,

Enabling, the new consulting

Consulting, although in the area of soft factors, has been a familiar core service of our company for business development for many years. Even as a boutique consultancy, we ask ourselves the provocative question from time to time in the context of strategy development:
Do we still need “consulting” or can it go away? And if it is still needed, in what shape or format?
Yes, that is our latest conclusion. Enabling, the new consulting.

How consulting was understood for a long time

There they were, those gray silverbacks and the large gaggle of motivated freshly graduated master’s students +, usually with excellence exams, who were certainly moving in the upper echelons of the companies. They were given ample freedom, conducted many interviews and collected valuable information in the organization at lightning speed. They routinely matched these with the concepts and competencies of their own consulting firm and documented them in a well-ordered and activating manner on slide decks prepared in a manner suitable for management. In manageable project periods. When they were gone, what remained was usually an excellent concept that had been coordinated with the C-level. Evaluated, provided with an action plan and “ready for take off”. Period.
These times are not over yet. Even today, this approach is still widespread.

That was really “expensive” and only low efficient

The slightly pointed undertone results from my own consternation. First of all, from the perspective of an employee who experienced how her knowledge, insights and experience were incorporated into the Big Concept without citation of the source and were reported without comment as the competence of the consulting firm.

And later, from the perspective of a consultant who came in after the big consulting firms were no longer there to support the levels below the C-level, to understand what was left behind or to work through and implement what was outlined in the concepts. Many a time we were the umpteenth consultancy that struggled to design what others had thought up or mixed for others. It was a miracle when a suitable added value emerged. With the many non-participants. Apart from the fact that, in addition to a high degree of demotivation, it cost vast sums of money.
If these concepts were ever implemented at all. We don’t even want to know how many of these high-end analyses and strategies were buried somewhere, in drawers in the past and in file folders today.

First it should then save the change management

The first attempt to get a bit of sustainability into it was to expand the idea of turning “stakeholders into participants”. Stakeholders should no longer only be asked in (stakeholder) interviews, but should also be involved in the development and implementation of solutions. This is where change management came into play. A large number of change projects were set up, most of them running in parallel, in which the added value and benefits of the high-end concept were explained. Naturally supported by powerful promoters. At least in theory, because with all the operational workload there was/is actually no time for this. Supported by a project management designed internally or by an external consultant and many Gantt charts. So a lot was done to explain and design how to make the concept make the transition from paper to everyday life. This was (at least economically) not bad for us. This was not a bad thing for us (at least from an economic point of view), because in addition to designing and implementing the concept, we also had to take care of change and project management. The external consultants continued to add value. And the so-called stakeholders became only indirect participants in the whole thing.

Even agile approaches did not bring the desired success

In the meantime, agility conquered the stage and now the sprints were supposed to fix it. Classic project management was given a new (admittedly pointy-headed) suit. The mood of those involved temporarily rose somewhat. Becoming a participant was within reach and finally, one’s own competence could be expanded a bit. How inspiring and beneficial. Finally, new faces came into play – Agile Coaches. They talked a lot about how to shape VUCA, the added value of vision and mission, and how to create team spirit. And they had funky tools in their little suitcase, e.g. retrospectives or techniques from Management 3.0. Great, Brought new motivation. And it was good that there were the consultants who created the deliverables in the meantime. Please don’t misunderstand: we are of course also Agile Coaches and continued to make our revenue with the externally delivered value.
However, it was really all just the same wine in new bottles.

Enabling, the new consulting

I don’t know whether we were driven by the fact that we no longer wanted to be primarily the extended workbench (although this will always be part of our service portfolio) or whether the entrepreneurs in us no longer see this incredible use of resources or – and perhaps this is it – we have seen that the greatest potential, namely that of the stakeholders, is not being used at all, but we decided some time ago: Enabling, the new consulting.

