Updates from March, 2014 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Eugene Eric Kim 6:11 pm on March 29, 2014 Permalink |  

    Hi everyone,

    Two quick announcements: First, I’m still on slate for self-organized bootcamp next Monday, April 7 from 4-6pm. The plan is to be in Oakland, but I still need to find a space. More details coming soon.

    Second, I’m doing an informal Google Hangout with my friend, Dave Gray, this coming Wednesday, April 2 at 12:30pm. We’re going to be discussing Learning via Artifacts, and we’ll be using Dave’s tool, Boardthing, to take live notes. Everyone is invited to join in on the note-taking! More details at:

    http://eekim.com/blog/2014/03/learning-via-artifacts-a-conversation-with-dave-gray/

     
    • Avatar photo

      Natalie 3:05 am on April 5, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      I’ve got an all-day training that day, so if I make the bootcamp, I’ll be late. The degree of lateness will influence whether I stop by.

  • Eugene Eric Kim 5:29 pm on March 17, 2014 Permalink |  

    For those of you who don’t follow tech, there’s a huge debacle that blew up this past week around a company called Github and some very poor gender practices. Summary is here:

    http://techcrunch.com/2014/03/16/github-julie-ann-horvath-response/

    The reason I mention it is that some of you have expressed interest in holocracy, and the Github founders had a strong interest in the topic. I roll my eyes whenever I hear this, not because I think holocracy is a bad concept (it’s not, and it’s also a very old one), but because the current groundswell of interest around it feels so naive.

    Two friends from Code for America wrote some excellent blog posts on this matter this past weekend:

    http://cbracy.tumblr.com/post/79876957198/the-github-debacle-why-holacracy-is-bullshit
    http://mike.teczno.com/notes/on-managers.html

    I wrote my own commentary on this several months ago:

    The Real Importance of Networks: Understanding Power

    I didn’t mention holocracy by name, but you might notice my subtle references to it in the piece.

     
  • Rebecca Petzel 4:30 pm on March 17, 2014 Permalink |
    Tags:   

    Hi Bootcampers!

    It was good to see many of you last week. Thanks for letting me join in the fun!

    I have a quick question: @brooking and I are working with a network with some pretty deep trust issues. We know that transparency in decision-making and sharing information are going to be essential in building this trust back up. In the mean-time, we were thinking of introducing the concept of “radical transparency” to help this group take a leap of faith and share more honestly and openly than they might otherwise.

    So here’s the question: Do you all have any resources on “radical transparency” that you like? I know it’s a framework that’s been percolating, but it’s not one I’ve had a need to access up until now. In this case, I think an established framework, almost a pedagogy, will help them take a leap.

    Thanks!!

     
    • Eugene Eric Kim 5:25 pm on March 17, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      What do you mean by “framework”?

      I have a blog post I started outlining several weeks ago on this topic. It’s more a series of anecdotes than a framework, but if it might be useful, I’d be happy to accelerate its publication or share the early thinking from it. I was going to get quotes from three past projects on the impact of the radical transparency: Delta Dialogues, CIA, and the international reproductive health work I did in 2008.

      How else are you addressing the trust issues in your design?

    • Rebecca 7:05 pm on March 17, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      That would be super useful Eugene! Look forward to seeing it.

      By “framework” I mean a tried approach, a structure to help move people through certain work. I don’t really need a “framework” (we have lots of those), but more of a succinct description of the theory, what a radical transparency approach looks like, and why it’s important.

      One of the simple things we’re working on is a decision-making dashboard where we track all the decisions that need to be made, and how they’re being made.

      We’re also investing a lot of time up-front in uncovering motivations so people aren’t making assumptions around what’s in it for others. But this is part of where having some accessible, brief writing on the importance of radical transparency would be useful: time spent on this work is time not spent on other things. It’s different than what they’ve done in other coalitions. They’re bought in mostly, but pointing to the value of slowing down and working transparently in order to go fast later would be helpful.

      Thanks Eugene!

      • Eugene Eric Kim 8:59 pm on March 17, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply

        Okay, I’ll flesh out my thinking and share it with you tomorrow. If I get responses back from folks early enough, it’ll be a Thursday blog post.

