Creating Heart Capital
30-Jun-03
This article disregards the ongoing global debate that continues to baffle experts about the facets of knowledge and their value.
Instead of delving into terminologies and techniques, the author raises basic issues to provoke solutions that can only come about by consciously disrupting the traditional mindset. He currently heads Ideafarms, a people-centric partnership between experts from varied backgrounds.
Details
Attachments: 1
-
Creating Heart Capital (200 Kb)By Sunil Malhotra.25-Jun-03
- Author:
- Helen Baxter
- Publisher:
- KnowledgeBoard
- Date:
- 30-Jun-03
- Categories:
- Emotional Intelligence
- Sections:
This article has been read 5369 times.
Tools
Member comments (22)
Share your views with other users: add your own comments to this item.
triple collaboration
Sample of current discussion of Human KM at
http://www.knowledgeboard.com/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=117257&d=1&h=417&f=56&dateformat=%o%20%B%20%Y
------------------------
Collaborative innovation is in its infancy in spite of the fathers of the internet (Vint Cerf) and the worldwide web (Berners-Lee) insisting that they were openly designing technology so that worldwide innovation opportunities would bring whole new value multipliers to organsiations and people's productivity.
Tell me your favourite bookmarks on collaborative innovation to register here:
1 2 3
Transparent branding's 4-multiplying ways to value collaboration imply that organisational systems must be changed inside-out to collaborate with:
A) Governments
B) Businesses
C) People as individual (knowledge) workers
D) Coworker groups such as teams, personal netorks and practice communities
Inside-out collaboration with government means no more furtive lobbying for protectionsism or rights to ruin local environments. Instead only get together with government where you can openly do something so wonderful locally that its a win-win-win for the company, government and humans in the local democracy.
Similarly, each of A-D has an inside out change leadership issue to systemise; for example companies will never learn to collaborate with their best knowledge workers whilst booking them as costs (unlike machines which tangible accounting compounds -as its meanest cuts of all - by arbitrarily framing as an investment)
PS I also have a personal colaboration project- outlining a future affairs 12 year olds curriculum to prepare for a transparent networked world - please tell me your bookmarks 1 2
Knowledge Maths
In my experience, enterprise success depends on a "gift-giving" culture, the proverbial, "Where a house is filled with rights, there is no room for gifts." -- it rides on "other-focus", on recognizing the paradoxical self-profit (because the whole ecology profits) of our self-less action without regard for (exclusive) personal return.
We stop to let a waiting car turn across our traffic stream path because we also know that this one stuck car is not just blocking the cars behind them, but also congesting the whole of the rush-hour roads.
As you rightly point out, this wheel-greasing gift-giving is ever so much more painless to do when Knowledge is only additive -- when I have two ideas and I share them with you, we don't have just two ideas each, we have my two ideas plus your two ideas about my ideas
When there's bi-directional connection via social software, I'll know when and how you've augmented my thoughts, so we can also add in my ideas about your ideas about my ideas, your ideas about my ideas of your ideas about my ideas ...
A bit of tactile mathematics may also be useful -- in early childhood education there's a popular game to teach youngsters the meaning of 'ecology' where we round them into a large circle and give each a role to play, one is an owl, one is a mouse, one is a wolf, one is a worm, a bird, a tree and so forth. We take a spool of twine, and from each role to the next who depends on them, we pull the line, and from there to the next and the next until the circle is criss-crossed in a chaotic mandala -- the children then pull on this great web of connections and balance themselves out ... and then, unannounced, the teacher sneaks up behind one species and SNIP! cuts their connecting threads.
The children, of course, go tumbling back, laughing and rolling about in the jumble of string, now fully understanding why it's critical to save the whales.
I wonder if this exercise would have any utility at a KM conference seminar? ;)
Vulnerability is strength
What a wonderful debate and thanks to Sunil for a good article and to Chris Macrae for drawing me to this.
I love these lines in particular : To
humanise is to recognise that technology cannot replace the charm of personal contact. To humanise is to disrupt current business thinking and methods. To humanise is to add
emotion. To humanise is to add fun to work and work systems.
I think the discussion about emotional environment is important; a lot of money goes into trying to create great physical spaces for work (and that's no bad thing) but the manners and subleties of human contact deserve equal attention.
I would add that as well as being fun, the creation of real "heart capital" requires taking risks and being vulnerable. Acknowledging our true feelings feels risky in many enviroments; yet in my experience it is often a touchstone for deeper and more satisfying human engagement.
intrigues of lateral mentoring- part 3 emotional observations
This interaction has expanded to sharing our ideas and epiphanies with other colleagues and drawing more people into our ongoing conversation. The relationship of two colleagues has transformed into more of a
web of individuals sharing ideas.