Since then, we have concentrated on enabling those affected, i.e. internal clients, whenever we create a deliverable for them. I.e. we apply what we have only talked about with the many approaches of the past. We co-create with our clients and share all our knowledge. Aware and with the intention to make ourselves superfluous at least with regard to this design. In this way, we make it possible for added value to be created directly and immediately by everyone concerned. In this way, those affected become participants and co-creators, and the personal and corporate competencies are strengthened.
With the perspective of creating much more.

The positive effect, which we have already experienced many times, is: the motivation of all participants increases and also their innovative power. Collaboration becomes tangible and spreads its effectiveness. And all parties have a whole lot more fun.

We call this enabling, the new consulting. And we believe this is the future.

You shape the future.
It works well with us.

 

created by: Eva-Maria Danzer

,

Ownership as a foundation for an agile role understanding

31.05.2022

How do we bring agility into an organisation? Certainly not overnight. In order for the agile plant to grow and flourish sustainably in the organisation, it requires constant, organic implementation. Only with consistent application and intensification of the methodology can sustainable implementation be guaranteed. After all, we don’t want to reap our harvest for just one season. On the way from seedling to magnificent blossom, however, this little plant needs a special breeding ground – ownership for an agile understanding of roles. Often our gardeners still have a clear distribution of roles – if fertilised, watered, pruned, all conventional plants thrive.

Role understanding

Picture 1: Ownership as a foundation for an agile role understanding, The Company Journey Guides

A fixed understanding of roles

…only our agile plant is hanging its leaves tiredly – what has happened here?

Agile project management quickly pushes a fixed understanding of the roles of our gardeners to its limits. The team is confronted with new tasks at short intervals. And they cannot be clearly assigned to the predefined roles. The plant is still drooping its leaves, not to mention the blossom. Who is responsible here?

Suddenly, important tasks are not carried out. Delays occur. The process comes to a standstill. Blame begins to be apportioned. A, often not insignificant, part of the available capacities is occupied with the questions – Who should have been responsible here? Who is to blame? – instead of dealing with the urgently needed solutions.

Understanding of roles

Picture 2: Ownership as a foundation for an agile role understanding

The problem does not arise within roles, but in between. Mostly when tasks can no longer be clearly assigned to a role and responsibility is shirked. Why does no one take action even though our plant is withering?

  • Agile project management makes it very difficult to identify all upcoming challenges in advance, to derive possible tasks and to assign them to concrete roles in the team due to short sprints and the specific input required from outside.
  • There is no specialist in the team for the newly added tasks, as they were not foreseeable in advance, so someone has to familiarise themselves adequately with the topic.
  • Often these new tasks represent an additional workload to the already planned range of tasks.
  • Since no one feels directly responsible, the fulfilment is also followed up only carelessly or not at all.

How can ownership save our plant?

In an agile sense, a gardener, for example the person who first noticed the fading of the plant, would inform the team about the deviation in the project plan – we have proceeded as planned and still have to reckon with the loss of the crop. In the team, our gardener now gets the mandate to find a solution. He/she also takes ownership of the well-being of our plant. He/she follows the process beyond the mere presentation of a solution and is only satisfied when a respectable flower emerges. Problem solved, but how can we instruct our gardeners to do this?

Ownership cannot be assigned like roles – the behaviour only emerges through attitude. It requires intrinsic motivation to take on the plant. And to decide to holistically take responsibility for the identified task. The agile framework gives the freedom for this intrinsically made decision. But only ownership leads to the implementation of necessary measures. Even if these have not been specified in advance in any role, process or task description.

How do I create a corresponding attitude in my team?

Our everyday actions, how we approach the tasks we are given and how we continue successful patterns of action, have an impact on our personal satisfaction. Successes that can be traced back to self-determined action have a much more positive effect on our satisfaction and our own self-esteem than following work instructions. Agile principles and methods support autonomous action. In this sense, if we give the definition of roles, processes and tasks back to our gardeners step by step, we enable a sense of achievement based on self-determined decisions. At the same time, we reflect the closing of the process gap for the well-being of our plant back to the gardeners, who in the best case have their own claim for the fulfilment of the roles they have developed. Ownership as a foundation for an agile role understanding.

