Is this the beginning of a backlash against self-awareness?
December 26, 2006 by Mary Wynne-Wynter · 3 Comments
NYT guest columnist Orlando Patterson, a Harvard professor of sociology states:
Authenticity now dominates our way of viewing ourselves and our relationships, with baleful consequences. Within sensitive individuals it breeds doubt; between people it promotes distrust; within groups it enhances group-think in the endless quest to be one with the group’s true soul; and between groups it is the inner source of identity politics.
The author writes of a “cult of authenticity” that provides an excuse for poor leadership and a weak response to bigotry and racism. He is much more concerned with the less ambiguous sincerity, civility and what he calls “Shakespeare’s looking glass self” which are woefully lacking in interactions and relationships.
I think he makes some excellent points, particularly about how the norms of sincerity and civility have served society for centuries. I know I miss them.
But although our individual and collective egos are resisting it, the world has changed, the old boundaries are gone and we can’t go back. The more, and the faster things change, people will look for things to identify with, and even call that self-awareness. I don’t think its surprising that cult-speak is emerging, but its important to discern that from true self-awareness, and to do so without judgment for the stages we all go through in our desire to be better human beings.
Part 2: From mindmapping to clarifying statements to change steps
December 10, 2006 by Mary Wynne-Wynter · Comments Off
Bloggers are increasingly sharing “how-to’s” with concise and focused posts in a Ten Steps kind of format. I find that a mind map will do the same for me but its personalized and integral, making it more valuable than a generic how-to.
I’m more likely to make changes in my work direction if I’m clear about all the problems, decisions and information that I process in the course of a week. A mind map helps me synthesize, clarify and prioritize without using a linear, left-brain approach to taking action. An integral approach to mind mapping makes the entire process more fun and effective. It helps me “see” that all the things that impact me during the week are not as disparate as they seem. Patterns and synchronicity become apparent the more I play around with the mind map.
A few key words lead to a few key clarifying and action statements that set things up and focus me for the upcoming week. These are the four clarifying statements and action steps from this weeks mind map:
1. If I feel anxious and tense about my work (or any part of my life direction), its because my knowledge that I’m relying upon is largely untrue, meaning its “that time again” to clean-out the internal clutter of false assumptions and self-judgment. Cleaning out gives me space for re-creating my personal story. Periodic re-invention is core to my being current, creative and original.
2. I work best in the digital world by trusting my instincts and discernment and focusing my efforts on creativity, simplicity and quality. Online, new models are constantly being introduced and praised as the latest and greatest new thing, but I’ve learned that there’s a tradeoff in time and energy for getting involved, for example, in social networks. SoLopreneurs have great freedom, but do need to manage time and brainwidth; so don’t keep taking more on. Stick to the prioties.
3. When I feel overwhelmed and unfocused, I can look to the cosmos for a perspective and alignment shift.
4. I feel less helpless about the suffering in the world, and more empowered to change it, if I take time every day to meditate from a place of compassion.
Part I: Benefits of right brain and mindmapping for creative professionals
December 9, 2006 by Mary Wynne-Wynter · Comments Off
I’m committed to making my change blog valuable with both content and daily updates but sometimes get impossibly stuck about getting it done. I can fluctuate between feeling like I have nothing to say, and feeling like I have too much to say. That can have a paralyzing effect.
Mind mapping helps me review my week from an integral perspective, taking the pressure and effort out of "choosing". I approach it this way: there are no accidents, only synchronicity, so have fun with it and see what comes up.
This past week, I’d been thinking a lot about social networking, so I thought I’d join zaadz. Its a nice site but joining started to feel stressful - more steps to take, duplication of content, and the opportunity cost of belonging.
I went through my news feeds for an inspiring topic, and came across some stunningly sad news that Ken Wilber is quite ill and has been suffering a lot this past year (with grace and grit, no doubt). His teachings and presence have been huge for me for twenty years.
