Breakthrough Ideas

“Breakthrough Ideas for 2008” (February 2008, Harvard Business Review”

This is a series of very short articles. The introduction describes it as ideas for which “Changes that appear to be sudden usually have been taking shape for years”. The articles “capture 20 transformations at single points in their development”. (I discuss only those that appear somewhat applicable to my current position.)

“Peer to Peer Networks” (Stan Stalnaker)

Summarizes the effect of recent developments:

-Ability of individuals to not only “consume” information, but also create it (blogs, etc.) This obviously has a major impact on information/misinformation on City programs and the impact of and on the City. Perhaps the lack of accountability and accuracy of informaiton is a major problem.

-The rise of payment with “personal currencies”, especially to make payments for “knowledge services”. This would have a major impact in a number of areas (money supply nationally, sales tax locally etc.).

-“Micro production” of energy. He cites one example of the possibility of a person with a hybrid car having the capacity to generate excess energy and selling it on the grid for micropayments.

All interesting, although the information angle is the only one which appears to be widespread.

“Task, not Time: Profile of a Gen Y Job” (Tamara J. Erickson)

More of the “how younger workers are different” discussion.

The author notes that younger workers (born since 1980) are “defined more by task than time.” She notes they “want to be compensated for what they produce”.

The author proceeds with a discussion (that appears to be age biased) how younger workers can work so much faster than older workers (she obviously hasn’t observed what I have observed). I don’t quite know why the author expressed this article in terms of age-it appears to apply or not apply to all ages without any qualifications.

The article is a summary of ideas I have observed in other articles, and I feel they are good observations, such as:

-The cycle of paying for “tasks” or “time” is moving from paying for “time” to paying for “tasks”, or what has been done.

-Accomplishing a task is more important than merely measuring the time it takes to do it. (of course there is the question of measurement).

-There is no relationship with accomplishing a task and the time. Many people (me included) work “anytime and anywhere”.

She notes that workgroups who have successfully adopted task based rather than time based measurement systems have more loyal employees and experience less turnover.

Some recommendations for going to a “task, not time” work model:

-Articulate the results you expect, and measure accountability by getting the job done

-Making physical attendance in the office, including at meetings, optional. (Sure, has the author every actually worked? I disagree 100% with this suggestion.)

-Guage performance on the work performed. (sounds familiar)

-Use technology to allow employees to work from anywhere

-Support changes by creating drop in centers, team spaces and open work areas.

I wonder how she would recommend the “task” of a Police Officer? When she calls for help, who would respond?

In addition to the ageism expressed by the author, many of the ideas simply won’t work in many careers. The ideas have basically been around for years and are hardly new. It is valuable to note that, for many positions, time is not a factor and the task based accountability would work, but it is hardly applicable to many jobs.

Most of the product of government is services, so this is not applicable in many positions.

A Doctor’s Rx for CEO Decision Makers (Jerome Groopman, MD)

Several thoughts I drew from this on avoiding “mistakes”:

-Anchoring error-Assuming the first information is the correct decision

-Availability error-Recalling past mistakes and applying them to the case at hand

-Attribution error-Relying on a stereotype to explain a cause

Dr. Groopman recommends that executives use of analysis to find errors similar to what Doctors use to determine the causes of errors. I agree this could be a valuable exercise.

Understanding Opposition (Michael Sheehan)

The author discusses how private business is used to “competition”, but not “opposition”, whereas government is used to “opposition”.

As an example, he cites the “Coke” and “Pepsi” marketing strategy to get their product in schools. This is competition. They did not anticipate “opposition”-the drive to totally ban such drinks as unhealthy.

Some approaches he recommends when encountering “opposition” are:

1. Step back and access the dynamics. Who is involved? Why are they involved? What is the sides ultimate goal? How can you help them meet that goal?

2. Co-opt the issue.

Adopt the goal and look at alternative ways to meet that goal.

3. Redefine the issue: Help people see the issue on your terms.

4. Deflection Strategy: Define a new cause/problem etc. and propose how to resolve that issue.

This was an interesting article to me. The general them of “competition” as a private enterprise practice and “opposition” as the environment for government makes sense, both in theory and in my experience.

“Sick Transit Gloria” (Mark Kuznicki, Eli Singer, and Jay Goldman)

This article concerns the efforts of the Toronto Transit Commission to communicate with the public through on-line sources. In an event called “Transit Camp” using a program called “Barcamp”, this was discussion through an open-source problem-solving framework.

This article provides some idea of how technology can expedite communication.

-“The Gamer Disposition” (John Seely Brown and Douglas Thomas)

The authors speculate that persons who play multiplayer games develop the following positive characteristics:

1. They are bottom line oriented. They are used to being measured by the games and expect and like evaluation.

2. They understand the power of diversity. They learn that one person can’t do it all.

3. They thrive on change.

4. They see learning as fun. Learning is rewarded.

5. They constantly need to find a better way to resolve a problem.

I’m not sure how seriously to take this. Somehow I feel it is self-serving and somewhat surface oriented.