Pixar Studios filmmaker Andrew Stanton gave a good TED talk
about a year ago where he states that one of the key aims of any good
story is that it must make the audience care. "Make me care," he says.
If you research the advice of famous directors . . . To read the rest of the article, click here
Tuesday, January 29, 2013
Sunday, January 27, 2013
Critical Thinking, the Goal of Education
Critical Thinking Rubric
The ability to mentally grasp the existence of circumstances or situations which do not conform with what would normally be expected (i.e. a problem), and then reason through, not only to the whys of how the circumstance came to be (including determining whether or not such whys are pertinent), but how to resolve the situation to as near a normal state as possible, is called critical thinking. Training students to think critically is the ultimate goal of higher education, and perhaps all education, regardless of the designated area of study. The individual who has acquired the skills necessary to think critically will find his or her life enriched and doors opened, both personally and professionally, which would not be accessible otherwise.
Traditionally, critical thinking was a natural off-shoot of biblical study. Those who worked with the Bible with an eye to understanding the truths found therein, wrestled with the whys and hows of application of God’s truth to the real needs in their own and others lives. Unfortunately, the professionalization of the clergy has led to their interpretations becoming dogma with little challenge or critical thinking. A situation which parallels in many respects what had occurred with the Pharisees in Jesus’ day and the Catholic church in the Middle Ages. This blind acceptance of dogma has led to a laxity of mental application and critical thought. In other words, laziness and shallow thinking abound.
The true role of higher education in my mind is to renew an emphasis upon critical thinking which goes beyond the tepid waters of half-hearted faith to find the intersection of God’s light upon man’s path. True critical thinking will enable the individual to find and apply truth in scripture as well as from all of creation. The critical thinker can operate wherever placed because his/her ability to process information has the mental tools to solve problems and find solutions, whether interpreting scripture, solving relationship problems or managing a fortune 500 company.
The actual process of critical thinking can be acquired by most, if not all, who will apply themselves to the basic formula:
Observe/Identify
Interpret/Analyze
Apply/Recommend
These three components are described below.
Observe/Identify
Situationally, this means the ability to grasp the reality of a problem, or at least to recognize the existence of less than ideal circumstances, with an eye to rectifying the situation. This demands an awareness of context since everything whether written, spoken, or existent has a connection to something else. The connections themselves are often clues to the solution, but definitely add meaning to the problem. Basically this step identifies the problem as presented by the symptoms of dysfunction, but doesn't ignore the possibility of "referred" symptoms. Defining the real problem versus the seemingly obvious problem is often the most difficult part of the process.
Some of the questions which can be asked to determine these connections and their relevance to the situation are:
What is the issue? (can you articulate what you perceive the problem to be?)
Who is in charge? (who has the responsibility for the existence of the situation and who has the responsibility for correcting the situation?)
What will happen if the situation is not addressed? or if the person in charge does not act?
What is the history? (very little occurs without a history)
Who are the players? (relationships are the key to life and the connections between people can have a profound effect upon a situation)
What other assumptions need to be considered? (culture, politics, economics, etc.)
Who can I contact for more information/consultation?
Interpret/Analyze
Interpretation/Analysis requires the individual to discern the “real” from the “felt” and the interplay of factors which have bearing on the situation and the possible solutions. Practically, this means to understand how a problem came to be, determine options for the solution and propose ways to have a positive result should it happen again. Scripturally, it means to discover the meaning of a passage from the context, grammar, and historical background which contains truth specific for current reality.
The next step in the process of critical thinking is the ability to take the information which has been observed and interpret or analyze the information to determine:
The real problem
What could be the outcome/results ramifications of the problem upon the relational, institutional, economic, etc., affected parties (i.e. what is the best and worst case scenario if the problem is not resolved).
Whether or not a solution can be offered which will have a positive benefit
What solutions can be offered and what are their relative “cost” (cost is more than just financial, it includes time, energy, resources and relational stress).
Some questions which could be asked to facilitate the analysis include:
Why is this an issue?
What makes this different from before?/What has changed?
What outside forces are involved?
What facts do we have?
What additional information/facts can be deduced from analyzing the facts/data available.
What are the desired results?
What are the "real" issues?
What, if any, are the primary emotional needs NOT being met.
