Category Archives: Professional

More of That Lifelong Learning!

The Queen Mary from my hotel window

The Queen Mary Outside My Hotel

I just finished my presentation, the last in a group of three on the subject of social media for the American Oil Chemists’ Society’s meeting in Long Beach, CA. This was a huge event, with about 1500 people and lots of organizations in attendance.

The room was set up for nearly 300 people, but no more than 30 – 40 were in attendance at any one time. I have since learned (and am not in any way surprised to find) that the scientists in the organization are somewhat reticent to adopt social media. Actually, I’m very familiar with the problem and even discussed it in my presentation.

One thing I think I’ve gotten out of this, as a result of going through the process of creating my schpiel and also from my conversations with my co-presenters, who both have businesses they’ve been running for about as long as I was at Rocketdyne, is a clearer understanding of what I may have to offer and can build a viable business around.

Both of them told me nobody’s providing much in the way of education and services designed for the use of social media inside an organization. Both of their presentations were about the value of social media, but they were focused almost entirely on how to use it to either market your organization or to connect with like-minded people in order to build your connections or your personal brand.

After I finished, we sat down for a panel discussion. Frankly, I wasn’t feeling all that good about my efforts, but I do seem to be my own worst critic. However, one of the members of the Society, who has been attending meetings since 1976, got up and said he thought ours was the best session he had ever attended. That felt pretty darn good to hear!

One more bright spot. I was asked to write an article on my subject for their industry publication and expect to hear more about it in the next several days. We’ll see how that goes. I’m glad I put this presentation together and now I’m going to refine it and see if I can find other places who would like me to give it. I’m told there’s a market out there. Now I have to find it.


What I’m In2

In2:InThinking Logo Pin

The In2:InThinking Logo on a Lapel Pin

A little over ten years ago, a group of people who were students or admirers of W. Edwards Deming decided to create an event that would honor the teachings of Dr. Deming here on the West coast. I am not privy to all the details of its genesis and they aren’t really all that necessary to this post, but I do want to provide a bit of context, as I’ve never before written about this event in this venue.

I’m bringing it up now because I attended this year’s In2:InThinking Forum for the first time since leaving Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne nearly two years ago. It’s funny, but I couldn’t remember whether or not I attended the Forum in 2010. However,  I just checked and . . . not only did I attend, I co-presented a three hour session with Professor John Pourdehnad of UPenn entitled “Emerging Social Software Platforms – How & Why Emergence and Adaptability Increase our Common Understanding”. I’m not sure what that says about my priorities, or my memory, though having looked it up I can now recall the session somewhat vividly. 😦

I stopped attending for several reasons, not the least of which was I had to start paying for it out of my own pocket. I’m essentially of the opinion now that I should have continued to attend, despite the extra expense, but I guess I wasn’t thinking all that clearly for the last couple of years. It is not an exaggeration to point out my “retirement” has knocked me for more of a loop than I anticipated when first I decided to accept the severance package offered to all employees who were 60 or over, back in the first quarter of 2010.

There were numerous reasons – besides the cost – I made the choice to not go in 2010 and, again, they were likely pretty stupid or silly, but that’s spilled milk under the bridge 🙂 . Suffice it to say I’m very glad I went this year. Among other things, I got to meet, talk to, and have a picture taken with the Dean of the United States Military Academy, West Point, Brigadier General Tim Trainor.

General Trainor gave Saturday morning’s keynote address and responded to questions afterward. One of the questions was from my friend Steve Brant. Frankly, I don’t remember his question but I do remember the answer included a somewhat sheepish apology for injecting a sliver of politics. It was this apology I addressed with him afterward when we had a moment to speak.

What I said to him was, essentially, that I thought it was time to start talking a little more politically; not in support of any politician or specific policy, but more in an effort to build dialogue and respect for diverse opinions. Unfortunately, discourse in this country has sunk to the level of pig-headed name calling and the delusional belief there is only one answer to any question (and it’s mine). This is a recipe for disaster, especially the latter belief, in any endeavor and surely with respect to the national discourse.

