined market segment comprising a distinct “some” set of customers. PR and PV are in very close proximity to one another. The customer has more direct influence over the specification of the system solution rather than component parts. Businesses are able to facilitate the customer’s choice by offering a wide range of configurations and feature combinations along a relatively lengthy decision-making timeline. As a result, the customer has longer to consider the alternatives in virtual space before making a final selection. Also, businesses can defer adding inventory until the last moment when the customer’s decision triggers realization of a solution already sold virtually.

The top relationship shows how a much larger population of “many” businesses bring products / services into a total solution in response to well-identified needs and wants of “one” customer. In this instance, the PV precedes the PR and each customer has the latitude to experience a total solution tailored specifically for their situation and distinct requirements. Oftentimes, the virtual experience of the total solution is so effective that the customer can sharply reduce the investment in physical / tangible assets required to realize the application value of the solution. This is a win for both the businesses providing the solutions and the customers acquiring them as the costs of operating in virtual space are much less than with tangible assets. While the conversion of virtual experiences into physical applications will be the mainstay in many transactions, it is trending such that this will be less the case as time goes by. This is significant for businesses and customers everywhere!

These three relationships – one to many; some to some; and many to one – play across a larger continuum of commoditization-to-customization depicted with the arrow in the background. Depending on the capability of a business to influence the juxtaposition of its “point of virtualization” to its “point of realization” determines the guidelines for an appropriate strategy for that business. Those that can adopt more intuitive, intelligent, and integrated information and communication technologies are better prepared to differentiate themselves from competitors by presenting highly customized total solutions in virtual space. Those less willing or able to do so focus directly on going head-to-head with competition in the delivery of singular products and services with a more favorable cost – quality – schedule result in the eyes of customers. An “appropriate strategy” keeps the PV and PR aligned with placement on the commoditization-to-customization continuum. This assures care is taken for the transactions passing through its portal from virtualization to realization, which is the real significance of any thoughtfully considered and well-executed business strategy.

Originally posted to New Media Explorer by Steve Bosserman on Saturday, October 1, 2005 and updated on Monday, October 3, 2005

A Solutions Triptych, Panel I: The Portal

In business, the term “solutions” has a particular meaning. It refers to the results of conversational transactions wherein the needs and wants of a customer are identified and appropriate responses are made through a business (or multiple businesses) that satisfies those needs and wants for which the business is compensated. These appropriate responses are “solutions” in that in the moment they solve the problems of previously unmet needs and wants.

Conversational transactions between customers and business are conducted through a portal that connects “someone” having needs and wants with “something” that constitutes a solution. This concept of a portal is characterized in the diagram below as the overlap between what something and someone are not and what something and someone are. The relationships of solutions to customers are rarely anything to anyone. Instead, they are specific. While it is helpful to know what is not a viable solution and who is not a likely customer, at some point a match between someone and something must happen or the transactions will not be fruitful.

As a result, it is in the best interest of a business to know the needs and wants to which it will respond with solutions. To know them is to know the customer and to know the customer is to know the market. As we all know, businesses whose compensation is less than the cost of providing the solution are not in business for very long barring subsidization. Knowing what a solution costs is critical to business success. Along with this is the need to know what type of solution portfolio best fits a business given its culture.

Needs and wants are met by solutions of different types. For instance, if a person wants to improve the quality of their sound system they can upgrade their speakers with a new set and are satisfied with the difference they hear. In this case they are interested in a component solution. However, a person may want to make an even more substantial improvement in the sound quality by replacing all components with more advanced, integrated alternatives. In this instance, they are more interested in an equipment system solution. Some circumstances lead to an even more comprehensive approach. In building upon this example of a home entertainment system, a person may be designing and building a new home at which point it is no longer just a matter of the equipment system alone, but the layout of the space in which that system will be installed. In other words, their interests move toward a total solution.

