Drawing a new map appendix and refs
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Drawing a new map appendix and refs






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds


Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Drawing a new map appendix and refs Drawing a new map appendix and refs Document Transcript

  • 1 APPENDIX A Snowden’s classification of the environment Simple environment Repeating patterns and consistent events Clear cause-and-effect relationships evident to everyone; the right answer exists Known knowns Fact-based management Complicated environment Expert diagnosis required Cause-and-effect relationships discoverable but not immediately evident to everyone, more than one right answer possible Known unknowns Fact-based management Complex environment Flux and unpredictability No right answers, emergent instructive patterns Unknown unknowns Many competing ideas A need for creative and innovative approaches Pattern-based leadership
  • 2 Chaotic environment High turbulence No clear cause-and-effect relationship, so no point in looking for the right answer Unknowables Many decisions to make and no time to think High tension Pattern-based leadership
  • 3 APPENDIX B The Differences between Debate and Dialogue 34) Debate–Oppositional: Two sides oppose each other and attempt to prove each other wrong Dialogue–Collaborative: Two or more sides work together toward a common understanding Debate – Winning is the goal Dialogue – Finding common ground is the goal Debate – Listening to the other side in order to find flaws and to counter arguments Dialogue – One listens to the other side in order to understand, find meaning and reach agreement Debate – Affirms a participant’s own point of view Dialogue – Possibility of enlarging and changing a participant’s point of view Debate – Defends assumptions as truth Dialogue – Reveals assumptions for re-evaluation Debate – Causes a critique of the other position Dialogue – Causes introspection on one’s own position Debate – Defends one’s own position as the best solution and excludes other solutions
  • 4 Dialogue – Opens the possibility of reaching a better solution than any of the original solutions Debate – Creates a closed-minded attitude; a determination to be right Dialogue – Creates an open-minded attitude; openness to being wrong and an openness to change Debate – One submits one’s best thinking and defends it against challenge to show that it is right Dialogue – One submits one’s best thinking, knowing that other people’s reflections will help improve rather than destroy it Debate – Calls for investing wholeheartedly in one’s beliefs Dialogue – Calls for temporarily suspending one’s beliefs Debate – One searches for glaring differences Dialogue – One searches for basic agreements Debate – One searches for flaws and weaknesses in the other position Dialogue – One searches for strength in the other positions Debate – Involves a countering of the other position without focussing on the feeling or relationship and often belittles or depreciates the other person Dialogue – Involves a real concern for the other person and seeks to not alienate or offend Debate – Assumes that there is a right answer and that someone has it
  • 5 Dialogue – Assumes that many people have pieces of the answer and that together they can put them into a workable solution What Does Dialogue Look Like?34) We can easily determine when dialogue is under way. The signs are as follows: The conversation is filled with laughter Everybody gets involved. There is a sense of excitement Views different from your own becomes exciting instead of annoying People are listening more than talking People are eager to add to what others have said At the end of the process the understanding reached is greater than that which any of the participants on their own could have reached. How to move a conversation from debate/discussion to dialogue Often conversations will move towards debate, an area where positions harden and minds start to close. The quickest way to move the conversation back to debate is by asking questions. These questions need to be aimed directly at what the other person has said.
  • 6 REFERENCES 1) Ackoff, Russell L. (2006). Why few organizations adopt systems thinking. Systems Research and Behavioral Science. 23, 705-708. 2) Strategic Learning: A leadership process for creating and implementing breakthrough strategies, pdf published on public Website. 3) Senge, Peter M. (2010). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organisation (Century Business) Random House UK: Kindle edition. 4) Beer, M., Voelpel, S.C., Leibold, M. and Tekie, E. B. (2005). Strategic Management as Organisational Learning: Developing Fit and Alignment through a Disciplined Process. In Long Range Planning. 38, 445-465. 5) Argyris, C. (2010). Organizational Traps: Leadership, Culture, Organizational Design. Oxford: OUP: Kindle edition. 6) Pink, D.H. (2009). Drive. New York: Riverhead Books 7) Johnson, H. T. (2008). Relevance Regained. New York: Simon & Schuster, Inc. Kindle edition. 8) Walton, Mary (1986). The Deming Management Method. Perigree Books. 9) Horwath, R. (2009). Deep Dive. Greenleaf Book Group LLC: Kindle edition. 10) Snowden, D.J. and Boone, M. E. (2007). A Leader’s Framework for Decision Making. Harvard Business Review, November. 11) Scott, A. Edinburgh Business School MBA Module: Strategic Planning. Module 1, page 13. 12) de Geus, A. (2002). The Living Company. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. 13) Ward, Kate (2012-05-06). Mental Models: The Key to Making Reality-Based Decisions (HRDQ Skills Development) HRDQ. Kindle Edition 14) Deming, W. E. (1986). Out of the Crises. Michigan: MIT Press 15) Schragenheim, E. and Dettmer, H.W. (2008). Manufacturing at Warp Speed. CRC Press. 16) Sloan, Julia (2006). Learning to Think Strategically. Kindle edition. 17) Keating, T. “An interview with Thomas Keating by Mary Nurrie Stearns.”
  • 7 18) Morris, D. (2009). The Human Zoo. London: Random House: Kindle edition. 19) Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. London: Penguin: Kindle edition. 20) Sterman, J.D. Learning in and about Complex Systems. Reflections, 1 (3) 24-51. 21) Argyris, C. (2010). Organizational Traps: Leadership, Culture, Organizational Design. Oxford: OUP: Kindle edition. 22) Kuhn, T.S. (1996). The Structure of Scientific Solutions. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. 23) Brown, V. A., Harris, J.A., Russell, JY (2010), Tackling Wicked Problems. Earthscan. 24) Renvoise, P and Morin, C (2007), Neoromarketing. Thomas Nelson. 25) Taylor, J. B. (2009). My Stroke of Insight. Hodder: Kindle edition. 26) Kroeger, O. Thuesen, J.M. Rutledge, H. (2002) Type Talk at Work. Dell Publishing. 27) Mintzberg, H. and Waters, J.A. (1985). On strategies, deliberate and emergent. Strategic Management Journal. 6, Jul–Sep, 257-272. 28) Brown, J. and Isaacs, D. (2005). The World Café: Shaping Our Futures Through Conversations That Matter. World Café Community: Berrett-Koehler Publishers: Kindle edition. 29) Conkin, J. (2006). Dialogue Mapping: Building shared understanding of wicked problems. New York: John Wiley and Sons. 30) Lang, L. (2010) Mafia Offers: Dealing with a Market Constraint. The Theory of Constraints Handbook. Section V, 22. New York: McGraw-Hill. 31) Elliott, J. (2006). Requisite Organization: A total system for effective managerial organization and managerial leadership for the 21st century. Carson Hall and Co. 32) Drucker, P.F. (2008). The Essential Drucker. First Collins Business Essentials. Harper Collins Publishers: New York. 33) Forrester J.W. (1971). Counterintuitive Behavior of Social Systems. Technology Review, Vol 73 (3).
  • 8 34) Flavin-McDonald, C. and McCoy, M.L. (1997). Facing the Challenge of Racism and Race Relations. Democratic Dialogue and Action for Stronger Communities, Topsfield Foundation. .