And though I hope I might have the chance to discuss it again with him (hopefully on [his] campus 🙂 ), and I will write about this subject again as well – probably numerous times – it’s not the point I wanted to convey here. That’s far simpler and less contentious, I think.

Linear Aerospike Engine Hot-fire

Look Ma. No Nozzle!

I attended an all-day, pre-forum workshop based on Barry Oshry’s Organizational Workshop. It was the third time I’d attended this workshop and it was led by a former colleague and dear friend. There were several other sessions conducted that day and we all started out together in the Leadership and Learning Center* at PWR’s Canoga Ave. campus. One of the participants/presenters was Col. (Ret) Debra M. Lewis and, just before we split up into our separate groups for the day’s activities, she said something that stuck with me the rest of the weekend.

She pointed out that, unlike many other conferences, forums, seminars, symposia, etc. she had attended, her being a little late wasn’t met with anything other than warm welcomes, hugs, and appreciation for her presence. As I said, that comment stuck with me and, when she and her husband LtCol (Ret) Douglass S. Adams shared their experiences on their year-long Duty Honor America Tour, I realized how much I had missed out on by not attending last year and by not remaining in touch with my former colleagues and so many friends I had grown close to over a career that spanned a little over 23 years.

As well, it reminded me these are very special people. There is no person who makes it to the In2:InThinking Forums who hasn’t become aware of the systemic nature of organizations and life itself. Every one of them is also a kind and compassionate soul who cares about the impact they have on their places of work, their families, and their communities. None of them are there primarily to sell a product or service. They come to share. If they’ve written a book they bring some, but it’s not their primary purpose. These are leaders and teachers. I’m very lucky to have been a part of the journey with them, and now look forward to many more years of positive engagement.

I’m also slowly realizing the process of “retiring”, which has entailed an awful lot of refocusing and not a little concern over how long I’ll remain sharp and capable, has affected me far more deeply and in more ways than I apparently cared to think about. So . . . my journey continues and I look forward to gaining a more clear understanding of how I’m coping and what I intend to do to make things interesting and productive. Reflection is good, don’t you think?

* It’s worthy to note this center contains, both within and just outside in a patio area, a rather large collection of rocket engines and the parts from even more, including some very historical engines. Among these are the SSME, J-2, RS-68, both an annular and a linear Aerospike, and a SNAP-10A nuclear reactor (minus the fuel).


This is NOT Your Grandparent’s Brain

The Divided Brain

Beancounters on the left and ne'er-do-wells on the right. Is this accurate?

This morning I came across this picture – actually a drawing – in Facebook that purported to characterize the two hemispheres of the human brain. As long as I can remember we’ve been told the left hemisphere is the seat of rationality and the right the seat of emotion and artistic endeavor.

I shared the picture on my Timeline, along with my observation that the left depicted “bean counters” and the right “ne’er-do-wells”. It was a light-hearted attempt at defining the so-called characteristics of each hemisphere.

However, I soon received somewhat of an admonition that all this was a fallacy, accompanied by a link to a wonderful animation (set to a lecture by the psychologist Iain McGilchrist) from the folks at RSAnimate, and I wanted to share it.

If I understand McGilchrist’s description of the brain’s activities, I believe the left side can be seen as the analytical part and the right can be seen as the synthetic (in the sense of synthesis; not man-made or chemical) part of how we see the world.

As one who considers himself a Systems Thinker and, especially, on a blog entitled Systems Savvy, this makes a great deal of sense to me, though I must admit I was in thrall to the belief that our left and right hemispheres were more like the graphic and less like the video. I, therefore, share them both and am curious to see if anyone will take the time to watch the video and tell me what they think. Have at it!


