I had the pleasure of meeting Jennifer Sertl on the twittersphere. Together with Koby Huberman, they have written a book that seems to touch on many of the aspects of this paradigm shift that I spend some much time writing about. It looks like in writing Strategy, Leadership and the Soul Sertl and Huberman are articulating a series of powerful responses to the changes our organizations are experiencing. I see a lot of alignment between the principles outlined in this 3 minute video and the work we do here at IISC. We are moving forward, see what you think.
(1) The leadership process requires three movements: (1) establishing the horizontal connection (“observe, observe, observe”), (2) establishing the vertical connection (“connecting to Source”), and (3) acting from what emerges in the Now (“acting in an instant”).
I am a huge fan of C. Otto Scharmer’s Theory U. It is one of the most powerful frameworks for understanding the essential shifts we need to make as we step into this paradigm shift. Scharmer sums up his Theory U with seven propositions, I’m going to write a series of blog posts taking a closer look at each of them: Read More
“Everyone today has to be an artisan and bring something extra to their jobs.” This says Thomas Friedman in the New York Times. I’m not sure I like where he is coming from, it sounds a little bit like adding obscure features to a DVD player. But I do like the point. I like this idea of being artisans, of engaging our work as a craft, adding meaning to our tasks by putting our own signature on what we do.
Somewhere beyond Friedman’s capitalistic “do more,” in places outside the yupified fields of trendy taste, there is significant power to the work of an artisan. For example, the work of social change has become so professionalized that it is often disconnected from the depths of purpose that could unleash transformation. But by thinking of ourselves as artisans our own self-expression can actually serve connection, it can bring us closer to that place where hearts can meet.
Consider the purpose of your work, then think of what you do every day… how much more of yourself could you bring to this field where we toil? What’s your craft? What is it that you can create?
Vote Today! It does matter. But you probably already knew that. I’m down on the state these days. And I don’t mean Massachusetts. I mean “the state,” the dominant organizing structure for human affairs. But I still think we should vote – wield some of the influence we have. Read More
Do you want to start a meditation practice? Why not start today? It’s November 1, and we have about 50 people committed to meditating at least 5 minutes per day for the next 28 days!
Over the last few days my family has been going through a sort of sacred grief. The mystery of connection, the power of vulnerability, turning to life with one’s whole heart – these are the themes covered by this wonderful talk and confirmed by my own experience.
It is quite likely that you landed in this page to take a quick peep at this blog, that you did not come here for a twenty minute commitment, but I encourage you to take the time, a shift in perspective is enough to change a life. Samantha and I are so convinced that this is central to our work in the world that we have decided to prototype a “Whole Heart Workshop,” a place for us to practice better ways of being-with. Stay tuned for more, this will be good.
I’ve been doing more and more work with arts organizations lately – events like Creative Change and groups like the Arts and Democracy Project. I’ve been seriously considering the role of the arts in our quest for social transformation, and I have to agree with my future wife, Samantha Tan, who is an artist herself – “We’ve exhausted out left-brain approach, linearity found its limits and the problems that we face are now calling on our full self, art is the way.”
I’ve said a word about my point of agreement with Gladwell, and then a word about my first point of disagreement, I will wrap up this series with my second point of contention – Gladwell’s apology for centralized hierarchy. The popularized story of a civil rights movement “run” by a few male leaders and a few national organizations is actually offensive to the rich history of a diverse and decentralized movement that provided an ecology through which the notion of civil rights could thrive. Read More
Gladwell misses the mark with two key parts of his argument. First is his misunderstanding of how weak-ties and strong-ties play play out in social media networks. Second is his defense of hierarchical, centralized structures, which is based on a clear (and popular) misreading of how the civil rights movement actually happened. Read More