Solutions are fractal in that depending upon the starting point, the continuum of component – system – total solution can be indexed along a scale of increasing complexity. Determining where on this complexity scale a company wants to be is critical for its strategy and organization design. As the diagram indicates, the connections through the portal vary in size depending on choice. A tendency toward component solutions places more focus on a portfolio of specific and relatively independent products and services that flow through a narrow, well-traveled pathway in the portal. The trade-off is a higher degree of similarity / commonality with the offerings of competitors; the portfolio is commoditized and competitive environment is head-to-head. A tendency toward total solutions opens the portfolio to include customized packages of integrated products and services. The pipeline between customer and business is enlarged with more opportunities. Attention must be given to the performance of the whole, which invites an entirely different type of challenge. But the pay-off comes in differentiation from competitors, which certainly carries an advantage in many circumstances.

Originally posted to New Media Explorer by Steve Bosserman on Monday, September 26, 2005

A Philosophy of Solutions

There are myriad ways in which we humans understand ourselves and our needs and wants within our experiences of the world around us. Self-awareness coupled with the dissatisfaction resulting from unmet needs and wants motivate us to influence circumstances in an effort to have a more favorable experience—to find a solution. Contentment, if ever achieved, is fleeting. The viability of a solution just found crumbles in the face of curiosity, “antsiness,” or ennui as further needs and wants rush in to renew the cycle. While this predicament may appear to be a routine fueled by frustration, the continual search for solutions is the creative impetus that advances every aspect of human civilization.

Solutions exist at multiple levels. The one most familiar to us, personally, is at the mind level. Despite our immediate circumstances we can always dream about a reality quite different from our current condition. In the realm of the imagination all realities are possible. Even though I may not have the details, the mental world in which my solution is envisioned is different than what I experience in the physical world; and it is preferable. This reality envisioned is a powerful construct, that when acted upon externally has the potential to bring a solution into existence at other levels.

Solutions stated are externalized. Whether verbalized, graphically represented, or physically demonstrated, the act of moving a solution from the mind to the surrounding world externalizes the solution. It becomes an agenda item in a forum outside myself and initiates conversation with others. Those in my family or community or workplace react to it by doing nothing or something, but react they must.

Solutions experienced externally are virtual or material. For instance, I can play soccer on a real field in a real stadium with real teammates and a real opposing team or I can play soccer on a virtual field in a virtual stadium with virtual teammates and a virtual opposing team. In the first case I am required to be somewhere at a specific time with the proper equipment and be prepared to expend a great deal of physical and mental energy for the duration of the game and run considerable risk of getting exhausted or injured. In the second case, I have an avatar who responds as I dictate within a virtual space wherein my teammates and the opposing team are similar representations. The game can start whenever and be played by whoever shows up online or I can make up my own players and have my own game independent of others. Fatigue and injury are still possible. However, eye fatigue from staring at the screen too long and injury to fingers and wrists due to excessive rapid maneuvering of the joystick are of a different nature!

The cost of designing and developing the material solution dictates the use of a virtual solution. When the cost of the material solution is quite high and testing is essential to manage risks, modeling that solution virtually at the outset carries significant value. Buildings, equipment, vehicles, appliances, even construction and manufacturing systems are likely candidates for designing and developing the virtual solution first to prove the concept before converting it into the much more expensive material solution.

Virtual and material solutions are transactional. Once solutions are expressed in the external world by whatever means other people experience those solutions and have conversations about them. Our desire to see our solutions be successful defines needs and wants for information, resources, and authority beyond what we can muster by ourselves to fulfill our solutions in the virtual or material realm. These needs and wants lead us to conduct conversations with others in transactional patterns to gain their understanding of, agreement with, and commitment to or permission for our solution to advance. Many times the world easily accommodates our efforts to advance our solutions and the transactions required to carry them out are minimal. Other times, though, the social and natural systems are perturbed by our solutions such that we are compelled to engage in numerous transactions to move forward with our solutions.

Transactions are economic. I need or want information, resources, or authority that others have and I must negotiate with others to get it. Either they give it to me through some altruistic motivation or we come to an agreement where I get it in exchange for something I give them. The nature and type of transactions I conduct to get what I need and want are directly related to the importance and urgency I have for my solution to be successful. As a result, transactions are governed by social convention, ethical and moral frameworks, conversational skill and savvy, and immediate personal circumstances. Transactions constitute the medium of exchange within an economic system by which solutions are externalized within the political and business arenas.