Social Business and Social Intercourse

Hand Axe and Computer Mouse

The Axe (made by one person) vs. The Mouse (made by millions)

While working on a presentation, which I’ll be giving to the American Oil Chemists’ Society’s Annual Meeting in Long Beach, CA at the end of this month, I’ve been looking for material I can use to highlight my excitement at the prospect of social business applications. I long ago came to the conclusion that what then was the nascent capabilities of Web 2.0 would someday revolutionize how we go about creating value in our economy and, necessarily, in our enterprises and organizations. Nothing has diminished this excitement and, in fact, I become more excited as I follow the changes that are taking place today.

In doing this bit of research I was reminded of a wonderful TED talk I watched some time ago and thought to check it out and see if it would jog my memory and, perhaps, give me some greater insight into how I can communicate my excitement and the vision I have to those to whom I will be presenting. The talk is by Matt Ridley and is entitled “When Ideas Have Sex”. I’ve embedded it below. In addition to the points he makes about the interchange of ideas (sex), it is also a wonderful example of the systemic nature of existence and human interaction.

Matt also refers to an interesting essay I believe gave him the overall idea for his talk. It was written by Leonard E. Read and is entitled, “I, Pencil: My Family Tree as told to Leonard E. Read.” Although I’m reasonably certain it was written with somewhat of a political agenda, which is the defense of free-market capitalism, I believe it also demonstrates the systemic nature of human economy and interaction . . . trade, if you will. I will leave the arguments for and against government intervention, whether through planning or through regulation, for other posts in future.

In the meantime, I really think you should read Read’s essay and watch this highly-engaging TED talk by Matt Ridley. You may find yourself wanting to repeat the process on occasion. I think this was the third time I’ve watched. Hope you like them.


You Can’t Be Trusted!

How many of us have heard those in charge of the organizations we work for complain that the use of some of the newer technology available is a threat to company security? How many are blocked from sites like Twitter or Facebook because – as the argument goes – the risk of compromising company security or inadvertently sharing intellectual property is just too great?

I recall a time when the company I worked for had a policy against bringing cell phones to work if they had a camera, the fear being we would all suddenly start taking pictures of . . . what? . . . papers? . . . hardware? . . . and sell them to the North Koreans, the Russians, or the Chinese. That restriction didn’t last very long and this presentation pretty much sums up why.

The futility of such an attitude, given the ubiquity of smart phones, is almost unworthy of discussion. In addition, much of this hand-wringing is tantamount to closing the barn door after the horses (or one high-level horse) have escaped. I have personally (along with tens of thousands of my colleagues) been subjected to training designed to “help” us not do what some corporate executive did, all designed to convince the government we had learned our lesson and would not do what none of us had any intention of doing in the first place.

I’m confident I could go on about this subject for quite some time and, no doubt, will in the future. However, I really just want to share this wonderful PowerPoint presentation I was recently reminded of. It’s one of those that is somewhat timeless. Hell, it may never quite go out-of-date. I think it’s deserving of a reprise. Please feel free to share. The author placed it in SlideShare, so I’m confident he wants you to see and share it.

View more PowerPoint from normanlamont

Are You Comfortable With Being Social?

A Child's Trust

Trust. Catch Some!

Funny thing about blogging. Unless someone takes the time to comment, or they subscribe, there’s no way to know who is reading and what interests them. There are lots of tools to figure out where traffic comes from, including a list of the search terms that brought people to my site, but it really doesn’t help me understand as thoroughly as I’d like which of my posts strikes a chord

On the other hand, I’ve been testing the waters with a couple of different styles and I’m working on changing voice as well. So, I’m mostly writing to say what I have to say and it’s kind of like “damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead” . . . “let the chips fall where they may”. That isn’t to say I don’t care. I do. What it does say, though, is I’m not sure who will be interested in what I’m sharing today.

My history with, and interest in, Enterprise 2.0 (now mostly referred to as “Social Business“) has brought me a lot of “friends” I would not otherwise have encountered. When I say “friends” I am referring to people, some of whom I have never met in person, and some of whom I’ve only actually seen once in my life. The person who gave the presentation that appears below is one of the latter, though we’ve communicated in various ways in the past nearly two years.

