Objective Designers

I've recently commented on this article expounding the virtues of AI and the creation of the author's Digital Twin. The article postulated that AI can "now effectively offer strategic mentorship". This is ridiculous! It shows a great deal of nativity in understanding how humans execute the (strategic) mentoring process and how AI can support it. Let me explain. Firstly, AI is relatively good at responding to questions - and it's certainly getting much better month-by-month. (I use claude.ai which is excellent at this task). But the mentoring process is not about the mentee asking smart questions. It’s about the mentor supporting the mentee. I often find a mentee can start a mentoring session with muddled and multiple objectives - even if they have drawn up an agenda beforehand. The skill of the mentor is to help the mentee parse and prioritise those different objectives so something useful and meaningful can be achieved in the session itself. The mentor needs then to ask questions to clarify the situation (not the other way around which is what you get with AI). These questions should raise the consciousness of the mentee and help them think about dimensions that are often hidden from their current frame of reference. This is particularly important if the mentee has muddled or misinformed thinking. The mentor's questions will come from the sources of experience and emotional intelligence. In terms of the flow of conversation, it’s also important to mix periods of dialogue with periods of silence so the mentee can listen and reflect on what has been said. Additionally, the mentor has a key role in summarising the conversation at appropriate stages of the process to show the mentor “gets it” and to help the mentee agree/disagree with that summary and clarify their own thoughts. If there is a challenge the mentee is facing, some sort of role play or rehearsal can be very valuable at the end of a session to help them visualise a desired outcome. Finally, a morale boost at the end of the session to say the mentee is doing really well can lift the energy. Some AIs are programmed to do this - but it is not yet commonplace. Even though AI is very useful at answering questions (where we are conscious we have a problem) certain commentators (like this one who will remain nameless) have become sucked down the rabbit hole of "AI can do anything a human can do - like mentoring”. It can't! And isn’t likely to do so any time soon! It’s important to keep our feet firmly on the ground in the human aspects of supporting each other in this wave of AI mania. There are enough crazy rabbits out there who want to offer us magic potions so we forget we are human. "'Who in the world am I?' Ah, that's the great puzzle!" as Alice said.

BOARD TRANSITIONS: THE POWER OF THE (AMAZON) 6-PAGER Oftentimes board meetings can be ineffective: > The board papers can amount to a list of minutes and actions from the last meeting. > Some actions will have been completed. Others remain open. Yet others are pushed down the line with excuses because of new events. > One or two powerpoint presentations followed by a spreadsheet of numbers from the finance folks follows - each session trying to cram 60 minutes of content and discussion into the 10-20 minutes allocated on the agenda, putting the meeting in jeopardy of over-running. > The board meeting ends with a sigh of relief from the Chair and agreement on the date of the next meeting. > And afterwards, one or two board members moan about the fact that xyz important issue was never discussed. Sound familiar? USES FOR THE 6-PAGER This is where the power of the (so-called Amazon) 6-pager comes in. The six-pager can (and should) cover important issues such as: > defining a new strategy, > scoping new programmes and projects, > allocating resources and budgeting for those new initiatives, > introducing new processes or IT platforms, > selecting and onboarding a new set of partners and suppliers > and pretty much any change that is going to affect business-as-usual. In less mature boards, such changes are discussed beforehand in a phone conversation, a powerpoint deck is prepared and the presented by the change owner at the board meeting. The idea is debated briefly, voted on or kicked down the road without all board members really understanding the full scope, implications and risks of the change at the end of the session. Here is where the 6-pager comes in. STEPS IN THE PROCESS The change owner has to prepare a text document with a few suitable tables, graphs or diagrams to support the text. Maximum 6-pages (or about 2500-3000 words). This is then circulated to board members before the meeting - or at the very least, time is allocated in the meeting for 20 mintues for board members to read the document. The contents of the document are then questioned, and the change owner is given the chance to clarify any questions. A no-go decision can then be made with a much better-informed board. OUTLINE OF A 6-PAGER There are various ways a 6-pager can be structured. Here is an example: 1. Executive Summary 2. Problem Statement 3. Proposed Solution 4. Implementation Plan 5. Potential Challenges or Risks Appendices (additional data, tables etc. if needed) CONCLUSION Amazon is one of the most successful companies on the planet - and the 6-pager is one of the methods Jeff Bezos has mandated in order to get them there. The approach definitely helps to clarify the way forwards on major change initiatives, gain consensus amongst key stakeholders as well as reduce the risk of making bad business decisions. What's to lose? #boardtransitions

