About Me

My photo
Recovering backpacker, Cornwallite at heart, political enthusiast, catalyst, writer, husband, father, community volunteer, unabashedly proud Canadian. Every hyperlink connects to something related directly or thematically to that which is highlighted.

Thursday, 31 October 2013

THIS FIRST AID KIT HELPS TREAT MENTAL ILLNESS


Mental health awareness campaign Campaign HjÀrnkoll collaborated with Stockholm-based agencyDoberman to create a first aid kit designed to raise awareness about mental health in Sweden.
The New First Aid Kit includes a traditional first aid pack and a mental health self-evaluation test designed to detect early symptoms of mental health issues like stress and anxiety. The kit has a QR code that links to an informational website. The kit also has a hotline number to a certified mental health care provider, as well as guidelines on how to help someone.
The design of the kit is very simple and the color blue was selected because of its calming effect. The kit was also made to look like a traditional first aid kit and is meant to be accessible in public spaces that are also somewhat private, places like the bathroom and copy room. The aim is for the kit to help break taboos about mental health.
The idea for a mental health first aid kit originated from a 2012 students’ design project directed and hosted by Doberman. The kit was developed with the help of mental health experts and psychologists, and with the help of funding from private businesses in Sweden.
The mental health first aid kit is currently being test around Sweden.
New-First-Aid-Kit-1 New-First-Aid-Kit-3

Thursday, 24 October 2013

Dealing with Team Members Who Derail Meetings (Roger Schwarz)

Dealing with Team Members Who Derail Meetings


What does your team do when someone takes a meeting off-track? If your team is like most, the leader says something like, “Lee, that’s not what we’re talking about now” or “Let’s get back on track” or the team simply ignores Lee’s comment and tries to bring the conversation back to the original topic.
But if your team responds in any of these ways, Lee may continue to press his off-track point, the meeting may drag on with members getting more frustrated with Lee, and the team won’t accomplish its meeting goals. Or Lee may stop participating for the rest of the meeting and the team, without realizing it, loses Lee’s critical input and support for implementing a team decision.
If you assume that Lee or others who derail a meeting are the problem and the solution is to get them back on track or stop them from talking, you may also be off-track. These team members’ behaviors are often a symptom of larger team problems. Team members often make off-track comments when there isn’t clear agreement on the meeting’s purpose or process, or when the team doesn’t provide time to hear each team member’s thoughts on a topic. Sometimes the problem is that you think others are off-track when they are not. So how do you handle it?
Agree on the track before going down it. Team members can’t be off-track if the team hasn’t agreed about what track it’s on. If your team doesn’t explicitly agree on the purpose and topic for each part of the meeting, then team members will use their own understanding to decide what is on-track. Because members will naturally have different interpretations, one team member’s comments can easily seem off-track to others.
Start your meeting by saying something like, “My understanding of the purpose of this meeting is X; does anyone have a different understanding, or think we need to add anything?” Even if you called the meeting and set the agenda, this ensures that if people think other issues need to be addressed, they can say so, and have them considered for the agenda, rather than raising them as off-track items. If it’s not your meeting and there is no agenda, simply ask, “Can we take a minute to get clear on the purpose and topics for the meeting to make sure we accomplish what you need?”
Check that others are ready to move down the track. When moving to a new topic, rather than say, “O.K, let’s move on” or simply move on to a new topic, say something like, “I think we’re ready to move to topic Y; anyone have anything else we haven’t fully addressed on X?”  If some people aren’t ready to move on, find out what needs to happen before they can move forward. This reduces the chance that people will re-raise issues that you thought had been fully discussed. If your team is staying on track but regularly runs out of time before completing its agenda, then you’re underestimating the amount of time necessary to make high-quality decisions that generate commitment. When you and the team agree on the track and make sure everyone is ready to move on, you are jointly designing next steps, which builds commitment to decisions.
Test your assumption that the meeting is getting derailed. If the team has agreed on the topic to discuss and you still think that someone is off-track, say something like, “Lee, I’m not seeing how your point about outsourcing is related to the topic of our planning process. Help me understand, how are they related?” When Lee responds, you and other team members might learn about a connection between the two topics that you hadn’t considered. For example, Lee might say that outsourcing will free up internal resources so that the team can complete the planning process in less time. If there is a connection, the team can decide whether it makes more sense to explore Lee’s idea now or later. If it turns out that Lee’s comment isn’t related but is still relevant for the team, you can suggest placing it on a future agenda. One caveat: there are times when it is critical to address team members’ issues immediately, even if they are off-track. If team members raise highly emotional issues about how the team is working together, it is important to acknowledge the issue’s importance and then decide whether it is more important to address than the current agenda topic. Sometimes focusing on how the team works together is more critical than focusing on the team’s substantive topics.
This isn’t simply a polite way of dealing with people who are off-track. It’s a way to suspend your assumption that you understand the situation and others don’t, to be curious about others’ views, and to ask people to be accountable for their own contributions so that the team can make an informed choice about how best to move forward. For this approach to work you can’t just say the words; you have to believe that Lee might be on-track and that you don’t see the connection.
By getting explicit agreement about the meeting purpose and topics and by being genuinely curious when people seem off-track, you and your team can move faster and accomplish more in your meetings.