Understanding of roles

Picture 3: Ownership as a foundation for an agile role understanding

How do I know that ownership is functioning?

We leave the next withered plant that catches our eye and see whether it is being consolidated in the team. And whether someone will take care of it completely. If a healthy plant presents itself to us after a few days, the first seed has been planted. A fluid shift from employee to co-creator is initiated.

Ownership is not a matter of self-sufficiency, but requires constant care. Where no essential damage is to be expected, we can deliberately leave new tasks open. We give individuals the space to take on the solution. In this way, we prepare the ground for the consolidation of ownership and allow self-confidence to grow in the team.

Would ownership, as part of an agile mindset, also add value to your team? You can get a first appetizer in our TCJG To Go Agile Mindset Experience. We look forward to the exchange with you!

 

This blog was written by Patric Huchtemeier.

,

Empowerment needs a psychological component

28.02.2022

We are already in the middle of the New Work era. The problem with New Work is that the focus is usually on structural measures. For example, working hours are quickly cut and hierarchical levels removed. Not too seldom, however, this does not have the desired effect and leads to identity problems, politicisation and complexity problems instead of motivation and increased performance.

What is missing here? The view from within.

Surprisingly, our research is quite a bit ahead of our economy here. As early as 1949, Harry Harlow experimented with laboratory monkeys on this topic. In the experiment, the monkeys were asked to solve a motor task (see illustration).

Source: Pink, D. H. (2015): Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us, Riverhead Books, New York.

At that time (and to some extent still today), the idea was: what drives us are either (1) our biological urges or (2) carrots and sticks. In other words, rewards and punishment. Things got interesting when the monkeys showed interest in the task even before the experiment started. And not only interest… they solved the task without any incentives.

This gave rise to a new theory: there is a third drive. A drive from within. Triggered by doing and trying the thing itself. Later, it was realised that people also have this drive, called intrinsic motivation: people want to expand their abilities on their own.

Great. Is it possible to activate this intrinsic motivation in our employees? One way to do this is through psychological empowerment. That is, empowerment needs a psychological component.

Intrinsic motivation through psychological empowerment

The term “empowerment”, referring to the empowerment of employees – mostly in the course of democratisation in the company – is unfortunately often quickly pushed aside as a buzzword. What has been problematic in implementation so far is that in the context of empowerment only the structural component (e.g. the removal of hierarchical levels) has been considered.

However, in recent years we have learned from Gretchen Spreitzer and extensive research based on her findings: people interpret their environment individually. That is, removing one level of hierarchy has a liberating effect on one person, while others lose an important point of orientation as a result. A broader view, the interpretation on a psychological level, is essential here to enable the empowerment of employees. In this context, there are four work-related perceptions that shape our role and thus the shaping of our possibilities for psychological empowerment:

The-four-facets-of-psychological-empowerment

Source: The Company Journey Guides GmbH

People who feel psychologically empowered experience their work as meaningful (significance). They feel confident in their work tasks (competence). They perceive autonomy (self-determination) and are convinced that their work can make a difference (influence).

Here, the perception of psychological empowerment is based on a high expression of each facet. If one facet is low, the construct loses stability.

Why we should engage more with psychological empowerment

The concept of psychological empowerment has already been examined in numerous studies and research papers. What is particularly exciting is that there are numerous correlations with benefits for employees but also for the organisation as a whole.

On the employee side:

On the organisation side:

For most companies today, the main focus is on generally increased performance. This can sometimes be explained by the fact that the trust gained through self-determination and influence is repaid through conscientious and uncomplicated behaviour.