I listened to the Voice of Knowledge audiobook and watched Goodnight, We Love You - The Life and Legend of Phyllis Diller (2004). These wildly different sources greatly inspired me in similar ways.
Although I live in the city and probably won’t see anything, I resolved to to go outside early tomorrow morning for the planetary alignment. I even checked Free Will Astrology for my weekly horoscope, which was surprising. And, I watched the Friday night news review and analysis TV shows..hoping for a ray of hope from the Iraq study, but getting the opposite.
So overall, although I was slowly recovering from a bad respiratory infection which had left me uncharacteristically weak and vulnerable, I had a great deal to work with but could not get clear about what to blog.
To get out of my head and unstuck, I mind mapped what strongly strongly affected me during the week. I relaxed, stopped pushing myself and let my right-brain find the connections and the synchronicity in the week’s events. It looks like this (click to enlarge):
As I suspected, the value was in the connections, but my analytical left-brain could not see it or make sense of it. The mind map not only clarified but also led to simple actions that I can take (Part II).
I don’t get “digg” - does that make me a dork?
December 6, 2006 by Mary Wynne-Wynter · Comments Off
Maybe its me. I have trouble seeing the value of a user-generated news site (”Digg is all about user powered content”). What does that mean? Ok..you get the title and excerpt of the news (or the blog, or the blog of the news of the rumor….), but they don’t always accurately represent the content that the title/excerpt is linked to. Its like getting hooked and duped when you click through.
I don’t see much value browsing the comments - users calling each other wrong or insulting each other over their disagreements. Some do provide an analytical or thoughtful POV, but you have to wade through mostly one-line comments making me feel oddly voyeuristic.
The goal seems to be to get to the top of the list. Top story (by vote). Top digger(s) (by numbers of submissions and comments). Supposedly, quality of content is determined by the community voting process. I don’t really see how that can work. The fact that an article has been digged to the top means nothing to me. What am I missing?
Maybe its a generational, or cultural difference. I feel like I’m wired differently and that’s why I can’t see the value of digg in terms of shared knowledge. I admire the model, the technology, the potential. I instinctively understand that digg could signify a massive shift just by the sheer numbers of people wanting to belong.
Update: 12/7/06
So, I went to digg again and it was a different experience. There were a number of stories, and comments, that I found interesting. Since my news reader/blog tool is really slow these days, maybe I’ll try digg.
Also, I came across this from the smart co-authors of Citizen Marketers and the Church of the Customer Blog. It helped me understand the motivation which is largely about belonging.
Question: What inspires people to create digital content?
Answer: We think there are three reasons: The first is that the people who helped build sites like Wikipedia, TiVo Community, or Mini2 aren’t part of mainstream culture. They’re what we call the “1 Percenters,” the people who live at the edges and are different than from 99 percent of the world. Our research for the book led us to create the 1% Rule, which states that about 1 percent of a site’s total number of visitors will create content for it. The 1 Percenters flout cultural conventions. Americans love rebels, therefore the 1 Percenters often become the influencers of American culture.
The second reason: Their work is a hobby. Hobbies are fun, certainly, but hobbies can be viewed at a deeper level as an extension and reflection of one’s identity. Hobbyism grants one the permission to consider their work as recreation while subconsciously it works as ideological re-creation. It replicates the skills of the workplace and adds value that may often be lacking from it. Their content is their production.
The third reason is the sense of community. We’re not talking cities but more like extremely large families that scale. It’s easy for other hobbyists to find one another. The human need to bond with something is strong, even if it’s with a commercial entity.
So maybe digg’s long-term strategy is to provide a way to easily mine the digg content for knowledge and insight - a potential gold mine for advertisers wanting to reach the market(s) represented by the 1%. Funny..part of me wants to sign up and add digg to my blog..because its the thing to do.