Tuesday, 22 October 2013

Why Life Means More When You're Building (Miles D. White)


Why Life Means More When You're Building

Serving as the chairman and chief executive officer at Abbott for almost 15 years, I’m often asked for management advice: What was your greatest lesson? What advice do you give college graduates entering the workforce? How do you effectively lead a large organization? How do you anticipate future business needs? These questions all lead to great conversations and I hope to address many of them in this forum from time to time.
This past summer, Abbott held its annual internship program for undergraduate and graduate students – where more than 500 students from around the globe pour their hearts and minds into real-world projects for our various businesses. Each year, I spend time with many of these students and see the foundation of a future generation of leaders. Occasions like these remind us of our own educations, our early career experiences and – most importantly – the lessons we picked up along the way. And, the one lesson that stands out to me is a simple one – it’s the idea that has been most important to me over the years: Be A Builder. Use your experiences to build yourself and the world around you; to make all that you see and touch in your life as good as it can be.
My undergraduate degree was in engineering and I was going to build things. It turns out that was true – just not in the way I expected. The building I’ve done is less literal, but every bit as real. Looking at Abbott today and where the company is headed, building has been at the core of what our people have accomplished over the past 125 years. And it’s what we’re committed to for the next 125 and beyond.
Before working at Abbott, one of the first jobs I held was with the consulting firm McKinsey & Company. There was a legend at McKinsey, named Marvin Bower. He was one of the founders of the firm and is widely credited as the creator of professional management consulting. He was with McKinsey for 60 years and led the firm for almost 20 of them. Every year, Marvin would have a session with the young employees who were new to the firm.
He talked about what mattered most – not about competition or profits. Marvin taught us about doing what is right and thinking and working for the long term. And one reason his words made such an impression on me was the way that he couched them. He talked about building – about building the company, your community, your family, and, always, the people they comprise. And, he encouraged us to be builders, too.
Marvin was a servant leader. He knew that by helping to build those around him – by raising and strengthening their abilities, their understanding, their confidence, their principles – they would help build the outstanding firm that he envisioned and the good community of which it would be part; and that this would help build him, as well – as a leader and as a person. Marvin put the goal, the principle, the value first. And he led people toward it. In doing so, he built the world’s leading business consultancy, and, by working with corporations and philanthropies and governments, that firm helped build the post-war world.
Marvin was a member of what we’ve come to refer as “the greatest generation” – the people who built the world of today on a set of strong, fundamental values. Life means more when you’re building, and when you participate in it more actively. When you build, you’re thinking of the future and acting in the present. To me, this is the essence of leadership: to see a goal, somewhere in the future; to commit oneself to making it real; and to change – often in difficult ways, at personal cost – to achieve it. You are willing to sacrifice to meet your goals – to invest in yourself in order to grow, personally and professionally.
As we’re speeding along in our careers and personal lives, it’s important to stop and look both ways – to see what we have already accomplished and where we want to go next. And the prospect you take in when you look across that vista will be much more satisfying if you bear that one guiding principle in mind: Be a builder.

Fiscal Sustainability & The Future of Public Services (The Mowat Centre)



I'm inclined to agree with this approach; add value through experience, design government with people in mind, let the realization that we're part of something bigger than ourselves be the thing that motivates us to work collaboratively.




Monday, 21 October 2013

NEURO POLITICS: A NEW CONSTITUTION IS WRITTEN : Policy processes or People processes? ( James F. Neuromarketing)



Much like in marketing, countless hours and colossal amounts are spent on products, business and tactic processes. Ironically, while this massive invested efforts aim to capture the consumer’s attention and loyalty, little or no efforts is invested to better understand the consumer’s buying behavior. Politics seem for decades to be going through the same processes.

