New posts from thoughtshrapnel.com
Thought Shrapnel
Just because we cannot imagine a future does not mean it cannot happen
I came across this post yesterday in which I was interested primarily for the graphic. The author didn’t specifically acknowledge the source, but I found Joseph Voros’ blog in which he explains how he came up with what he calls The Futures Cone:
The above descriptions are best considered not as rigidly-separate categories, but rather as nested sets or nested classes of futures, with the progression down through the list moving from the broadest towards more narrow classes, ultimately to a class of one — the ‘projected’. Thus, every future is a potential future, including those we cannot even imagine — these latter are outside the cone, in the ‘dark’ area, as it were. The cone metaphor can be likened to a spotlight or car headlight: bright in the centre and diffusing to darkness at the edge — a nice visual metaphor of the extent of our futures ‘vision’, so to speak. There is a key lesson to the listener when using this metaphor—just because we cannot imagine a future does not mean it cannot happen…
Source: The Voroscope
3 strategies to counter the unseen costs of boundary work within organisations
This article focuses on research that reveals people who do ‘boundary work’ within organisations, that is to say, individuals who span different silos, are more likely to suffer burnout and exhibit negative social behaviours.
The researchers used “field data, surveys, and experiments involving more than 2,000 working adults across two countries” and found that there are three ways that organisations can reap the benefits of this boundary work while mitigating the downsides:
- Strategically integrate cross-silo collaboration into formal roles (i.e. acknowledge their role as “cross-team, cross-function collaborator[s]”)
- Provide adequate resources (e.g. training programmes and tools for collaboration, but also reward and recognition)
- Develop multifaceted check-in mechanisms and provide opportunities to disengage (i.e. gain feedback in multiple ways to gauge when boundary spanners need additional space and/or support)
While past research has documented many benefits of boundary-spanning, we suspected that individuals collaborating across silos may be faced with higher levels of cognitive and emotional demands, which could lead to higher levels of burnout. We also wanted to understand if the exhaustion and burnout they faced may lead to abusive behavior toward others.
[…]
Cross-silo collaboration is a double-edged sword in the modern workplace. While it undeniably serves as a catalyst for expedited coordination and innovation, it can adversely affect the well-being of those who engage in it. The good news is that organizations can adopt a multifaceted approach to support their boundary-spanning employees.
Source: Harvard Business Review
The effort required to maintain internally consistent and intellectually honest positions in the current environment is daunting
Albert Wenger, the only Venture Capitalist I pay any attention to, writes on his blog that… he misses writing on his blog. He talks about a couple of reasons for this, the first of which is the usual excuse of “being too busy”.
It’s the second reason that interests me, though, especially as I feel the same futility:
[T]he world is continuing to descend back into tribalism. And it has been exhausting trying to maintain a high rung approach to topics amid an onslaught of low rung bullshit. Whether it is Israel-Gaza, the Climate Crisis or Artificial Intelligence, the online dialog is dominated by the loudest voices. Words have been rendered devoid of meaning and reduced to pledges of allegiance to a tribe. I start reading what people are saying and often wind up feeling isolated and exhausted. I don’t belong to any of the tribes nor would I want to. But the effort required to maintain internally consistent and intellectually honest positions in such an environment is daunting. And it often seems futile.
Source: Continuations
Image: Timon Studler