I first met him at the Enterprise 2.0 Conference in Boston in June of 2010. I didn’t realize it at the time, but later discovered he coined what had become one of my favorite words – folksonomy. I had been arguing for some time that we (Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne, where I was working) should concentrate less on a formal taxonomy for our explicit knowledge artifacts (meaning paper reports and electronic files) and go with tagging, which would create a useful folksonomy. Actually, I was arguing at the time for developing a hybrid, i.e. providing a “recommended” set of tags, allowing leeway in using them and creating new ones, and occasionally “culling” the list to get rid of the less useful tags while retaining the most useful ones for later use.

At any rate, Thomas has become a valuable source of understanding. I appreciate his insights and only wish I was in a position to attend more conferences and the kinds of presentations from which I can learn other viewpoints about the use of social media, especially for business. While I have some reasonably well-developed concepts and a fairly good understanding, there are so many areas where others have far more experience than I, especially when it comes to the information technology (including IA, Information Architecture) aspects of how it affects people and their relationships.

Below I’ve embedded the presentation Thomas gave at a recent conference on IA, which he just uploaded to Slideshare. Since he uses the same philosophy of presenting that I and many others do, i.e. avoid bullet points wherever humanly possible, use lots of interesting graphics, and talk your butt off, I can’t be quite certain I understand the point(s) behind every slide, but I think I get his drift. In fact, I love the concept of “Social Comfort” as I spent many years working to alleviate the discomfort so many of my colleagues seemed to feel back in the day. I also like his idea of avoiding use of the word “Trust” and – instead – substitute related words that evoke a feeling of trust, e.g. dependable, believable, treasured, consistent, honest, etc.

Going back to my use of the word “friends” for people I don’t really know or, at least, have never met in person. I consider them friends precisely because over time they have shown themselves to be dependable, consistent, honest, etc. That is, I’ve come to trust them based on numerous instances of conversation or reading something they’ve chosen to share not only with me, but with the entire online community. People who are unworthy of our trust don’t stick their necks out very often . . . if at all. The people I consider friends do so repeatedly, which is something I cherish.

I hope you can glean something useful from Thomas’s presentation. I believe I have. Feel free to comment here or to go to Slideshare and comment directly to Thomas if there’s something you don’t get or would like to discuss with him further.

Trust photo by mikebaird


If Russ Ackoff Had Given a TED Talk

I love TED talks. Sometimes I watch them while walking on my treadmill (which I don’t do often enough; walk on the treadmill, that is). Some of them I’ve seen several times and I’m reasonably certain I will watch them again. I recently shared a talk by Alan de Botton on this blog, which I found fascinating and, apparently, so did quite a few others. They are all fascinating.

When I originally started this blog, part of my plan was to discuss Systems Theory and its relationship to Dialectical Materialism, as well as how they affected our relationships, our economics, and our society. For various reasons, I was unable to pursue that particular goal at the time, but it’s why I called this blog Systems Savvy. I now find myself in a position to spend more time researching and thinking about that relationship and its ramifications. In that regard, I want to share what I would consider a fundamental aspect of my understanding of Systems Theory.

We are fortunate that a good friend of mine, Steve Brant, has managed to gather a fairly extensive collection of videos of the man I consider one of the leading thinkers, writers, and doers in the world of Systems Thinking, Dr. Russell Ackoff. The one that follows is a particularly good example, in my less than humble opinion, of what Systems Thinking is and how it should inform our understanding. Actually, let me share Steve’s words that accompany the video on YouTube:

“This presentation is from a 1994 event hosted by Clare Crawford-Mason and Lloyd Dobyns to capture the Learning and Legacy of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Russ knew Dr. Deming and speaks here about the difference between “continuous improvement” and “discontinuous improvement” as seen through the lens of systems thinking.

“Russ was going to give a TED talk in Monterey, CA in 2005 and had to cancel because he was recovering from eye surgery. If he had given one, this is probably what he would have said… because there’s a powerful and unexpected lesson at the end. Enjoy!”