Utilising the psychological component of empowerment in the right way

Especially in today’s world, it is important to understand that control from the outside is neither manageable nor desirable in many areas. Psychological empowerment relies on the view from within. It gives us a chance to sustainably inspire our employees by activating their intrinsic motivation.

In the course of redesigning one’s own work, it is therefore well worth considering setting psychological empowerment as a target. Those who would like to use psychological empowerment for themselves must bear in mind that there is no universally valid special recipe for this. As explained at the beginning, the concept is based on the individual perception of each employee. Therefore, it is first necessary to recognise and understand the point of view and needs of one’s own employees.

The same also applies to the manager. Why not start with a small personal experiment? Ask yourself these two questions every day after work and take 5 minutes to reflect.

Which work situation has made you feel empowered?
In which situations have you experienced less empowerment?
Once it becomes clear what is lacking, there are a wide variety of human resource development measures that can strengthen the perceived psychological empowerment across the individual facets, such as:

Source: The Company Journey Guides GmbH

And it is clear – empowerment needs a psychological component.

We are looking forward to hearing about your experiences. You can also find more on this topic in our Learning Nugget New Work in a nutshell.

 

This blog was written by Leoni Meffle.

,

From co-worker to co-creator

15.04.2021

Today, human “work” is increasingly migrating to the machine and AI is taking over more and more tasks from us. By doing so, it is only driving forward a process that has already begun. Many of the classic “jobs” have been the responsibility of the so-called “low-wage countries” for years. How contemporary is the term “co-worker” – at least in industrialized countries? Is there a change on the horizon?
The one “from co-worker to co-creator”?
(By the way: we always think diversely, even if we “sacrifice” the wording for the sake of reader-friendliness).

Work has a lousy image

In the ant-song from Tabaluga you can hear “Work is half of life …”. And indeed, there were times when a large part of the population of the industrialized countries would have fully agreed with this. And still today we encounter this confirmation from other regions of the world.

Although the term “work” is initially described neutrally as a “purposeful, social, planned and conscious, physical and mental activity”, it nevertheless has a “hidden agenda” attached to it. Work is usually associated with burden and effort, with complaint, and often with “unfair” working conditions. This attribution has its roots in ancient medieval times. And although the Christian, primarily Protestant religion has tried to give work a positive “image” and this was also emphasized again and again in the course of industrialization, it remained so – we still associate with work a matter of the socially lower classes.
It is poorly paid and performed by people with low education. These people supposedly need representatives who enforce their interests and leadership, since they cannot lead themselves.

Perhaps sociology could provide a remedy here. According to its definition, work is a process in which people enter into social relationships that are of central importance in the overall context of life; these include the structuring of time, social recognition and self-esteem.
And, honestly, that was a great try, but who would define “work” that way?

Co-worker, employee, colleague, ….

When it became clear that trying to correct this “hidden agenda” with optical polishes was not really fixing the problem, new names were created for the more modern or educated worker: Co-worker or Colleague and “Senior Associate” or “Executive.” In this way, they distanced themselves from the lower class, which, for example, also had hierarchical levels in the form of the foreman, and created a parallel world. With the familiar social conflicts. And then – for whatever reason – a compromise was reached in the world of Management 2.0+. All of them became the species “co-worker”. Employees of a company who are assigned to a manager. So much hierarchy was necessary after all. Although there is also an ambiguity, because managers are also employees and therefore actually co-workers.
To top it off, all of them are “workers”. Again, “work”. And whatever it actually means.

In any case, it sticks with the “worker”. With the whole worker story in the luggage. With or without a crown. More or less dependent.

Expiration of the term the “co-worker”

That somehow no longer fits the times, does it?
The term “work” is overdue now, at least in the age of the next big digital transformation. Even if it is still a central component of our understanding of the economy, primarily the national economy, which is still valid and characterized by performance thinking.

How unsexy it is today to see oneself as a “worker”. Who among us still wants to “work”?
The term “co-worker” has had its day; it simply no longer has any appeal or hardly any appeal.
At least the “work(er)” part is then best left for disposal. But what happens to the ” co-“?