        I’ll also share some stuff with you on DRIs (Directly Responsible Individuals), a model used at Apple, Square, and Asana (which I may have shared with you before at some point), and a very rudimentary dashboard that I’ve been using with PostCode (as part of my Code for America experiment).

        The network mindset stuff I’m doing with Garfield may also help you guys with these trust challenges. We put in a tremendous amount of up-front time pre-screening for the right mindsets with our Design Team, and we’ve still run into challenges. Happy to share more if you’d like.

        • Rebecca 9:02 pm on March 17, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply

          Thanks Eugene! And I’d love to hear more about screening for the right mindsets on the design-team! I think screening and criteria are valuable; and we’re trying to figure out how to do those without perpetuating old decision-making / power patterns. I think clarity and transparency around what you’re screening for is a key piece, but it would be great to hear more about your approach to this.

  • Eugene Eric Kim 5:46 am on March 12, 2014 Permalink |  

    I loved yesterday’s bootcamp. I was so happy to see so many of you there, although I missed @anna341bc and @lauren. @marie and @eugenechan, you guys did a great job designing and facilitating, and I liked how you co-facilitated. Would love to see more of that! And @brooking, enjoyed our pair conversations!

    I’ve been sitting on, “I matter,” and the more I think about it, the more I like it as a proxy for thinking about aliveness (with @rapetzel’s objection noted).

    Finally, to whomever took pictures of the action, thank you! Was glad to have them, and I even snuck in on a few. I’m assuming it was @eugenechan, but don’t want to make any assumptions! There aren’t any whiteboard pictures there, as I didn’t get them all. Eugene, feel free to upload them to the Google Drive folder, and I can supplement if I have better versions.

    Thanks again! I’ll email everyone about April and beyond.

     
    • Eugene Chan 6:27 am on March 12, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      Thanks @eekim. It was a treat to get to work with @marie.

      It’s also quite amazing to watch people with high meeting IQs interact in a personal environment. Lots of interplay, some collaborative, some supportive, some dissentive, but all in the spirit of learning. I was fascinated and impressed.

      I thought that checkins would go way longer than it did. I wonder if was because the group wasn’t as familiar with each other that checkins were shorter.

      I did take the pictures as you guessed.

    • Avatar photo

      Natalie 6:45 pm on March 12, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      Thanks, Eugene & Eugene & Marie. Even when I’m being crotchety, I’m still learning. 🙂

  • Eugene Chan 3:15 am on March 11, 2014 Permalink |  

    In the spirit of today’s discussion–being alive can mean doing something that’s very scary and then succeeding!

     
    • Eugene Eric Kim 5:41 am on March 12, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      This was kind of an extraordinary video. Go Pro making the world a better place! Do you know this person?

  • Jessica 7:15 pm on March 9, 2014 Permalink |  

    Hi bootcampers,

    I just came across this new report on e-learning: http://leapofreason.org/e-learning-report/ — it’s all about how learning has changed and should continue to change moving forward, with recommendations on what e-learning providers might need to do differently.

    As some of you may know, I’m considering going back to graduate school (vs. learning by doing or taking supplementary online courses), and thought this report was both well-informed and timely.

    Enjoy,

    Jess

     
    • Eugene Chan 9:20 pm on March 10, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      Interesting and thanks for posting! Would love to do a whole session on how networks have changed learning (not just e-learning). I didn’t have time to read the full report. What are your takeaways and how might it relate to you future work? (Is e-learning the method by which you are thinking of graduate school or a potential area of study for graduate work)?

    • Eugene Chan 9:25 pm on March 10, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      As a parent of a 6th grader, it’s also been fascinating to see how online learning is impacting traditional K-8. I think EEK and I have both referenced Carol Dweck and her research on “growth” vs. “fixed” mindsets for learning. http://mindsetonline.com/

      Also the impact of Khan Academy and the flipped funnel approach to subjects like math and science. Some schools are assigning Khan Academy and other online learning systems as the introduction to a subject and then have the teacher work with students to review their understanding. The idea is that it provides more individualized analysis rather than rote lecturing.

c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel