The Knowledge Organization: Acting On Information
The “knowledge organization” is structured around information, not hierarchy. This week’s lesson from Maciariello (2014) really affirms the case for distributed leadership. Drucker believed that knowledge organizations were best made up of specialists who direct their own and the organizations work with the feedback of colleagues, customers, and headquarters (2014). Drucker called this an “information-based organization.” This means that the proper people in the organization must be able to transfer data into information.
This converting of data into information is a crucial step that many organizations leave out or don’t figure out how to do well. This is especially true in education. I think about all of the data we have, but it is only important if we can turnip into actionable information. Maciariello (2014) used Brad Stevens, former Butler University and present Boston Celtics, basketball coach as an example. He breaks down all of the available data and then looks for trends. For example, how many three point attempts per field goal attempt. Again, he is turning the data into information. It is then the coaches jobs to make sure the players understand the information. Then the players must act on the information. If the players do not understand the information, or don’t act on it then the data/information is worthless. This is the flow of information to information literacy to information responsibility.
I really like the idea presented this week of moving from data literacy to information literacy. This really involves the asking of two questions: What information does my organization need? And What information do I need? This really places the emphasis on creating useful information, not just showing a bunch of data. A major problem in education. So, for example, in education everyone always wants to look at growth data. I contend the more valuable information is the benchmark data of where the student is performing right now. Isn’t that what I really need (information), if I am a teacher, right now to create a plan to get that student where she needs to be academically. If we are doing that properly, the growth will take care of itself. Trust me, it works! Remember, you must convert raw data to true information.
True information is those data that are important to the solution of specific problems faced by the organization. The question is not “Are the data interesting?” but rather “Are the data important and useful for making decisions to solve problems and seize new opportunities?” This truly makes the conversion from data to information. Therefore we must focus data on the information needed for decision making.
I also really like thinking about sabermetrics here, too. This was the precursor of Billy Beane’s Statcast, developed by Bill James. Billy Beane’s system took data generated by sabermetrics and turned it into useful information. His Statcast enabled him to assemble players so that their individual abilities were able to complement one another. This enabled them to “measure a player’s value in the context of the rest of the team (Macariello, 2014, p. 76).”
Eliminate data you do not need for decision making. Eliminate data that do not pertain to the information you need. Organize, analyze, and interpret the data you need so that they become true information.
Reference
Maciariello, J. A. (2014). A year with Peter Drucker: 52 weeks of coaching for leadership effectiveness. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers
Resist Multitasking: Cut The Pattern To Fit The Cloth
I am almost a week behind on my reflection of week nine in A Year With Peter Drucker: 52 Weeks of Coaching for Leadership Effectiveness (Maciarello, 2014). I usually read the week’s lesson and write the post on Sunday mornings. Last week, however, I had to fly out to be at Harvard University early Sunday morning so I packed my book and was going to do the work Sunday night. Well, long story short, the airline lost my bag and I just had it returned last night – a full day after returning home. That entire experience and adventure may be the topic of another post.
The basic premise of last week’s lesson was to organize our personal work and the work we delegate to others effectively. We should attempt to plan our time, making sure that our most important tasks are done first, and, as much as is possible, resist pressures to engage in multitasking (Maciariello, 2014). Both empirical evidence and common practice confirm that multitasking really isn’t possible. In other words, we should fit our most important tasks into our available time. Or, “Cut the pattern to fit the cloth.”
Andy Grove, one of the three founders of Intel, put it this way: “What am I doing that I shouldn’t be doing (Maciariello, 2014, p. 66)?” Grove also offered four other great questions to help guide us in resisting multitasking:
- Should I still be doing it?
- Am I doing it well?
- Am I adding enough value to what I am doing?
- Is it more worthwhile or less worthwhile than anything else?
Grove shared that after answering these questions he then negotiates with himself.
So how do we make this all happen? We must learn to delegate certain activities, abandon other activities, or relax the frequency of the performance of repetitive duties. To do this we must have the strongest followers. Successful leaders are not afraid of strong subordinates. We must assemble the most talented team available develop their competency and capacity, and then, get out of their way. When we develop others we simultaneously develop ourselves because we have to figure out how to raise the capacity of the people we are trying to develop. This will serve as a stretching activity for us, too.