Apply/Recommend
This final step in the process takes all of the above information and determines which of the proposed solutions has the best chance of success in relationship to the cost of the decision. No decision which costs beyond what is willing to be paid, either in actual funds or relational stress, is an option, regardless of its ability to address the problem. A good rule of thumb here is that no solution should be considered unless the one proposing it is willing to share the cost personally in equal or greater measure than the other parties involved.
Once the solution has been settled upon, the implementation of the solution should be carefully considered as timing always plays a role. Solutions which do not culminate in implementation are basically useless. When dealing with scripture, this step is what separates the scholar from the holy man, i.e. head knowledge from heart knowledge. Scripture which is studied and understood, must be applied for God’s power to be unleashed in that individual . . . and the world. Practically, the willingness of an individual to invest in bringing solution is one of the truest signs of leadership. Thus, there is a direct connection between critical thinking skills and leadership.
Example of a real life situation/illustration:
Observe/Identify: I observed that my car was making a flapping noise and pulled strongly to the right as I started driving it. I stopped the car and identified that the right front tire was flat.
Interpret/Analyze: I examined the tire to determine if there were obvious cut marks. I then examined my options: change the tire (do I have a spare and a jack?), call a friend for help (do I remember the phone number and who is available?), call AAA (is my membership up to date?), flag down another driver for help (is this really safe?), leave the car where it is and go on with life (can I afford to do this and will I incur a fine of some kind?).
Apply/Recommend: After looking at my options I decide to change the tire myself. At this point I can sit back and let the decision work its magic (which means I will be waiting forever, or at least until the police come), or I can get to work changing the tire. I also decided it would be a good idea to periodically check the tires for wear and proper inflation.
1
The ability to mentally grasp the existence of circumstances or situations which do not conform with what would normally be expected (i.e. a problem), and then reason through, not only to the whys of how the circumstance came to be (including determining whether or not such whys are pertinent), but how to resolve the situation to as near a normal state as possible, is called critical thinking. Training students to think critically is the ultimate goal of higher education, and perhaps all education, regardless of the designated area of study. The individual who has acquired the skills necessary to think critically will find his or her life enriched and doors opened, both personally and professionally, which would not be accessible otherwise.
Traditionally, critical thinking was a natural off-shoot of biblical study. Those who worked with the Bible with an eye to understanding the truths found therein, wrestled with the whys and hows of application of God’s truth to the real needs in their own and others lives. Unfortunately, the professionalization of the clergy has led to their interpretations becoming dogma with little challenge or critical thinking. A situation which parallels in many respects what had occurred with the Pharisees in Jesus’ day and the Catholic church in the Middle Ages. This blind acceptance of dogma has led to a laxity of mental application and critical thought. In other words, laziness and shallow thinking abound.
The true role of higher education in my mind is to renew an emphasis upon critical thinking which goes beyond the tepid waters of half-hearted faith to find the intersection of God’s light upon man’s path. True critical thinking will enable the individual to find and apply truth in scripture as well as from all of creation. The critical thinker can operate wherever placed because his/her ability to process information has the mental tools to solve problems and find solutions, whether interpreting scripture, solving relationship problems or managing a fortune 500 company.
The actual process of critical thinking can be acquired by most, if not all, who will apply themselves to the basic formula:
Observe/Identify
Interpret/Analyze
Apply/Recommend
These three components are described below.
Observe/Identify
Situationally, this means the ability to grasp the reality of a problem, or at least to recognize the existence of less than ideal circumstances, with an eye to rectifying the situation. This demands an awareness of context since everything whether written, spoken, or existent has a connection to something else. The connections themselves are often clues to the solution, but definitely add meaning to the problem. Basically this step identifies the problem as presented by the symptoms of dysfunction, but doesn't ignore the possibility of "referred" symptoms. Defining the real problem versus the seemingly obvious problem is often the most difficult part of the process.
Some of the questions which can be asked to determine these connections and their relevance to the situation are:
What is the issue? (can you articulate what you perceive the problem to be?)
Who is in charge? (who has the responsibility for the existence of the situation and who has the responsibility for correcting the situation?)
What will happen if the situation is not addressed? or if the person in charge does not act?