If we had not had a personal relationship before, we could not be challenging, supporting, and assisting each other now. This could not happen in an environment exemplified by distrust, fear, and prejudice. This relationship also did not happen over night and without effort. If Juanita had not made an effort to stop by my room and see how the new teacher was doing, I wouldn’t have learned to trust her as someone who cares about my welfare. If trust is not present, honest exchange is not possible.
When approaching mentoring within a community (whether you are having a one-on-one dialogue or a round table discussion), you should keep in mind how the attitudes and preconceptions that are held by the community at large and by the individuals within the community will affect their acceptance of you as a mentor. Spend some time taking stock of the assumptions held by your community. When you find some common ground upon which to build a relationship, you can begin to build some trust. Listen to what others are trying to share with you; when they feel valued as a participant who has something to offer, they
will be more open to what you have to offer."
intrigues of lateral mentoring part 2
Before entering into any lateral mentoring relationship, it is helpful to take a step back and examine the feelings, prejudices, and influences present. How would you answer the previous questions for the following situation?
"I have a lateral mentoring relationship with a colleague of mine; I’ll call her Juanita. We did not approach one another and say, “let’s mentor each other and have a free flowing exchange of ideas.” I am a relative newcomer to our building and to our school community. My colleague has been at this school for over 15 years. She is older than I am and a Hispanic female. I am a White male in my late
20s. She grew up in a neighboring community and has lived in the area all her life. I moved here to accept my current job. She was on the committee for my interview before I was hired.
Juanita would come in to my room on occasion during the first year that I was there, checking on me to see if everything was going O.K. I believe that she felt comfortable coming to me for conversation because I didn’t have emotional baggage related to the school. We began to develop a personal as well as a professional relationship as many of our conversations turned to family, community, and our experiences growing up both in school and out. As we continued to have these informal conversations we realized that we had a lot of things in common as well as a lot to learn from each other.
We do not share a common background or heritage, but we use our differences to learn from each other. We are, however, in similar places in our learning journeys. We began pursuing our Masters Degrees at approximately the same time (hers in Education Administration, mine in Educational Technology)
and soon saw that we could use each other for resources and support. When challenges come up either related to our jobs or our Masters programs, we seek each other out and spend some time over coffee. When I have a question related to protocol in our district or at our site (being a relative newcomer) I go to Juanita first. When she has a problem with technology, or wants to discuss current learning theories, she seeks me out.
-see part 3 for emotional analysis
the intrigues of Lateral mentoring
I was reading this report on Lateral Mentoring and whilst it may be only directly related to this thread , it raises some emotional issues I wanted to discuss. First, I should warn of a catch 22, I have met some of these ideas in educational contexts where people have signed up front a time rich learning commitment to each other; what worries me is that whilst the social factors of learning that lateral mentoring informs us feel right to me, the chances that corporates will make time for facilitating such learning procedures is next to zero. Is there a way that people in an organisation can discover their mentoring focui in spite of the organsiation getting in the way?
Emotional Environment for Lateral Mentoring
There are environments other than physical surroundings that need to be considered when thinking about lateral mentoring. Have you considered the emotional environment of your mentoring community? Let’s take a minute to discuss some things that affect the emotional climate of your group. When thinking about mentoring within a community we should look at attitudes of the members. This is by no means an exhaustive list, but a few questions to think about before we begin the mentoring process. Some of the questions may have different answers for subgroups within your community than for the larger group. Take a few minutes to assess some of the emotional factors in your situation. Are the members generally open to discussion, willing to share ideas, or are they guarded in conversation? Think of an example to support your answer:
Are decisions made and handed down through a hierarchy, or is there a mechanism for discussion and input from various points of view? Describe the decision making process in your lateral mentoring community:
Do participants in the community feel safe approaching each other with questions, encouragements, and/or disagreements?
Are personal relationships encouraged or discouraged within your community?
Are there some obvious prejudices or presuppositions that are present within the community?
What are the subtle, unspoken, or underlying prejudices that are present within the community?
Are diverse perspectives honored, ridiculed, or treated in a patronizing manner?
If a healthy emotional environment already exists, then community mentoring is probably second nature. It is much easier to develop a lateral mentoring relationship within a previously established personal relationship.