BOARD TRANSITIONS: WHEN IT'S TIME FOR THE FOUNDER TO MOVE ON There often comes a point in a company's growth where the skills that launched it aren't those that are needed to scale it. So-called "Founder's Syndrome" can create real challenges at board level when a company is ready to grow beyond the founder's capabilities. This article briefly explores key issues and strategies for transitioning founders. UNDERSTANDING FOUNDER'S SYNDROME Founder's syndrome typically manifests in three ways: Emotional Attachment Founders very often view companies as extensions of themselves. This can cloud their judgment and create egoic tensions in the board which become unresolvable unless the founder changes his or her ways. Difficulty Delegating Control Founders can struggle to relinquish control and trust others to do their own job, micro-managing new directors and employees to the point where they leave. Resistance to Change Founders may cling to early-stage methods, structures and favourite ideas/people that are unsuitable to scale the business. STRATEGIES FOR FOUNDER TRANSITIONS When it becomes obvious to the board that it's time to move the founder on, here are some approaches: Open Communication The board and it's co-directors need to navigate this period of transition with empathy, communication and good planning, whilst preserving the founder's legacy and keeping their eyes on the next stage for growth. Discuss the company's future needs and use real data to create the case for change. Succession Planning Develop a detailed transition plan with timelines and role definitions. This should ideally be agreed with all board members, including the founder. If the founder is completely resistant to the changes, then the board might have the difficult task of forcing the founder out without his or her buy-in. This can become a painful struggle, with a prolonged period of tension and disruption. Best avoided if at all possible! Gradual Role Transition Bringing in new leadership for aspects of the change that are not covered by current board members, allowing the new operational leadership team to take gradual control. Celebrate the Founder's Legacy Honour the Founder's contributions with a new title that maintains their status. For instance, promoting the founder to Chairman or advisor is suitable in some circumstances. Post-Transition Support Maybe, like President Biden, it is time for the Founder to retire. In which case, send them on their way by nominating them for an industry or other suitable award and give them the recognition for the work and mark the occasion with a leaving party. Ultimately, the company itself will no longer want to remain as the founder's baby. A "teenager" company needs to leave home to find their own way in the world. This can happen in the way that Steve Jobs moved on from Apple - when the founder dies on the job and the transition happens after they have passed. Good transition planning saves a lot of angst!

HOW "SUSTAINABLE" IS THE AI REVOLUTION? I've just listened to a fascinating BBC Radio 4 programme on the implications of AI on the green agenda (see link at the bottom). I'll summarise the main points: AI and data centres are now using a significant amount of global energy supplies, rivalling the aviation industry in terms of carbon footprint (with about 3-5% of all global energy consumption). When I did a study in IBM in 2008, the IT industry only consumed 1-2%. One example given by Dr. Sasha Luccioni, (the Climate Lead at Hugging Face, a company that does research on AI technologies based in Montreal) is that if you generate a single high-definition AI image (4000x4000 pixels) on AI, it can use as much energy as half of a smartphone's battery charge! Yet these costs are invisible to your average user (like you or me). This highlights the notable lack of transparency from technology companies about their energy usage in data centres - particularly around the additional impact that running AI models is having on the environment and targets to reduce carbon emissions. Microsoft has already declared it is unlikely to meet its net zero targets promised by 2030 because of the rise of its use of AI. And it is likely the other hyper-scalers will be feeling the same pressure. Yet the need to continue building out data centre capacity continues at a pace. Google has announced that it is building a massive data centre in Singapore as well as the new 1 billion data centre in Hertfordshire which they announced in January. The programme also highlights that the rate at which AI and data centres are expanding is far outpacing the development of energy infrastructure. For example, adding capacity to the power grid (e.g. Small Modular Nuclear Reactors) takes about a decade, while building new data centres only takes 2-3 years. This creates a significant mismatch in energy supply and demand. For instance, how will the UK's national grid actually cope with Google's additional power needs in Hertfordshire? And how will it impact other users and households? As AI becomes more prevalent and integrated into applications so we don't really have a choice to use it (or not use it), these issues will continue to bring into question the environmental sustainability of AI as well challenging the promises made by corporations on their net zero objectives. And I wonder if the "answer" hinted at by the programme that the onus is on governments to create more regulation and force more transparency will really be sufficient. After all, look at Scope 3 to see how effective that's been! You can listen to the whole programme on BBC Sounds here: https://lnkd.in/embEQK-s #AI #greenIT #sustainability #energy #scope3

