Stoos Network (part 3): Core Idea One wish I had for the gathering in Stoos was to discover a common foundation that could reconcile differences between the many management thinkers, writers and consultants the world has already generated before. We have The Toyota Way, the 14 Points for Management, Radical Management, Management 3.0, Wiki-Management, Beyond Budgeting, Tribal Leadership, Servant Leadership, Elastic Leadership, the Declaration of Interdependence, and many more models, values and principles. I asked the group at Stoos, “Is there something more fundamental?” Is there a management axiom? Value-Creating Networks And so I suggested a late-night session about this topic in the bar of the hotel. I offered the group the suggestion to define organizations as value-generating networks. Learning, Diverse Individuals At 1am in the night we agree we had achieved some convergence, but we also felt we had not finished yet. So we started a relentless analysis of the keywords that were offered. Complexity Made Simple
RIP FedEx Day, Meet [Your idea here] Day Umm, so what's a ShipIt? Anything can be a ShipIt. We see everything from practical to inspiring, simple to insane, technical to non-technical. JIRA Service Desk Andreas, Nick, Mike, Ross, and Scott spent 24 hours hacking together a simpler portal to create JIRA issues. Better bulbs Luke and Jeffy replaced all the hot, energy ineffecient light bulbs in the "phone booth" rooms. Extermination "I hate you IE8, I hate you IE8, I hate you IE8… Oh. DIY video studio Mark, Sam, & Jamey wanted more videos in our blogs & pages. Faster JIRA "Dear Jonathon and Matt, thanks for making my pages load faster. Black ops Ricky, Sonia, and Manesh made something so cool we can't even tell you about it yet. Better brew Jonathon makes awesome homebrew and wants to share it. Infinite quarters Ever dream of having an infinite stack of quarters at the arcade?
Stoos Network (part 2): Stakeholders & Personas "Who is our customer?" This was one of the first questions to pop up during the gathering in Stoos. "Which people are our target audience?” and “Who else is involved?" Or in other words: "Who are the stakeholders in organizational transformation?" Many Stakeholders One of my first contributions during the event was to organize a session about the stakeholders. CEO's, top management (o x)Middle management (oooo xxxx)Support, HR, Legal, Operations (xx)Employees, knowledge workers (oooo xx)Customers, end users (oo)Business schools, teachers (oo xxxx)Students, "new millennials" (oo xx)Shareholders, business owners Startups, entrepreneurs (oo xxxxx)Local/regional communities (o x) Two times in our discussion we used dot voting to see which of these stakeholders we thought were the most important ones to focus on. More Stakeholders I realize this outcome was nothing more than a first draft. This already adds up to 16 groups of stakeholders of organizational transformation. Categories and Personas
Nintendo Asks Atlassian for Some Innovation Help By Sarah Lacy On March 20, 2012 For an enterprise software company Atlassian does some, let’s say, unconventional things. The first time I met Atlassian President Jay Simons he was wearing full drag. Slightly less strange is a tradition called “FedEx days.” One of them lead to a product called Bonfire; which generates more than $1 million a year in annual revenues for Atlassian. Plenty of companies offer bonuses if an engineer comes up with something cool, but Atlassian’s founders believed that impressing your colleagues and challenging yourself is a bigger motivator than a cash prize. It has worked so well that Dan Pink wrote it up in his book Drive, and that prompted some other companies to do their own FedEx days. When I met with Simons a few weeks ago, he was telling me about this. Because I’m nice, I agreed not to write about it until they were ready to announce, which they are tomorrow. It’s clearly a brand win for Atlassian, given the company makes software for developer teams.
Stoos Network (part 1): About Communication I write this in my hotel room after having traveled back from Stoos to Zürich airport. The Stoos Gathering just ended and I’m feeling very tired. I had just 6 hours of sleep in the last 2 nights, and tomorrow I have to get up early, again, to catch my plane to Cleveland, US. My report about the proceedings of the Stoos Gathering will have to wait for a day or two. But there’s one thing I wish to clear up before I tuck in. A number of people have been waiting (in vain) for feedback from the Stoos Gathering over Twitter during the event. Apparently, it wasn’t. The purpose of the Stoos Gathering was to try and reach consensus on how to accelerate management transformation. And so, at the start of the event, we asked ourselves, “What about Twitter?” Then a long discussion started. Some of the participants had non-disclosure agreements with their organizations and/or customers. Personally, I would not have minded more openness to the outside world during the event itself. What did we do wrong?
What it takes to do new things at work, overnight By Polly LaBarre, contributor (TheMIX) -- What leader today doesn't want more innovation? Yet, producing more (of anything) inside an organization generally leads to more process, which smothers individual creativity and all-too-often kills organizational innovation. Innovation isn't about structuring a process to lead to an outcome so much as it's about creating space -- both elbow room, the space to roam free of bureaucratic rules and red tape, and head room, the freedom to see differently, think wildly, and aim higher. The leaders who generate more creative energy and innovation are always wrestling with the question: How do we design in more slack? Those questions are the beating heart of nine-year-old Australian enterprise software company Atlassian. Atlassian is constantly inventing and refining practices to unleash its people. The two pillars of the practice address that tension between opening up space to explore and driving to produce. Open up space Create just enough structure
Stoos Network - Home Atlassian's Big Experiment with Performance Reviews 1. Rip apart the traditional performance review We've replaced the traditional performance review structure with a more lightweight, continuous model. 2. Stop paying individual performance bonuses Instead, we gave everyone a salary bump. 3. The thing with our traditional review was that, despite good intentions, it focused mainly on two sections: the manager rating and the employee's weaknesses. All sections should receive equal attention. 3. We think it's important not to shy away from giving honest performance feedback. - No 'exact rating' We prefer people not to concentrate on the exact rating definitions, but rather on having a good and honest conversation on how they have gone in the past 6 months. - Two Axis In addition to an evaluation of performance/achievements, we've added the scale on 'how often you have stretched yourself'.
The OR Society - Operational Research, at the heart of analytics Ratings Are Out It's almost impossible to talk meaningfully about someone's performance as a whole ("Nicola, I thought you did great last year"). So instead most performance conversations are broken down into chunks & at CSB we call these chunks factors. For example a factor might be a hard performance metric, like sales, or a softer behavior, like teamwork. People typically get a rating on each factor, and there are a million different types of rating scales, which many smart people have put lots of effort into designing. But for the purposes of this coaching idea the actual rating scale is, er... kind of irrelevant. Imagine you have a rating scale from 1 to 10 (like I said it really doesn't matter), you're dealing with a factor of teamwork, and your employee Nicola has rated herself a 5. The best way to get to the absolute core of understanding how Nicola views her contribution to teamwork is not to ask her to explain why she is a 5. Why? Why is this a cool question?
Learn About O.R.