![Courtesy: Different Views
Pugh, KM 2.0 Conversation 17
[C]ourtesy to me includes seeking first to understand before making
myself understood.
Retired Navy, Consultant
Further, I showed courtesy in my discussion posts, yet I cannot say it
was engaging. The most courteous comments from my group
acknowledged another’s influence on his or her thinking.
Social Media Lead](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/pughcollaborationandfourdiscussiondisciplinesforsikm171017-171016134224/75/Pugh-collaboration-and-four-discussion-disciplines-for-sikm-171017-17-2048.jpg)
Uploaded byKatrina (Kate) Pugh
Pugh collaboration and four discussion disciplines for sikm 171017
The document discusses the importance of collaboration in organizations, highlighting research that indicates a significant gap between the value placed on teamwork and the structures that support it. It introduces four discussion disciplines—integrity, courtesy, inclusion, and translation—that can enhance collaboration and promote psychological safety within teams. The conclusion emphasizes that effective collaboration requires shared goals, structure, and intentional practices that foster engagement and innovation among members.
More Related Content
Similar to Pugh collaboration and four discussion disciplines for sikm 171017
Pugh collaboration and four discussion disciplines for sikm 171017
- 1. SIKM Leaders: Collaborationand the Four Discussion Disciplines Katrina Pugh President, AlignConsulting Academic Director, Columbia University, Information & Knowledge Strategy October 17, 2017
- 2. Agenda • What theresearch says about collaboration • Structure, shared purpose, and psychological safety • One approach to building psychological safety: Four Discussion Disciplines • Discussion 2Pugh Collab & Four Discussion Disciplines
- 3. What does the researchsay about collaboration? 3 Pugh Collab & Four Discussion Disciplines
- 4. Gallop poll: Employeeengagement Participation in decisions, sharing in the rewards. Developing abilities and putting them to productive use. “Palpable sense of community,” fairness, and reciprocity. Gallop, 2013 quoted by Otoole, James, “U.S. Employees Are Disengaged—and Mismanaged,” Strategy + Business http://www.strategy-business.com/blog/US-Employees-Are-Disengaged-and-Mismanaged?gko=af848 Employees want: 4 Pugh Collab & Four Discussion Disciplines
- 5. Yet, team investmentis rare… Majority of organizations value team collaboration. Yet less than 1 in 3 organizations actually provide the proper framework for it. *www.esi-intl.ca/teamcollaborationstudy ESI Research: 5Pugh Collab & Four Discussion Disciplines
- 6. We must bringour whole selves Pugh Collab & Four Discussion Disciplines 6 Comply Be inter- dependent Be ready to change Coordination CollaborationCooperation Source: Columbia University Information and Knowledge Strategy Master’s Program, 2016
- 7. 7 Collaboration dynamic Pugh, KM2.0 Conversation 7 Get (Demonstrate measurable value) Feel (Build confidence, trust, get “networked”) Act (e.g., Transfer knowledge) Management Strategy Source: Katrina Pugh, “Sustainable Communities: 10 CSFs for Keeping the Faith,” IBM Syn.chrono.us blog, 2010 http://synch.rono.us/social/blog.nsf/dx/07192010091946AMSLIHMX.htm 7
- 8. Research: Popular misperceptions aboutteams 1. Harmony helps. 2. It's good to mix it up. 3. Bigger is better (magic 6). 4. Face-to-face interaction is passé. 5. It all depends on the leader. 6. Teamwork is magical. Hackman, Richard, “Six common misperceptions about teams” HBR Blog http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2011/06/six_common_misperceptions_abou.html. Pugh Collab & Four Discussion Disciplines 8 8Pugh Collab & Four Discussion Disciplines
- 9. Research: most-productive teamshave: More face to face More 1:1s (individual members with members) More equitable meeting contribution Eye contact; see body movement http://hbr.org/2012/04/the-new-science-of-building-great-teams (HBR on his research). Also http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2010/profile-pentland-1101.html Pugh Collab & Four Discussion Disciplines 9
- 10. Research: Source The fivekeys to a successful Google Team by Julie Rozovsky, Analyst, Google People Operations, Nov 17, 2015 http://rework.withgoogle.com Pugh Collab & Four Discussion Disciplines 12 “Quest for the perfect team” 10
- 11. Organization and individuals get benefits: •Efficiency • Identity • Job satisfaction • Innovation Across units: Dispersed, diverse resources come together for: • Efficiency • Quality • Power • Innovation What do we have to do? What does success look like? Across Orgs./CoP: Targeted outcomes: • Coordination • Translation/adaptation of ideas • Support members’ work • Learning/Innovation ✓Strategic moves (e.g., shared goals, leaders modeling the way) ✓Structural moves (e.g., tools, roles, facilitation) ✓Tactical moves (e.g., metrics, incentives) ✓Shared goals (unification) ✓Structure (Rewards cross-unit collabs) ✓Relationships/ Nimble networks ✓Shared goals ✓Structure (e.g., charter, metrics, roles) ✓Individual learning ✓Care Within a Team Summary: Collab models Pugh Collab & Four Discussion Disciplines 11
- 12. “Design-in” psychological safety PughCollab & Four Discussion Disciplines 12
- 13. Online discussions What cango wrong? What can go right? Pugh Collab & Four Discussion Disciplines Focus Honesty Diversity of ideas Sense-making Commitment Distraction Avoidance Misunderstanding Group-think Resentment