What is the history? (very little occurs without a history)
Who are the players? (relationships are the key to life and the connections between people can have a profound effect upon a situation)
What other assumptions need to be considered? (culture, politics, economics, etc.)
Who can I contact for more information/consultation?
Interpret/Analyze
Interpretation/Analysis requires the individual to discern the “real” from the “felt” and the interplay of factors which have bearing on the situation and the possible solutions. Practically, this means to understand how a problem came to be, determine options for the solution and propose ways to have a positive result should it happen again. Scripturally, it means to discover the meaning of a passage from the context, grammar, and historical background which contains truth specific for current reality.
The next step in the process of critical thinking is the ability to take the information which has been observed and interpret or analyze the information to determine:
The real problem
What could be the outcome/results ramifications of the problem upon the relational, institutional, economic, etc., affected parties (i.e. what is the best and worst case scenario if the problem is not resolved).
Whether or not a solution can be offered which will have a positive benefit
What solutions can be offered and what are their relative “cost” (cost is more than just financial, it includes time, energy, resources and relational stress).
Some questions which could be asked to facilitate the analysis include:
Why is this an issue?
What makes this different from before?/What has changed?
What outside forces are involved?
What facts do we have?
What additional information/facts can be deduced from analyzing the facts/data available.
What are the desired results?
What are the "real" issues?
What, if any, are the primary emotional needs NOT being met.
Apply/Recommend
This final step in the process takes all of the above information and determines which of the proposed solutions has the best chance of success in relationship to the cost of the decision. No decision which costs beyond what is willing to be paid, either in actual funds or relational stress, is an option, regardless of its ability to address the problem. A good rule of thumb here is that no solution should be considered unless the one proposing it is willing to share the cost personally in equal or greater measure than the other parties involved.
Once the solution has been settled upon, the implementation of the solution should be carefully considered as timing always plays a role. Solutions which do not culminate in implementation are basically useless. When dealing with scripture, this step is what separates the scholar from the holy man, i.e. head knowledge from heart knowledge. Scripture which is studied and understood, must be applied for God’s power to be unleashed in that individual . . . and the world. Practically, the willingness of an individual to invest in bringing solution is one of the truest signs of leadership. Thus, there is a direct connection between critical thinking skills and leadership.
Example of a real life situation/illustration:
Observe/Identify: I observed that my car was making a flapping noise and pulled strongly to the right as I started driving it. I stopped the car and identified that the right front tire was flat.
Interpret/Analyze: I examined the tire to determine if there were obvious cut marks. I then examined my options: change the tire (do I have a spare and a jack?), call a friend for help (do I remember the phone number and who is available?), call AAA (is my membership up to date?), flag down another driver for help (is this really safe?), leave the car where it is and go on with life (can I afford to do this and will I incur a fine of some kind?).
Apply/Recommend: After looking at my options I decide to change the tire myself. At this point I can sit back and let the decision work its magic (which means I will be waiting forever, or at least until the police come), or I can get to work changing the tire. I also decided it would be a good idea to periodically check the tires for wear and proper inflation.
1
Friday, January 25, 2013
Remember, It Was Once Someone’s Good Idea - reprint
Many, if not most good ideas are not good forever. Over time they lose the luster they once had. They become irrelevant and ineffective.
The universal danger we all face, is that we get so comfortable with what we do that never recognize that moment when it no longer serves the why. So it is good to periodically take a look at why we do what we do. But it is important to remember that they were once good ideas. Someone once fought to get the idea implemented that you are now trying to change.
When we want to change the status quo, we need to
(to read the rest of the article click here)
The universal danger we all face, is that we get so comfortable with what we do that never recognize that moment when it no longer serves the why. So it is good to periodically take a look at why we do what we do. But it is important to remember that they were once good ideas. Someone once fought to get the idea implemented that you are now trying to change.
(to read the rest of the article click here)
Monday, January 21, 2013
Love Works - Review
I just finished Love Works by Joel Manby. I started it shortly after Christmas and have referenced it it an earlier post on this blog. Manby's background as a GM executive and then CEO of Saab North America followed by becoming CEO of Herschend Family Entertainment, the largest family-owned theme park corporation in the U.S. definitely gives credibility to this book. Not to mention his Havard Business School degree.
