Category Archives: v | b | t

Visibility | Behaviour | Trust

Project threat

What is the biggest obstacle to your project success?

Researching the theory of Systems Dynamics recently I found a reference to the value of asking why. Five times the same question is asked, and each time a more fundamental truth is revealed. Forrester’s early work of SD did not offer this idea, but it seems to work. I can certainly vouch for the value of the follow up question in a consulting context.

When do you want to retire?

I found myself saying the following in answer to this question on LinkedIn a few days ago:

I spent 25 years planning for retirement. I nearly cashed it all in.
My answer now is never. Rethink your tomorrows if you are wishing them away…

Ask yourself what you want to look back on with pride when you take your last breath. Then get started on that in the here and now.

Author via LinkedIn

Perhaps more easily said when the only obstacles in the way of doing what you want, is not knowing what you want. For others I think the reality of life’s challenges cannot so easily be dismissed. I was however reminded of a few truths I had to face of my own. My own modal confusion. Only really uncovered as I faced up to deeper and deeper questions of why. Of then seeing myself being caught up in an illusion that repaying debt and building a nest egg could be my life purpose. Finding plenty of motivations based upon having, not being. It all meant nothing when my wife’s health became a focus anew. I am more present now. But it took several years to be clearer on a better path. My gravest error was confusing a correlation of circumstances with cause.

Correlation is not causation[1]

This is what I deem the greatest risk to this research project. Me. Or more specially my bias and the danger of conflation. My bias is influenced by my wider reading, my professional experience, and my personal journey.  I have become convinced there is link between the layers of perspective afforded by each.

Illusory correlation

Illusory correlation is the psychological term for it. It seems to fit just as well towards projects beyond those of the mind. So is even my remedy simply proof of the illusion too? My visibility | behaviour | trust ( v | b | t ) has informed my own intended change. Visibility of this risk was the first step. Second was to reset behaviours via the control environment to manage it. Thereby increasing trust.

This website a further increase in visibility, another layer of assurance. My behaviour caught by a decision to be taking time, as much as it takes. This is about thoroughness, not speed. Therein the trust via the process.

A better deadline

Finding a passion for learning and research. Being present to this task seems to be my project. It therefore only needs one deadline…

…and no retirement plan.

[1] https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-correlation-2794986

Francis Bacon saw through it

With a few days yet before I rely upon my academic betters to once more guide my learning, I find myself seeking passages from older text that I doubt my psychology syllabus will stretch to. Here are a few lines from one of the stalwarts of applied learning, Francis Bacon. Like all sciences before it, psychology as a science spawned from Philosophy, these passages a case in point. In reminding myself how the essay was once the command of all thought, this author was one of the best.

Nature is often hidden; sometimes overcome; seldom extinguished…bend nature, as a wand…let not a man trust his victory over his nature, too far, for nature will lay buried a great time, and yet revive, upon occasion or temptation…

they are happy men, whose nature’s sort with their vocations…

whatsoever a man commandeth upon himself, let him set hours for it, but whatsoever is agreeable to his nature, let him take no care for any set times; for his thoughts will fly to it, of themselves; so as the spaces of other business, or studies, will suffice…

A man’s nature, runs either to herb or weeds; therefore let him seasonably water the one; and destroy the other.

Francis Bacon 1561-1626, extracts from his essay “Of nature of men”

Just as our respect for all nature begins with our understanding of its will, so too must we understand ourselves if we are to harness our best and manage our worst. There is stoic resolve here, but also hedonistic understanding. To know yourself is to perhaps find both stoic indifference but to also have a quiet peace if doing what your nature has you do best, with least effort. On those rarefied occasions we are blessed enough to choose.

These sage words also remind me of Jungian shadow, those repressed parts of our psyche that we dare to override but reappear unannounced all the same. Psychological impact of denial of what we are. That we do well not to repress, but to understand, integrate, and respect. Thereby finding means to improve. And then make good nourishment from those unwanted weeds.

These are the projects within each of us. Of which psychology can aid us better intend change, rather than simply react to it. This too will become a place for my evaluation of what connects all projects. Increased visibility as leading to our understanding, enabling us to better address our behaviours, and therein trust ourselves more. The more of ourselves we can acknowledge the more consistent our truth to ourselves. All of which I contend myself with thinking Francis Bacon knew quite some centuries before…

About Me

In psychology we are required to look beneath the mask. This blog series is attempting to unmask some hidden parts of projects to engender a more collaborative way.

Find my professional mask here:

Original art
, , , ,

We cannot talk about that!

Something from the weekend, Sir?

This is from my weekend LinkedIn observations. The Danish Government showing themselves able to be authoritative and present, by increasing their visibility, behaving in an accountable way, acknowledging low levels of trust and extending the trust they assume.

Full article from Bloomberg {here}. “Doctor Who Espoused Sex Helped Denmark Weather Covid Storm”. My LinkedIn post {here} and comments from some Danish friends confirming the positive impact of the honesty underlying the actions of Soren Brostrom.