Like in the NEW marketing, the New Politics is giving the current landscape a foreclosure notice, revitalizing the political scenery and giving its actors a new political party called (the people), the latter will express, create, develop, reclaim the power and sets up institutions that guarantee their sovereignty, right of petition and of legislative initiative to be included in the constitution of participatory democracy, A Ministry of a popular Education of associative liberties that will ensure people fully exercise their citizenship. 

Politics of the people, is it the NEW form of populism?

The key element of this NEW ever popular politic is the close links between membership of local  communities and their solidarity networks: While rural or urban neighborhoods are perishing, this is starting to build the sense of identity of citizens of the community. While other competing identifications such as a nation,  a country, or other higher entities that want to impose a priority,  substitution is made ​​more difficult locally by the existence of different identities already deeply rooted in the communities.

Historically speaking, despite the harshness of their social state, the people in its majority is revealed as deeply conformist of the latent egalitarianism background.

With the new people of the millennium, not much had changed except they accept  social hierarchy and authority of the powerful, but  must also be in a report with an implicit contract, you’re as good as your last performance.

To tentatively conclude, we can safely say, a party that seeks SUSTAINABLE  leadership must adopt an anachronistic policy language that realigns the people in an implicit centralized  hemisphere who otherwise may continue to aimlessly sway to the right or left and alternating between a resigned membership and lucidity to the established order.

LEADERSHIP IN THE NEW PARADIGM

To create enduring value for the people and to enjoy a new friction-free LEADERSHIP, a political party must incorporate generational cognitive behavior, practices and systems in its communication strategy. Once the party values mirror that of the people, the people will gravitate around it.

This new rewired leadership provides the new people with the rewards they need to harness a new sustainable loyalty. The dominating young generations are transforming their countries and we need to be ready to collaborate with them to win their hearts and minds.

ETHICS AND POLITICAL  SLANDER

The extremely skeptic dominating generation Y and X are becoming more and more sophisticated and are developing a major anti-vaccine for unethical behavior, These generations are diligently carving out their own place and be assured that any counterfeit politician that favors personal interest over the common goal will soon find themselves with their pants down. When looking at generation Y, X and the emerging Z we’re witnessing extremely transparency-driven new rivals so much so that detect the slightest discrepancy in political speeches. 

Today, political speeches that are not cognitively calibrated by  contextual barometer is treated as noise pollution by these generations. so let us not worry about who’s saying what and who’s doing what and focus on the people’s issues at hand and try to win their TRUST.

Sophisticated political marketing must ignore the opponent’s dirty laundries and concentrate on what’s relevant: what’s good for the people (blue ocean strategy). These generations mean business and have been taking meaningful action to engage and retain these future leaders with outcome-based-thinking attitude who speak transparency fluently. They will however bury those with ethics functional illiteracy who simply don’t fit their Lifestyle.

THE NEW SOPHISTICATED POLITICS: 

By default, the new politics keywords are becoming: Political art, Democracy, Justice, Education, Collective Action, Human Condition, Social Politics.

It appears more and  more evident that the NEW politics is becoming more mobilized in a fruitful way by sociology and social sciences. As we enter in the new millennium,  the people, worldwide are connecting to form a new coalition of communities that solely serve the people’s social causes.  Issues that are at the heart of some of the major questions of contemporary social sciences, the possibilities and conditions of living and acting together. The dialogue over the human condition becomes the sole key issue of the new paradigm.

Social ties and  citizen participation is impregnating a new form of politics called the sociopolitical paradigm of collective action, a paradigm of utilitarian alternative approaches that better serve to common objective not personal interests. The creation of new values ​​that can directly affect the masses by significantly placing them in a dominating context. and creating meaning from the bottom up.

On a foot note, politic addresses the community and reciprocity of different beings, because man is a-political and politic  arises in space-which-is-between-men, therefore is something fundamentally foreign to man; there is no real political substance. In fact politics arises in the intermediate space and constitutes itself as a relationship. It is their commitment to this relationships than men does emerge in politics. The community is not born of similarity, it arises from the reciprocal recognition;  it is the spirit of community that produces similarity.

POLITICAL COMMUNICATION IN THE NEW PARADIGM 


The concept of political communication, for its part, faces two limitations: firstly, the relationship between speech and action, the growing share of the representative logic as a means to regulate the flows of communication and many other heterogeneous . These two limitations are directly related to the concept of equality of opinions in political communication.


COMMUNICATING IN THE NEW PARADIGM 


When it comes to politics, communicating with voters in the new paradigm requires new calibration. Calibrating political speeches requires new cognitive COHERENCE ingredients. Failure to adhere by the new principles of CONTEXTUALIZATION renders a total death of voters TRUST.

