With a title that includes a potentially ambiguous word, Koen Perters‘ talk started with intrigue. It went on to deliver meaningful value, inspiration, and ideas on ways of… letting go.
Co-creation is an approach to consultancy that builds not on being the genius-expert with all the answers to every question, but a facilitator who can tease the meaningful answers out of the client. On the one hand, it delivers results that the client feels more attached to, because they participated in defining them. On the other, it can leave them feeling they actually did all the work.
In order to work, it is a mindset that needs to be maintained throughout a project’s lifespan; if it is abandoned after the initial sessions, it is no more than a kick-off workshop. This requires far more commitment of key client stakeholders, team members and users than other approaches based on handing off the work and receiving back a set of deliverables. It helps cross-pollinate, exposing different parties to each others’ ideas and challenges. Read more of this post
Any talk about information that kicks off with references to chaos theory is bound to be good. Lisa Welchman‘s opening keynote at EuroIA was just such a talk, and it didn’t stop with the chaos.
We live in a society that has been permeated by digital communications. As key participants in this relatively new, but rapidly evolving, ecosystem, Information Architects need to be stepping up and leading. We are not passengers: we are the drivers who will shape the future. But it is not an easy world to navigate; not only do we lack a map – we are breaking the first trails – but the system is far from linear.
Much of the environment we are operating in is a legacy from the industrial age: big organisations with top-down hierarchies. These are not conducive to designing and implementing meaningful digital presences. The people tasked with crafting these things often sit at the lowest point of the organisation, minions responsible for avoiding failures, but without the authority to make decisions (and, obviously, never credited properly when things go right). But this organisation model is not where the industrial revolution started; when the individual artisan was replaced with larger enterprises, the first organisational charts were designed with lines of reporting and responsibility, empowering the individuals at the tips to make decisions because they were the experts, while the trunk managed overall strategic direction. The inversion of the model came about as a result of megalomania, and those running organisations based on this model clearly fear change – their power is at risk. Read more of this post
Kicking off EuroIA in Edinburgh, I attended Eric Reiss‘ workshop – really, as he admitted, a master class – on Usable Usability. The theme echoed his book of the same name, released last year.
Eric didn’t hold back with his class; it was heavy with information, ideas and practical approaches to improve usability; not by focusing on any specific, but largely by poking fun at the endless stream of counter-examples.
In all, usability is about people interacting with things. While it is easy to claim that usability stops at the point of “does it make the action achievable?” (whatever it is that is supposed to be done with it), the reality is that there is far more to something being considered usable. It is about the ease with which it can be used. Read more of this post
After a manic couple of days, it’s only fair that the closing note – pre panel – of CS Forum should be Margot Bloomstein discussing the need to slow down a little – to consider that not all things need to happen at a breakneck pace.
There is an industry trend towards efficiency; usually read as getting them in and out the door as quickly as possible. But is this really the best thing to be doing? There are many aspects of our lives where we want to move more slowly – where we want to stop and smell the roses. If we want to do that, doesn’t it make sense that others might not be in such a rush either?
Alongside the idea that speed might not be all-important, there are other scenarios where we need to consider slowing things down a little. If there is some external factor that limits speed – that imposes a wait – what can we do to make it a more engaging, interesting and enriching pause? Read more of this post
It’s not surprising that Stacey Gordon mentioned that the first rule of Thought Leadership is “Don’t mention Thought Leadership.” In her CS Forum talk, she went on to explain how it is the result of an attitude and behaviour, not a manipulatable marketing tool. It just happens to have great results when it is a natural result of expertise.
Fundamentally, thought leadership is the consequence of being an expert and a pioneer within your field. It is about expanding a discipline; giving to the community. As such, while there are huge rewards to be garnered in the form of professional reputation, and consequently marketing value, it is not a “game” that can be cheated. It is not a marketing strategy. (This notwithstanding, the term has such strong connotations, almost two thirds of business-to-business companies think they are involved in it.) Read more of this post
Speaking on a subject that I, personally, have trouble understanding, Misty Weaver delivered a rousing call to embrace people’s passions -to help them get the most out of what they love – thereby knitting together a community that will turn to you also as a supplier of choice.
We hear constantly about community, especially as an empowerment of business: engage your community, the rallying cry goes. But what is this community, and how can one truly harness it. Given human nature, a community needs a guiding hand; it needs to be managed. Otherwise, its dynamic nature will result in it evolving away from being “your” community. Management implies some for of order.
There are many activities businesses think initially will help them manage their community, in the misguided belief that they are somehow dealing with people who do not conform to human nature. Specifically: Read more of this post
One of the gems of CS Forum 2013 was Jonathon Colman‘s talk on core values, and how they drive not only business practices, but also the structure and substance of communication (i.e. content).
At the very root of a functional business is a purpose, are a fundamental set of principles, vision and ideology that guide the implementation thereof. Without these core values, so strategy can be sound. This does not mean the core values will always have been articulated… the authenticity of values derive from behaviour rather than claims, so it can take time for them to be discovered. Within organisation, this discovery process cannot occur without breaking down the barriers between organisational silos.
Many organisations will lay claim to a series of values, because they sound good as marketing spiel. These values will usually sound generic, suitable for just about any organisation (which is a tell-tale sign that they are fabrications). Real core values are principles we can live and operate by, even when we have not achieved our ambitions. They guide our decisions, serving to resolve moral dilemmas. Companies that hold themselves accountable by publishing real core values generally outperform the market by a factor of 12. Read more of this post