Thoughts, Comments, and Observations: Today's Solutions - Tomorrow's Problems

Thoughts, Comments, and Observations: Today's Solutions - Tomorrow's Problems: “We can not solve today's problems at the same level of thought we were at when we created them” Albert Einstein Most of what we ...

Today's Solutions - Tomorrow's Problems

“We can not solve today's problems at the same level of thought we were at when we created them”

Albert Einstein

Most of what we are attempting “fix” today were solutions to past problems.  This should be insight to what is to come - today's solutions will be tomorrow's problems.

Teetering on master of the obvious, good intentions and best hopes seldom solve problems. More often or not, our solutions like those implemented before fail to resolve or solve completely the problem.  I believe it is more or less due to a critical missed opportunity.  That is, the understanding and practice of root cause analysis.  

Akin to treating the common cold, we use different strategies to address the symptoms of a cold.  Actually, our body reacts to any number of viruses (some estimate over a 200) creating a set of symptoms we commonly refer to as a cold.

According to the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, scientists can identify the cause of a large percentage of colds but there remain somewhere between 20 to 30 percent unidentified.  They are hopeful that technology will assist in getting the “causes” identified in the next 10 years.

Treating the symptoms of a cold is not addressing the virus.  We merely treat any number of symptoms hoping to feel better.  Scientists are hopeful that there may in fact be a vaccine in the future to prevent the spread of cold producing viruses.

The good news is that unlike the cold, organizations can in fact not only identify the root cause of a problem but can take steps to adjust, correct, and prevent future problems.

I’ve learned that it's not that we don't want to get to the "root" of a problem.  We either don't invest the time, energy, or effort, or, we don't know how.  Nonetheless, getting to root cause is extremely important to a learning organization.

There are several proven tools and strategies with respect to root cause analysis.  Leaders must select one that best meets the culture, context, and capacity of their organization.

I want to suggest that root cause analysis is not just for identifying the cause of a problem.  It can be used as a tool to identify "what" we stop doing.  

In rereading Permission to Forget by Lee Jenkins, I was reminded of a powerful concept - one that I need to get better at - "add one subtract two" Simply, before adding an initiative, change, policy or etc. effective leaders carefully examine their organization to identify at least two programs, practices, or the like to abandon or eliminate.  Root cause analysis can assist especially in the area of initiative overload.

Determining program efficiency and effectiveness goes beyond identification of root cause.  Bill Daggett introduced the efficiency/effectiveness matrix several years.  The application of the matrix is most powerful when you require the use of actual data to determine where you place a program or practice with respect to efficiency (cost) and effectiveness (performance).

The utility and import of the matrix is found in the depth of data used to determine efficiency and effectiveness.  You must use both qualitative and quantitative data points.  What you can't use or at least depend upon is anecdotal accounts or evidence of cost and results.  Though tempting to rush this, you have to drill down to actual cost and actual performance results.

If we utilize both root cause analysis and the efficiency/effectiveness matrix we can make better decisions today especially in addressing “yesterday’s” solutions – our current problems.

I am confident that we can reduce the likelihood of future leaders looking at our decisions or solutions as problems if we invest in both root cause analysis and the efficiency/effectiveness matrix on a continuous basis. 

Best of Class: "Preferred Future - When was the last time ..."

Best of Class: "Preferred Future - When was the last time ...": Leadership is more than the “now”.   It must be about the future! We have all heard it – “lead...

Thoughts, Comments, and Observations: Leadership is more than the “now”

Thoughts, Comments, and Observations: Leadership is more than the “now”: Leadership is more than the “now”.   It must be about the future! We have all heard it – “leaders have vision!” ...

Leadership is more than the “now”

Leadership is more than the “now”. 

It must be about the future!

We have all heard it – “leaders have vision!”

Arguably, developing others and influence are strong parallels but vision, or the lack of, differentiates leaders – or it should. 

Borrowing from a Cisco advertisement, “Tomorrow starts here” is a great first step of a significant role of leadership – describing a preferred future. 

