HSD 7

In the review of our 2010 Human Systems Dynamics Certification course {ref. HSD 3}, F. and I continued our discussion about tools to deal with each type of change.

For static or dynamic change, traditional methods can be used to measure outcomes; e.g. statistical methods from quality control like histograms, distribution curves, etc. However, Project Management might work for static or dynamic change but not dynamical change because for this type of change we don't know what the interactions and interchanges between the agents are, and might be, as the project progresses.

Another difficulty we recognized comes up with stereotypical management activities such as the Board of Directors asking for the forecast of profit results for the next quarter without understanding that the results are actually due to dynamical change. This situation requires management understanding of dynamical change and comfort with the uncertainty of unknown influences and with imprecise results. In other words, as F. noted: a reduction in strategic planning replaced by strategic thinking.

The golden rule F. suggested is to observe each type of change without prejudice. In other words, treat each situation with the scientific method starting with observation and description to reach a hypothesis. Instead of using methods based on intuition, use a systematic approach. That would include being careful to understand the type of change in front of us using the questions we discussed last time. {ref. HSD 6}

We then began looking more deeply at dynamical change.

With open boundaries around the system, influencers are outside the system in question and are unknown. F. pondered the possibility of attempting to determine the “openness / closeness” of a system. Could we build a rating method that categorizes systems on a scale from “closed” to “open”? My concern is that even with such a rating there would be difficulties: a closed box in a sealed room is subject to external influences some of which are known, such as gravity, temperature, etc. but this situation is still subject to unknowns.

I applied this difficulty to planning a workshop. We can get all the details available about the participants, the venue, the circumstances, etc. - in short, think about all possibilities. However, there still will be surprises, and unknowns that affect the outcome. Therefore, understanding the dynamical nature of the situation leads to an approach which can use the surprising, emergent elements successfully.

We agreed that the approach used in an “Open Space Technology” workshop {Harrison Owen} comprehends that there will be unknowable influences on the participants, and the workshop as a whole. This knowledge allows the organizers and participants to use these influences to achieve emergent and unexpected results. Accordingly, the goal is not to seek a specific result but to use an approach that allows a variety of unanticipated results.

More to come.

HSD 6

In the review of our 2010 Human Systems Dynamics Certification course {ref. HSD 3}, F. and I continued our discussion about uncertainty and change.

F. described a recent commercial flight which was delayed for 2 hours; however, their connecting flight was also delayed so after a lot of uncertainty everything worked out. The extra efforts that anxious people went through to find alternatives turned out to be unnecessary. His hypothesis is that in certain conditions of “wellness” the majority of humans prefer to stay in the status quo and don't like change. Alternatively, if not happy, people will look for change.

We next discussed the different kinds of change: static change, dynamic change, dynamical change. It seems that “static” change is a contradiction in words. Accordingly, “stability” in the starting and ending states is an important element. F. feels that for him the word “transformation” is closer to dynamic change; however, for me it means static change since the final state is the new stable transformation. Words, words, words!

We agreed that people should have an emotional reaction to change. Generally, people are afraid of change, particularly dynamical change where the results can't be predicted, and the timing and flow is very uncertain. Or people may be happy with a change that promises something better for them, and a list of emotions felt during change should include hope. As a pilot, I experience joy and fear in the many changes during a flight, with fear being offset by good planning, good instruction, and practice. (The Landscape Diagram tool provides good insight into someone's comfort with change.)

We talked about questions to better understand types of change such as:

For static changes:

• what are the initial and final states of the change?
• what energy is needed for the change?
• risk: ignoring context leads to incorrect impact
• F. noted that a good examples of static change are to replace a tire on a car, moving from one house to another, a theatre performance in different venues - these are predictable, we have a good idea of energy required

For dynamic change:

• what are the initial conditions?
• what is the predictable flow?
• risk: identification of the border between the states
• Examples have more energy, more change occurs - many more pieces/elements/more agents, culture, interactions more varied, energy flowing out to the environment

For dynamical change:

• what is the energy/tension/stress in each level of the system?
• how are the agents connected & what is the strength of these connections?
• what interactions are occurring?
• risk: how you view the system; human desire to predict all results to help you understand life
• Examples have many outcomes possible depending upon the interaction of agents; e.g., political events in the middle east and in South America

We finished by exploring the idea of using some of these questions to identify each type of change before it happens.

More to come.

HSD 5

In the review of our 2010 Human Systems Dynamics Certification course {ref. HSD 3}, F. and I completed (for now) our discussion of the definition of a Complex Adaptive System. 

F. describes our review as: Continuing our travel in the past for a better future. (Which I think is cool, and reminded me of this TV show. Anyone remember the title?)

• F. questioned "system wide patterns being created by agents". Given that agents can create actions (or at least have the ability and freedom to act), some of these actions have strong connections or weak connections, and what are the parameters for this? As a real-life example: the VP of IT & VP of Operations debating and disagreeing about IT solutions for the business departments. Both VPs also have HR/Training managers with very different views. Their overall boss wants more synergy between them all. So we have emergent patterns that influence the agents (all 5 of them) which in turn influence the system, particularly with respect to the IT solutions chosen (in this example).
• Additionally, there are degrees of strength between the agents: levels of power, influence, authority, frequency of interaction, etc. Further, there may be invisible agents in the system who are not readily apparent. So as we analyze this system, we may wish to separate out the interactions between the combinations of agents and note the strength (influence) of these interactions.
• We then moved on to the question of Uncertainty. F. noted that patterns vary widely by geography and country; for example: for him, international flights leave more consistently on-time than local flights. There are differences in uncertainty according to culture, and situation.
• Our final note for this session was that some people still see organizations as mechanical and ordered and don't realize they are complex adaptive systems. Accordingly, they think they are in control when they are not, and don't see the possibility and probability of change coming.

More to come.

HSD 4

In the review of our 2010 Human Systems Dynamics Certification course {ref. last blog post}, F. and I paused at the following spots and commented or shared insights:

• the domain of Complexity Sciences is - well - complex! Or at the very least, very busy and full to the brim. F. counted 13 different fields of study on the provided list of Complexity Sciences, and many we agreed we couldn't explain: "nK Landscapes", "Autopoiesis", "Self-Organized Criticality", etc. They aren't on my lips as I wake up each day!
• nonetheless; now we have taken the course, we are experts on the field of Complex Adaptive Systems! 😁
• combining Complexity Sciences and Social Sciences (more familiarity here - augmented by Twitter and FussBook - LOL) we get Human Systems Dynamics as the intersection. So if you are alive and interacting with other humans you are in the HSD game.
• Simple Rules (example in the previous post) are important initial conditions for every productive behaviour toward a desired result. F. added the insight that to “Attend to the part, the whole and the greater whole” (4^th. rule in the list for the HSD Institute) one also needs to attend to oneself. This is like the maxim I've used in our teamwork sessions: that in an in-flight emergency, one needs to secure their oxygen mask first before trying to help others. So in any situation where help is required or to be given, self-care is important (health, wellness, adequate sleep, minimal stress, etc.). Self-care is also recognized as an important virtue in the teamwork protocols - the Core - from McCarthy Technologies as described in my blogs Team Tips. And even more alignment of best practice occurs with the Personal Commitments which are the introduction to the Core. These are also the Simple Rules which govern the best in team behaviours, including my favourite: “Don't do anything dumb on purpose.” (The only discrepancy between the two bodies of knowledge is that HSD recommends six rules or less - to keep it simple. The Core has a longer list of Commitments.)
• then we got to the definition of a Complex Adaptive System, which is a biggee! F. was struck by the words “freedom to act”: do the values of, and accepted behaviours in, an organization really allow freedom among the individual agents? For example; if one acts outside of the framework then they don't belong in that system, or can be invited to leave the system, and therefore are restrained. (F. finds more unpredictable behaviours in government than in private companies because they are not as focused on the company's goals). Groups often don't share a vision and so act randomly; however, when functioning more as team they know each other better and listen better and act more uniformly. Perhaps the possibility of “freedom to act” depends on using rules to create the environment for freedom - like a country's constitution. We concluded that rules of behaviour on teams leads to greater freedom and creativity; like agreeing in advance to allow unpredictability. My attention was on “in unpredictable ways” (like recent elections). My memory is that it is the unforeseen variety of possible outcomes that makes the system complex. Also, the difference between “complicated” (like a modern, working, internal combustion engine) and “complex” is that complicated things can be designed, built, re-assembled, whereas complex things are unknowable as a whole. We can't build democratic election results. (We do know how to complain!)

We paused at that point and agreed to continue the review at our next meeting.

More to come.

HSD 3 {HSD 1 revisited*}

A friend has been nibbling away at me over the last few years to review our HSD Certification course. (As I write the acronym it occurs to me that it sounds like a disease. 😜 )

HSD is far from a disease - it's a means to a cure. It stands for Human Systems Dynamics and provides a perspective on organizations and all the interactions and related ups and downs that occur when groups of two or more humans try to accomplish something.

You know: CHAOS. (The most recent elections in the U.S. and about Brexit might come to mind.)

Wouldn't it be wonderful if someone could provide some insight and practical suggestions to deal with this kind of mess? The mess being a complex system that has unforeseen and unintended consequences? Like... oh, LIFE in general?

Well, Glenda Eoyang and the HSD Institute can, and do!

And since my lovely and talented partner, Vickie Gray, and I have dealt with many messy organizations with complex problems throughout our consulting days, Human Systems Dynamics seemed very worth learning about. So we did, by taking the HSD Certification course from Glenda in 2010.

As well as being a rewarding, insightful, and revealing learning experience we got to work with a cohort of classmates with years of organizational experience and insight on the related problems and challenges they had tackled.

One of the kindred consultant spirits in the group was F., and it was his idea to review the course, share experiences and new learning, and discuss questions since six years has passed.

So F. has been poking at me and trying to set aside time in his busy practice for us to talk. Today was our first solid crack at opening our class binders and walking through the materials. 

I thought it would be useful to capture our thoughts and insights here as we go forward.

To set the stage I'm borrowing the Simple Rules that the Institute established for their course:

• Teach and learn in every action
• Search for the true and the useful
• Give and get value for value
• Attend to the part, the whole and the greater whole
• Engage in joyful practice
• Share the HSD story

Just the concept to even have Simple Rules to follow as part of the initial conditions for group behaviour was one of the first lessons. I'm sure we'll come back to this later.

Stay tuned for more!

{* My first blog post on HSD was in 2010.}

Team Tips - 24 {Protocol Check - What do you think?}

Friday Brag (borrowed from my sweetheart Vickie)(steal from the best):

Highest number ever of page views of my blog of my last post “Team Tips - 23”. Yay!

You can now say: “You did that?”, and I can reply: “I did that!”

I also received some complimentary comments, and an offer of a reply to my Ask for Help. “All good” as they say locally.

I'm also receiving the highest volume of email spam, which probably means the evil bots are mining their way from the blog to my website and my supposedly “un-bot-able” email address. The offers of deposited funds, court action, lewd (I'm assuming) photos, follow-ups to fictitious requests for business proposals, fake billing, etc. are actually quite creative. One even claims that I've been caught speeding on a traffic camera - as if they existed here. If the spelling and grammar weren't so atrocious one could be tempted to pay attention to them. And if they didn't have the huge red warning flag of the attached zip file.

Following the line of the last post, it would be nice to scream “Protocol Check” at them.

But that isn't at all the point of Protocol Check.

While it would occasionally feel really good, and satisfying, and therapeutic to yell at someone who gets a Protocol wrong, or breaks a Commitment, that's not what Protocol Check is for. It's really a learning tool.

If I bury an Ask for Help inside a Perfection Game, or Check In angry about someone's behaviour without asking their intention, or just generally get the Protocol steps wrong, that's a great opportunity to gently, quietly, compassionately have a conversation with me about the Protocols in a spirit of shared learning.

It might go:

• Paul, Protocol Check.
• Oh? 
• I'm wondering what your intention was in that Perfection Game.
• Err .... I think I was looking for some information.
• OK; let's both look at the Core Protocols and see what it says about the Perfection Game. Were you really trying to Ask for Help?
• Hmmmm. Let's have a look. Maybe there is a better way than what I did.

In this kind of interaction both parties, adhering to the Commitments, are interested in discovering how the Protocols in question work, and the best way to use them.

For me, it is important that both parties are open to learning and teaching simultaneously. Alternatively, the risk is that one party becomes the “Protocol God” and rains fire and brimstone down on the transgressor.

Even when, as occurred in one of our BootCamps, a participant had the Protocols virtually memorized, and became Mr. Protocol Check. Happily, it all became fun: we had a Protocol Check dance, and phone ring tone imitating his specially exaggerated Protocol Check voice. But he followed “Rule Number 6” (Art of Possibility, Zander & Zander) and it was hilarious learning for all of us.

So while no one objected to my licence in writing about “screaming Protocol Check” last time, that's not how it is done.

Nevertheless, the ring tone may still be available.

Team Tips - 23 {Protocol Check - on myself}

I've been thinking about my last post of Team Tips - Team Tips 22 {Ouch, that hurts - Part 2} - and that no one responded to my challenge.

And how that is actually a good thing. Weird, eh?

I know that 20+ folks looked at the blog page, and so it is reasonable that some even read it. But not one comment.

Now, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence (or more precisely, is not evidence - period.) Someone out there may be busy pondering my questions, researching articles, sharpening their cyber pencils, drafting an essay, getting copy editor revisions, and so on. Or not!

However, no response is perfectly reasonable, because I broke the rules.

The Perfection Game is one of the Core Protocols. I like the choice “Protocols” because it implies following a procedure, a set of steps. In other words, doing it - the Protocol - properly. After all, if you want to do things well, then once you have a successful method follow it! At least until a better procedure shows up.

So I shouldn't have hidden an Ask for Help inside a pretend Perfection Game. Sure, I presented it as “an example” to skirt the fact that you didn't actually ask me to Perfect your reading of the post. But a donkey having been through the car wash is still a donkey.

I should have just Asked for Help directly.

All of you who didn't comment - all 100% - congrats! You could have gleefully screamed “Protocol Check!!” and pointed out the error of my ways. You could have asked me for an intention check to clarify my purpose, and then with that clarification from me then gleefully screamed “Protocol Check!!”. Or you could have ignored my inappropriate behaviour and walked away, as the evidence might indicate you did.

The point of having these atoms of proven successful group behaviour - the Protocols - is that everyone in the group knows them, how to use them, what to do if they suspect improper use. All of which set up the best known initial conditions for successful teamwork. If you would rather use your own version of the Protocols, or not use them at all, be my guest. Let me know how that is working for you.

In the meantime, let me Ask for Help properly:

• Will you use the Comments area to note some [employee] performance examples for which the Perfection Game doesn't seem to work; and
• when using the Perfection Game as your performance management method, a simple scheme to allocate merit increase money if it must be based on job performance?
  

Management 11

A very special person is lining up his first management assignment. 

He's been poking at the idea for some time, even tried for an opening in his organization a while ago. Another opportunity has now come along and we've been talking about it: what the current situation is, is he interested, is he ready, what are the implications, etc., etc.

These conversations are wonderful for me because I love sharing what I've learned and the results. I'm a strong believer in the pilot's adage: Learn from the mistakes of others, because you won't live long enough to make them all yourself.

So after an ask for help from him to prepare for this new opening, I've been thinking about how best to be helpful. How do I usefully condense 20+ years of management learning and experience? It suddenly occurred to me that I had posted thoughts on management before, and they might be useful. So the list below is an index of management topics from which anyone can pick and choose items of interest.

Management

• Management 1: The prospective manager dilemma
• Management 2: Precision of terms
• Management 3: My manager is a bozo
• Management 4: Some definitions, to have the correct discussion
• Management 5: My manager is my best customer?
• Management 6: Managing my manager!?
• Management 7: Jobs vs. Roles
• Management 8: Fun with role play
• Management 9: Management training?
• Management 10: Coaching and mentoring and asking for help

And just in case you thought you would see more on "leadership" in these, there are lots of posts on Leadership starting with:

• Leadership 1: Leadership can come from anywhere

through to 

• Leadership 13: Smart leadership

(If you want to scan through all the Leadership posts, just look in the Archive list (middle right), select an arrowhead beside a date to find the desired topic. (Google organizes by date instead of topic.))

Now the fun begins! What does he find most interesting? What did I leave out? Do these posts help him get results?
Stand by!

Team Tips - 22 {Ouch, that hurts - Part 2}

(For the folks just switching from a code window)

BEGIN

IF: you've read “Ouch, that hurts - Part 1”

THEN: jump to END

ELSE: read “Ouch, that hurts - Part 1”

END

So now you know how the Perfection Game works. It's one of the Core Protocols. It could be called the Perfection Protocol, but that could be problematic because we are only human and as much as I would like to improve I'm not counting on getting to complete perfection. I'm such a slacker.

Besides, it really is fun as a game: Do something, Perfect it (Caps meaning Perfection Game steps), do it again, Perfect it, etc. Kids love it. I'm glad I'm a kid.

When I wasn't a kid, I had this very serious corporate manager job being a very serious corporate manager and eventually became a very serious corporate manager of very serious corporate managers. One of the duties of being a very serious corporate manager was to evaluate employee performance, following a very serious corporate policy and filling in very serious corporate forms describing and scoring all manner of employee performance and behaviours.

