Lidar com as restrições

Ontem de manhã li duas vezes este artigo "Constraints Don’t Have to Be Constraining"

"The goal of the session was for students to hone their entrepre­neurial instincts by trying to identify opportunities, limited by the $5 they had been given. And in fact, they were very entrepreneurial.
...
But which teams made the most in profit? Those that didn’t use the $5 at all.
.
It’s a lesson they are all amazed to learn: Those who come back with the highest profits — one year, a team earned more than $4,000 — are typically the ones who never even use the seed money. The teams that seem to generate the greatest profit are those who look at the resources at their disposal through a completely different lens.
...
“You put me at zero, [and] there is no limit to what I can achieve.”
.
We have a tendency to focus on constraints and to think of them as a kind of adversity. But in fact, constraints can be a form of advantage. When we own our constraints, magical things can happen — and the constraints can become tools to propel us forward.
...
 You see, focusing on the $5 limits the ideas that are possible.
...
Constraints don’t have to be constraining. Those who assumed that they had nothing in start‑up capital did better. They didn’t see the $5 as a crutch, so they focused on the opportunity instead of the con­straint. That freed them up to think about what other assets they did have, and pushed them to look beyond $5 problems to more valuable opportunities. The lesson: If we let others dictate our constraints, then we can’t dictate our own opportunities.
...
Constraints are inevitable, yes. But rather than accepting them, we can discover and pay attention to them. We can recognize their value. In many ways, we need them. When we notice constraints but we don’t let them define our possibilities, we can actually flip them to create an advantage."

Comecemos pelo: “You put me at zero, [and] there is no limit to what I can achieve.”
Há dias ao ler "The Essentials of Theory U: Core Principles and Applications" de Otto Scharmer o autor recorda o dia em que adolescente saiu da escola antes da hora e chegou a tempo de ver o que restava da casa com 350 anos, onde tinha nascido e vivia, a desaparecer num incêndio. Então, o autor recorda este pensamento:

“As I stood there, taking in the heat of the fire and feeling time slow down, I realized how attached I had been to all the things destroyed by the fire. Everything I thought I was had dissolved. Everything? No, perhaps not everything, for I felt that a tiny element of myself still existed. Somebody was still there, watching all this. Who?
At that moment I realized there was another dimension of myself that I hadn’t previously been aware of, a dimension that related to my future possibilities. At that moment, I felt drawn upward, above my physical body, and began watching the scene from that elevated place. I felt my mind quieting and expanding in a moment of unparalleled clarity. I was not the person I had thought I was. My real self was not attached to all the material possessions smoldering inside the ruins. I suddenly knew that I, my true Self, was still alive! It was this “I” that was the Seer. And this Seer was more alive, more awake, more acutely present than the “I” that I had known before. No longer weighed down by the material possessions the fire had just consumed, with everything gone, I was lighter and free, released to encounter the other part of myself, the part that drew me into the future—into my future—into a world waiting for me to bring it into reality.”

Quantas vezes só depois de encostadas à parede, só depois de terem perdido tudo, é que as empresas tentam o que parece absurdo, ou o que vai contra a formatação do mainstream e... resulta?

 E acerca do: "We have a tendency to focus on constraints and to think of them as a kind of adversity." E o que é assumir uma estratégia senão criar uma restrição para nos beneficiar? Como aprendi com Stephen Covey: Não é o que nos acontece que conta. É o que decidimos fazer com o que nos acontece. Adversidade ou oportunidade não é uma característica do que nos aparece no caminho, mas uma classificação que nós atribuímos.

Por fim, o truque principal: "When we notice constraints but we don’t let them define our possibilities, we can actually flip them to create an advantage."

Aprender com o futuro (parte II)

 Parte I.

“Understanding process means to understand the making of our social relationships. If you want to change a stakeholder relationship from, say, dysfunctional to helpful, you cannot just order people to do it. You have to intervene further upstream in the process of social reality creation. You have to change the making of that relationship from one mode to another—for example, from reactive to co-creative.
...
Often in organizations you see CEOs and executives who fail to get that. They think they can create behavioral change just by making speeches and pushing tools onto the organization. Tools are important. But they are also overrated because they are so visible. But what is usually underrated is all the stuff that is invisible to the eye—for example, the less visible elements of a good holding space: intention, attention, and the subtle qualities of deep listening. Building a good container means to build a good holding space for a generative social process.
...
And just as the organic farmer depends completely on the living quality of the soil, social pioneers depend on the living quality of the social field. I define social field as the quality of relationships that give rise to patterns of thinking, conversing, and organizing, which in turn produce practical results.
And just as the farmer cannot “drive” a plant to grow faster, a leader or change maker in an organization or a community cannot force practical results. Instead, attention must be focused on improving the quality of the soil. What is the quality of the social soil? It is the quality of relationships among individuals, teams, and institutions that give rise to collective behavior and practical results.
...
For example: the quality of my listening co-shapes how the conversation unfolds. Or, speaking more generally, the quality of results in any social system is a function of the consciousness from which the people in that system operate. Boiled down to three words, the idea can be expressed as form follows consciousness.
...
Listening is probably the most underrated leadership skill. At the heart of most examples of colossal leadership failures—which are in no short supply—leaders are often unable to connect with and make sense of the “VUCA” world around them; that is, a world defined by volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity.
Listening, however, is not only important to leadership. If you are not a good listener, there is no way that you can develop real mastery in any discipline.
The most consistent feedback we have received from the hundreds of workshops, programs, and innovation journeys we have facilitated is this: Shifting your mode of listening is life-changing. Shifting how you listen, the way you pay attention, sounds like a really small change. But here is the thing: Changing how you listen means that you change how you experience relationships and the world. And if you change that, you change, well, EVERYTHING.”