It is interesting that while the background in GM and the automobile industry obviously strengthened his management skills, it wasn't until he moved to Herschend Family Entertainment that the principles behind Love Works actually became central to his leadership style. Inside the cover there are literally eight pages of recommendations by impressive people for Joel and this book. Similarly, the back cover contains even more praise for Love Works.
The sub-title of the book is: Seven Timeless Principles for Effective Leaders. Those principles are:
- Patient: Have Self-Control in Difficult Situations
- Kind: Show Encourageme3nt and Enthusiasm
- Trusting: Place Confidence in Someone
- Unselfish: Think of Yourself Less
- Truthful: Define Reality Corporately and individually
- Forgiving: Release the Grip of the Grudge
- Dedicated: Stick to Your Values in All Circumstances.
"Love isn't a feeling, but an action, an action by which leaders and entire organizations can experience almost unimaginable success and personal fulfillment." p. 22
"Making someone's day better is contagious and increases the energy, effectiveness, and productivity in any organization." p. 55
"Kindness is about intentionally creating and maintaining the right environment in your organization so that frontline employees can deliver an enthusiastic guest experience." p. 60
"I've come to believe that the definition of CEO needs to be expanded. It also stands for 'chief encouragement officer.'" p. 66
"Trusting the people we work with is crucial to building a climate of positive morale and successful performance. . . . the bottom line is that successful leaders understand and activate trust on a daily basis." p.70
"We think we want efficient organizations, but what we really want is effective organizations." p. 81
"I believe that giving is critical as a leader, regardless of your personal beliefs." p. 93
"For leaders to thrive, they must define the truth of the organization's real role in the marketplace and identify its weaknesses and strengths." p. 112
"Most people don't leave because of poor performance; they leave because the don't feel valued." p.118
"Malacy McCourt quote: 'Resentment is like taking poison and waiting for the other person to die.'" p. 146
"Leading with love is a higher testament to one's leadership acumen than simply taking the well-trodden path toward fear-based, power-hungry management." p. 170
"Never lose an opportunity to bring sunshine into the life of another." p. 176
If you have a strong Christian background, you are probably already doing these things in your life and leadership, so this might serve as a reminder or an encourager. If you are a nominal Christian, you should find solid support for moving these principles from the sideline in your life to center stage. If you are not a Christian, particularly if you do not follow any faith creed, this is probably going to sound soft. Thankfully Joel has included many examples of how these principles have positively impacted the company's bottom line which should help connect the dots.
This is a fairly easy read and I recommend it, especially if you're serious about creating a culture which recognizes the value of employee and customer in a way that produces remarkable returns.
Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Why We Find it Hard to Change Our Behavior
We know every behavior begins with a thought. So if we want to have lasting change, the beginning point has to be our thinking.
Behavioral change is only surface change if we don’t first change the thinking behind those behaviors. And it won’t stick. It will keep coming out in so many ways we won’t be able to keep up with it because we haven’t changed the thinking behind it.
When we look at our behavior we have to understand that there is a thought going on in our heads that is tripping us up. And we have to change that first. Or we’re working on the wrong thing.
The question becomes, “What thoughts do I need to change to make my
behavior change?” New behavior will automatically follow a change in
thinking. One right thought can correct a lot of bad behavior. . . . click here to read the rest of the article
When we look at our behavior we have to understand that there is a thought going on in our heads that is tripping us up. And we have to change that first. Or we’re working on the wrong thing.
Saturday, January 12, 2013
Knee-jerk, or just Jerk??
Joel Manby in Love Works writes: "Recently, Google commissioned their internal human resources team to identify and rate the attributes of their best leaders. They were surprised to find that technical knowledge ranked dead last. Instead, attributes like listening well and letting employees make relevant decisions attracted and kept the best people." (p. 106) A little later he adds, "Most people don't leave because of poor performance; they leave because they don't feel valued." (p. 118)
For a company which prides itself on its technical expertise like Google to discover that the attributes of their most effective leaders, which correlated with keeping and attracting the best people, had nothing to do with their technical knowledge, must have come as quite a surprise. "Instead, attributes like listening well and letting employees make relevant decisions attracted and kept the best people."
While I don't believe Manby's statement in the second quote above has been validated by research, it "feels" right. Feeling like a trusted part of the team goes a long way in enhancing my willingness to stay . . . and to stay fully engaged. I certainly don't want to remove that feeling of trust from a fellow employee.