Originally posted to New Media Explorer by Steve Bosserman on Sunday, September 18, 2005 and updated on Saturday, September 24, 2005

Changing Organizations

An organization is a sustained, focused set of conversations between and among people intended to generate results that are deemed of sufficient value by participants such that the relationships are worth continuing. Since conversations are inherent in human communication, it can be concluded that an organization is defined and held together by the unique communication patterns it manifests. People in conversations establish organizations.

Oftentimes, we have little choice about the organization in which we are a member. In some instances, such as with parents and family, it is a lifelong association over which we have no say about who these people are to us. Other organizations are much more elective and temporary. Regardless of the type of organization or whether our membership is by choice, as long as we are associated with it we continually look for ways to make it function more effectively in meeting our interests. The dilemma becomes one of how to change the organization, but keep it intact.

At the heart of staying together is the concept of “integrity.”” In an earlier post, the notion of personal integrity was introduced as shown in the lower-left part of the graphic in the diagram below. Organizations, as human social constructs, also have integrity – —organizational integrity. Many of the elements, such as those in the authority, fiduciary, and legal arenas, are almost identical with personal integrity. Others are variations on personal integrity themes: “purpose”” is transposed to “mission statement,”” “principles”” to “vision statement”” and “intentions”” to “values statement.”” As indicated by the arrow in the background, people with their individual statements of “personal integrity,”” carry those forward into the organizational integrity of the group to which they are members. Hence, what I endeavor to do that is beyond my capacity as one person, I link with others in an organization so that I can accomplish more.

Organizations stay intact by keeping their organizational integrity unwavering. However, to adapt and respond to different conditions and circumstances organizations have to change. What is it, then, that changes? The answer is—: the formal system. In the diagram below, the triangle of organizational integrity is layered with the hierarchy (authority structure) of a formal system characterized by “rules and regulations” – ”—compliance to externally imposed laws; “policies and procedures” – ”—compliance to internally imposed guidelines; “programs and processes” – ”—what work is done in the organization and how; “funding and resources” – ”—how the work of the organization is supported according to the dictates of wise stewardship; and “roles and relationships” – ”—how authority and responsibility are distributed to assure accountability. This formal system carries with it certain conversations, e.g., staff meetings, program reviews, performance evaluations, etc., that keep its basic functioning intact. However, the formal system is immersed in a larger informal system of networks and webs which fosters a much less constrained set of conversations, usually dealing with possibilities outside the scope of formal system conversations. Members of the organization belong to both systems simultaneously. Since they wear both hats, they draw upon the dynamics of each system depending on the nature of the conversation at hand— – a delicate balancing act to be sure!

There is an infinite variety of manifestations of the formal system structure that can be adopted. It is incumbent on members to keep looking for different ways to change the formal system so the organization is more effective and efficient. However, when members are not clear what the organizational integrity is or they are not aligned with it, their dependency on the formal system deepens. This dependency leads, on the one hand, to fear of change to the formal system over concern that the organization will lose its integrity and destruct, or, on the other hand, unwillingness to change the formal system because its current state is overtly beneficial to certain members. Either way, the result, as depicted in the graphic below, is a “red arrow”” of resistance to change. This is opposed to the green “explosions”” on the edge of the informal system where receptivity to change is a way of life. As we well know, change begins at the periphery of a living system and pushes inward.

One role of a knowledge broker is to promote healthy organization change by convening those conversations that will make a positive difference in the formal system without damaging the integrity of the organization. In a previous posting, the visual of forums, agendas, experimentation, learning, and influence superimposed over the integrity and filters and screens representing two people in conversations gave a sense of the complexity involved. The graphic below builds on this concept as it extends from a couple of people to two organizations. Here again, the approach is to convene conversations, largely in the informal system, yet ask participants to wear their formal system hats long enough to give credence to the applicability of what they experience. Armed with that understanding and agreement, they commit to tell the stories in the formal system conversations that initiate changes in that system. Knowing what conversations to convene and setting up viable forums and agendas in response – —that is the heart of organization design.

Originally posted to New Media Explorer by Steve Bosserman on Sunday, September 11, 2005and updated on Saturday, September 24, 2005