Acronym: Comments

Comment on "A Day for Happy Accidents"

Wed, 08 Feb 2012 13:17:46 -0500

A great post and a great idea - one that nearly any organization could not only afford to implement, but considering the potential benefits should consider implementing!

- Tahira Endean CMP

Comment on "A Day for Happy Accidents"

Wed, 08 Feb 2012 08:14:01 -0500

I really love the idea of using a "Serendipity Day" as an opportunity to engage with members. What about a requirement that a staff person must co-develop an idea with a member on that day?

- Eric Lanke

Comment on "What does it take to be an innovator?"

Mon, 06 Feb 2012 11:54:24 -0500

Whenever I advocate the "baby steps" approach to innovation, I usually get challenged by voices who think the need for innovation in associations is so great, that thinking about baby steps amounts to little more than whistling past the graveyard.

I disagree. To me it depends on what you're taking baby steps with. Making minor changes to outdated processes is likely never to move the needle, but if we can find ways to make minor changes with regard to how we approach problems, or how we engage members, or where decisions get made, then we might be able to ramp baby steps up into innovative change.

- Eric Lanke

Comment on "Quick clicks: Two-by-two edition"

Mon, 30 Jan 2012 09:40:37 -0500

Thanks for including me and my post and for acknowledging CMAD! And as ever for making keeping up with the many association blogs so easy--who needs Google reader when there's Quick Clicks?

- Maggie McGary

Comment on "Quick clicks: Two-by-two edition"

Sat, 28 Jan 2012 04:15:43 -0500

Thanks for including me ... and for titling the post in such a way to make me think of Two by Two, one of the best songs from the Broadway hit, The Book of Mormon: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tCSRhhVO3A

- Jeffrey Cufaude

Comment on "Are We Suffering From Teamwork Fatigue?"

Wed, 25 Jan 2012 17:19:42 -0500

It doesn't have to be either/or. Sometimes collaborative processes, and sharing in real time, are best and other times they aren't.

In one association, I asked for Board member feedback on some suggested planning options, and they thought I did that because I didn't know which option was best.

Well, I could have made a good argument for any of the options. I wanted to know what they thought before I proceeded any further.

Be sure your audience is prepared for this type of idea sharing.

- Anonymous

Comment on "Are We Suffering From Teamwork Fatigue?"

Wed, 25 Jan 2012 14:26:11 -0500

Picking up on Jeffrey's idea, maybe the goal should be more to share mind space than to share physical space? Organizations (mostly larger for-profits that I'm aware of) are experimenting with things like Yammer and Cisco's Quad to allow idea sharing and true collaborative work (which, in my mind, is VASTLY different than forcing 20 people to sit around a conference table together for 2 hours).

- Elizabeth Engel

Comment on "Are We Suffering From Teamwork Fatigue?"

Wed, 25 Jan 2012 10:04:00 -0500

I have a host of problems with Cain's rambling essay in the NYT that IMHO tried to take on too much in one piece. I'm hoping her book will be better.

I think one principle that gets to your question Mark is making it a common part of the culture that individuals share works in progress (in real-time) and ideas and hunches they are pursuing. This would support Steven Johnson's assertion (Where Good Ideas Come From) that colliding hunches and ideas are often how innovation occurs.

In that sense, it becomes a bit less about the furniture in the office and more about the mindset to make public more regularly (think Johari's window) what you're working on and ideas you are exploring. Doing so enables others to react, share ideas and resources, build on your ideas, and connect with you and your work. It could be as simple as posting an idea in the break room and inviting others for feedback. Or having the FB equivalent of a work status update in an internal social network that spawns the same types of comments and connections we see in FB or LinkedIn.

So while the office furniture and configurations is most definitely one tactic for facilitating collaborative conversations, it by no means is the only way, nor is it sufficient in and of itself.

- Jeffrey Cufaude

Comment on "The Fiction Fix"

Sat, 21 Jan 2012 17:13:30 -0500

Interesting post from a literary agent who asserts women are the primary readers of fiction ( as well as books overall), and that men mostly read genre fiction:

http://andyrossagency.wordpress.com/2012/01/19/battle-of-the-literary-fiction-sexes/

- Jeffrey Cufaude

Comment on "The Fiction Fix"

Thu, 19 Jan 2012 10:20:08 -0500

Elizabeth and Amanda, thanks (belatedly) for your thoughts. I agree that novels are a way into critical thinking, and part of that might have to do with the fact that novels (at their best) can provide more immersive ways to think about the world than business books. I'm not knocking those: You can pull a handful of great insights from a business book. But novels are in the business of worldbuilding (to pull a term from the world of science fiction), and in that way they can be ways to think about how organizations are structured. Fiction questions can be business questions: How do all the parts fit together? What's driving the conflict?

- Mark Athitakis

Comment on "The Fiction Fix"

Fri, 13 Jan 2012 12:00:52 -0500

After reading the Kreamer post and Athitakis's post above, I find the business case for reading novels to be reasonable. Beyond storytelling, Kreamer reinforces the power of fictional characters to reveal unique insights and emotions. Unfortunately, today's business or association executive often has a short supply of empathy (note recent occupy movements); thus, novels can be sources for empathy development. Even Middle Passage (which I have not read) probably taps those core emotions that make us human. Emotions and empathy for those around us can form strong organizational threads. Lack thereof can weaken the business or association bonds.