Yet, I have to confess that I struggle sometimes with balance. My nature is inclined to search for patterns, and data points which interrupt the pattern. Sometimes those data points are positive and will hopefully are indicative of a trend in improved performance. In other cases the data points are evidence of poor performance with the potential effect of worsening. I have in the past been accused of being negative and I think I can trace that back to this recognition of a pattern which is going the wrong way and projecting it to a worse case scenario, and then reacting, perhaps too vigorously, to avoid the, as I see it, looming disaster.
Here's where my struggle with balance comes in. I need to listen better, trust more, and let those responsible make the relevant decisions. But I want to focus on the problematic data points, I want to push for immediate action. So, take a deep breath, and try to balance trust with the right amount of judicious concern, NOT knee-jerk reaction.
For a company which prides itself on its technical expertise like Google to discover that the attributes of their most effective leaders, which correlated with keeping and attracting the best people, had nothing to do with their technical knowledge, must have come as quite a surprise. "Instead, attributes like listening well and letting employees make relevant decisions attracted and kept the best people."
While I don't believe Manby's statement in the second quote above has been validated by research, it "feels" right. Feeling like a trusted part of the team goes a long way in enhancing my willingness to stay . . . and to stay fully engaged. I certainly don't want to remove that feeling of trust from a fellow employee.
Yet, I have to confess that I struggle sometimes with balance. My nature is inclined to search for patterns, and data points which interrupt the pattern. Sometimes those data points are positive and will hopefully are indicative of a trend in improved performance. In other cases the data points are evidence of poor performance with the potential effect of worsening. I have in the past been accused of being negative and I think I can trace that back to this recognition of a pattern which is going the wrong way and projecting it to a worse case scenario, and then reacting, perhaps too vigorously, to avoid the, as I see it, looming disaster.
Here's where my struggle with balance comes in. I need to listen better, trust more, and let those responsible make the relevant decisions. But I want to focus on the problematic data points, I want to push for immediate action. So, take a deep breath, and try to balance trust with the right amount of judicious concern, NOT knee-jerk reaction.
Thursday, January 10, 2013
Picking Your Fights
One of the big mistakes I see new, and unfortunately some older, leaders fall into is in making an issue out of everything. I think this is affected by one's personality to some degree, and I'm pretty sure perfectionists struggle with this more than most. I also think an awareness of the politics surrounding the situation, as well as the ethical and moral factors are also significant. For instance if an issue is violating ethical or moral standards, then to not pick that fight would be wrong. On the other hand, if there is no ethical or moral component to the issue, then the choice whether or not to press the issue, i.e. fight, must be weighed by other factors.
Some will choose to make the issue because of pride, e.g. it was their idea and they will fight for it to the death, even if wrong. Some will chose to press the issue because they feel it will position them for favor or advancement, or they will chose NOT to fight for the same reasons. I mentioned politics earlier and by that I mean the relationship between individuals which enhances or reduces the ability to collaborate AND the other connections which bring value to the individual which may be impacted, positively or negatively, by that relationship and/or collaboration. It goes back to some of my earlier posts about the Greatest Management Principle: If there is intrinsic or extrinsic value for the other person, or someone they care about, then they will be inclined to collaborate, The opposite is also true, no value: no collaboration, or at least a reduced likelihood of collaboration.
Now, here is the thing, not everything is worth a fight, and more often than not, even those things perceived to be ethical or moral issues are personal opinion with no real ethical or moral value. So here are some steps to take when faced with the decision whether or not to make an issue out of something with your coworker, boss, spouse or friend:.
1. Clearly define exactly what you perceive to be the problem.
2. Clearly identify exactly what you would wish the outcome to be and why you feel it should be addressed (here is where the ethical/moral factors would be considered, along with how, and if, it has a personal benefit which may be clouding your judgment).
3. Will the change make any real difference? In what way?
4. How will it affect your working/living relationship with the other individual(s)
5. Weigh the proposed change against question 3 and 4 above and consider whether it is worth the fight.
If you have come to the conclusion it is not worth the fight, then accept the reality and move on. If you are still convinced the issue has to be addressed, now comes the importance of EQ. Knowing how to bring the issue to a head in such a way that all those involved feel heard and respected is far preferable to the "bull in the china shop" method. The individual who refuses to take the time to consider the impact of their choice of words and their effect upon others will quickly alienate the very ones they need to persuade, making for embittered relationships and possible job change or divorce.
