We live in a roller coaster world. One day you’re up and the next day you’re down ¹

• Countries destinies are determined by social media crowding-sourcing and opinionating of the moment, devoid of plans for ‘now-what’ let alone the future.
• Company stocks are traded by computer super algorithms that disregard a company’s performance and just bet the odds, yet distinctly affect a company’s profits.
• CEO longevity is now an average of three years, hence the ballooning of compensation as hazard-pay reward for being the corporate shooting-gallery duck.

With this constant flux, every company needs an Elasticity strategy. They must be able to expand and contract, be flexible, agile and mobile – on a day-to-day basis. There probably isn’t anything more static and unmoving than the bricks and mortar part of the business – the physical work environment. The workplace facility and its equipment, fixed assets that are the second to third highest consumer of company monetary and other resources, is in dire need of more than a face lift.

Looking for a plug-n-play formula for Elasticity? There isn’t one. Nor are the answers found solely in more or new CRE/Facility investments. Elasticity is a mix and balance of components that span all operational and enterprise entities, intrinsically determined by the uniqueness of each company. And that mix, in and of its self, needs to be changeable on a dime. Hence the need for variable movement – elasticity at all levels and categories of the organization.

Is there a bit of the Ouija Board or witch craft in this? Maybe. More accurately, elastic strategies and plans are proactive maneuvers based on intuition and trending – moving on the aggregation of multiple data points available at the moment. For the workplace, the foundation is no longer made of concrete, rather a quicksand mixture of risk and experimentation, micro-markets desires, niches and a plethora of options. (See Pluralism)

If the ups and downs of the world are constantly volatile and ever-changing, then the solutions aren’t perfectly pre-determinable or static. They breathe, like a workplace diaphragm that expands and contracts and pumps oxygen equal to the extent of the corporate exertion and the varied, proportional and variable needs of its organs and limbs, at any moment in time.

¹ As so now famously expressed by Heidi Klum on the Project Runway TV show.

One size doesn’t fit all. I have said this so many times that I’m even getting tired of hearing it. So I am going to let some else say it – Malcolm Gladwell. Malcolm, in his book What the Dog Saw, has an essay entitled The Ketchup Conundrum. Buried within this story is a sub-story about Howard Moskowitz, Diet Pepsi and spaghetti sauce.

Howard Moskowitz, now a legend in his industry, is the owner of a food-testing and market-research company. In the seventies, while trying to find the perfect sweetness mix for his client Pepsi’s new Diet version, he noticed all the data from his testing research was wacky. There was no clear winner. As Malcolm writes it, Moskowitz had an epiphany. “They had been asking the wrong question. There was no such thing as the perfect Diet Pepsi. They should have been looking for the perfect Diet Pepsis.”

Malcolm relates that Moskowitz spent years trying to get the food industry to understand “his idea about the plural nature of perfection.” Then in 1986 the Campbell Soup Company called. They were in huge competition against Ragu with their Prego brand of spaghetti sauce and losing. Moskowitz created forty-five varieties and, instead of just relying on professional food tasters, he took them on the road. Because, Gladwell quotes Moskowitz, “The mind knows not what the tongue wants.” Consumers don’t “know what they desire if what they desire doesn’t exist yet.”

What did the perfect competitive sauce turn out to be? It seems, after sifting through mounds of data, not one but three broad patterns emerged – “plain, spicy and extra-chunky.” Extra-chunky, the new version, brought “hundreds of millions of dollars to Pepsi” over the next decade. Thirty years later multiple flavors of spaghetti sauce is the expected norm.

Since the transition from factory work to office work, workplace designers have also been looking for perfection. They have engaged in a century-long effort to design that one, perfect place where everyone works full-throttle – happy, productive and efficient. The result is our current incarnation of supposed perfection – one-size-fits-all facilities. You know it, Dilbertville® on steroids.  Rows and rows, floors and floors, buildings and buildings of the same types of offices, varied only slightly based on hierarchy. Non-descript workspaces for a non-descript workforce of human cogs in the great corporate machine – modern age perfection.

The workplace’s parallel conundrum is that the workplace industry, from corporate real estate and facilities managers to architects, designers and furniture manufacturers, also has been asking the wrong questions. There is no such thing as the perfect workplace. They should be looking for the perfect workplaces. Because, as not everyone liked plain or spicy, not everyone works well in an office or cube.

