Date
1 - 8 of 8
Employee-created Company Values #culture #vision
|
Bruce Karney <bkarney@...>
During Raj's presentation today when he talked about the creation of
the CLASS company values, I was reminded of a similar process that took place early in Intuit's history. See http://www.intuit.com/about_intuit/careers/why.jhtml for a brief story of what their 10 values are and how they were developed. As I recall, Intuit was also approximately a 400 person company when they created their values in 1993. Cheers, Bruce Karney Marsh bruce.karney@... |
||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Raj Datta <rajd@...>
Thanks Bruce -- you're right, there do appear to be similarities, including
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
headcount and approach. Also, the comment from Steve Denning was interesting about moving towards managing values. I reflected a bit on that after the call. The way I see it, core values define our belief systems and behavior(e.g. what is right and wrong) which define our mental models (e.g. rationalizing, categorizing, etc.) So, if we wanted to impact behavior and have a shared vision and common understanding, then we must start with core values. If we are a knowledge based organization, then the core values must stress KM. However, core values would state the intent, and putting it on paper would not be enough. To put it into practice, the role of the support structure becomes crucial, including the enabling technology, people (HR) policies, communication, social networks etc. This, overtime, helps us walk the talk so to speak. Communication through Storytelling (e.g. good & bad, compliance and non-compliance) IMHO plays a crucial role in value clarification, particularly in tricky areas like integrity. Mechanisms like 360 degree feedback on core values are opportunities for everyone to reflect upon what the core values mean. Thus overtime, we move from intent into practice. Regards, Raj Datta General Manager, Knowledge Management MindTree Consulting Pvt. Ltd. Office: +91-80-2671-1777 x1603 Mobile: +91-98451-97530 -----Original Message-----
From: sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of Bruce Karney Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 9:59 PM To: sikmleaders@... Subject: [sikmleaders] Employee-created Company Values During Raj's presentation today when he talked about the creation of the CLASS company values, I was reminded of a similar process that took place early in Intuit's history. See http://www.intuit.com/about_intuit/careers/why.jhtml for a brief story of what their 10 values are and how they were developed. As I recall, Intuit was also approximately a 400 person company when they created their values in 1993. Cheers, Bruce Karney Marsh bruce.karney@... Yahoo! Groups Links |
||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
David Snowden <snowded@...>
Well just to be a disruptive element
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
The concept that you go from values, to beliefs to mental models to behaviour is linear, assumes cause and effect relationships and in no way reflects what we now know about how the brain makes decisions. In practice we partially scan data (5% if we really work with it) and scan stored patterns of experience in our long term memory to make a first fit pattern match which we then act on. The patterns come from personal experience (especially failure) and through stories. Values and believes are emergent properties of the interaction between experience and our patterns, and in turn influence which stories get told but there is no linear causality. Dave Snowden Founder, The Cynefin Centre www.cynefin.net On 22 Feb 2006, at 07:00, Raj Datta wrote: Thanks Bruce -- you're right, there do appear to be similarities, including |
||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Raj Datta <rajd@...>
Great disruption Dave -- thanks for pointing this
out. I didn't mean to trivialize things and make them sound linear
and mechanistic, and may have given that impression in the email, now that I
look at it. In the call and in the slides, I did stress the emergent
nature of the behavior that we seek, and am on board with your
thinking.
However, this brings up another interesting question that I
would like to raise. What is the best mechanism for communicating about
emergent phenomena?
Stories, analogies, and metaphors clearly help,
visualization may help. But if your audience is made up of left-brained
rationalists who believe in cause and effect and linear deterministic
relationships (which, let's face it, is dominant) , then how do you explain
emergent phenomena to them. I have had discussions with people where they
have asked whether culture comes first or process or technology in how you
deploy a change program! I have used phrases like "interdependent,
interlinked, inter-related" to describe culture, intellectual capital etc.
But some people don't understand even that. As a change agent or
salesperson, sometimes you have to be able to communicate with the
stakeholders in terms that they understand. And sometimes that has to be
reduced down to cause and effect or inputs and outputs which they may more
easily relate to. But then you're not doing justice to the actual nature
or complexity of the phenomena.
Look at the software development world -- we have managed
it as if it were a set of linear deterministic activities
historically. Recently of course, the Agile Software Development movement
has brought attention to the interdependent collaborative and non-deterministic
nature of that work. But the question still remains on how to communicate
in a rational world about such phenomena -- it is
challenge.
Any thoughts? From: sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of David Snowden Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 10:58 PM To: sikmleaders@... Subject: Re: [sikmleaders] Employee-created Company Values The concept that you go from values, to beliefs to mental models to
behaviour is linear, assumes cause and effect relationships and in no way
reflects what we now know about how the brain makes decisions.
In practice we partially scan data (5% if we really work with it)
and scan stored patterns of experience in our long term memory to make a first
fit pattern match which we then act on.
The patterns come from personal experience (especially failure) and through
stories.
Values and believes are emergent properties of the interaction
between experience and our patterns, and in turn influence which
stories get told but there is no linear causality. Dave Snowden
Founder, The Cynefin Centre
www.cynefin.net On 22 Feb 2006, at 07:00, Raj Datta wrote: Thanks Bruce -- you're right, there do appear to be similarities, including |
||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Steve Denning
Dave
While I would agree about the non-linearity of
relationships involved, I'm less confident about the apparently sharp
distinction you seem to draw between "stored patterns of experience" and
"values", with values being "emergent properties from the interaction of
experience and our stored patterns of experience."
