|
|
Rethink
or else..!
Creating Intelligent Organizations
Written by: Brett Richards, M.A.
President, Connective Intelligence Inc.
Rethink or else…! It’s that simple. North American organizations
are being pressured to continuously rethink the way they do business
and the way they add value to their customers, shareholders, employees
and society. World market “ion” pressures such as globalization,
digitization, decentralization and the capitalization of knowledge,
information and intelligence – now the key drivers of economic wealth
– are creating tremendous demands on organizations to rethink, adapt
and respond.
Leaders have been forced to respond to these world market pressures
by moving to organizational styles that are more agile, flexible,
team-based, networked and entrepreneurial. The move away from “vertical”,
dominantly hierarchic systems has been seen as one strategy needed
to meet the demands of a complex and increasingly competitive market.
In their book, The Individualized Corporation, Ghoshal and Barlett
cite innovative leaders such as Jack Welch (GE) and Percy Barnevik
(ABB) who believe that, “in a dynamic, global environment in which
competition is service-based and knowledge-intensive, human creativity
and individual initiative is a critical source of competitive advantage”.
Further, organizations need to be designed so that they are “flexible
enough to exploit the idiosyncratic knowledge and unique skills
of each individual employee”. A fundamental challenge for leaders,
then, is to create effective systems and an organizational climate
that allows intellectual capital to flourish.
Intellectual Capital: Thinking, Intelligence and Knowledge
Intellectual Capital is the sum of an organization’s intangible
assets. It’s the, know how, know who and know what of everyone in
the organization that can be leveraged to create wealth. “Intellectual
capital is also a process of value-creation, in addition to being
an asset – it’s an action, more than just knowledge.” –Leif Edvinsson.
There exists a dynamic relationship between thinking, intelligence
and knowledge. Collectively, they represent the horsepower of an
organization’s capability to adapt, respond and to innovate. Some
simple working definitions:
Intelligence is an ability or capacity to learn and to know. Most
researchers would agree that in basic terms, it’s the ability to
learn from experience and to adapt to changing environments. It
has also been described as “the ability to deal with cognitive complexity”
–Linda Gottfredson, Universtiy of Delaware. I believe organizations,
like people, have different levels and types of intelligence.
Thinking is a process of contemplation and reflection. It’s a process
of using one’s mind to reach conclusions, formulate ideas and describe
what is known. –Webster’s. In a sense, thinking both utilizes and
enables intelligence.
Knowledge is content. The ideas, impressions and beliefs one possesses
within themselves. Both tacit and explicit knowledge assets are
the result of a continuous feedback cycle of reflection (thinking)
questioning and assimilation (intelligence).
Knowledge Creation
The creation of knowledge or, as Karl Eric Sveiby would describe
as creating the “capacity to act”, is crucial to corporate survival
in a knowledge intensive economy. Knowledge creation is a function
of thinking, intelligence and motivation as shown in the diagram
below. Knowledge creation is a dynamic, networked process that takes
place en masse daily throughout the entire organization. The by-product
of this dynamic, networked process, are bits of value-added content
(assets) that can be utilized to expand the organization’s capacity
to act. An organization’s knowledge assets will grow in direct proportion
to its ability to think through complex challenges and learn. In
fact, an organization’s “capacity to act” should grow exponentially
due to the cyclical and self-reinforcing relationship that exists
between knowledge creation, thinking and intelligence.
The Drivers of Knowledge Creation
Knowledge
Creation = Thinking X Intelligence X Motivation
Although this formula is not intended to imply scientific exactness
in predicting knowledge creation, it does provide a meaningful purpose.
The multiplication signs indicate that the effects of thinking,
intelligence and motivation are non-compensating: a high score in
one factor cannot compensate for a low score in another. We’ve all
known individuals or teams with all of the intelligence (ability)
in the world that could not create new, value-added solutions for
the organization. Often, the individual or team lacks the collaborative
thinking (process) skills needed to leverage their intelligence.
Sometimes it’s merely a lack of motivation (drive), which prevents
individuals or groups from achieving value-add results. Similarly,
individuals and teams can have all the fire in their bellies, with
lots of passion and drive, but if the organization does not create
or maintain the necessary conditions for success, they will likely
end up frustrated and unable to implement their new ideas.
The Motivation Factor
Motivation functions as an accelerator in that knowledge creation
will be greatly impeded without the underlying drive or motivation
to learn, create and realize new human and organizational potential.
The motivation factor in the above diagram should be viewed on two
levels: First, leaders themselves must value and visibly exude a
keen desire to unleash the brainpower of every member of the organization.
