remote collaboration - the video version

This 8 minute video provides insight into the virtual collaboration methodology that is evolving from Ilabs F2F experience. It is worth watching the progression - and how Jay positions the process. This links to Jay's previous posts below, and provides some structure to what Ilabs would provide in a remote setting. Link direct to Youtube for a larger version which is necessary to see the details of Jay's presentation.

A Virtual Collaborative Design Process

Based on these inputs, here is a possible model for a Virtual Collaboration Process.

1. Assemble a Core Team
Instead of gathering 50 or 100 or more participants for a multi-day session, we will start by assembling a Core Team of decision-makers. This might be 10-20 people, and should include some diversity.

2. Define Objectives and Outputs
The Core Team will work with us to define their objectives for this collaborative process and the output they want to receive at the end of the project. We will also define with this group the diverse perspectives that we want to explore through this process (stakeholders, time frames, models of solutions, etc.)

3. Distributed Model-Building
The Core Team will then distribute model-building assignments to small teams and individuals throughout the organization (and beyond). These teams will be asked to spend a small amount of time to build a model, document their work and send their outputs (models) back to the Core Team. This activity could be assigned to existing project teams or other groups. They could be asked by top management to spend an hour on this task during a regularly-scheduled meeting. We can engage a very large population with very little disruption to normal operations.

4. Processing the Models
The Core Team will then have to explore the models that have been created and use them in some way. The Core team would then send out the next round of assignments to the same or different teams throughout the organization. The outputs from these teams is again returned to the Core Team for processing.

This process can engage a huge population, but the primary transformation, insights and decision-making will happen in the Core Team. They are the only group that sees all of the divergent models being created. They are the only group exploring the ramifications of these different models. The Core Team will need to get together periodically during this process, but much of their work can be handled remotely as well. This will significantly decrease the client's cost for travel, lodging, etc. compared to large face-to-face meetings while at the same time increasing the breadth of participation and the depth of the exploration of divergent perspectives.

This process looks very different than a traditional face-to-face collaborative experience. But it uses the same core principles to achieve superior results through different tools and methods.

Conceiving of "Virtual Collaboration"

There are two possible approaches for exploring "virtual collaboration". The first is to add digital tools to existing processes or to recreate face-to-face experiences digitally. This seems to be the approach of most "collaborative technology" providers -- they want to create digital tools that make it seem like "you're in the same room" with people in other parts of the world. As facilitators of collaborative design, we know that most face to face meetings are highly unstructured and unproductive. Why would anyone want to perpetuate those experiences online in the first place?

The second approach to virtualization is to explore the core principles that makes a face-to-face process effective, and then to apply those core principles to a new, digital environment. The resulting process would leverage the strengths of the new medium rather than faithfully replicating the original face-to-face experience.

So what are the core principles of our face-to-face collaborative design process? What is it that we really do?

Approach to Facilitation and Design
First, there is a rather large universe of collaboration processes. Some processes involve a high facilitator presence (controlling the participants from the front of the room), and some involve a low facilitator presence. Some processes are designed in great detail in advance, and some processes allow the design to emerge through the experience. Plotted on a matrix, these two variable define four quadrants of collaboration.

Templates: Workshops
Most training and workshops fall into this quadrant with high facilitator presence and lots of design in advance. The agenda is established before the meeting and the facilitator runs the whole show.

Coaching: Doyle and Strauss
The traditional facilitation model involves the facilitator as a coach for the group. The group determines the agenda at the beginning of the meeting, and the facilitator focuses on managing the behavior of the participants (ensuring everyone's voice is heard, etc.)

Self-Organizing: Open Space
In this quadrant, there is no design and very little facilitator involvement. The group determines what it wants to do and how it will accomplish it. This is the realm of Open Space Technology.

Design-Intensive: Future Search, DesignShops, etc.
This is the high-design, low-facilitation quadrant where we have historically played and developed our expertise. The design is structured in great detail in advance, but the assignments facilitate the group's work. The facilitator plays a very light and occasional role in the process.

It is my belief that the core of the collaborative methodology that we use ("Collaborative Sessions", "DesignShops", etc.) is model-building. We ask participants to build models of a solution from a wide variety of perspectives, over and over again throughout our face-to-face sessions. An individual assignment asks the participants to build a model of a solution from their own vantage point. A "metaphor" activity asks participants to build a model of a solution based on a different system (a living system, for example, or another kind of lens). A "take-away" activity asks participants to build a model of a solution that does not include a component that is normally viewed as essential. They build models from the perspectives of different stakeholders. They build models of solutions in different time frames. They build models of solutions as if they were a competitor or a brand new start-up. Each of these models highlights new aspects of a final, workable solution. Our expertise is in identifying the right perspectives for building models and then sequencing those perspectives to explore new ideas and then converge on an excellent and innovative solution.

The Anatomy of a Model-Building Activity
Our collaborative sessions are a series of these model-building activities. Each activity is made up of several components. The assignment provides the context, process and instructions for the activity. The team defines the individuals working on the model. The template is the form for the team's final output -- a list, a graph, a flowchart, a diagram, etc. We may provide the team with some resources -- tools, information, materials, etc. Finally, the team does its work in some environment. These five elements combine into the experience of the activity, and the activity produces an ouput - some kind of model.