Over the years, every time a new version of workplace is created, such as the original switch from offices and the typing-pool sea to offices and the system furniture cube-farm, or the current switching from four-sided, high cubes to low or sometimes even no-sided cubes, the same old pattern is followed. Everyone gets them. This is akin to totally dumping plain and spicy and offering only extra-chunky. A new group is now satisfied but the others are left out in the cold.

If the answer is found in pluralism, as Moskowitz, Gladwell and I believe, what are the perfect workplaces? I have my own thirty year study and I guarantee that it is not just some new combination of office workspaces. With the discovery of extra-chunky, that version was just one of forty-five tried that seemed to rise to prominence. Today there are even more flavors fulfilling every niche. For workplace, most companies and the workplace industry have yet tried only a few variations on the same theme.

Also key is another concept Moskowitz espoused – his mind-tongue ambiguity. That people don’t know what they don’t know is especially true for workplace. Having only been presented with two choices in their worklife, they don’t know what other types of workplaces really might be the right ones for them. Again, it comes back to asking the right question. The right question is not “What is the perfect workplace?” The right question is “Where do people work best?”

From my years of research and experience, I see there are also three strong patterns emerging. Most likely they are not the ones you think. Given the heavy industry pursuit in a single direction, you may never have been presented other choices to try. Try some, you might like them. But don’t just try one, try many. The plural nature of perfection is about choices.

http://www.ted.com/talks/malcolm_gladwell_on_spaghetti_sauce.html

Gladwell at TED, talking about Ketchup, makes the larger argument about the nature of choice and happiness.  “Embracing the diversity of human beings is the path to making them truly happy.” – Malcolm Gladwell

Copyright © 2011. Catherine Adams Lee Consulting. All rights reserved.

Before you answer that question, let me ask you another one.

Which kind of player do you use to listen to music – MP3 player, CD player, computer, cassette player, 8-track tape player, record player, radio?

If you entered MP3 player, you are up-to-date, new. If you entered record player, you are old school. But the question isn’t about what you use. The question is about having your brain look at the idea of  using old or new things that were built to essentially do the same, one thing – listen to music. Let’s think about it together.

Things that play Records are:

1. Large
2. Cumbersome
3. Attached to the wall
4. Fixed in one place
5. Can only be heard from where the speakers and you sit
6. Need to be plugged into an electric wall plug for power
7. Scratch and ruin the record if moved while playing
8. Only play a prescribed list – the songs on the album

 Compared to say – MP3 players, MP3 players are:

1. Small
2. Light and portable
3. Attached to nothing but you
4. Easily operated anyplace
5. Can be heard anywhere
6. Power moves with it
7. Designed to be mobile
8. Play list is customizable to your wants and needs

There are more comparisons I could make, but you get the idea. So let’s take this process and apply it to the workplace.

Old workplaces are:

1. Big
2. Cumbersome
3. Is and is full of attached things that take a small company fortune to move
4. Takes another small army to keep operating in that one place
5. Seemingly can only be heard/managed if you are located right there
6. Everything needs to be plugged in right there to operate – equipment, technology, people
7. Moving any part takes 3 and 4 above
8. Can only used in a prescribed way, usually as determined by Facilities, HR and IT

You see where I am going with this. Does your old workplaces list match mine? It doesn’t matter if it does. Just like it doesn’t matter which thing you choose at the beginning to play music. Any answer is valid. If you play records, or tapes or digital media, all is okay. But pretty soon you can’t get the right or new music on the old media. When the records become unplayable, scratched, you can’t buy new ones. When the record player breaks you can’t repair it. If it works for you right now, that’s fine. The question is – will it work for you later? And if not, when is later? I think later is today.

So it’s not about right or wrong. It’s about saying out loud, truthfully what the ‘As Is” is so you can accurately and successfully plan what you want the “To Be” to be for you, for your company. I call this congruency – when the thing and the need are in sync. How does it work, here is an example.

Vision:   Play beautiful business music. 
Strategy:   Become a 21^st century business player of new business music.
Plan:   Be a  21^st century business.
Road Map:   Innovate to be a NewWorkPlace.