The new communication process is no longer a one way abstract dialogue. Relevancy is becoming the new communication order. Failure to identify the generations various unique behaviors and their  cerebral engaging mechanisms opens a wide spectrum to candidate-voters total dissonance.

Calibrating speeches is no longer a fiction, it is the new hallmark of successful connection and assured altruism between the messenger and the receiver.  Today not only do we calibrate the rhetoric necessary dosage destined for each generation but also the value-based words relevant to their ideals. The message, the messenger and the receiver must be on the same connecting frequency to render attention and ult

COLUMN: A PHD IN INSENSITIVITY (MarketingMag)

COLUMN: A PHD IN INSENSITIVITY


While it’s not a revelation that advertising plays on our vulnerabilities and insecurities, a recent study from global media network PHD underscores just how much those fears can be used to inform advertising decisions.
This so-called “beauty study” from PHD in the U.S. surveyed 648 women to ask when they felt most vulnerable about their appearance and attractiveness, then used the information to create what it cynically referred to as the “ugly day” index.
This, by the way, from the agency that did so much through its work on Dove’s “Campaign for Real Beauty ”to create dialogue about the unrealistic expectations foisted on women.
Anyway, this new survey apparently found that nearly half (46%) of women feel least attractive on Monday, with Sunday close behind at 36%. So what better time to hit them up with images of impossibly glamorous women in order to reinforce those negative feelings and sell them more beauty products?
Kim Bates, who heads brand planning for PHD in the U.S., said the study demonstrates an opportunity for advertisers to “heavy up” and wrap marketing and media activity around those key occasions.
“Concentrate media during prime vulnerability moments, aligning with content involving tips and tricks, instant beauty rescues, dressing for the success, getting organized for the week and empowering stories,” said the release.
There is so, so, SO much to hate in the tone-deaf press release promoting the study, like the line that says: “While the study was designed to provide insights to marketers, the results may be valuable on an interpersonal level as well – especially for anyone who may need to speak to a woman on a Monday morning.” Surprisingly, it doesn’t mention that time of the month.
In a column explaining the study that appeared on AdWeek.com, Bates acknowledged that the use of the words “vulnerable” and “marketing” in the same sentence was an “open invitation” to misinterpretation, but said the study does not advocate exploiting women’s vulnerability about their looks.
Sadly, the release goes on to say that women’s positive feelings about their appearance seem strongest in a “relatively short window” between noon and 3 p.m. Phew, thank goodness it doesn’t come during prime time, right?

Employers need to avoid 'bad behaviours' in hiring process (DEIRDRE KELLY)

Employers need to avoid 'bad behaviours' in hiring process


Ben Baldwin believed so strongly that finding the right fit between an employer and an employee is essential to a company’s success, he developed a patented software program to prove it.
Aimed mostly at small to medium-sized businesses, ClearFit finds potential job applicants through partnerships with candidate sources such as Monster.com and Craigslist and matches them with the right jobs. For the employer, ClearFit streamlines the recruiting process by providing clients with the best people, adding an interview guide with tailor-made or personalized questions geared at individual applicants.