I'm sure you know what I'm referring to:

• describe the employee's performance over the previous period
• highlight job responsibilities done well, or requiring improvement, for all 99 job duties
• from the following exhaustive sets of descriptors, choose characteristics that best describe the employee's attributes, and those requiring more focus
• etc., etc.
• provide an overall summary score out of 5

All of this is, at best, a well intentioned effort to provide guidance to the manager and to standardize a process that ensures the employee gets some information on their performance in a scheduled, repetitive manner.

But, at worst, it becomes a way to find enough sugar to cover the medicine of enough negative concerns to keep the final score centered on a bell curve. If everyone is regularly at a 4 or 5 out of 5 then they are over performing in their job, ready for promotion, and candidates for salary increases (when there is merit increase money available.) And as a boss, you didn't do it right.

That becomes a mess.

It is stressful for the manager, stressful for the employee, each jockeying for position. Feedback becomes a negative experience even though it should include amplification information as well as dampening. The score keeping becomes a case of “1 aw-shit cancels out 10 attaboys”.

Alternatively, imagine how pleasant and useful the Perfection Game plays out:

Boss:
"Continue doing this, stop doing that, add these things, and I'll be happy."
You: (Realizing the boss doesn't have his facts right, or missed some of your best moves)
"You didn't mention the amazing thing I did 6 months ago; do you still want more of that?
(Realizing the boss is asking for you to do something you are currently doing)
"I can certainly do that." 
(Realizing that you don't understand what is wanted) 
"Happy to give it my best shot; how would it look when I do it?" (Collecting requirements and a definition of “done”.)

As the boss, I don't have to wrestle my way through negative feedback, finding the right words, trying not to hurt feelings, struggling with cultural or maturity differences, etc., etc.

And if the employee follows all the Perfection Game steps and decides to ignore my suggestions, then I am already prepared for the next round - rinse and repeat - until one of you has had enough and you part company.

Now that you have read this far, here's some Perfection for You (provided as an example since you didn't actually ask for it):

• 8/10
• I like that you persisted, put up with my quirky humour, and got to this point
• For a 10, use the Comments area to note some employee performance examples for which the Perfection Game doesn't seem to work; and/or, when using the Perfection Game as your performance management method, a simple scheme to allocate merit increase money if it must be based on job performance.

(Back to your code window - I hear the boss coming!)

Team Tips - 21 {Ouch, that hurts - Part 1}

You've been to the doctor, right?

There's always the moment when the doctor or nurse has to give you a needle, or draw blood, or otherwise inflict some unmentionable procedure on, or in (ew), some unmentionable part of your humanity.

That's when you hear the phrase:

This won't hurt a bit.

Just like when a “best friend”, or business associate, or the boss at performance evaluation time thinks you really need to hear some feedback, some constructive criticism. After all doesn't everyone want to improve? See their mistakes and learn from them? Make themselves a better person?

This won't hurt a bit. This is for your own good!

It's a wonderful idea if you are the “helper”: being a good friend, advising someone with your pearls of wisdom. But it's not so much fun being the “helpee”. Particularly when it is “inflicted help”. (I think every instance of feedback should be automatically matched in strength and duration with a return message; not as defensiveness or revenge. Just to return the favour.)

Ah, Reeves, you just don't want to hear criticism. You just don't want to be a better person. I'm, like, trying to help you here!

Hmmmm: right; wrong; wrong.

Right: I don't want to hear criticism. I may not respect the source; I may not like the intent; and I've already got my own imaginary critic whispering in my ear.
Wrong: I do want to be a better person. Returning as a dung beetle isn't at the top of my list (see previous post).
Wrong: You really aren't helping. If you really intended to help you would ask me how I would like to receive the “feedback” you have for me.

What I would like you to do, when I ask, for the topic of concern:

1. Tell me how I'm doing numerically, roughly, on a scale of 1 to 10. 
2. Tell me what you like and think I should keep doing 
3. Tell me what I should do differently, or add, to make the score a perfect 10, from your point of view. 

Now:

• I have a quick idea of how I'm doing: 10 out of 10 means I'm good for now; 1 out of 10 means you have lots of improvement ideas for me. 
• And I know what things you think I should continue doing. 
• And, best of all, I know what you think I should do more of, or do better, or add to my game. 
• The final component is that I can decide to use, or not, any of your suggestions. Nothing inflicted. 

In fact, this can be seen as a game. We could even call it, say, the Perfection Game. Crazy! 

It could be part of the Core Protocols. 

Oooops; Jim & Michele McCarthy already thought of that.

10 /10 from me.