From co-worker to co-creator
What exactly “co-” is and what does it mean? First of all, “co-“ means “with” or “also” and not “alone”. “Co-” requires others in each case. That is the spirit of the times. Today, we still talk a lot about teams, but now the idea of collaboration is gaining ground. The idea of creating something together. As opposed to every man for himself. By the way, collaboration has its roots in working together with the “enemy”. That really resonates with a lot of transformation potential.

Co-creation is therefore the current and forward-looking approach. There the “co-” is further in it. And something new. This is “creating” instead of “working”.

For some time now, a re-prioritization can be seen in people’s basic motivations. It is no longer the motivation to perform that is most pronounced, but rather that of influencing or shaping and that of connecting. In some sources, the basic motives are supplemented today by “freedom,” the motive that is currently becoming a shooting star. And “influence” as well as “freedom” have little to do with what we conventionally understand by “work”.

It really looks like the shift is coming: from co-worker to co-creator.

Spot on the “co-creator”

Assuming that the co-creator does exist, what distinguishes him from the “co-worker”?

First of all, a completely new basic understanding and a changed attitude. Designing or influencing something oneself does not mean waiting for a task to be assigned. It means becoming active, perhaps even proactive, and getting involved proactively. It is about ownership.

Energy that may be tied up in resistance in the “co-worker” is released in the “co-creator”. Creative potential and joy in self-efficacy can emerge.
What a benefit for the individual and the entire company.

At the same time, the requirements increase. It is important to deal with what one’s own contribution is, where one’s personal strengths lie and can be developed. Attentiveness and care for oneself and visibility in business take on a special significance. Courage is required to defend one’s own point of view. And resilience, should this not prevail with other co-creators. This can also be quite strenuous and takes those affected out of their comfort zone.

These are all future competencies that sometimes need to be developed first. An accompanying qualification offensive is certainly indispensable here.

Effects in the system

However, moving from ” co-worker to co-creator” is not done by changing the attitude and behavior of the “co-creator”.
It has an impact on the entire system and culture of an organization or company.

Co-creators have something to contribute and say, and they want to be heard. For this, it is necessary to create a suitable framework, formulate governance and develop principles of collaboration.

Co-creators have different requirements for their environment in terms of the type and location of the place where value is created. Here, a flexibilization of existing structures would be required. Mobile work and trust instead of control of times would be basic requirements. As would an understanding of which formats are suitable for joint creation and exchange.
Here, at the latest, we are in the center of the transformation to the “New Work” which is taking place anyway.

Leaders First

The shift from co-worker to co-creator can only be considered if leaders internalize and support the shift.
In fact, such an approach requires executives to be engaged in the transition even before implementation.

Co-creators, who take ownership, contribute themselves effectively and thus take over leadership through their role, make classic leadership unnecessary. New and future-oriented competencies are then also and especially required of leaders.

First, however, we need a mindset shift and the development of a supportive attitude in management and among all decision-makers. The following also applies to executives: From co-worker to co-creator.
This journey should be accompanied and begin before the “co-workers” set out on their journey.

Interested in going deeper? Gladly.
Please contact us.

You create the future.
This is something we’re good at.

,

The Effectiveness of the Circle

27.08.2020

 

Whenever transformation is involved, it is stated that a mindset refraim has a key role to play. Many initiatives threaten to fail because people remain in their old “patterns” instead of opening up to the new. Even the best chains of argumentation are of no use. And even horror scenarios or idealized visions of the future miss their target alone. Time to reflect on a very old format and its power – the effectiveness of the circle.

The failure of transformation

Each and everyone is currently engaged in primarily digital transformation. However, many are apparently not making much progress in this area, and it can be often heard  that they are “lagging behind”. Transformation initiatives often drag on for years and seem to be stagnating.