ClearFit is an automated recruiter that uses technology to draw out hidden behaviours around the hiring process. The software helps employers better understand the person applying for the job.
And according to Mr. Baldwin, the right person is not just a sum total of their skill set. It is something more nuanced, and often not easily quantifiable: “Fit is personality, it’s motivation, how they integrate with a team, and how they can help your culture.”
But the onus, he says, is on the employer to make that fit happen. Clients of ClearFit need to know what their core values are in order to avoid what Mr. Baldwin calls “bad behaviours.”
“When an applicant doesn’t align with your company’s values, then that could be construed as bad behaviour,” the 40-year-old recruitment entrepreneur says. “The software can often predict that in advance of the client meeting the candidate. We use the résumé, experience and some free questions to provide the right information for a good hire to take place.”
But not everyone’s a convert to new recruiting techniques. Leading Canadian fashion designer David Dixon says that in a creative industry such as his, technology can be effective, but it’s no replacement for old-fashioned intuition and word-of-mouth endorsement. When he’s trying to find someone to hire for his growing 18-year-old business, he looks at the details, among them hand-delivered letters of solicitation, which technology just can’t measure.
“I have always been a fan of the personal touch, and if a résumé is mailed to me as opposed to e-mailed, all the better,” says Mr. Dixon, whose elegant clothing is sold under his own name across Canada, the United States, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Switzerland, Germany, Hong Kong and Tokyo.
“Often when I receive résumés via e-mail they seem distant, or they have a copied-and-pasted feel about them,” adds Mr. Dixon, who conducts face-to-face interviews himself. “Having a hard copy in hand tells me that the applicant also values the personal touch, and is someone I could feasibly work with. I understand that e-mail is efficient, but it’s not special.
“I am looking for someone who genuinely wants to be part of a growing business and not someone who just wants to hang their hat until something bigger comes along.”
Other industries – many of them far removed from the rarefied world of high fashion – also emphasize the human factor, eschewing technology in favour of tried-and-true, word-of-mouth hiring practices to ensure they get the right people for the job.
Long & Morris is a janitorial company whose employees often don’t have access to computers and so technology necessarily takes a back seat to more socially based forms of hiring, among them church bulletins, president James Long says.
“As a small janitorial services contractor with 100 employees we are focused on stability and rely on good hiring practices and human-resources policies that enable us to retain people for the long term, which is a challenge in an industry that sees quite a bit of turnover.”
Consequently, Mr. Long relies on clergy who typically have a good handle on which parishioners are looking for work. It’s the kind of endorsement money can’t buy.
“We stick to a firm practice of always assessing relevant experience and calling references from both employers and character references,” Mr. Long says. “Casual absence is a key indicator. We ask them and their previous employer about how much time they’ve taken off in the previous 12 months.”
Face-to-face interviews are essential, Mr. Long says. “It’s key to judging character and assessing reliability – did they show up on time for the interview, did they look directly at the interviewer when providing answers, or were they evasive?”
Fernando Tito, managing director of SKYGRiD Construction Inc., has tried different recruiting avenues. His Ontario-based company has hired almost 40 people in less than two years, and it is looking to hire an additional 50 by next spring.
“We tried recruiting agencies, but that was a mediocre experience resulting in high employee turnover,” he says. “We also tried social media sites like LinkedIn, where applicants had international experience that was not relevant to the work we do here in Canada.”
Old-fashioned networking ended up being the best way for SKYGRiD to hire. “By far it has been our most reliable and most comfortable route for hiring staff,” Mr. Tito says.
“It might be a much more time-consuming process than using the available technologies, but the individuals we get come to us from a familiar background, and quite often are already known to the principals of SKYGRiD.”
But that doesn’t mean the new technologies aren’t efficient. It just depends on how you use them, says Dave Kaiser, a McDonald’s Canada owner-operator in Cranbrook and Fernie, B.C.
“In my restaurants, we try to reach potential applicants through as many avenues as possible. While we use traditional advertising from time to time, I definitely utilize online employment sites in my hiring strategy,” Mr. Kaiser explains.
“We also ensure our restaurants have signage and posters. I’m fortunate that the company also works with its franchisees to put on job fairs, such as national and regional Hiring Days, where restaurants from across the country invite job seekers to learn more about a position with McDonald’s.”
But even when the Internet streamlines hiring practices, the human touch still rules.
“For my restaurants, I utilize our refer-a-friend or family member program,” Mr. Kaiser says. “What better way to reach great people than to have those who are already a part of the team recommend candidates they know would be an ideal fit?”
When it comes to hiring, employee fit can be subjective, of course. ClearFit aims to make the process easy by taking out some of the guesswork. The results are so revealing that within the recruitment industry its software is sometimes known as the lie detector test. The idea is to give employers more confidence in their recruitment process and to date more than 10,000 businesses have started using ClearFit since its launch in Toronto in 2006.
“ClearFit helps find applicants who will succeed at the job,” Mr. Baldwin adds. But in the final analysis, employers must still rely on gut feeling.
While that instinct remains more important than technology in some cases, ClearFit has carved a niche for itself as a useful recruitment tool.

Friday, 18 October 2013

Improving School Lunch by Design (Courtney E. Martin)

Improving School Lunch by Design


What if the secret to fostering success was to stop focusing on profit?  What if the secret to innovation was to stop focusing on products?  Nah, that's silly.  It's like saying you can address violent crime by focusing on prevention.  You can't design engineer society to modify behaviour, can you?