BOARD TRANSITIONS - GETTING PERSONAL In start-ups, founding directors often have vastly different motivations. Yet it's still surprising to me how many times I see these founding directors coming together without aligning their objectives, only to find themselves coming to blows months (or sometimes even years) later. Emotions can run high because many founders see their business is not just a source of income but also as a fundamental part of their identity. When disagreements arise, it's not just about business decisions: it becomes personal. Very personal! This scenario is more common than many realise. The entrepreneurial spirit that drives individuals to start a business together often overshadows the crucial step of aligning personal and professional goals. In the excitement of launching a new venture, founders frequently overlook the importance of having frank discussions about their long-term visions, risk tolerances, and exit strategies. As long as the company is growing and facing new challenges, founders may find it easy to put aside their conflicting objectives. However, as the business matures or faces significant hurdles, these unaddressed differences can surface with explosive force. To prevent such situations, founding teams should: - Establish clear communication channels from the outset - Regularly revisit and realign their shared vision and individual goals - Understand what each other's expectations are of one another - Implement conflict resolution mechanisms before they're needed - Consider bringing in neutral third parties for mediation when tensions arise When prevention fails and emotions flood the boardroom, creating space for cooling off is also crucial. This might involve temporarily stepping back from operations or bringing in an interim manager. Refocusing on the company's mission and responsibilities to stakeholders can help shift perspective from personal grievances to shared business objectives. If reconciliation seems possible, structured mediation can be invaluable. A skilled mediator can help unpack underlying issues and guide parties toward resolution. In cases where the relationship has deteriorated beyond repair, a clean break may be the best solution. Just like a marriage break-up, the process can be painful for all parties involved. But it's always important to consider the needs of the children. And in this case, the child can be seen as the corporate entity that the founders have created. The key lesson is that board dynamics, especially in start-ups, require constant care and attention. By acknowledging the role of emotions and proactively managing interpersonal dynamics, boards can create a more resilient foundation for their companies. The most successful boards harness diverse motivations whilst maintaining a unified direction. It's a delicate balance, but it's crucial for long-term success. As the saying goes: "Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater"! #boardtransitions

We are in the very early years of developing ethically-based "Choice Architectures" which work 1-1 with an individual's choices. Like any new discipline, best practice is hard to find (even if the big consulting companies are trying to sell you on their particular "solution"). It's very much "make it up as you go along and make sure you don't get into too much trouble with the regulators". NUDGING AND THE ART OF DESIGNING CHOICE ARCHITECTURES We face countless daily decisions, often relying on habits to cope. 'Nudging', a concept from behavioural economics, leverages this tendency to guide choices without restricting freedom. Introduced by Thaler and Sunstein in their book "Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness", nudging helps choice architects to influence the decisions we take by employing psychological principles like social proof, framing, and the decoy effect. Applications span public policy, health, and finance. For example, opt-out organ donation policies have significantly increased donor rates. However, nudging has faced criticism. Some view it as manipulation, especially with AI and big data enabling highly personalised nudges. The ethical concerns are even more contentious as they require transparency, consent, and accountability across the whole end-to-end lifecycle of a customer's journey. Implementing ethical nudging systems is very challenging. I've recently had to create a set of "guardrails" for a big data/AI project for a mobile phone company. Balancing the need for careful design of a choice architecture with the need for speed and agility for the development team was too hard for me. In the end I was asked to leave the project because I asked too many questions! The future of nudging holds promise for addressing societal issues, but requires careful design of choice architectures. As technology advances, balancing beneficial outcomes with individual agency is crucial. Leaders need to balance the risks of going off the rails with the need for speed. The nuclear industry and financial services companies probably do this better than others - yet we need to also develop choice architectures which are more fluid and which can be used in less risk-adverse industries. Nudging also offers a middle ground between heavy regulation (and lots of expensive lawyers) and outright anarchy. As we continue to debate the openness and right for free speech, it is likely that "choice architectures" will become an increasingly important part of architecting and designing any business system. Businesses need to step-up to understanding and managing the risks and rewards of great choice architectures. It's no longer just IT issue. #choices #architecture #decisionmaking #decisions

