January 6, 2014
I’m an IT guy. I’ve been working for 25 years in this business doing just about any job you can think of. I’ve been working in different industries, different countries, using different types of technologies, from IBM Mainframe technology built in the 60s to 00’s avant-garde mobile start-ups.
My strategy to survive in this fast-pace changing business has been to think in patterns. This comes from IT industry standards called Design Patterns. The baseline is : for every problem that will slow you down you while designing a software solution, someone has already bumped into it and standardized a generic design solution.
This is both a bless and a curse and here’s why … Read the rest of this entry »
May 12, 2013
Our point of view is that the rationale of scalable efficiency is becoming less and less compelling, and the alternative rationale is scalable learning. The reason we have institutions is because we can learn faster as part of an institution than we could alone.
This quote is taken from a great John Hagel interview by Stowe Boyd. The co-chairman of Deloitte Center for Edge innovation shares here a profound idea.
In Here Comes Everybody, Clay Shirky suggests that the core purpose of organizations, as defined by Nobel prize Ronald Coase, (the cost of transaction) is no longer relevant in our networked economy. In order to demonstrate his statement, Shirky draws on complex distributed projects such as open source software or wikipedia. So this has left us wondering : what is the core purpose of institutions in the 21st century ?
John Hagel proposal is inspiring : it is to scale learning to the whole organization for faster individual learning and (I may add) to develop organization intelligence as the network of individual knowledge. Which brings us back to the Knowing-Doing Gap : once the company has accumulated learning and knowledge, how does it turn it back into action ?
May 7, 2013
In The Knowing-Doing Gap (How Smart Companies Turn Knowledge into Action) they attempt to address one of the main root cause of the problems organizations face in 21st century economy : why the ideas that are widely known and proven to be useful remain unimplemented ? How to bridge this knowing-doing gap and what are the results of companies succeeding in doing so ? How to tackle the paradox of companies that know too much and do too little, and who fails in transforming knowledge into action (and action back into new knowledge) ?
This is one of the most powerful book I’ve read about management together with Toyota Kata by Mike Rother. Both books have this thing in common : these are proposing meta-processes to address systemic issues faced by companies today. The objective is to align thinking and action and, while doing so, it is to deeply transform organizations into dynamic entities able to tackle any new problem arising.
Another classic reviewed by #hypertextual and another very long post (+2000 words – 10 mns read) …
December 10, 2012
November 4, 2011
Ladies & Gentlemen, please be warned that I just passed the PMP Certification.
I have been studying the topic during about 6 months and I am quite pleased with the result.
Now, why on earth would an Enterprise 2.0 evangelist and Agile Methodologies practitioner would want to become PMP certified and how did he do it ?
Read on if you have some spare clicks …
November 17, 2010
Matthew B. Crawford est un pur produit de l’économie de la connaissance : il est docteur en philosophie politique. Pourtant, avec cet ouvrage (Eloge du Carburateur – Essai sur le sens et la valeur du travail), il attaque celle-ci de front et chante les louanges philosophiques des activités manuelles. En philosophe authentique, l’auteur a aligné ses actes sur sa philosophie et a délaissé ses activités fructueuses dans un think tank de Washington pour ouvrir son garage de réparation de motos.
Un ouvrage accessible qui réfléchit à cette question fondamentale : comment faire sens de notre contribution professionnelle ? Une rhétorique originale et virulente battant en brêche une pensée majoritaire qui sacralise la connaissance au détriment de la pratique.
Il ne s’agit pas ici de nourrir la nostalgie d’une vie plus simple, soi disant plus authentique et dotée d’une aura démocratique liée à la classe ouvrière. Cet essai a pour objectif de montrer le potentiel d’épanouissement humain offert par les métiers manuels et la richesse de leur défi cognitif.
Première partie de l’article dédié à cet ouvrage : les 10 idées majeures du livre. Dans la seconde partie, ce blog y répond depuis une perspective de Manager et de travailleur de la connaissance.
July 7, 2010
When I started working as a Junior Developer in the early 90s, I was developing application software in airline mainframe systems (for the record : IBM TPF technology). Dozen thousands of users (travel agents, airline reservation offices), hundredth thousands transactions a day.
Back in those days we were developing in Assembler/370, a programming language which, roughly speaking, is to today’s programming languages what a 70s calculator is to an iPad. Anyway, that was the most appropriate technology to get things done fast on these mainframe systems.
The problem was : a programming mistake (e.g. pointer error) would end up in mistakenly over-writing the core system, bringing the whole system down and having travel agents all around the planet without any system to enter customer bookings. Coding error would easily cost millions of dollars.
So you didn’t want to mess with the code and for each piece of code you wrote, you were having code reviews by your peers. Half a dozen professionals discussing every single line of code, the number of CPU cycles for each instruction etc … More than often, these code reviews turned out to be some kind of Arena in which professionals happened to struggle to find out who was the toughest TPF gladiator.
Prior to one of my first code review, my team leader (Tony Knight – an exemplary manager) provided me with a guideline to help me taking a step back and cool down : the 10 commandments of ego-less programming. This has since proved to be a professional life savior for me. Read the rest of this entry »
At the Enterprise 2.0 Forum, during the Workshop on the Wednesday afternoon, Bertrand Duperrin proposed some Enterprise 2.0 definitions from both Andrew McAfee and himself. Bertrand insisted on the fact it was a moving definition, constantly evolving.
Regardless of how good these definitions were, I’m still not fully convinced. My concern is that they don’t address the management issue. And the more I think about Enterprise 2.0, the more I think it has a direct connection to management.Therefore, the definition should really focus on that point.