If the climate within the community does not include positive characteristics, it will be difficult to develop a lateral mentoring relationship. The negativity can make its members feel closed to the exchange
of ideas.
let's not put constraints on KM in this thread
If you want to define an exact species of KM , please go eg here
I realise that KM is an unfortunate term - because linguistically its hard to reach its systemic impacts on learning and behaviours compounded over time and across networks but yet that is where all human emotional relationships connect as you map how value exchanges multiply or destroy themselves and their neighbours over time. The legitmacy to see KM linking all the way through these dynamics has been hard fought over many years by some of the navigational stars of KM so lets not try and narrow down their progess against those micromanagers who would numerise emotions and humanity out of every organsiational system and every community. References to those who have fought for KM's systemic reach include:
Amidon
Allee
Sveiby
Finland's parliament
The Three Laws of Knowledge Management
The Three Laws of Knowledge Management
Here they are:
1. Knowledge is simply what we're doing, what we're thinking or what we're saying right
now, in the present moment. That's all it is.
2. Knowledge management focuses what we're doing, saying or thinking right now towards
some particular goal.
3. In the process, knowledge management tranforms our intellect into intellectual capital.
Everything else about KM can be understood in this context, including the meaning of info,
data, know-how etc. I'm going to elaborate on these laws a bit later...
Don Mezei
http://www.kmprofessor.com
Origins of coinage
Dear Chris,
I would like to believe that I invented the phrase "Heart Capital". Google shows a couple more, but only one other seems to be in the same context as I have used it.
In 1999, I felt that it was time to invest "heart" into living and I first used the coinage as a title for a proposal I made to a company. The idea then, as it continues to be now, was to focus on the human part of enterprise although at that point it was from the perspective of mass customization of technology for user comfort.
Would I seek to copyright the phrase? No. I believe in the knowledge paradox that says "my knowledge is entirely mine and also part of the common heritage of mankind."
Regards,
Sunil
self-organising futures
I am sure that neither we as people nor our modes of groupwork 'organisations' have a future without evolving self-organsiaing styles to have as much living system impact as opposite command and control rulership systems have.
The catch 22 is how to help those currently in power through command and control to unlearn and join in the big picture futures of humanity and how KM can progress that.
I dont find much of the living system vocabulary very user-friendly in first helping old tulers unlearn. Does anyone have any favourite first training sessions aimed at converting old rulers.
I do find the whole web of capitals language useful:
human capital
heart capital (by the way did you coin this word especially with us or did it pre-exist (if so where)
social capital (1)
intellectual capital (1)
intellectual capital of nations, regions aka democracy capitals
various sorts of network capitals that often go under community style names
change 'The System' Capital (1,,,2
Living Systems
Dear Chris,
Organisations are living systems simply because the constituents are living beings. A key characteristic of life is self-organisation and this is the direction that KM ought to be taking. The remnants of the industrial era manifest themselves in the commodity transactions that KM proponents take comfort in. Whereas knowledge defies all attributes of products and packaging.
I wonder if this thought can open out some possibilities of debate and discussion.
Regards,
Sunil
can we redefine business language?
Systemically, I believe this is one of our most vital collective challenges. Perhaps we need to leap on to the most interesting emerging constructs and make sure we have a simple definition of each
for example, I am interested in taking the construct "living system" anywhere I can debate it
Perhaps one definition is simply: living systems are those where heart capital reigns for all who participate truly and openly
I am actually piloting a different definition: living systems are those where all human flows communally have far more dramatic impacts on sustainability than cash-flow.
governingtrustflow.ppt
The idea of this definition is those businesses who dont believe that human flows have more system impact than cashflow can get lost in any knowledge management world I want to inhabit. Whilst those who buy the idea need to demonstrate they are prepared to be governed transparently by human flows as well as cashflow. (technical note - sometimes I use trust-flow as the dynamic system surrogate for interactions of all human flows)
What we all at Emotional Intelligence need next is your favourite bookmarks to human flows that have extraordinary organisational impacts , especially those that have never been recognised by number peddling measurers like the monetising has-been Andersen.
all the capitals as one
I was wondering if anyone knows of an education centre etc that teaches human and social and intellectual capital as one unifying subject.
One of our big problems in this space is that as far as EU is concerned Knowledge Management (and IC) is almost entirely separated from Human and Social Capital. Programs are funded by completely different directorates. I would love to find ways to narrow these gaps of understanding
As some may know, I have started an experiment asking what each country is contributing most to knowledge persectives of social and human capital at http://www.knowledgeboard.com/redirects/social_capital.html
I will try to add in a thread for India as soon as I can
Valuing Human Capital
An interesting and thought provoking piece that resonates at a number of levels for me. Placing people at the center of considerations for systems is a paramount design principle if you want takeup in the use of those systems. No system is worth the $ spent if people don't use it. Taking the time to see what dimensions of human endeavour you'll be engaging with- personal motivations, a sense of purpose and balance, creativity, inquisitiveness- the sum of those things that make us human rather than a meat resource, are the things that appear to make a difference between work as a place of meaning or drudgery.