Ao ler estes trechos vieram-me à memória as imagens que visualizei no Twitter há dias:

In case you missed it, video of the week: Dutch PM checks his bike into a big underground parking place. Attendant (of Kurdish origin) is amazed: “He has to check in and out like a normal person! This is how you run a country. I’m never leaving” pic.twitter.com/49aGdWH2Tx

— Ben Coates (@bencoates1) January 25, 2020

E reli " It is the quality of relationships among individuals, teams, and institutions that give rise to collective behavior and practical results."

Ainda ontem, durante um telefonema, recordei esta estória "Crédito fácil e barato", sem "intention, attention, and the subtle qualities of deep listening" como criar o terreno para uma mudança real?

Trechos retirados de "The Essentials of Theory U: Core Principles and Applications" de Otto Scharmer.

Aprender com o futuro (parte I)

Depois de ter visto os vídeos apresentados em "Generative Listening" fui em busca da bibliografia de Otto Scharmer e fixei-me em dois títulos:

• Theory U: Leading from the Future as It Emerges
• The Essentials of Theory U: Core Principles and Applications

O primeiro título tem tudo a ver com as conversas oxigenadoras... e também com o tema do calçado e do têxtil precisarem de uma nova abordagem, para ultrapassarem um modelo que parece que ficou fora do seu prazo de validade. Daí o "leading from the future as it emerges"... o futuro agir como a causa... o retorno ao bom velho Ortega y Gasset "O meu presente não existe senão graças ao meu futuro".

Entretanto, optei pela leitura do "The Essentials of Theory U: Core Principles and Applications" porque aparece como um resumo das ideias do autor. Ontem de manhã, apesar da chuva, mergulhei numa caminhada e leitura:

“We live in a moment of profound possibility and disruption. A moment that is marked by the dying of an old mindset and logic of organizing. And one that is marked by the rise of a new awareness and way of activating generative social fields. [Moi ici: Mais tarde o autor descreve o significado deste termo] What is dying and disintegrating is a world of Me First, bigger is better, and special interest group-driven decision making that has led us into a state of organized irresponsibility. [Moi ici: Até aqui o bigger is better a levar tareia. A malta que se reúne nos Encontros da Junqueira continua mergulhada no século XX]
What is being born is less clear. It has to do with shifting our consciousness from ego-system to eco-system awareness—an awareness that attends to the well-being of all.  [Moi ici: Tudo acerca dos ecossistemas do negócio e da regra de maximização do bem comum]
...
 [Moi ici: Corro o risco de usar e abusar do exemplo de Zapatero que ainda há dias referi em "O paradoxo dos peritos", mas reparem no trech que se segue] My first insight is quite elemental. There are two different sources of learning: (1) learning by reflecting on the past and (2) learning by sensing and actualizing emerging future possibilities.
.
All traditional organizational learning methods operate with the same learning model: learning by reflecting on past experiences. But then I saw time and again that in real organizations most leaders face challenges that cannot be responded to just by reflecting on the past. Sometimes past experiences are not particularly helpful. Sometimes they are the very obstacles that keep a team from looking at a situation with fresh eyes.
.
In other words, learning from the past is necessary but not sufficient. All disruptive challenges require us to go further. They require us to slow down, stop, sense the bigger driving forces of change, let go of the past and let come the future that wants to emerge.
But what does it take to learn from the emerging future? When I started to ask this question, many people looked at me with a blank stare: “Learning from the future? What are you talking about?” Many told me it was a wrongheaded question.
.
Yet it was that very question that has organized my research journey for more than two decades. What sets us apart as human beings is that we can connect to the emerging future. That is who we are.   We can break the patterns of the past and create new patterns at scale.
...
Let me say this in different words. We have the gift to engage with two very different qualities and streams of time. One of them is a quality of the present moment that is basically an extension of the past. The present moment is shaped by what has been. The second is a quality of the present moment that functions as a gateway to a field of future possibilities. The present moment is shaped by what is wanting to emerge. [Moi ici: Ah! Ortega y Gasset] That quality of time, if connected to, operates from presencing the highest future potential. The word presencing blends “sensing” with “presence.” It means to sense and actualize one’s highest future potential. Whenever we deal with disruption, it is this second stream of time that matters most. Because without that connection we tend to end up as victims rather than co-shapers of disruption.”

Lembram-se de Boyd e da rapidez? Quando não se conhece o futuro, quando se procura aprender com o futuro que está a emergir, a rapidez é fundamental, e as organizações são tanto mais rápidas quanto mais colaborativa for a aprendizagem de todos e por todos. Não chega o líder iluminado.

Continua.