Studies have shown that leaders have a significant impact on the
type of climate that exists in an organization, and perhaps, more
importantly, have a tremendous impact on the degree to which their
workforce achieves bottom line results. Second, the desire to learn,
innovate and create will be diminished if the workforce does not
possess high levels of motivation. Again, leaders have more power
to influence the motivation factor than they might think. Leaders
cannot force motivation on or, “in”, to their workforce, but they
can influence the conditions in which motivation either flourishes
or diminishes. In other words, sometimes a good strategy is to ensure
that current conditions are not de-motivating as a first step to
motivating a workforce. Some key levers to consider which influence
motivation are: level of job scope and autonomy, flexibility, challenge,
transparent decision-making, meaningful goals, follow through and
appropriate time to indulge in the future, rather than being permanently
enmeshed in the day-to-day of the present.
The Intelligence Factor
Intelligence enables knowledge creation and should therefore be
recognized, leveraged and valued like any other asset within an
organization. Knowledge management is more than quantifying and
capturing intellectual capital currently unrealized or unrecognized
within an organization. Effective knowledge management strategies
should also be geared toward the generation of new knowledge and
this must include the domain of intelligence. Leif Edvinsson, a
leading practitioner in the field of Intellectual Capital articulated
at, The Third World Congress on Intellectual Capital that, (to paraphrase)
“The knowledge age is over. Intelligence is the next wave”. Knowledge
becomes stale without the generative forces of thinking and intelligence
to rethink and reshape what is known to better respond to an unknown
future.
When we think of intelligence as a capacity or ability to deal with
cognitive complexity, it helps us realize its importance in terms
of organizational health and survival in an age of hyper-accelerating
change. Further, intelligence should not be described in the traditional
sense. The works of Gardner, Rhodes and Sternberg, all attest to
the need to rethink intelligence itself. Intelligence is really
not about IQ points on tests, it’s about being more effective at
drawing on a fuller range of abilities to make the most of what
you’ve got. Rarely is it an issue with respect to the amount of
intelligence that resides in an organization; rather, the real challenge
for leaders is how to make the most effective use of the brainpower
that already exists.
The Thinking Factor
What could be more universal than thinking? Remember Descarte’s
famous maxim: In cogito ergo sum – I think, therefore I am. Our
ability to think shapes our existence. We distinguish ourselves
from all other species by our ability to think. Thinking underlies
our behavior. We employ our thinking process when we have an end
in mind – a goal. Thinking, then, is both intentional and goal-directed.
Further, thinking is a process, so when we speak about thinking,
we are not talking about specific content, but a generic process
that enables the exploration of thoughts and ideas.
Oddly, few of us ever learned in school how our personal thinking
preferences impacted our perceptions and biases to different styles
of teaching and types of curriculum. Until recently, very little
attention has been given to the discipline of thinking in schools
or in the workplace. The concept of thinking styles, as a distinct
entity distinguished from traditional personality measures, only
started to take hold within the last 5 years; although the empirical
work began in different parts of the world over 20 years ago.
Effective thinking is a skill, and like all skills it takes practice
and discipline to master. Whether it’s on the field, in the home,
on the court, or in the boardroom, quality thinking distinguishes
star performance in all walks of life. Having worked with hundreds
of groups around the world, what strikes me most is a) the profound
impact thinking styles have on group dynamics and b) the degree
to which a common language and process for thinking impacts a group’s
ability to collaborate and achieve high performance results.
Creating Intelligent Organizations
What exactly are organizations doing to optimize their thinking
and intelligence assets? If we are in fact in the age of brain,
not brawn, the real challenge will be to create smarter, more intelligent
organizations that are designed to optimize their intellectual capital.
As the shelf life of existing knowledge and information continues
to decrease, it becomes critical to invest in systems and tools
that will increase the organization’s intelligence – or capacity
to learn and cope with cognitive complexity. Organizations will
increase their capacity to successfully adapt to the future if they
work to increase the effectiveness of the multiple thought progressions
- the thinking - that occurs everyday, and actively seek to expand
their corporate intelligence. Intelligence, it has been shown, represents
a capacity to learn, intelligent organizations develop systems and
processes, and actively seek to create environments, that enlarge
their capacity to learn and respond to complexity.
Organizations that take a holistic approach by trying to optimize,
simultaneously, their thinking processes, motivational drive and
intelligence will better equip themselves to meet a complex future
with creativity, speed and passion.
 |
About
Brett Richards:
Brett is the President of Connective Intelligence. He is a performance
coach and a certified North American Effective Intelligence™ Master Trainer.
He is dedicated to helping people, teams and organizations realize
their full potential, by helping them to transform their brainpower
and intelligence into more effective action.
|
|