THE MAGIC OF SIX INTERVIEWS When faced with a question I know little about, I try to find six people who know a lot more about the subject than me. I then ask them if they would be willing to give a bit of time to help me in my quest (often related to the not-for-profit/charity sector which makes the ask a bit easier). After six people interviews where each person has a different perspectives on a problem, I become more far knowledgable than any one of them and can get a far better understanding of the problem area. It also gives me a fantastic set of other contacts which can be useful if I want to go deeper into an aspect of the problem area. I've tried more than six - but I find six gives the right mix for value over effort for the initial stage of research. Have you tried anything similar - and do you agree / disagree with the magic of six interviews?

SURVIVING CHURN IN PARTNER CHANNELS One of the biggest challenges of managing indirect partner channels is managing churn. It is estimated that about half of all those managing partner ecosystems move jobs with a year! And the figure is even higher over two years. So relationships that have been built up suddenly evaporate into thin air and it can take a few to many months to get the new folks in the channel educated and motivated to get flow back into the channel. This has affected my business as well as many of those folks I work with. I've found the most successful relationships can take literally years to nurture and to gain trust both sides of the relationship. Those are the golden ones. And with the number of aspiring headhunters looking to make commission on moving people from one company to another, I can't see the situation getting any better. I'm wondering if this is something you've come across and what measures you have taken to mitigate the risk of losing all the value in the channel relationships you have built up? And what do you do when someone leaves you high and dry saying they are off to their next job? Oh, and have you found success in following them to their new jobs?

THE HIDDEN POWER OF "INDIRECT INNOVATION" When we think of innovation, we often picture scientists in labs or engineers hunched over blueprints, deliberately working to create the next big thing. Yet some of the most impactful innovations in history have come about in less direct ways. This phenomenon, which I like to call "indirect innovation," is a powerful force that drives progress in unexpected directions. Indirect innovation occurs when discoveries in one area lead to breakthroughs in another, often unrelated field. It's the unplanned side effect, the happy accident, or the surprising application of an existing idea in a new context. Consider the story of Percy Spencer, an engineer working on radar technology during World War II. One day, he noticed that a chocolate bar in his pocket had melted while he was standing near a magnetron. This accidental observation led to the invention of the microwave oven, revolutionising home cooking. Sometimes, indirect innovation happens through cross-pollination of ideas between industries. The assembly line, famously implemented by Henry Ford to produce cars more efficiently, was inspired by the continuous-flow production of meat-packing plants. This transfer of concepts from one industry to another transformed manufacturing worldwide. Indirect innovation can also occur through gradual, incremental changes that accumulate over time. The smartphone in your pocket didn't appear overnight but evolved through countless small improvements to mobile phones, computers, and touch screens over decades. The power of indirect innovation lies in its ability to bypass traditional constraints and spark creativity in unexpected ways. It reminds us that progress isn't always linear or predictable. By fostering diverse knowledge, encouraging cross-disciplinary collaboration, and remaining open to serendipitous discoveries, we can harness the potential of indirect innovation to solve complex problems and create groundbreaking solutions. In a world that often emphasises targeted, focused research and development, it's crucial to remember that some (if not the majority) of our most valuable innovations have come from the least expected places. The next world-changing idea might not be found where we're looking for it – but somewhere else entirely. "It's time to take a bath", as Archimedes probably never said! #innovation #indirectinnovation #serendipidy