In my opinion this is one more example of a project | within a project, this time at National scale. I also observe this as an attempt to create a singular truth of this project despite the information gaps in place. The metrics of visibility | behaviour | trust positing a useful backdrop to frame my rant.

Danish example

How to behave as a decision-maker in highly uncertain situations. Acknowledge the uncertainty, make brave decisions that are transparent in their reasoning, and actively manage the low trust otherwise present. All motivated by a higher underlying trust in the electorate.

Result: a greater confidence that the project is one that is shared

British example

Continued behaviours reflecting power aimed at deflecting blame. Defensive decision-making. Hidden reasoning intent on managing the science not being open to its wider opinions. All based on the same low level of trust by the electorate, but reciprocated as something to be managed not improved.

Result: reinforced distrust, split agendas.

What I am presenting here is the range of intended change these comparisons are offering. This is an ongoing enquiry and test of this idea.

About Me

In psychology we are required to look beneath the mask. This blog series is attempting to unmask some hidden parts of projects to engender a more collaborative way.

Find my professional mask here:

Original art
,

Being more integrated

Dish watcher 👀

I’m trying to find everyday examples of applying a mode of being vs having, that can translate into project application. Here’s a comparison of two similar projects of repair and how they differed in control framework and why.

In the last month my boiler and my dishwasher both needed expert repair. Neither were time consuming or expensive. In theory one manner of engaging a service repair could have worked for both. However, here’s how they compare using the criteria of visibility | behaviour | trust.

Boiler

This was a recurrence of a problem. A case of wear or tear of a known weakness in a system, a valve that is prone to perish. My relationship with my heating engineer is long-standing and mutually respectful. He charges at reasonable rates. I do not shop around. He explains the fix, because I want to know. I know enough to give him an idea of what he is likely to need to repair. I can offer no value to the repair, other than give authority to conduct what must be done. He is responsible. I am accountable.

Dishwasher

A leak in an old appliance. An asset being sweated to it’s last. Unexpected failure and cause unknown. With no prior knowledge I was prepared to learn some basic checks for wear, blockages, replacements of rudimentary parts such as rubber seals. All were performed as a make-do and see, and a means to understand a little more. No success. Time for the local repair man who I also know well enough. Available but not for two weeks. I chose to wait for this someone because of past experience and trust.

Comparison

The boiler system repair was to be instructive. Dishwasher was enquiring. I offered little ability toward either expert. But there was benefit in being more attentive to the situation least well understood.

I remained close at hand as the dishwasher was expertly checked over. Nothing obvious was wrong, so further enquiry began. I remained. I offered him some latitude to experiment. He fed back immediately. We shared ideas, his with the expert perspective. Mine only from a basic understanding but a willingness to learn. Note how proximity was key. How this enabled optioneering. Being present offered the expert more latitude and clarity on progress on the go.

A fix was eventually found, authorised immediately, permitted to be performed and to fail. It happened to be a good idea and it fixed the problem. Kudos to him. But the risk of failure was retained by me, as project initiator.

In broad terms here is how each compared.

Boiler repair

Clarity of understanding: medium-high

Chance of failure: medium-low

Visibility: low

Behaviour: distant and instructive

Trust: High

Dishwasher repair

Clarity of understanding : low

Chance of failure: high

Visibility: high

Behaviour: present and enquiring

Trust: High

Judging the control framework to project need

The key project observation to make is the control framework I implemented in each. I was engaged enough to at least be an informed buyer. It enabled me to determine a need to be closer when the uncertainty was higher, but also when the specialism necessary was less. It could have been very easy to use the same distant and authoritative approach to each. I think most people do just that. Simply have a contract of service. Be happy with a result, or debate what level of service was received. But note the success of the second, was modestly influenced by the initiator, and trust retained by acknowledging a risk was not better passed on – despite me being no better able to manage it therein.

How relevant is this as a comparison for commercial projects?

This simple comparison is a foreshadow of additional comparisons I will be introducing in upcoming blogs. I see direct comparison to larger scale commercial projects to explain what distance we can close when being an active participant vs passively having change implemented on our behalf. Using these same metrics of what I, as project initiator, could actively be. What it is to be part of the process vs to have an outcome bestowed.

These are the same metrics I am introducing throughout this series. This reasoning will be used in each case. It may offer some insight into how we can all assess how active and present project actors are. Or the more present they should be required to demonstrably be. Next, I will introduce a concept I think we all misunderstand. The transient nature of responsibility, and static nature of who must be held to account.

I am building a case. I am gathering examples of comparison in more complex situations. I hope you will stick around to see more…

please comment, share, subscribe

About Me

In psychology we are required to look beneath the mask. This blog series is attempting to unmask some hidden parts of projects to engender a more collaborative way.

Find my professional mask here:

Original art
, , , ,