Coda:

My “New” WorkPlaces list:

1. Small
2. Light and portable/agile
3. Attached to nothing but you, the employee
4. Easily operated anyplace
5. Can be heard connected anywhere
6. Power moves with it
7. Designed to be mobile
8. Play list is customizable to your needs

Yes – this is the same list as the MP3 player. Think about it. It works.

Copyright © 2011. Catherine Adams Lee Consulting. All rights reserved.

I am once again returned from my travels, this time from Washington D.C. The main reason for the trip was an invite from Kennan Kellaris Salinero to participate in her first “UnSummit”. She gathered thought leaders from science and various other professions and industries to advance the mission of her non-profit Yámana Science and Technology  and “bring together the ideas, people, and resources alongside new trends in workplace practices to bring out the best in science”. It was an honor to be invited and participate. Thank you Kennan! More about the UnSummit in a future blog. 

 Kennan timed her Science UnSummit 2010 to coincide with Larry Bock’s USA Science and Engineering Festival in D.C.  They closed off blocks of Pennsylvania Avenue on the National Mall, put up rows of booths and drew a huge crowd.

Each booth involved some form of Science. Represented was anything from genomics (there was a traveling RV exhibit), to earthquakes (kids were tumbling blocks), to space (you got into a real space suit) to robotics (a small remote vehicle was traveling around). And all were mobbed by kids. My first thought was “how was this going to work?” You couldn’t just stroll down and see what each as about. You had to stop and participate – become involved. That, it turned out, was the real genius and success of the event.

As I wandered down row after row of booths, there wasn’t a single one that didn’t have at least 4 -5 kids with their hands active or mouths agape, brains raptly engaged – and parents beaming. Kudos to Larry and his small group! I heard that he and only three other people pulled this off. Talk about what a small group can do. If anything should become viral, this is it.

What a way to teach …

….. by and for all people of all ages.

At one point I was strolling down a whole row of NASA booths and looked up to see the signage above the booths. Each had a slogan that was individually and collectively inspirational. I was so taken by the words that I was about to snap pictures of each. Then I spotted a NASA literature booth so I went up to it and asked one of the young women if they had all of the words printed on something I could take with me or could be emailed to me.

She smiled and said no, but they were thinking of posting them on their web site. I exclaimed how much I like them and she answered with a thank you, I created them. Talk about fortuitous serendipity! I happened to go up to the one person that developed them. I think I made her day, as she seemed surprised that anyone noticed them let alone would want more info. Creativity and curiosity, the underpinnings of scientific and other kinds of discovery, comes in many forms. This reminds me that I have to find her card and email her at NASA.

Here are some more of her inspirational words.

Learn it. Engage it. Build it.

     Invent it. Pursue it. Code it.

            Know it. Brainstorm it. Try it.

                        Dream it. Imagine it. Find it.

                                    Define it. Invent it. Try it.

                                                Boost it. Encourage it. Form it.

                                                            Style it. Provoke it. Own it.

                                                                        Share it. Inform it. Plan it.

                                                                                    Find it. Create it. Engage it.

 Coda:

A couple of months ago I was talking with a business associate. At one point she exclaimed that I was so much like a child in my enthusiasm and curiosity.  At first I was sort of insulted. She seemed to imply I was acting like a child. She assured me that she meant it as a compliment and I thanked her.

Afterward it occurred to me how sad it was that the only way we have to describe joyful curiosity and the extensions of creativity, exploration and discovery was “childlike”. Implied is the expectation that after the age of say 6 or 7 we would, and should, lose that, and grow up, become what – dour and serious? How unfortunate for us as a society and the world. And does the latter behavior really produce creativity and innovation? I don’t think so. Something to think about next time you try to crush that energy – from any age.

Lately I’ve felt that I pushed myself so far out to the edge of the workplace transformation envelope that I am floating in the exosphere of space, barely able to be pulled back by gravity. It’s a lonely place out here. But finally I think I have company.

 The January/February 2010 issue CoreNet Global’s industry magazine The Leader published an article entitled “Moving beyond Alternative Workplace Strategy: After 20 Years Can AWS Finally Scale-Up?”, authored by Gagandeep Singh and Nadia Orawski, two Deloitte consultants. At last I have found some people who seem to “get it”.

Their definition of Alternative Workplace Strategies (AWS) is the current incarnation, “a combination of practices involving space design and usage, technology provision, and HR policies that allow work to be done from a variety of settings beyond the traditional office environment.”