Rather than say much more about Russ or his research and his teachings, let me just share the video. As time goes by I will share more, as well as my thoughts on how his teachings can be used to help us understand the endeavors I’m most interested in: Knowledge Management; Economics; Social Media, etc. As Steve says, Enjoy!


Hey! Where You From?

Humanist Bumper Sticker

No boundaries. Love all. Serve all.

This is a graphic I put together around eight years ago after seeing some bumper stickers declaring the driver (or vehicle owner) to be a native of California . . . or some other state. It seemed to be somewhat of a trend and I found it a bit stupid and offensive. Today I’m inclined to think it was also nativist, as in anti-immigrant.

I am a humanist and I believe we need to move toward a world that knows no political boundaries and respects all humans as part of the same family. I realize some may see this as a pipe-dream, but I believe it is part of the trajectory of progress that traces back to the days of primitive tribalism. Just as there are very few items remaining that can be made by one person, taking care of our planet and its ecosystems (both natural and human/social) is going to require recognizing our interdependence.

So that was my thinking when I created this graphic. Until such time as we discover life in other star systems, which I’m convinced we will some day; perhaps within my lifetime, I am of the opinion we are all part of the same race of beings and must conduct ourselves with that in mind. I was born in Los Angeles, California . . . but I consider myself a native of Earth and part of a very large and diverse family.


On Being Effective.

It is far better to do the right thing wrong than to do the wrong thing right. – Russell Ackoff

I put this quote in here partly because it’s one of my favorites, from one of my favorite people . . . but also in part because I wanted to test WordPress’s posting capabilities. Much as what happened with posting a picture (WordPress has these quick post capabilities for several different types of content), I really don’t like how it works. I much prefer the regular posting functionality if for no other reason than you can save a draft; something that isn’t available as far as I can tell with the quick posts.


Nearly eight years ago I gave a presentation at a KM Cluster event held at PricewaterhouseCoopers in downtown Los Angeles. The title was “From Wright to Wrong: The Dark Side of Intellectual Property Rights” and in it I took the position that IP protection had hypertrophied to the point it was choking off innovation and providing far more protection than was either necessary or useful. I was able to find a link to the website for the event, but it was so long ago it’s been abandoned and the URL resolves to a GoDaddy Parking site (here’s the link – http://www.kmcluster.com/lax/Past%20Events/LAX_Spring_2004.htm).

The title comes from the story of the Wright Brothers’ defense of their patent for “wing warping” which, like ailerons, allows an airplane to fly straight and level. Their assertion was that they had actually invented the concept of straight and level and they were able to prevail in the Supreme Court, thereby “stunting” further development until after the outbreak of WWI, when the U.S. was desperate to produce airplanes and worked out a deal to overcome the hurdle. I’m busy recrafting the presentation I gave, ironically in part because I posted it to SlideShare and quickly received a call from my former company’s IP attorney asking me to take it down as it contained their logo, which I’m removing as well as updating the info.

I’m pretty sure Mark is being a taste satirical here, and I think he’s kind of making the same point I was. I tied my preso to the concept of knowledge management, especially with respect to freely sharing knowledge and the damaging effect I believe overzealous IP protection has on it. See what you think.

kenbonzon's avatarblog maverick

Anyone who reads this blog knows how much I hate patent laws. I think 99pct of the time they are anti-competitive, corruptive,  impede creativity and innovation and can kill small businesses. I think the ratio of patent law doing a good job protecting company IP vs it being used purely to negatively impact competitors or to troll for un-earned revenue is probably 1000 to 1, or worse.

When I read that Yahoo was suing Facebook my immediate reaction was disdain. As I thought more about it, I came to realize that this case could be the water shed moment that causes enough people to recognize just how horrific  our patent law is.

I am not saying that there is zero value to patents. There are plenty of examples out of the however many patents that have been issued where the patent was put to legitimate use to protect…

View original post 452 more words