At the Everett Middle School in San Francisco, students, parents, school administrators and community partners toured an exhibit displaying the vision for new dining experiences in local schools.
What if the secret to getting kids to eat healthier is to stop focusing on food?
In spring 2013, the San Francisco Unified School District (S.F.U.S.D.) began a five-month collaboration with the design firm IDEO to re-imagine the school food system. This effort might not sound unique. Childhood obesity has become a hot topic, in large part thanks to the first lady’s Let’s Move! campaign and projects by high-profile chefs like Jamie Oliver and Alice Waters have aimed at getting fresh, healthy foods in schools.
When adults eat outside the home, it’s about more than just food. The same is true for children.
In this case, however, the adults aren’t as concerned with whatstudents are eating as they are withhow they are eating.
“When adults dine, we don’t just think about the food,” explained Orla O’Keeffe, the executive director of policy and operations. “The food is important, but so is what’s going on around it: the ambience, the service, the company. Why would we assume kids are any different?”

And yet that’s just what most school districts do. The S.F.U.S.D., to its credit, has made great strides in the quality of food available to students in the last decade, most recently engaging Revolution Foods, a company dedicated to creating healthy meals for schools, as its primary food vendor; but, until now, they hadn’t put as much effort into considering what the 40 short minutes that students actually have for lunch are like. IDEO, known for putting people’s experiences, not objects, at the center of the design process (what they call “human-centered design”) insisted that this be the starting point.