 The gist of Singh and Orawski’s premise is that this is all well and good, and even though technology is well-advanced in support, a very small percentage of companies have successful implementations for an even smaller number of their population, mostly in pilots. Their rationale for this failure of large scale deployment, and I am in agreement though not stated as strongly by them, is the lack of commitment to large scale-up.

 What you do for a small, let’s stick our toe in the water and test the temperature pilot and what you do for full-blown, company-wide enactment is entirely different. The actions in the areas of intent, commitment and support, both in polices and attitude, change.

 Here are key points extracted from the article that illustrate both of our points of view. It’s almost as if I had written it myself. I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve expressed that telework, et al, is not a one-off program but a new business process, a way of working, at a distance, over technology, that has now become business-as-usual. Hmmm – maybe they have read my site/blogs. Wouldn’t that be nice!

 Key points, the bold is my added emphasis, are:

 “Integration and alignment across enabling functions – Corporate Real Estate (CRE), Human Resources (HR), Information Technology (IT) and Finance. AWS often impacts and requires significant changes across HR, IT, CRE and Finance. In our experience … large scale deployment requires systemic and sustained enterprise wide cooperation across these “silos.”

Outside of transactional job categories, productivity is rarely measured in corporations, so improvements to productivity cannot be proven. This is a “red herring” issue and should be stated as such.

 … AWS is not a space program but rather a shift in how people are “expected” to work (even if in reality they are already working differently than expected).

 … the “enterprise mandate” approach relies on a compelling business case with high-level executive sponsorship for large-scale time-bound change.

 A sustainable “business-as-usual end state … AWS programs falter due to their inability to evolve from a project focused approach to an on-going “business as usual” state that would transform AWS from being the “alternative” to being the “norm”.

 … AWS needs to become a part of day to day operations and not be a special project that requires large teams of specialists and the associated costs.”

 To this I would add one more key ingredient necessary for success of Alternative Workplace Strategies – Congruous Branding and Culture

You have to walk the talk. Most companies publically espouse their “want-to-be” culture but fail to match reality with the cultural vision. Lofty goals replete with corporate altruism are wonderful, and necessary. However, a company that refuses to be real about the gap between what they ‘want to be’ and ‘what they are’ can never bridge that chasm. A strategy or plan based upon a false gap analysis leads to invalidation of purpose, a waste of valuable time, energy and money and, no matter how well branded, funded and supported, ultimately experiences failure through incongruity.

I have adopted a tradition of celebrating the year change with a trip to a museum. This year I went to the de Young Museum in Golden Gate Park in San Francisco. The exhibit that captured my attention this year was the again one of textiles, “Amish Abstractions: Quilts from the Collection of Faith and Stephen Brown”.  Another year it was the Gees Bend Quilt exhibit at the Palace of Legion of Honor, SF. http://newworkplaces.com/blog3/2007/01/12/wrapping-up-the-old-year-2006/ .

I found the Amish quilts to be equally as intriguing as the Gees’ Bend for similar, and different, reasons. The similarity is the natural pursuit and need for self-expression through what is essentially a utilitarian medium, quilts, in a restricted culture that existed in isolation. It is the nature of that isolation – self chosen in the case of the Amish and imposed in the case of Gee’s Bend – that created the differences. The Amish’s isolation, being selective, was not complete and allowed for some of the outside world to seep in. Their designs were afforded the benefits of acquiring and incorporating new concepts while simultaneously allowing them to break rigid conventions of color and innovate pattern. Gee’s Bend’s forced confinement kept them from such exposure, yet also freed them up to create new and entirely different, free form versions devoid almost all traditional format. In both cases, I find the inherent and driving human need for outward expression of personal and individual self, in even the most restrictive or dire of circumstances, a lesson unto itself.

 My personal preference is toward the Amish quilts. Their design is, as commented on a wall plaque at the exhibit, is reminiscent of the Modernist and Op Art painters such as Victor Vasarley, Josef Albers, Paul Klee, Frank Stella and Piet Mondrian. In my twenties years I was a great fan of the Modernists, particularly Victor Vasarley. I had a poster of his ‘Games’ on the wall in my dorm room and still have copies of four of his color studies. Although my younger self might have preferred the single-minded pursuit of the pure color aesthetic by modernist painters, I now find the Amish quilts, which pre-date this art period, more exciting.