According to the study Shifthappens 2020, two out of every three initiatives fail. If one follows the many analyses and studies that examine this, the disruptive factors are usually the classics of change management: lack of vision or future prospects, too many activities at once and the resulting sand dune effect, incorrect planning, lack of support from promoters.

And above all a culture shock. Whereas in the past, classic silos, services according  to instructions mentality and cascade goals were required, collaboration, self-organization and iterations are now suddenly on the agenda. A 360-degree turn, so to speak, with a clear panoramic view. A bit much at once, for one or the other.

The importance of communication

Communication is one of the central success factors for successful change, which is a transformation. Even if the holistic version of the Change. Lack of communication leads to resistance. And this makes the entire transformation process slack. Helpful communication, in turn, takes the players on the road, involves them, and ensures integration. So far so good. Has been understood.

But what kind of communication should inspire the transformation? Nicely designed slides with many good arguments. The arguments that are plausible to the creator of the slides. Optimized to the point that they convince every member of the steering committee and beyond.

It obviously does not work. This kind of communication does not seem to bring people into effectiveness and action. Rather, it seems to make them persevere. Otherwise, many transformations would not be where they are.

A question of the mindset

It is really not about communication. It is only a means to an end. It wants to move. To bring people into thinking. Change perspectives. Broaden perspectives. Create desires. Arouse interest in co-design.

It’s more a matter of stimulating the mindset to change. To expand it, to move it out of its rigid corset and comfort zone and to go on a journey of discovery.

And this is certainly not possible with a plausible set of slides. But maybe with good stories. Not with one but with many. Maybe with analogies and personal experiences. And with individual wishes and desires. And with the medium of emotion instead of reason.

The effectiveness of the Circle

And this is where the Circle comes into play. A circle is a conversation circle, which allows to reach deeper levels of communication. In literature several names are used for this circle, e.g. Communication Circle or Talking Circle.

The Circle is a “learning format” that is still actively used by many indigenous people today. For the development of their children or to make decisions for example. It has been used as a method of organizational development and facilitation in recent years for organizations and companies and can work true miracles.

For a circle, a group of people (approx. 6-30+) comes together, whose connection consists in answering a common question. These groups sit together in a closed circle.
This can take place around a table or in an open circle of chairs.
The question for a circle is published for all to see.
A talking stick is used, which moves from group member to group member. It can either be passed on directly when a group member has spoken, or it can first be moved back to the center and then picked up by the next member who wants to contribute.

The effectiveness of the circle can be traced back to the setting, but above all to its principles.
Each member speaks in turn and has the right to speak as long as he or she sees it as appropriate and holds the speaking stick in his or her hands.
There is no external dialogue in the sense of questions or debates, but rather contribution after contribution. Sometimes with reference to previous speakers, sometimes without.
Once the circle is complete, it begins all over again.

An accompanying facilitator can at this point set a short summary of the preliminary round or a focus e.g. with reference to the initial question.
In this way, up to four rounds (depending on the size of the group) can take place. Then the facilitator closes the circle.

The Magic of the Circle

The principles of this format allow the minds of all participants to come to rest and listen to each other more and more intensively. Since an answer cannot/should not be given immediately, the attention remains with what has been said. From different perspectives and aspects, a new and extended  view of things crystallizes in small steps. In mini-steps your own mindset changes. By themselves. On the basis of a diverse view, but with your own thoughts and feelings. This is sustainable and works. This is how action is planned.

Interesting is the effectiveness of the Circle. It works through itself. Change happens. Just like that. Without chains of argumentation. Without logic. From within itself. How magical.

To everyone’s satisfaction, by the way. It is astonishing. Everything important comes up. Represented by all. Thus a wonderful example of self-organization and collaboration is created. And thus changing culture. In every circle.

Circles also have success factors

Two factors are crucial to the effectiveness of the Circle.