Being provocative, leading for the moment is not leading at all.  Rather, it is maintaining and more or less a function of managing.  Whereas, leading for the future is defining as well as describing a preferred future in such a way that it compels others to see it, want it, own it, and be a part of doing it.

Preferred future cannot be limited to a picture with today’s issues, problems, or challenges solved.  Rather, preferred future answers a critical question, “What does our work look like completed?”  It requires examining the “mission” and describing the mission accomplished.  It is not about the “how” but clearly articulated “what” and “why”.

I suggest that one reason preferred future is absent from leadership is rather simple not profound.  Time and intentional use of time to invest in conversations about preferred future though important is not valued, as it should.

Vividly, I recall Dr. Carl Glickman asking, “As a nation, why do we celebrate the 4^th of July?”  Though obvious to many, it is a day that we as nation review as well as reflect on the principles of our foundation – why we are a nation.  I believe we also think about where we’ve been, where we are, and where we’re headed as a nation.

I think preferred future is more that a day a year.  It is more than a workshop, in-service, or meeting.  Defining and describing the work completed – mission accomplished must be ongoing.  The oft-cited conversation between the Cheshire Cat and Alice in Wonderland, “if you don’t know where you’re going any road will do” rings truer today than ever.

In a time of sound bytes, 30-second attention spans, and ubiquitous connectivity making time to revisit, reflect, and review the “what” and “why” of where we are going seems to me to be critical. 

Again, leadership is about the future. 

When was the last time you intentionally described for others the future you are trying to create?

"There can be no compromise"

Watching a journalist apologize on national television and admit they were wrong on a story was not in any way reassuring that what is right, good, and true will be reported.  Adding insult to journalistic integrity was the acknowledgment that mainstream networks pay individuals for interviews, film footage, and exclusive rights to stories creating for me at least a sense that "truth" is a commodity to be traded on the open market.

More troubling, even by those in the media, is the ever-increasing practice of embellishment, sensationalizing, and outright lying or falsehoods being reported as "true".  It's not that the press has been without a position albeit partisan, conservative, liberal, or etc. but compromising integrity, compromising facts, compromising objectivity for a story – hmm … maybe something else is wrong!  Are we naive enough to accept that truth should be subject to the highest bidder?

Maybe, just maybe it's not being naive.  Rather, is it possible that we have become so polarized by ideology that we expect to read, watch, and hear news through the lenses we choose to see the world through?  Truth as subjective?  Truth as situational?  Truth as amoral? 

How does the CBS 60 Minutes report on Benghazi or NBC's purchasing the Sky Diving accident footage and exclusive interviews have to do with education - public education? 

Everything!

Negative stories about student performance and the state of education in general are reported and accepted with little debate.  Questioning the integrity of such reports is viewed more often than not as "whining",  "complaining" or "defensive" especially when reports use data to manipulate a point or position.

Educators have in many cases "given up" trying to educate the press in what constitutes performance improvement or growth because in most cases they don't want to know or worse, they justify that their readers will not understand.  For example, the public understands such ratings as "A" or " "F".  But, do they?

In a society steeped in competition, winners and losers, success and failure, and finishing first or finishing last it is hard to break away from the mindset of “A” equals excellence and “F” equates to failure. 

Effort, attitude, grit, perseverance, motivation, commitment, determination and the like are what differentiate success from failure.  Opportunity and access as well as timing – being in the right place at the right time are also considered contributing factors.  Lastly, the value proposition of, for, and by an education weighs heavy in tipping the scales of success – can all of this be reflected by a letter grade?  A test score?

These are important.  These qualities are however what we must desire for all - not just a few.  And what’s more is this should be reported!

The truth and what is seldom reported is how schools today are intentionally building the aforementioned skills, habits in children.  It's far too easy to simply use an antiquated reporting system rather than create a system that reports progress and growth including the skills, knowledge and experience we expect and desire for each learner.

What matters more - how we start or how we finish?

Once standards were introduced the traditional grading system became antiquated.  Meeting or exceeding the standard became the goal for all.  Grades for too long were used to sort and select learners not necessarily reflect the level of competence, mastery of learning.  The complexity of teaching and learning now more than ever cannot be summarized by a letter grade.