Aren't values also stored patterns of experience, albeit of
a particular kind? Aren't values among the stored patterns of experience that we
scan along with the the rest of the data, so as to make a first fit pattern
match that we act on?
If so, that might facilitate handling Raj's challenge of
explaining to people unfamiliar with the concept of emergence as to what is
going on here. It might also help us avoid falling into the trap of imagining a
sequential process in which we act on data + (value-free) patterns of
experience, with values only coming into the picture somewhat later as an
emergent phenomenon.
Steve Denning
Email: steve@...
Phone: 202 966
9392
Fax: 202 686 0591 |
||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
David Snowden <snowded@...>
interesting point, but I don't see how one can have an experience of a value, values I think arise from multiple interactions between experiences and are influenced strongly by stories (which themselves emerge from experience). As values establish themselves, they become filters through which we store expereince and thus are enforced ......
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Dave Snowden Founder, The Cynefin Centre www.cynefin.net On 25 Feb 2006, at 16:09, Steve Denning wrote:
|
||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
David Snowden <snowded@...>
I think communication through metaphor has great value (and use it). I also think its more valuable than examples. Examples lead to immitation, metaphor to applying a new concept to ones unique situation.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I don't buy the "people think its causal, so explain it in causal terms" - you just perpetuate bad thinking. Better to create a metaphor and engage them in action - the theory can wait until they have the experience to understand it and engaging in intractable or difficult problems is one way to get people to experiment - they know the old ways don't work. Of course some people just never get things, until half the market has already understood them - so if you want to sell to them OK, you would compromise, but as long as their are early adopters around I know where I prefer to work! Software is fascinating in this respect (and I am working with some of the Agile people). Not many people have yet got the concept that these days you don't design an application, you allow the applications to emerge from the interaction of people and objects .... Dave Snowden Founder, The Cynefin Centre www.cynefin.net On 25 Feb 2006, at 08:14, Raj Datta wrote:
|
||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Raj Datta <rajd@...>
Just thought I would share another example of open participative innovation
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
applied to the organization -- this time towards re-visioning. Please see the text of the email that our Chairman sent to all our employees to collaboratively redefine our vision below which gives some background. We already have some interesting idea responses from employees across experience levels, and across geographies. We believe that such thrusts will lead to renewal and agility at the same time. We plan on conducting a similar exercise for our mission statement next. -------------------- Dear MindTree Minds, As you know, when we started the organization, we settled a set of DNA, Mission and Vision statements. After MindTree was born, the CLASS values were added to the above. Among these, the DNA would probably never change because it is what makes us who we are. The Mission Statement also, by its very nature, does not change often. However, it is the Vision of the company, expressed as a set of measurable & time-bound goals, that need revisiting from time to time. When we started the organization, we had defined 5-year Vision for the company for 2005 as: - To achieve $123 million in revenue - To be among the top 10% in our business in terms of profit after taxes & return on investment - To be one of the top 20 globally admired companies in our industry - To give a significant portion of our PAT to support primary education The current Vision for 2007-08 is different from the original 5-year Vision only to the extent of the revenue goal being $ 231 million. Even as all of us are all working together to make the Vision statement a reality, we also need to look at what would be our ambition beyond that timeframe? What kind of goals do we want to establish for ourselves for the year 2010-11? I want you to think about that. All MindTree Minds are invited to participate in creating a new Vision for 2010-11. Based on the collective inputs from all of you, we will articulate the new Vision. This is independent of another longer-term exercise that will be undertaken later to look at the Mission Statement with an even larger horizon. Thus, what we should do right now is to put on our thinking caps and articulate a Vision for 2010-11. The Vision Statement (unlike the Mission Statement) needs to be time bound and measurable. You will notice that the current Vision statement has four distinct elements: - A revenue (top line) goal; - A profitability (Bottom line) goal which also includes a measure for how well we manage our balance sheet; - An aspirational goal to be an "admired" company; - A Vision of giving back to Society which also occurs in our CLASS Values, but defined more precisely here. You should consider whether all four elements that are currently part of the Vision Statement need to stay, do we need to bring in new ones? Do we need to reduce them? What must remain and what should go? In order to facilitate ease of participation, I have entered a request for ideas in Neuron, our recently launched Idea & Innovation Management System. Please use the link below to see the request and then click on the "Add Response" link to send us your response. You may choose to articulate the Vision in its entirety or merely define one element or suggest exclusion of another. https://knowledgenet.mindtree.com/neuron/viewrequests.asp We will keep the link open for receiving responses upto 5.00 pm IST on March 17, 2006. As you know, our CLASS Values were created through a similar, participative exercise. We look forward to your inputs for shaping our Vision. Best wishes, Ashok -----Original Message-----
From: sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of Bruce Karney Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 9:59 PM To: sikmleaders@... Subject: [sikmleaders] Employee-created Company Values During Raj's presentation today when he talked about the creation of the CLASS company values, I was reminded of a similar process that took place early in Intuit's history. See http://www.intuit.com/about_intuit/careers/why.jhtml for a brief story of what their 10 values are and how they were developed. As I recall, Intuit was also approximately a 400 person company when they created their values in 1993. Cheers, Bruce Karney Marsh bruce.karney@... Yahoo! Groups Links |
||||||||||||
|
|