Ask yourself which kind of a work environment you'd rather be in- one that engages just your mind and base needs identified in Maslows hierarchy(food, shelter, etc) or one that moves higher up that hierarchy of needs and engages your heart and wider sense of purpose and social contribution? I know where my vote would go.
can we create a hq test?
h for heart that is
it astonishes me that so many experts came to KM with closed hearts; time to fail all those who don't pass a HQ test
I LOVE it :-)
Hello Friends,
Heart Capital is a beautiful concept.
Leif Edvinsson has already suggested to replace head-office with HEART-OFFICE !
Too little love in organizations is one of the major reasons for poor KM.
And I believe organizations are like people: both need love to grow !
With warm regards,
Edna
km exercise
hi Sunil,
I've put together a short exercise in Word which presents the basic premise of KM theory. I believe that km is a three step exercise in holistic thinking.
So individuals practice it. But that's the extent of KM. How this practice get translated into organizations can be described as knowledge management, but resists definition beyond that point.
Go to
http://www.islandnet.com/~dmezei/kmexercise.doc
Don Mezei
http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/kmtheory
Good point
Hi Cindy,
Thanks for sharing this great example about the way people like to "unify" culture. Precisely the point I was making. We have to make our own spaces based on our culture, conditioning, social norms and knowledge in groups of common purpose and interest. That, I think, is what communities are all about. Information can be globalized with only the minor issue of language. But culture draws its strength from being distinct. Unity in diversity and peaceful coexistence need acceptance and tolerance. Basically, in the knowledge era we will have to look in the same direction while maintaining our identities and will have to discard the confrontational approach of "I am better than you".
I am still working on the impact and feasibility of making this thought possible in the global environment. I don't even know if it can work. HELP!! :-))
Sunil
interesting article and timely
Hi Sunil,
There seems to be two pushes going on, the push for KM via IT solutions, and more recently, the push for the recognition of the individual as a KM player.
I think both pushes are right.
I like the way you distinguish between knowledge management and managing knowledge. I was just writing about the same thing on my KM theory group on yahoo. KM is a description, while MK is the process. I like the term managing knowledge because it implies 'what are we managing'? As we discussed earlier, I believe that knowledge is like a pair of eyes that allows us to look out and look in. Without the eyes, we can't see or recognize anything. The outer frame of reference we view is defined by the terms information and data, while the inner frame of reference is the conscious/subconscious minds.
Via knowledge, we recognize that a steady stream of ideas, thoughts and motivation is flowing. That's the power. We freeze these ideas using information and data, and we unfreeze them with our conscious/subconscious mind. And it happens so fast, we don't even recognize that the process is taking place.
So in a sense, that's what KM is concerned with - how we lock, then unlock, meaning.
Don Mezei
KM theory group on Yahoo
How are we going to do that?
Sunil,
Thanks for sharing this very interesting and thought provoking way of looking at things.
I agree that knowledge/ideas seems to flow better when I am comfortable, feels at home. But how do we do that with a global environment? Give you an example. When I was travelling/working around the South American region, complained came from the South American that US mentality are so different bla. bla. And the US folks said the Southerners have no concepts of time bla. bla. To improve the working situation, during one department meetings, management hired a South American 'motivation talk guru' who migrated to the US some 15 years before, to come talk to us. Her job was to highlight the two cultures and teach us etiquette South of the Border. Well, I kind of relaxed and accepted most things until she mentioned that it is customary to kiss both cheeks and hug!
Hey, I am no stranger nor naive to all these South American hugging and kissing rules. The point is I am Chinese, I just don't feel comfortable to be told I have to observe and bend 'my rules' to fit in anyone's comfort zone! Your thoughts.
Cindy
Criticism welcome
Friends,
Shoot down this article. Say it's a whole lot of theory. Say it's preaching. Say anything. The idea is to provoke a debate so we know what the "real" issues are and what's the best way forward.
Sunil
The climate is right and the soil is willing ...
... but is the spirit?
Never before has the climate been more conducive for collaborative innovation. Never before has it been so easily possible. It has taken root in art and design disciplines and has been going on silently for a few years.
On my last trip to the US a few months ago, I had the privilege of meeting Jeff Smith, CEO Lunar Design ... a California based Industrial Design Company. Jeff's a rare breed especially in America. Sensitive, humble, gracious and extremely talented. May his tribe increase!
You'll find several thoughts and examples, including Lunar here ...
http://www.dmi.org/dmi/html/publications/journal/articlelist_d.jsp?itemID=JNL-V13N2
A collaborative global art gallery is at ...
http://www.globalcollage.com/new_site/index.html
Designers and artists are sensitive and innovative people and are heralding a change without the hoopla ...