First is this: the question. It needs to be carefully chosen and well formulated to reach everyone and to raise the potential inherent in the community. Ideally, it should be formulated in several iterations together with representatives of the Circle and the facilitator.

Then the attitude of the facilitator. No, a facilitator is not a moderator. Rather, it is a person who unintentionally shapes the room and “holds” it, i.e. ensures that the Circle process runs smoothly and in accordance with the principles. This is a very special art that needs to be learned.

 

You use the effectiveness of the Circle to make Mindset Refraim.
With us it goes well.

 

,

Triple A instead of unconsciousness

What exactly does “Triple A” has to do with fainting? And what about Mindset First?

AAA(+) could become the magic formula for changing individual attitudes in thinking, feeling and motivation. It could be the key to overcoming powerlessness and power in interpersonal relationships and organizations and to a completely new encounter with ourselves and with other people. And this creates added value for all sides.

Triple A is a seal of quality

Let us first take a closer look at AAA. Triple A is a measure of quality that reflects the quality of a product, a service or the strength of an organisation (see e.g. rating with banks or companies). This rating expresses that it is the highest possible quality. This creates trust and security for the observer.

Admittedly, Triple A is rather rare today. Too many disturbing factors and influences must be considered and “dilute” the result. Some are to be arranged, others rather not.

AAA is rather to be understood as the desired target state, more like a northern star.

Triple A in the sense of the mindset

The named descriptions of  “Triple A” also applies well to the interpretation of AAA, which is taken up here with a view to a “Zeitgeist” or “spirit of the time” mindset. Triple A as a measure of quality and as a desirable target state. A yardstick for oneself, for one’s personal inner attitude and one’s own framework of action. A mindset that shapes one’s own behaviour in a self-determined and sustainable way.

And a mindset in which each A stands for a focus: Attentiveness, Attention and Alignment.

With AAA to a new mindset

Attentiveness

Attentiveness or so to say mindfulness is currently a “buzzword” and a product that is marketed in numerous workshops and in literature. That’s why it’s even more important to be careful with it. What does “attentiveness” mean?

To be present in the “here and now”, not only physically, but above all mentally. Not to be flooded and “disturbed” by the many offers and stimuli, but to concentrate completely on the one moment, what is now. And thereby its uniqueness notice, recognize and evenly? Respect? Completely without an evaluation, only observing. This is a challenge that usually needs to be mastered.

A Master of Mindfulness is gifted with the gift of being in contact with her-/himself and her/his own thinking, feeling and wanting. And to be able to lead oneself.

Attention

Today we encounter attention mainly negatively attributed, e.g. as attention deficit / hyperactivity disorder. The human being seems to lose the ability to focus on something or a person over a certain period. This is questionable, because then there is no more immersion in the depth and then topics are no longer really penetrated. With the downside that there is no natural feeling of security. Rather it remains gladly with unchecked assumptions or superficially developed evaluations.

If the art of attention is mastered, true understanding can arise instead. This leads to encounters that today are called “at eye level”.

Alignment

Alignment means knowing one’s direction and using it as an inner guideline. To know the way intuitively and to give orientation. To be clear and unequivocal in one’s own actions, not to be nervous or arbitrary.

And thus, a reliable quantity for oneself and others. Even in times of upheaval, as they exist today.

If alignment is practised, a high degree of clarity and waste is avoided.

The concentration on the AAA leads to becoming aware of oneself and its value, to understand that others also have their self and value and to bring oneself into action in the sense of a co-creation. So, to become collaboratively self-effective.

And this is exactly what corresponds to the mindset of the future.

What’s this got to do with powerlessness?

In fact, in everyday working life today, powerlessness or actions that are motivated by having the power are the order of the day. In many companies, managers are still perceived as acting powerfully. They are said not to trust their employees, but to dominate them and not to give them the freedom they need. Power-oriented people are said to want to control and influence others. That leads naturally to resistance, since self-efficacy goes here at the expense of a third.