Rhode Island and Providence: a model of transformation through merging business and creativity
December 5, 2006 by Mary Wynne-Wynter · Comments Off
I attended an interesting panel tonight put on by The Arts & Business Council of Rhode Island about how businesses can use creativity for competitive advantage. Points compiled from my notes include:
- To meet the challenge of impending work-force shortage and increased outsourcing of any skills that can be automated, large corporations are now considering graduates with art and liberal art educations…thinking of them as ‘performers’.
- Artistic directors base their long-term creative success on the following criteria: a model and culture based on 100% collaboration, sharing, compensation equality and curiosity about the unknown.
- U.S. traditional ‘nuts and bolts’ companies are facing not only a massive loss of knowledge as an aging workforce retires, but also a loss of creativity that was largely unlocked because the conditions and norms for creativity were not in place.
- There’s a gap (a chasm!) between understanding the need for creativity in the business world and an understanding about how to teach it, support it, and incorporate into the corporate culture and social norms.
- Discipline and practice are often forgotten cornerstones of successful creative people, projects and organizations.
My friend Joan who attended thinks Providence is a city on the verge of being an urban change model and that Rhode Island’s history provides a kind of karmic attraction for radical thinkers and artists.
Providence is a renaissance city. Its success is largely based on its commitment to merge business and the arts. If you can, spend some time there and see first-hand the most recent results of a ten-year project and vision culminating in the Avenue of the Arts, Renaissance Providence Hotel and Veterans Memorial Auditorium. Here’s a photo before/after showing what can be accomplished with creativity and change leadership.
Tonight, when RI School of Design President, Roger Mandle opened the panel by talking about Dan Pink’s book, I was pleasantly surprised and encouraged. He brought up a challenge that I’ve been thinking about: in order to apply creativity in the real and practical world of business, what is a framework for bringing together the left-brain analytical with the right-brain creative/intuitive?
I’m looking forward to Creative Intelligence, Part II of the series which focuses on the education aspect. I’m hoping to get insights about how business leaders assess and improve their Creative IQ.
My comments about Gladwell’s thoughts on racism, Michael Richards and Mel Gibson
December 4, 2006 by Mary Wynne-Wynter · Comments Off
Thanks to Malcolm Gladwell for trying to make sense of the recent ugliness by suggesting three criteria for defining racists: content, intention and convictions.
I would collapse conviction and intention and name the resulting criteria: belief. This assumes that intention=belief=identity.
My 3rd criteria would be desire: is the racist belief what the person wants to believe and if not, what would the person rather believe.
I think the subconscious reason (or purpose) for lashing out, and using hurtful words (content), represents our individual and collective anger rooted in fear of change and denial that we have choice in our beliefs.
From this perspective, it seems to me that both Michael Richards and Mel Gibson (as well as the black comedians and rappers) are painfully stuck in contradiction between holding on to old, worn-out identity (including racist beliefs about themselves and others) and taking radical responsibility for becoming their desired, better version of themselves (a desire which they almost desperately try to express).
Focusing on blame, judgment, semantics and celebrity obsession seems to be our collectively unconscious way to resist change and avoid deep understanding of the weaknesses we all share and our compassionate natures that we avoid and deny.
Hopefully, these incidents will provide some catalyst for individual and collective change because the more we hurl insults, bullets and bombs, the more apparent it becomes that our wounds are largely self-inflicted.
Tom Peters asks: is it possible to get rid of the traditional “organizational chart”?
December 3, 2006 by Mary Wynne-Wynter · Comments Off
I always recoiled from org charts when I was an employee. The more I embraced being a generalist, the less I "fit". Translate: I ended up on the bottom, or alone.
So making the RedShift org. chart was fun. I’m a business of one so some could say my org chart doesn’t matter. But I look at it often. It helps me speak clearly and simply about my business.
I guess I’d call it a "blob" but perhaps I’ll make a zig-zag structure, (like Peters suggests) if I’m so inspired. It reminds me of why creative freedom is in my top 3 rewards of going SoLo.
If you have a non-traditional, non-heirarchical org. chart you’d like to share, please comment.
(click to enlarge)