- 14. Four Discussion Disciplines Inclusion Translation Integrity Courtesy PughCollab & Four Discussion Disciplines 14
- 15. Integrity – Whatare examples of Integrity? Integrity • Use your true voice • Research views • Ask questions that propel Anti-Integrity • Parrot others • Make vague statements • Don’t ask questions, but make statements disguised as questions Four Discussion Disciplines Pugh Collab & Four Discussion Disciplines 15 Integrity
- 16. Courtesy – Whatare examples of Courtesy? Courtesy • Respect others, with appreciation, gratitude (“thank you!”) • Respect the forum. Keep the discussion in the forum Anti-Courtesy • Let a nice deed (e.g., shared knowledge) go un-thanked. • Take the conversation “offline,” e.g., into email. Four Discussion Disciplines 16 Courtesy Pugh Collab & Four Discussion Disciplines
- 17. Courtesy: Different Views Pugh,KM 2.0 Conversation 17 [C]ourtesy to me includes seeking first to understand before making myself understood. Retired Navy, Consultant Further, I showed courtesy in my discussion posts, yet I cannot say it was engaging. The most courteous comments from my group acknowledged another’s influence on his or her thinking. Social Media Lead
- 18. Inclusion – Whatare examples of Inclusion? Inclusion • Broaden the perspective (“This could also be called X.”) • Explain terms, and don’t use acronyms • Call others in (“@Jimmy, your view?”) Anti-Inclusion • Be exclusive • Use jargon Four Discussion Disciplines 18 Inclusion Pugh Collab & Four Discussion Disciplines
- 19. Inclusion: Different views Pugh,KM 2.0 Conversation 19 When I was not translating, I tended to restrict my inclusion to a single person, which hijacks the conversation and excludes others. Going forward, I will be more inclusive to the entire group. Author, Project Mgr
- 20. Translation – Whatare examples of Translation? Translation • Summarize/use insights generated (“We started here and ended there.”) • Help others with summarizations. Anti-Translation • Leave the forum when you “get the answer,” without recap. • Comment without acknowledging what you are responding to. Four Discussion Disciplines 20 Translation Pugh Collab & Four Discussion Disciplines
- 21. Translation: Different Views Pugh,KM 2.0 Conversation 21 Translation is the most difficult discipline to exercise. It required that I pull back from my thoughts and ideas, and away from advocacy, to succinctly represent other’s views. I tried to build bridges between similar and diverse ideas. Analytics Mgr, Education Sector Translating is not just a condensed recap; meeting minutes are definitely not in vogue. Instead it should weave a narrative of the conversation and open the door for further discussion. Author, Project Mgr
- 22. Four Discussion Disciplines: Whichones do you need to work on? Inclusion Translation Integrity Courtesy Pugh Collab & Four Discussion Disciplines 22
- 23. Students self-assess onfour discussion disciplines 15 17 23 25 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Translation Inclusion Courtesy integrity Self Assessed Good Performance 26 26 19 17 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Translation Inclusion Courtesy integrity Self-Assessed Poor Performance 23 Pugh Collab & Four Discussion Disciplines
- 24. ”...Before knowing aboutthe four disciplines, I thought those phrases were just buzzwords…now I'm honing those skills on purpose instead of being on autopilot.” Large Health Network Project Mgr. 24Pugh Collab & Four Discussion Disciplines
- 25. 2013: Columbia/Motorola Research:4 Discussion disciplines drive innovation Skifstad and Pugh, “Beyond netiquette: Discussion discipline drives innovation” (In Smarter Innovation, Ark Group, 2014). Discussion discipline Description 1. Integrity Use true voice, research views, Ask questions that propel 2. Courtesy Respect others and forum. 3. Inclusion Broaden the perspective. Explain terms, call others in. 4. Translation Summarize/use insights generated, and help others with summarizations. Benefit to Collaboration Primarily tonal; builds community and social capital. Primarily content- related; drives innovation. 25Four Discussion DisciplinesPugh, KM 2.0 Conversation 25
- 26. We’ve come along way, baby… Pugh Collab & Four Discussion Disciplines 26 1990s Organizational Learning 2000s Networked organization 2010s Collaborative ecosystem Rob Cross University of Virginia Peter Senge MIT Example thought- leader: Charlene Li Altimeter Group 2016 Conversational Firms Catherine Turco MIT Sloan School
- 27. Conclusions • We arewired to collaborate • Most of our organizations (and schools) don’t teach collaboration, and misconceptions abound. • Companies like Google and Facebook are investing. • In successful collaborations shared goals, structure and psychological safety are common denominators. • Each discussion contributes to psychological safety. 27 Pugh Collab & Four Discussion Disciplines
- 28. Discussion and Reflection 28 PughCollab & Four Discussion Disciplines
- 29. Kate Pugh, ColumbiaUniversity katepugh@alum.mit.edu www.sps.columbia.edu/ikns www.alignconsultinginc.com Twitter: katrinapugh • KM and the Internet of Things (KMWorld, 2016, with Ralph Poole) • Smarter Innovation (Ark Group) • Designing Effective Knowledge Networks (MIT Sloan Management Review) • Sharing Hidden Know-How (Wiley/Jossey-Bass) 29 Pugh Collab & Four Discussion Disciplines