Team Tips – 20 {I'm being reincarnated as a what!?}

OK; I have a confession to make.

Last blog I said I had no evidence of anyone reading my posts. That was a bit of poetic licence to make the point that I have not been overwhelmed with responses or comments.

Google Analytics really does know I exist - I use their blogging tools. And they do report pulses of readership when I actually post something. I also have a very small cadre of blog followers. My last article even received several comments and some Google “pluses”.

So there are a handful out there who make the time to read through my stuff. There've been no arguments, no debates, no requests for other topics, but I'm not complaining. Well, maybe just a little.

But when the evidence of readership knocked on the door of my conscience, my virtue alarm went off.

“Brrrraaaaaap! Excuse me, sir, but you said you had no evidence when there is evidence. That is in direct violation of your Integrity virtue. Your penalty is 100 demerit points and no use of the virtue halo for a week.”

If, at this point, you think I should change brands of coffee because clearly something weird has affected my brain, please let me explain.

After the Ask for Help protocol mentioned in my last post, Personal Alignment is for me the next most powerful tool in the Core Protocols for personal growth and improvement. The essence of Personal Alignment is first to know what you want out of life - not just stuff - but your legacy, your contribution, your karmic achievement to avoid reincarnation as a dung beetle. (Just to hedge my bets: no offense to any dung beetles out there; I'm sure you're swell folks.)

And second is to choose a virtue (a handy list of suggestions is provided) which feels like it will help you get to your goal.

Before my experienced friends, or the Core Protocol police, object, I admit that this is how I use Personal Alignment: going for the big existential goal. That is not the critical part. The critical part is choosing a virtue to work on that feels like it will help surmount the obstacles that have prevented you so far in getting you to what you want, whatever it is. Virtues like: Self Awareness, Faith, Hope, Passion, Self-Care, Courage, Wisdom, Peace, Joy, Integrity...

So just pause a moment and chew on that. It's not about working harder, getting up earlier, staying later, cramming more into your life to get what you want. It's about virtue. (Yeah; you're wondering about my brand of coffee again!)

The “work” is putting energy into your chosen virtue, hanging on to it, thinking about it, exercising it, checking it's health.

So in my case the virtue of Integrity is a big deal for me because I've often been in situations where my thinking, my talking, and my acting were not coherent, were not aligned, were not in sync; for example, saying I would do one thing, then actually doing another. My Personal Alignment has been Integrity many times, and at other times while focused on a different virtue, Integrity has still been hanging around, just offstage. That happens after 10+ years of Personal Alignments; the virtue becomes a friend, an ally, a helper. It's like a personal assistant nudging you, reminding you, checking your temperature.

And going “Brrrrraaaaaap” when you slip up.

It's actually very cool. And it's helping me avoid coming back to this earth as a dung beetle.

Team Tips – 19 {Ask, and ye might receive.}

Back when I was a kid my parents made me have a bath every Saturday evening - whether I needed it or not. I'm not kidding! Imagine. 

So here's a blog post whether anyone needs it or not.

There's no evidence that anyone reads any of my posts, but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence - in this case. Maybe Google Analytics forgot about me, and didn't check to see if someone has been peeking. Maybe the feature that allows comments at the bottom isn't working, or is too complicated for people to bother, or requires a secret handshake and the root of minus one for identification.  Maybe there are so many people trying to tell me that they live just for my posts that they are swamping the internet. Or have died waiting.

It was been a while since my last article, (Me Mum is fine, by the way, in spite of all previous indications to the contrary): some 23 months and 13 days ago if you like hard data.

So for all you billions of fans out there, here's a poke to say I'm still here, still kicking, still training and consulting and helping people be their best. When they really want the help, that is.

I've made lots of offers with few takers. If we're talking evidence, the data that there have been few takers seems to reinforce the human condition that we all love to forge ahead independently without asking for help because that's the err, umm, adult? thing to do. Our mature egos balk at looking like, or admitting, there might be something we don't already know, or are proficient at, or with which we could use some assistance.

Of course, how do we know help is available, or that the helper really knows something we don't, or can actually explain it so we can learn something, or might actually be useful and not waste our time when we are busy struggling? How do we even know what we don't know?

Welllllll - we don't. Unless we ASK.

Asking for help - about anything - is still one of the best kept secrets for success in the world.

That's why it is the “secret sauce” in the Core Protocols. Why it is the primary behaviour to learn to develop and to be part of a great team.

And you don't have to wait for Saturday evenings to do it. It works anytime, all the time.