Therefore, resist multitasking, develop your team with “A” players, and determine what are the most important tasks for you. As Peter Drucker said, “Effective leaders delegate, but they do not delegate the one thing that will set the standard. They do it (Maciariello, 2014, p. 70)!”
Reference
Maciariello, J. A. (2014). A year with Peter Drucker: 52 weeks of coaching for leadership effectiveness. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers.
Until Every Child Is Well
I was struck this week while at Harvard University by the story of Boston Children’s Hospital’s vision/mission: Until Every Child Is Well. Really, I guess it would be more of an anthem, as Sally Hogshead would call it. What an anthem it is, though! Think about how simple and abstract “Until Every Child Is Well” is. In my studies this week I was reminded how important it is to make sure that our vision, or anthem, is broad enough to enable us to change as the world changes. What a simple, yet powerful statement Boston Children’s Hospital has made. Who could argue with, “Until Every Child Is Well?”
If we were to write it the way Joseph Michelli taught me, using the word “Wowful,” it would be “Wowful Child Wellness.” Regardless, both statements allow for cutting edge theories of action and strategery. I was also reminded this week of the 1942 Harvard MBA graduate, John Fisher, who was the CEO of Muncie, Indiana company Ball Corporation (you probably know them for Ball Jars). He worked for the company starting in 1941 and was CEO from 1970 to 1981. After World War II the glass jar business was booming, but later Fisher purchased and developed an aerospace business. Everyone thought he was crazy, but it led to the development of the plastic water bottle. I’ll bet you would agree that was a pretty savvy move. When asked about the shift from glass at a Harvard reunion, he stated that their vision had nothing to do with just glass, it was, “we want to be the best container company.” Again, simple, broad, abstract, and agnostic. John Fisher had learned well from his Harvard MBA. He learned you must exploit your present capabilities, but you must at the same time explore. We must learn about the future quicker than anyone else.
So, since my personal wow statement is “Delivering Wowful Educational Leadership” and my anthem is “Energetic Change Agent,” I set out reflect on what these two statements should be for my school; given my learning this week. Remember the goal is to be simple, broad, abstract, and agnostic. Let’s define agnostic. The dictionary defines agnostic as: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly one who is not committed to believing in anything being for sure. Think about that for removing all barriers of thinking things will stay status quo or need to be done the same way.
Here’s what I came up with:
Delivering Wowful Learning
Until Every Child Graduates
I would welcome your feedback on these two statements. It would be great to here how you would change them. These statements allow us to change as the world changes to do what the Indiana State Constitution says in Section 8 where it states: Section 1. Knowledge and learning, general diffused throughout a community, being essential to the preservation of a free government; it should be the duty of the General Assembly to encourage, by all suitable means, moral, intellectual scientific, and agricultural improvement; and provide, by law, for a general and uniform system of Common Schools, wherein tuition shall without charge, and equally open to all. It is important to pay particular attention to the statement, “by all suitable means.” We have a constitutional obligation to make our delivery of knowledge and learning to our students distinct and effective. I love the statement, “by all suitable means.” That is simple, broad, and abstract.
Schools have growing alternatives for delivering education. Choices range from presentations and discussions in the classroom to online, blended, and hybrid courses. As facilitators of learning, teachers will increasingly turn the process of teaching and learning into a partnership, with students and teachers constantly learning from each other. Self- learning will be seen as a bonus— and encouraged. Also, think about the online world where the greatest minds are just a click away and readily available. This open access has tremendous possibilities for many of our US underserved populations as well as third world countries. Pretty exciting, don’t you think?
I encourage you to take some time and think about your school or organization vision, mission, and anthem. Does it allow you to be nimble and change as the world changes? Remember: Leaders need to be consistently inconsistent. We have to constantly explore who we are and what we do!
Targeting & Focusing Your Efforts
Think about creating tomorrow by focusing on the “right results” and “changes in trends” rather than on just the current trends affecting your organization. An important question to ask is, “What are the right results for your organization?” Maciariello (2014) posited in Week 8’s lesson that knowing your mission or purpose is essential in choosing from among all available opportunities those that have the highest probability of producing the right results.