- Amanda Batson

Comment on "The Fiction Fix"

Fri, 13 Jan 2012 10:44:59 -0500

I think this is analogous to a liberal arts education, which doesn't teach you a particular trade or skill, but does teach you how to think. I'm pretty sure the time I spend reading a TC Boyle or Jane Smiley novel is FAR better invested than putting that same time towards reading 99.8% of the business books out there, which are often so much trite, obvious, poorly written crap.

- Elizabeth Engel

Comment on "Reading between the lines on conflict and inclusion"

Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:33:46 -0500

Thanks David and Jamie. I agree on all points regarding consensus. It doesn't equate to unanimity, and it should be founded on shared understanding of all important information and views. Coincidentally, Mark Golden wrote an excellent blog post this week on the topic of consensus that is also worth a read: "Consensus is not a dirty word."

Another part of Engle's research that he writes about in the feature article (again, sorry that it's not available online) is about the extremely limited amount of time that most association boards have to meet and discuss issues in person. Often, the board simply doesn't have the time necessary for engaging in the type of healthy debate that builds shared understanding and consensus, and so that work has to happen in focused committees or task forces in order for the board to make its decisions.

It may also be important to note that Engle's research studied associations as they are, and it recommended practices for decision making that will fit within the realities that associations face, such as limited time and strong feelings of personal ownership among volunteer leaders. Decision making in an ideal environment might look a little different.

- Joe Rominiecki

Comment on "Reading between the lines on conflict and inclusion"

Wed, 11 Jan 2012 16:59:27 -0500

I want to read the whole article before I weigh in fully, but I will mention my favorite definition of "consensus" from Michael Roberto, author of "Why Great Leaders Don't Take Yes For an Answer." Consensus is NOT about agreement. Consensus is the combination of (a) a high level of shared understanding, and (b) a high level of commitment. Shared understanding is not always about total agreement, and that's really where conflict can be productive--in facilitating a much deeper shared understanding. I don't agree with your conclusion, but I really understand why you hold that view. I know why we disagree and you understand my viewpoint fully too. And we can commit to X actions moving forward. That's consensus.

- Jamie Notter

Comment on "When the Problem You Solve Is the Problem You Have"

Tue, 10 Jan 2012 16:44:32 -0500

This is an interesting post. It makes me think of a local women's advocacy organization offers great programs and services for all kinds of people in need in my community. They say that their mission is twofold: to empower women by getting them on corporate boards and to eliminate discrimination in every form. Unfortunately, they don't allow men on their board of directors and to me, that's the ultimate hypocrisy, for two reasons. One, it is the very discrimination their own mission is fighting against, and two, if you look at who has the voting power on corporate boards in the world, not just the United States, it is men. It doesn't mean they're bad or good, it's just it is what it is. So if you want to empower women and eliminate discrimination, you have to start with your own organization. Sometimes we get too insular at our organizations and need to seek outside perspectives to keep fresh.

- Annie Gallagher

Comment on "Reading between the lines on conflict and inclusion"

Mon, 09 Jan 2012 16:26:20 -0500

We should stop thinking of conflict as something bad. And we should not fantasize about a healthy discussion always leading EVERYBODY to support the position of the majority.

Dissenting speech is often representative of the diverse attitudes of associations and it forces discussions to include many points of view.

Just because a committee approves something doesn't mean that every Board member has to vote for it. And those who vote "no," or speak in opposition, should not be dismissed as having "personal issues."

Striving for "consensus" often stifles minority opinion.

- David M. Patt, CAE

Comment on "Reading between the lines on conflict and inclusion"

Mon, 09 Jan 2012 11:43:28 -0500

Thanks Elizabeth. I think you've summed it up even better than I could. You're exactly right, that healthy conflict leads to better decisions, when it's embraced and facilitated in the right way. Researchers call healthy conflict "cognitive conflict" and the personal, political kind "affective conflict," and Engle gets deeper into those differences in his feature article. His findings showed that the timing and environment in which conflict is sought out is vital, and that the committee or taskforce level is most effective for letting healthy conflict over a decision play out, at least in the association context. Trying to do it all at the board level, in the cases he studied and surveys he conducted, seemed to more often lead to problems and affective conflict.

- Joe Rominiecki

Comment on "Reading between the lines on conflict and inclusion"

Mon, 09 Jan 2012 10:20:38 -0500

I believe most diversity & inclusion research indicates that expanding the pool of decision makers produces *more* conflict in the process of making the decision, but it's productive conflict that ultimately produces better decisions. It seems like Engle's research would indicate that the conflict is going to come regardless, but that deferring it to after the decision is made is just going to result in unproductive conflict (sniping and hurt feelings), rather than improving the decision itself.

- Elizabeth Engel

Comment on "In denial about technology"

Mon, 09 Jan 2012 08:56:58 -0500

Thanks Dave and Wes for your follow-up thoughts. It definitely gives me a more nuanced perspective on the balance between customer-service quality and back-end integration. Ideally, the latter would improve the former, but a line has to be drawn somewhere if that back-end work hurts progress. I suppose the toughest part is knowing where that line stands.

- Joe Rominiecki

Comment on "Quick clicks: My favorite blog posts on association management from 2011"

Mon, 09 Jan 2012 08:51:37 -0500

Hi all- Just wanted to follow up and say thanks for the kind words. Glad you enjoyed the year-end round-up of blog posts. Keep up the great work in 2012!

- Joe Rominiecki