Types of Activities
There are a variety of different types of modeling activities that we can assign to a team. Orientation activities familiarize participants with the context of their work -- the objectives, the market, the landscape, etc. Exploration activities engage participants in learning about new perspectives or new systems. Build activities ask participants to create solutions. Testing activities ask participants to evaluate one or more possible solutions. Incubation activities get participants to think about other things for awhile to allow the problems to simmer. Exchange activities trade a model for some form of value -- a project plan, for example, might be exchanged for resources to fund that project. Again, our expertise is in identifying which types of activities are appropriate for a group and in what sequence.

So if we assume that the core of our face-to-face collaborative design process is "iterative model-building", then how can we create a virtual process to accomplish the same objectives? It may be valuable to learn from other successful processes for distributed, asynchronous change. Appreciative Inquiry is a successful change model that involves mostly one-on-one interviews between people throughout an organization. The process for creating "Implications Wheels" can engage small teams throughout an organization in a one-hour model-building activity that serves as very valuable input into a core team of decision-makers.

Next, I will present a model for a Virtual Collaborative Design Process

The Retiring Baby Boomers

In most of the developed nations there is a large of number of people in the Baby Boom generation who are getting ready to retire from the workplace. This will have a significant impact on the fiscal health of these countries.

78 million Americans are in the Baby Boom generation, and they have just begun to retire. Spending on retirement and medical benefits for them is about 7% of US economic output today. It will increase to 13% by year 2030.

In the graph above, the bulge in the middle represents the 78 million Baby Boomers, and because there are a lot more of them in the generations that follow, when they retire there will be fewer workers active in the work force to cover the cost of retiree health care and pensions.

Federal Reserve Chairmen Ben Bernanke refers to this as a ‘vicious cycle’ that will result in rising government deficits and interest rates. Since the cost of health care for older persons is often much higher than for other age groups, the financial burden will be significant.

As in Japan, this is potentially a significant source of inter-generational conflict about social priorities and government spending. It will have a large impact on government policy in taxation, health care, immigration , and in all the financial services industries.

•••

This blog post is number six in a series on key trends for innovators.

The Robot Divide

When people receive care from robots, what emotions will develop in these relationships? Will people come to love their robots, as they love dogs and cats and horses? Will they love them as people love spouses and children?

David Levy recently published a book entitled "Love + Sex with Robots," in which he predicts that sex and marriage between humans and robots will eventually become common.

So how close will we get to science fiction's depictions? Will Data (from Star Trek) actually exist one day?

Today we talk about the "digital divide," the haves and have-nots when it comes to computers. When will we start talking about the "robot divide"?

•••

This blog post is number five in a series on key trends for innovators.

Mzinga : Enterprise Social Media & Learning Solutions for Your Business

Mzinga : Enterprise Social Media & Learning Solutions for Your Business

Washington, DC the rise of network intelligence

Washington, DC

The Robot Market

As Japan's population declines, there are fewer and fewer workers available to perform service jobs. One response is emerging from the Japanese technology sector: Robots, to fill the many jobs that be needed in the service sector, particularly caring for the elderly.

This shows how issues in one area affect others. In this context, robots are a technological response to a demographics issue, although there are of course other reasons why robots are being developed.

Taken from the opposite viewpoint, demographics presents a potentially-significant new market opportunity for robot manufacturers.

Toyota, for one, believes that service robots will be one of its most significant core businesses. For example, Japanese researchers are developing a robot that can spoon-feed the elderly, bathe them, help them carry groceries, or carry them over uneven terrain.

•••

This is blog post number four in a series on key trends for innovators.

Japan's Declining Population

In 59 countries around the world, the birth rate has slipped below the replacement level, which means that in these countries the population is actually declining.

Japan is perhaps the most extreme example, as shown above. There the birth rate is about 1.3 children per couple, which is far below the level needed to maintain the population. (2.1 is the replacement rate.)

Unless Japan opens its doors to foreign immigrants, which it has historically resisted, then it the population will probably continue to decline, and this is likely to lead to inter-generational conflict as society must choose to allocate resources to various population groups.

An example of inter-generational conflict in the US occurs in local school districts that must raise their own funds through local taxation. In districts where a significant proportion of the population is retired people, funding for schools is often lower because the older people vote against taxes for education. (The children, of course, do not have the right to vote, so they are under-represented.)

In Japan, the declining population also has significant economic impacts elsewhere. For example, as consumer markets shrink, the profits that Japanese companies can earn in their home market declines, forcing them to go overseas.

There are a lot of business questions to ask here, and also sociology questions, such as, Why don't Japanese people have more children?

•••

This blog post is number three in a series on key trends for innovators.

Tobacco Kills 1 Billion in 21st Century

The UN's World Health Organization estimates that during the course of the 21st century, tobacco will kill 500 million people who are alive today, and another 500 million yet to be born. It called on all nations to adopt a six-pronged strategy to dissuade people - especially women and young people - from smoking and to help them quit.

Raising taxes to as high as 75% or more of the pack price would be the single most effective strategy, the WHO said. Higher taxes would also provide funds to counter tobacco industry marketing tactics.

But there's a lot of money in it. For example, who sells cigarettes in China? The government does ... So how long will it take for governments to learn that the cost of death, disease, and lost productivity may be greater than the gains from selling little packs of addictive death?

•••

This blog post is number two in a series on key trends for innovators.