I compare this “focusing” to that of sunlight through a magnifying glass to start paper or grass on fire. Peter Drucker said, “Concentrate on the smallest number of activities that will focus on the greatest productivity.” (Maciariello, 2014, p. 62) I have found this to be so true in turning schools around. This is one of the most important lessons I have learned from my postdoctoral professional development at Harvard University. We talk about having too many resources. I know that sounds really weird coming from an educational leader. Too many resources? Yes, if you have not asked yourself, “What am I (or our school or organization) willing to give up?” We should abandon, or not start at all, programs where even great success is unlikely to make a significant difference.
Maciariello (2014) argued that economic results require that staff efforts be concentrated upon the few activities that are capable of producing significant business results. This would be true for schools as well. Knowing who we serve and what makes us distinct allows us to concentrate our resources on a few major opportunities. This also means being prepared to eliminate past programs and best practices that are no longer productive or getting the results needed to move our organizations to the next level. “If leaders are unable to slough off yesterday, to abandon yesterday, they simply will not be able to create tomorrow.” (Maciariello, 2014, p. 63) Without targeting and focusing on the right things we will not be able to exploit our resources strategically for success.
Just like a flashlight focused on an object in the darkness, we must target ourselves on the areas where a little success will have the greatest impact. Don’t forget the key question here: What are the “right results” for our school or organization?
Reference
Maciariello, J. A. (2014). A year with Peter Drucker: 52 weeks of coaching for leadership effectiveness. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers.
Manipulation of Reality
“The problem is that 25 years after Photoshop launched, we’d much prefer manipulations of reality to reality itself.” This statement by Caitlin Dewey of The Washington Post in a very well written article entitled “How 25 years of Photoshop changed the way we see reality” really got me to thinking about whether this was true in all parts of our lives, not just photos and appearance. This great article was about a set of unretouched Beyoncé photos that appeared on a fan site called Beyoncé World on Wednesday morning. Within an hour the pictures were taken down, but fans were angry not that Beyoncé had been Photoshopped to breathtaking beauty, but that someone had shown her without manipulation.
So, have we really come to a time that we do prefer manipulation to reality? If so, what implications are there for leaders? The more I reflected the more I realized there are similarities between leading and manipulation. Both imply action and involve influencing people to do things. Furthermore, both ultimately benefit the person who is either doing the leading or the manipulation. Manipulation is what happens when we influence someone to do something and only we benefit from their actions. Think about it; there is really only one person that benefits from the Photoshopped pictures of Beyoncé – her. Leadership, in contrast, works to ensure that both parties benefit. For a relationship to be sustainable you need to be getting at least as much as you are giving from relationships (both personal and professional). While sounding selfish, I would argue that a relationship where one party gives without receiving much in return only breeds resentment over time. Again, this is what happens with manipulation.
As Dewey also stated in her article, “It’s worth remembering… that perfection and reality are not the same thing.” As leaders we must always make sure we are not creating distorted realities for our organizations and those we serve.
President’s Day With Woodrow Wilson
On this President’s Day I want to reflect on a president who I have always been very intrigued with. Our 28th President was a successful academic who took a different path to the White House than Presidents before and after. Woodrow Wilson attended college at what is now Princeton University, studied law at the University of Virginia, and earned a Ph.D. from Johns Hopkins University. Wilson is our only President to have a doctorate. He later taught at Princeton, and became president of the university in 1902. As a scholar he was the leading political scientist of his day. As an academic president, he transformed Princeton into a leading university. Wilson was President of Princeton from 1902-1910.
John Milton Cooper Jr. described Wilson this way in his book Woodrow Wilson: A Biography: “Boldness and thinking big marked Wilson all his life, and those qualities helped make him the only president who rose to the top in two professions entirely removed from public affairs.” Woodrow Wilson’s experience as a transformational leader at Princeton is what I believe prepared him for political office. He was “a dynamic reformer” as Governor of New Jersey from 1910-1912. As President of the United States he led the country into and through World War I.