On July 11, 2013, at Everett Middle School, a diverse crew of high school students sit around low round tables in a cafeteria and look at a picture of Maru, the Japanese cat that became a YouTube sensation for jumping in and out of boxes, illuminated on a screen. “Maru is the best prototyper ever. Fearless. Fun. Today we want you to channel your inner Maru,” instructs Coe Leta Stafford, the design director and project leader from IDEO. The teenagers have come to participate in a prototyping session, which will help determine what it is that high school kids really care about when it comes to lunchtime.
Joyce Gu, a senior at Thurgood Marshall High School, lets out a giggle. She’s wearing skinny jeans and Converse All-Stars, scrolling through her Instagram feed on her cellphone. She’s known for posting pictures of unusual foods that she’s tried (the most recent was Chinese abalone).
Joyce is one of the 56,000 students in the district, 61 percent of whom qualify for free or reduced lunch (a family of four that makes $40,000 or less a year qualifies). Despite the district’s location in San Francisco, which is 43 percent white, only 12 percent of the public school students are white (24 percent are Latino, 42 percent are Asian, and 10 percent are African-American.) Many white students end up at one of the many prestigious private schools in the city.
Joyce and 14 other students spend the next hour participating in simulations of their lunch hour. They are given an allowance ($5 for the whole week and various options for how they might pick up their food each day, including the traditional lunch line (not a big hit), a vending machine (though the food appears to be fresh, students are skeptical), and a mobile cart featuring meals from a local restaurant (everyone’s favorite). Afterward the students are asked to reflect:What did you choose and why? What works best for you? How did you choose?
The answers are wide-ranging and sometimes surprising. Some students delay gratification — choosing to bring a lunch from home until Friday, when they will reward themselves by spending all $5 at once. Some talk about prioritizing sharing food with their friends who don’t have any — a dent in their budget, but a boon for their social lives. Still others focus on figuring out which meal they can get the fastest (they have homework to do) that will also give them the most energy for sports practices later in the day. Almost universally, they say that lunchtime is about spending time with friends — first and foremost — not food. The IDEO team documents their answers painstakingly.
Then Stafford asks the students to check out an app on the cellphone stationed at each table. It’s a prototype of what IDEO calls “smart meal technology”— where kids can pre-order meals in the morning that they will eat later in the day. They can also provide feedback on the meals and set dietary preferences; student nutrition services, for their part, can collect data on kids’ preferences and eliminate food waste. The kids intuitively start tapping away.
Joyce looks at O’Keefe, who is seated at her table observing, and says, “This is too good to be true. Who cares what students want?”
O’Keefe looks crestfallen. When I talk to her about the exchange later, she says: “It was a profound moment. You spend so much of your existence serving kids and then they are genuinely shocked that adults would be invested in doing something for them.”
The collaboration, aimed to change that perception, was paid for by the Sara and Evan Williams Foundation, which essentially bought the S.F.U.S.D. time (multiple staff members, like O’Keefe, were pulled off their day-to-day grind to participate), and of course, IDEO’s expertise.
But it also bought them something more intangible — the space to be truly innovative. Superintendent Richard Carranza explains, “If you look at the private sector, they have R&D [research and development] departments where people get to dream and create things that don’t already exist. That’s a luxury that doesn’t exist within the school system where we are often barely able to keep the trains running on time.”
RELATED
More From Fixes
Read previous contributions to this series.
The S.F.U.S.D. is the largest meal provider in the city of San Francisco, serving 33,000 school lunches and snacks a day. Even so, it’s greatly underutilized. Currently, only 57 percent of students who qualify for free and reduced lunch eat it, and only 13 percent of those who don’t qualify do. Not only is this a lost opportunity for improving student health (research consistently shows that those who go off campus eat poorly, if at all, and that children consume 40 percent of their daily calories at school), but also for the district’s budget (Student Nutrition Services has consistently operated with budget shortfalls the last few years.)
The S.F.U.S.D. — like most school districts — would have traditionally approached a challenge like this by doing an assessment of its current labor, vendors, equipment, budget etc., and then writing a lengthy report of recommendations for improvement. Places like Oakland High School, right across the bay, have recently taken to closing school campuses during lunch in order to force kids to eat the healthy meals provided.
“Sure, we could close all the campuses and get the same results,” says Sandy Speicher, an associate partner at IDEO, “but designing with the kids’ desires in mind makes them feel valued. Kids learn about what they’re eating through their choices. The district learns about consumption patterns and reduces waste. Everyone gets smarter.”
Over 1,300 students, parents, nutrition staff members, principals, teachers, administrators and community partners were involved in the process, which included workshops, prototypes and experiential exhibits — all trademark IDEO tools. The IDEO and S.F.U.S.D. teams, consisting of almost a dozen people, then worked together to consolidate the learning and come up with 10 design recommendations and a comprehensive plan for how they might be prioritized, paid for and realized in schools.
The whole team presented its proposal at the Board of Education meeting on September 17 to an unusually full house, starting — not surprisingly — with student voices and also including testimony from nutrition staff workers, the other population for whom the design of the food experience in schools is most urgent.
They proposed three very distinct eating experiences aligning with the developmental stages in a student’s life, but most fundamentally based on what the students themselves expressed wanting. For elementary school, they imagine lunchrooms where kids sit together at round tables and eat family style — learning to serve one another in stages (healthiest foods are brought out first by nutrition staff workers who oversee their own carts).
Principal Dennis Chew of Lau Elementary, who had initially expressed skepticism about the communal dining idea during an early workshop, was inspired by the final design and the idea of bringing back the ritual and lost art of communal dining: “The elementary school children are the best teachers for the parents.”
He requested that the pilot program take place at his school, where a large majority of the 700 students are Asian immigrants. “Their exposure to American culture is coming through the food that the dining services provides,” Principal Chew explained. The cart concept would work well, he believed, because it would be reminiscent of familiar styles of eating, like dim sum, but feature new foods.
For middle school, the focus shifts toward more independence; students can choose “grab-n-go lunches” from mobile carts and then sit in spaces designed by them.
And in high school, it’s all about choice; students multitasking on their short lunch break leverage the convenience of new technology, like the app tested out in the simulation, and are rewarded with discounts for making healthy choices and eating at school more frequently. They spend less time waiting in lines and more time hanging with friends.
After hearing the presentation, Jill Wynns, the commissioner of the Board of Education expressed some apprehension: “I am, of course, along with the rest of the board, excited about all of these recommendations and appropriately skeptical and nervous about the ongoing costs…As a matter of principle, we need a go-slow plan.”
But the other commissioners, seven in all, seemed on a much faster track: “Put me to work. I’m really excited about this. I want to see us move forward,” said Hydra Mendoza.
“Sometimes when we involve students, it’s often just to say we did and it’s in a token way,” admitted Matt Haney. “I’ve had the opportunity to talk to many of the students involved in this project and they said it was the opposite of that. If we can do that, not just with school food, but with everything we do as a school district, we’re going to get better results.”
Only time will tell if the S.F.U.S.D. team is able to realize the recommendations, but they have continued support from the Sara and Evan Williams Foundation and are fiercely determined. “I’m long in the tooth,” says O’Keefe. “I’ve seen the ‘thud effect’ with consultants — they plop down a big report and move on before you’ve even finished the engagement. This never felt like that. We all have a genuine desire to see this come to fruition.”
Carranza, the schools superintendent, puts it a little more poetically: “We’ve had a chance to imagine where the rubber meets the sky. Now we’re getting back to the road with a totally new vision.”
Join Fixes on Facebook and follow updates ontwitter.com/nytimesfixes. To receive e-mail alerts for Fixes columns, sign up here.

Courtney Martin
Courtney E. Martin is the author of “Do It Anyway: The New Generation of Activists” and a founding director, with David Bornstein and Tina Rosenberg, of the Solutions Journalism Network. Follow her on Twitter @courtwrites.