The one thing that is NOT acceptable is to just conclude you can't win the fight and grumble and complain. No one wants to be around a grumbler, and honestly grumblers and complainers are like the proverbial bad apple which needs to be ejected from the barrel.
You don't always need to fight (not everything is worth what it might cost in relationships, etc.) and even if you do fight you will not always win. Here again, you will have to choose to accept the reality or if that is not possible, chose to go a different direction, but don't become bitter or wallow in self-pity, grumbling about your situation.
Some will choose to make the issue because of pride, e.g. it was their idea and they will fight for it to the death, even if wrong. Some will chose to press the issue because they feel it will position them for favor or advancement, or they will chose NOT to fight for the same reasons. I mentioned politics earlier and by that I mean the relationship between individuals which enhances or reduces the ability to collaborate AND the other connections which bring value to the individual which may be impacted, positively or negatively, by that relationship and/or collaboration. It goes back to some of my earlier posts about the Greatest Management Principle: If there is intrinsic or extrinsic value for the other person, or someone they care about, then they will be inclined to collaborate, The opposite is also true, no value: no collaboration, or at least a reduced likelihood of collaboration.
Now, here is the thing, not everything is worth a fight, and more often than not, even those things perceived to be ethical or moral issues are personal opinion with no real ethical or moral value. So here are some steps to take when faced with the decision whether or not to make an issue out of something with your coworker, boss, spouse or friend:.
1. Clearly define exactly what you perceive to be the problem.
2. Clearly identify exactly what you would wish the outcome to be and why you feel it should be addressed (here is where the ethical/moral factors would be considered, along with how, and if, it has a personal benefit which may be clouding your judgment).
3. Will the change make any real difference? In what way?
4. How will it affect your working/living relationship with the other individual(s)
5. Weigh the proposed change against question 3 and 4 above and consider whether it is worth the fight.
If you have come to the conclusion it is not worth the fight, then accept the reality and move on. If you are still convinced the issue has to be addressed, now comes the importance of EQ. Knowing how to bring the issue to a head in such a way that all those involved feel heard and respected is far preferable to the "bull in the china shop" method. The individual who refuses to take the time to consider the impact of their choice of words and their effect upon others will quickly alienate the very ones they need to persuade, making for embittered relationships and possible job change or divorce.
The one thing that is NOT acceptable is to just conclude you can't win the fight and grumble and complain. No one wants to be around a grumbler, and honestly grumblers and complainers are like the proverbial bad apple which needs to be ejected from the barrel.
You don't always need to fight (not everything is worth what it might cost in relationships, etc.) and even if you do fight you will not always win. Here again, you will have to choose to accept the reality or if that is not possible, chose to go a different direction, but don't become bitter or wallow in self-pity, grumbling about your situation.
Thursday, January 03, 2013
Reading Love Works, by Joel Manby (thank you Richard for the Christmas gift).Although I'm not far into the book yet I've run across an interesting story told by the author of a time when he was in high school, attending a sports banquet. While going into the event and walking with his mother he passed some freshmen who greeted him with some admiration as he was a senior and would be receiving awards for his accomplishments. He passed off their comments and practically ignored them as he walked and talked with his mother. After they were gone, according to Manby, his mother stopped him and spoke to him sharply: "'You listen to me, young man,' she said, 'Every time you walk past someone you have an opportunity to make their day better or make their day worse. And I don't think you made their day better! Those boys clearly look up to you, and because of who you are in this school, you have an opportunity - no, an obligation - to try to make their day better, and certainly not to make it worse.'" (p. 53-54)
As I read that I felt the truth of this resonate within me. No matter who we are or where we are, we have an opportunity to make someone's day better or worse. It might take a smile or a word, but it is an obligation we must not shirk. This is my goal: to make sure I make someone's life better - EVERY DAY! It is an opportunity I welcome and an obligation I choose to embrace. It is not all about me . . . but about Him shining through me. I encourage you to join me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)