Leaders like Woodrow Wilson advance the cause because they see what others do not and are willing to move toward that vision. As Wilson said, “I would rather fail in a cause that would ultimately succeed, than succeed in a cause that would ultimately fail.” Such work calls for boldness. Wilson also said, “Do not follow people who stand still.” As we come to the end of President’s Day, let’s think about these questions: Are you moving to transform your organization or cause social change? Where do you need to be more bold?
Unwavering Steadfastness & Loyalty
Leaders must be strong, don’t they? Also, leaders must demonstrate they are decisive, resolute, and have all the answers. Right?
Wrong? Leaders should strive for clarity, not necessarily certainty. It is extremely hard to operate today with 100% certainty all the time. Therefore, we should strive for clarity. I have blogged about this before. Click here to read my previous post, “Lead With Clarity, Not Certainty.”
Back to the earlier comments I led off with. Leaders should be allowed to change their minds and should not be afraid to consult others for help answering questions. If the team is developed correctly, leaders should be getting input from everyone. Many times the term “unwavering” is used to describe the decisiveness of a leader. I would rather use this term to describe the leaders unwavering loyalty and steadfastness to those she leads and the organization she serves.
Steadfastness is a disposition of choice to embrace and pursue a worthy goal or objective, despite obstacles. This steadfastness should not be confused with obstinance or not making changes when it is clear a change in direction is needed or necessary. Steadfastness is also a mark of moral maturity and courage. When challenged or facing obstacles and leadership storms we must use our counsels of wisdom.
Great leaders will step outside of their comfort zones. By exercising their flexibility, the leaders becomes stronger. He recognizes the rewards of the risk. Finally, steadfastness allows great leaders to act calmly in the face of disruption or catastrophe. The unwavering leader is resolved to see things through.
It behooves us, then, as leaders, to work at having the physical, mental, and emotional stamina to be an unwavering leader for those we serve.
Important, Not Urgent!
Peter Drucker was the master of focusing his time on the important, not the urgent. He led a focused life doing what he felt he was called to do. Drucker knew how to work on the truly important issues and abandon all the rest (Maciariello, 2014). We have our own purpose in life that should include balance between work and pleasure. But there will always be a decision to make between the important and the urgent.
In advising leaders, Drucker believed in focusing on their processes of leadership, organization and management, including the development of people, building community, and planning for succession (Maciariello, 2014). A pretty good list of focal points if you ask me. Keeping this in mind it is important to remember: You are responsible for allocating your life.
In this week’s lesson I learned of Harry Hopkins, one of President Franklin Roosevelt’s top advisers during World War II. Because he was dying of stomach cancer toward the end of his service, he was forced learn how to do the important and not the urgent. He was able to cut out everything but truly important and vital matters. Churchill called him “Lord Heart of the Matter” and believed he accomplished more than anyone else in wartime Washington. I have added the book The Hopkins Touch: Harry Hopkins and the Forging of the Alliance to Defeat Hitler by David L. Roll to my bookshelf to read this year.
Drucker believed effective leaders do not start out with the question, “What do I want to accomplish?” They start out with the question, “What needs to be done?” He believed, “If there is any one secret of effectiveness, it is concentration.” We must learn in the midst of multiple demands, to give priority, and the necessary amount of time and focus, to the important rather than to the urgent (Maciariello, 2014).
Maciariello (2014) suggested forming a habit of pausing to distinguish the difference between the important and the urgent demands on your time. In order to determine the decisions and work that is important, you must answer the question, “What do I want to be remembered for?” The answer that you come up with will give your life focus and purpose.
I’ll leave you with a question to reflect on: How Have You Allocated Your Life?
Reference
Maciariello, J. A. (2014). A year with Peter Drucker: 52 weeks of coaching for leadership effectiveness. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers.
Leadership At The Highest Level
During my A Year With Peter Drucker professional growth time this morning I learned that the two leaders that Peter Drucker was most influenced by were President Harry S. Truman and Cyrus the Great. Truman because of his immediate recognition of Israel after being granted statehood by the United Nations and Cyrus the Great for freeing and returning the Jews to Jerusalem. Cyrus and Truman were both men of integrity who had sympathy for the human condition. Drucker believed that integrity, and doing the right thing, is the essence of leadership (Maciariello, 2014).