Leading So People Will Follow -- 6 Vital Traits (Boiled Down To 1) - David K Williams


Leading So People Will Follow -- 6 Vital Traits (Boiled Down To 1)


Anyone who knows me knows my deep love for leadership books. Leadershipis certainly one of my favorite and most frequent topics. So I was honored by the invitation from fellow Forbes contributor Erika Andersen to read and review an early copy of her new book, Leading So People Will Follow, available for presale leading up to its Oct. 9 launch.
It is critical that successful executives learn to lead so that others will follow.
How do you lead so others will follow? All the character strengths in the world won’t matter if there’s nobody willing to go where you lead. Andersen begins her book by noting that we all desire and even crave good leaders, and this has been true since the earliest beginnings of time.
Armed with this knowledge, Erika, a renowned business strategy coach whose company Proteus International has counseled Fortune 50 companies such as GE, PriceWaterhouseCooper, Discovery Networks and Time Warner Cable TWC -0.29%, went to work on cracking the code.
Based on research and observation she’s distilled the secret to leading with excellence to six foundational traits:
  1. Far-sightedness
  2. Passion
  3. Courage
  4. Wisdom
  5. Generosity
  6. Trustworthiness
These traits are very close mirrors of the 7 Non Negotiables that my company, Fishbowl, and I use to direct our own growing company. You’ve likely heard me discuss them before. I am particularly taken by the trait Erika refers to as “far-sighted.” Leadership experts Jack Zenger andJoseph Folkman refer to this strength as “has a strategic perspective,” and in research have demonstrated that every top-line leader (yes every one of them–100%) has this trait. The ability to look beyond the current circumstance to see the ultimate possibilities and eventual outcome is a strength that every great leader possesses and that every aspiring leader should do all within their power to learn.
If you think about it, the other strengths in Erika’s focus – passion, courage, wisdom, generosity, and trustworthiness–are essential character traits that become more possible and more meaningful as they emerge naturally and logically from the ability to take a far-sighted view. If there were just one trait a leader could learn that would make the single greatest difference in their effectiveness, in their company’s ability to succeed, and even in the success of their personal career, it would be the ability to always keep their sites on the ultimate goal. For example, when a question or a difference of opinion emerges, how many executives have the ability to genuinely and immediately focus on the facts of “How much will this matter in 5 days?” (sometimes even in 5 minutes). “How much will it matter In 5 months? In 5 years? To the ultimate success of the company?”
Any individual who can pause and consider these answers will be well on the track of gaining a strategic perspective. Furthermore, with this perspective in mind, the traits of passion, courage, wisdom, generosity and trustworthiness (patience as well!) are the natural follow-ons, as they are necessary elements on the ensuing path to success.
This format and process maps within our experience and thinking at Fishbowl as well. It is a process much like this that has allowed our company to surmount the impossible and to continue to set and achieve new “impossible goals.”
Clearly this essential trait, followed by its companion strengths, has been the secret weapon for many strong leaders and firms. For example, Erika tells the story of CBS CBS +1.13% executive Nancy Tellem (Forbes contributor Ken Sweet wrote recently about Tellem herewho once presented a proposal to fellow CBS executives about a change in programming she wanted the firm to pursue. It was clear she believed in her proposal strongly from a far-sighted point of view and that she was passionate about it, but there was no “kick” in her presentation to imply that their thinking was flawed if they didn’t agree with her, or that her path would be the only smart choice.
Yet in the responses that came to her, there were definite “kicks” – while the other executives in the room were also passionate, their passion was a knee-jerk reaction that came through as saying, in effect, “that’s a dumb idea, and anybody who agrees with it is dumb.”  In this case, as a truly effective leader, Nancy was the one executive in the room who was able to demonstrate her commitment to her vision without dismissing or belittling anyone else. Her position prevailed.
How do your own leadership skills measure up in these key areas, and particularly in #1? Would you rank yourself as strong, exceptionally strong, or as needing growth in strategic perspective? Where do you stand in the other five areas Erika brings forward as the additional critical keys?
With that scorecard in hand, the exercises in Erika’s book can take every prospective leader further forward than where they are standing today. As an important parting thought — my own best strategy as a leader has been to invest the significant part of my own leadership effort in the process of teaching others to lead. This strategy has helped to ensure that the principles I value are the principles others will also use to guide and govern their teams. In this respect, it is possible to create an organization with a growing number of leaders. The approach has led to a rhythm and cadence that allows us to work together fluidly. We have many leaders, many growing leaders, and little to no need for followers in a model like this.