There is emerging practice that reports progress toward meeting or exceeding standards.  Using language students, parents, educators, and yes the press understands is what is needed.  Agree or disagree, a letter grade does not inform or articulate progress toward achieving a standard.

Back to journalistic integrity -

Truth matters!

Reporting accurately, authentically, and with transparency is what we should demand and at a minimum, expect in reporting about education let alone other matters.  We need to without apology question not only what is reported but the motivation of those reporting.

Accountability is two-way – the press holding the public accountable and the public holding the press accountable. 

There can be no compromise to accountability!

It is Time!

"Bullying"

There isn't a day that we don't hear or read about "bullying" in our schools, our community, or our nation.  I believe we are dangerously close to becoming numb to bullying as a justification, rationale, excuse, or explanation for retaliation or worse - the taking of ones' own life or the life of others.

Why?

You would be extremely hard-pressed to find anyone who doesn’t believe bullying is wrong in any form.

Why then is bullying an issue?

Addressing bullying and moreover preventing bullying is more than a slogan, speech, poster, or assembly.  It requires more.

Again I must ask, “why”?

From my perspective we have completely lost sight of our individual and collective responsibility, accountability, and authority required of a civil society.  At a minimum a civil society practices and demonstrates respect of, for, and by each of its’ citizens.  Irrespective of whether or not we agree with an opinion, position, policy, law, or etc. – we respect the right, the fundamental right to disagree – respectfully.

In a civil society we call into question behaviors that interfere with the safety or well-being of others. 

In a civil society we take responsibility for holding others and ourselves to the behaviors we expect and require to ensure the safety and well being of others.

In a civil society we don't fear reprisal, repercussions, or retaliation for holding self and others accountable for interfering behaviors

Most people, however, don't know that bullying is a legal term not just a catchall phrase for inappropriate behavior.  Flippantly “bullying” is tossed around recklessly in the press without unpacking first the definition.  This is further compounded by the absence of a comprehensive approach to minimize let alone eradicate "bullying". 

Legislation at the local, state, and national levels exists.  In common is a legal definition that includes words or phrases like "pattern of behavior", "intended to intimidate", "gain an advantage", and "intentional acts that cause harm" to name just a few.  The forms in which these intentional acts occur include but are not limited to verbal, written, cyber, video, or digital.  They can be physical, non-verbal, via social media, or in about any manner in which communication can occur.

There was a time when it could be assumed that children came to school equipped with certain skills, knowledge, and experience associated with a civil society.  In a like manner, many if not a majority of students possessed a foundation of skills such as self-management, self-control, self-discipline, conflict resolution, or de-escalation strategies.  Today these are the exception not the rule.

 Further exacerbating civility is the absence of self-advocacy skills where individuals as well as groups are empowered, entitled if you will, with the "right" to advocate for their safety and well being.

Edmund Burke penned, "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." 

A civil society does not turn a blind eye on interfering behaviors.

A civil society does not choose to be deaf to interfering behaviors.

A civil society does not loose its' voice to interfering behaviors.   

The call for "doing" is clear. 

Our challenge is "how".

There are powerful strategies and programs that do in fact work.  Needed are the courage, commitment, and conviction to implement with fidelity. 

I want to strongly endorse these approaches I know from personal experience that work. They compliment one another.  Combined, these approaches provide our best strategy to address both the symptoms and root cause of bullying in our schools, communities, and society.

"Capturing Kids Hearts" (http://www.flippengroup.com/education/ckh.html) is fundamental and foundational.  It provides the answer to "why" we should intentionally engage each learner and adult.

"Make Your Day" (http://www.makeyerday.com) is the tool to learn, equip, practice, and monitor citizenship by both students and adults with respect, dignity, and civility.

The final tool and one necessary to proactively combat bullying and harassment is the "McGrath system" (http://www.mcgrathinc.com/mjm.htm)

If we are really serious about addressing bullying we will look at these three powerful strategies as comprehensive solution – we owe it to this present generation and to each that follows to equip them with the skills, knowledge, and experience to live and thrive in a civil society.