Drucker did a lot of reading and studying outside the realm of management. He did this because he believed that leadership at the highest level is rooted in history, religion, sympathy, and human reality (Maciariello, 2014). This studying beyond one’s own discipline coupled with enough practical experience to know real challenges was very important to Drucker. He believed the ability to quantify is very important in management, but when leading there are unique events that can only be observed through human perception. “What we can perceive is shaped by what we know and that can be aided by broadly educating ourselves” (Marciarello, 2014, p. 38). Perception can be trained so we can identify unique events as they unfold.
Xenophon said, “Adversity is the test of leadership.” Because this is true we must develop a personal growth plan to broaden ourselves in all realms including the humanities and social sciences. We need to follow Peter Drucker’s example and read widely outside of our own disciplines. Will you pledge, along with me to do this? To this end I have added two books to my “to read” shelf this morning:
Reference
Maciariello, J. A. (2014). A year with Peter Drucker: 52 weeks of coaching for leadership effectiveness. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers.
Education: Exploiting Knowledge
“Education will become the center of the knowledge society, and schooling its key institution.” This quote by Peter Drucker in May of 2004 has proven so true as we begin 2015. Week 4 of A Year With Peter Drucker: 52 Weeks of Coaching for Leadership Effectiveness by Joseph A. Maciariello (2014) deals with the idea that education is a key to economic development. As I was reading this week’s lesson I couldn’t help but remember what the late H. Dean Evans, former Indiana State Superintendent of Education, used to say about this related to taxes. I had the honor of working for Dr. Evans, and he would say: “The way to raise taxes is to provide great training and education and then everyone will have great jobs and be paying more taxes.” A pretty basic, but true concept. I realize, however, and he did too, that this is a very complex issue to solve.
The lesson this week started with a story about E-Veritas Trading Network in Manila, Philippines. Bottom line is this company trained knowledge workers to develop an entire electronic trading system to deliver quality and safe food to their people at a low cost they could afford (Maciariello, 2014). In other words, they created human capital within people at the bottom of the economic and social pyramid so they could develop rapidly and escape poverty. There is evidence all over the world that through education and management training, those at the lower levels of the social and economic pyramid can be lifted up. People globally can be helped to be sheltered from corruption from being involved in small-scale local economic activity.
For another example we can look to South Korea. Within 25 years after the Korean War, Korea became a highly developed country. They did this by using the universities and colleges of the United States for management education of their people. Then when their students returned home all of that knowledge was shared and assimilated into their businesses and economy (Maciariello, 2014). Maciariello argued it is much more effective and efficient to provide resources for educating present and future leaders of a developing country than providing financial aid (Maciariello, 2014).
This concept is equally true domestically in our own country. It is no secret and is widely accepted that the practice of investing in employee development is the most beneficial practice an organization can partake in. This is why the habit of continuous learning is so important. We must be teaching our students how to learn, because the practice of continual learning will be very important to their generation. It is interesting to me how education and knowledge acquisition has really jumped to the forefront of American politics. This jump has even surpassed over the importance of property and capital acquisition that dominated the Age of Capitalism.
Two questions that need to be answered for learners of all ages, whether P-16 or adult professional, are: What mix of knowledge is required for everybody? and What is “quality” in learning and teaching? Can you imagine if we could come up with these answers in a way that everyone can agree on? Interesting, many businesses and organizations have. Maybe at the P-16 level there needs to be more autonomy to evaluate what quality looks like for the students served.
I was moved by this 1993 quote from Peter Drucker: “No country, industry, or company has any ‘natural’ advantage or disadvantage. The only advantage it can possess is the ability to exploit universally available knowledge (Maciariello, 2014, p. 32). Think about how much more universally available that knowledge is today than when Drucker wrote that. Have you and your organization made learning a lifelong habit? It is never too late to start. Don’t forget the two questions that must be answered for all learners in the previous paragraph and I would add a third: How do the individuals in your organization and you yourself learn? We all learn differently so make sure to differentiate for those differences. Have a great week!
Reference
Maciariello, J. A. (2014). A year with Peter Drucker: 52 weeks of coaching for leadership effectiveness. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers.
Byron's Babbles 
leave a comment