And the same is true of powerlessness. Already in the childhood and youth many humans make the experience that they are limited in their natural drive for action and in their self-efficacy. Instead of having to follow what third parties (teachers, parents, etc.) tell them. Punishment and reward systems that are highly manipulative are often used. At some point the urge to express oneself is not enough. The individual feels powerless and/or adapts in order to be the person exercising power later.

Until then, these are often the employees who feel powerless and in turn “feed” the existing power structures.

Powerlessness and power are two sides of the same coin, the play money of a monopoly, which should now be replaced promptly.

With the Triple A Mindset this is possible. With the practice of attentiveness, attention and alignment that lead to authenticity and autonomy. Making faint superfluous.

,

Uploading to Develop the Co-Creator of the Future

“Uploading” enables shaping the future

The term “Uploading” originally comes from Otto Scharmer and his Theory U. “Uploading” describes the conducive attitude and suitable behaviour of each individual in order to shape their own circumstances and future. With an understanding of “Open Mind”, “Open Heart” and “Open Will”, people act consciously and autonomously. He sees himself as a proactive and constructive co-creator of a community. It makes a meaningful, value-creating and sustainable contribution to organizations and society. The meaning of “Uploading” can be understood as an individual creating his or her own substantial contribution and bringing it into the system. The individual thinks, feels and acts on its own and makes this output available to others. Based on its own free will and for the good of themselves and others. That is courageous. This is how the future is co-created.

“No, like this” and “Wow, so” seem en vogue today

Uploading” thus stands in contrast to “downloading”, which is also described by Otto Scharmer. It is about the ongoing reproduction of information already available. Regardless of whether this information is evaluated positively or critically. “No, like this” and “Wow, so” are two sides of the same coin. They express the individual’s actions, which are more owed to the swarm. One joins a trend or a group and follows this view. This has little to do with a reflected individual view and design. Rather, one remains true to oneself and one’s mindset, reinforcing it again and again.

As soon as an individual, a group or an organization shows its edge, i.e. its own point of view, the feedback is not long in coming. Towards the one extreme as well as the other. If the Positioning meets the zeitgeist, it can lead to countless likes and a quantum leap in followers in no time at all. Conversely, countless platforms invite you to give room to your own displeasure, which can quickly grow into shitstorms and hate triads. The more populist the tone, the better. Sometimes the content is no longer important. What this overshooting behaviour does to us as society is another completely different subject.

Co-creation begins by leading yourself

Admittedly, in our world today, every day a whole series of themes become visible that give cause to marvel or to shake one’s head. At the same time, one could be distracted or standardized every minute. Push notifications, Alexa, messenger services, social media and many more try their best to win over our attention. It is a huge challenge to resist.

The daily dynamics, the exponentially developing flood of information and the much-mentioned digital transformation challenge us beyond measure. It is becoming increasingly difficult to keep track of things or to form one’s own picture. We are increasingly reaching our limits. It seems tempting to join “like-minded people”, to have a pre-selection of information made, to follow the chosen swarm. And thus, to put one’s own thinking, feeling and acting back.

But how much of a human being does then remain? Is this still worthy of human beings? Or is it more like being a machine?

If we want to keep being human (s), it is advisable to become stronger and more conscious to become a co-creator again. And to shape our own future proactively. Use your own potential and create added value. To express oneself, in coordination with the expression of others.

Otto Scharmers supports “Uploading”.
With the aim of “Presencing”, i.e. to “be present” as a human being and to help co-creating.

First of all, this means to lead oneself.
To do so, the following first steps are recommended:

  • Check your own “downloading” status and make a conscious decision to change
  • Consciously “switch off” disturbances and create more time to be mindful with yourself
  • Consciously form one’s own opinion and use a variety of sources of information for this purpose
  • Give space to personal intuition and learn to listen to it

To do so, techniques for the development of mindfulness (such as mindfulness-based stress reduction) can be a great support.