 

Welcome to the New Year, and New Decade!

Post scripts: 

1. Why these museum trips at the ends of the years? They provide me with perspective. Forcing me to see the world through others eyes, they afford me the opportunity to better reflect on where we have been the past year(s) and gain a greater understanding of where we are going. I highly recommend it.
2. For more on perspective and museums, check out my trip a few years back to The Getty. This is an updated version of a piece I wrote several years ago.
3. If anyone is still questioning the value of the arts in education, a closer look at some of the Amish quilts should erase that. Many of the designs are so intricate and precise that they clearly represent applicable skill exercises in mathematics, engineering and spatial visualization (see figures above and below).  There is an ever-growing body of evidence that the study and practice of music and art engender the skills necessary to advance mathematics and science creativity to the highest levels. In an ever-increasing world of creative and knowledge-based work, those of both genders that will lead and succeed will have acquired some of their abilities in this manner. Our continued elimination of these courses from our education system will have a direct cause and effect on the next generation of Americans’ ability to compete in the future.

I find museum trips very inspiring. Walking amongst the various works of art takes me out of mind and into the mind of the artist, forcing me to look at subjects through their eyes. A while back I had an encounter that was more than a passing enjoyment. It taught me a lesson that has stuck with me to this day.

I was visiting The Getty Center Museum in Los Angles, touring through the Impressionists section. When museums are busy, people form a self-organized approach to art viewing. Orderly and without instruction, they move around the room in a clock-wise (left to right) manner (at least for Western audiences). Pausing in front of each painting for a period of time, the length determined by how large the crowd is and, unspoken, by what the group deems as the right and polite amount of lingering time before moving on and letting the next person have a turn.

This day there was a moderate crowd, so people were moving at a fairly slow pace, but not slow enough to really stand and study the art. I usually make a point of seeking out Impressionist works in each museum and, moving along, I was delighted to encounter Claude Monet’s “The Portal of Rouen Cathedral in Morning Light”, 1894. Here is a link to The Getty’s blurb on the piece. http://www.getty.edu/art/gettyguide/artObjectDetails?artobj=142049.

Claude Monet, French, Rouen and Paris, 1894
Oil on canvas  39 3/8 x 25 9/16 in.

from The Getty Center, Los Angeles collection

Then I saw a couple of more works by other artists and rounding the room’s corner, there was another Monet in the middle of that wall. I suddenly had the urge, given the unusual opportunity created by the juxtaposition of the two paintings, to compare the two. So I stepped out of line and into the middle of the room. From this point I could look at the first painting and, with a turn of my head, see the other, with straight on views of each.

I stood there doing this a while, really studying the magnificence of his skill and comparing the pieces. Seeing famous works of art in person is an entirely different, and incomparable, experience to viewing slides in art history class or pictures in books. You really do need to go to a world class museum and see such world class, historic art.

Lost in admiring Monet’s brush stroke choices and creation of light of the Rouen, suddenly my concentration was broken by a tug on my sleeve. I looked around and there was the museum guard pulling on my arm. My first thought was of course, “what was I doing wrong?” But then he began motioning me with his head and said – to fully appreciated the picture, I had to stand back further. So I moved directly back and he then said, “No, you need to go sideways.” I took a step to the right and received the surprise of my life. The whole painting suddenly popped in 3-D!

I was awe-struck. Not in all of my years of art and architecture history classes did I recall having been told to do this, or in all of my years of looking at 2-D pictures had I truly seen this third dimension in his paintings. I looked back at the guard, my mouth agape, and he just smiled. He must have noticed that I had more of just a passing interest than the others shuffling along. He was relishing the opportunity to surprise and educate and I was equally happy and grateful. I then went back to the other Monets and did the same, looking at them diagonally. The same thing happened. Suddenly they took on a depth of field that could only be viewed in this way, in person. I seem to recall my best vantage point was at about a 75° angle.

Thought my amazement and appreciation for Monet as an artist grew exponentially, what has really stayed with me ever since is a lesson in perspective. That we can look at a thing, an object, and idea one way for a long time, and, then, something can come along and change our perception of it completely, and forever. But those moments don’t usually happen if we don’t go out of our way, out of our normal patterns and habits, our comfort zone, to greet them. If we do, if we take a step outside of our box, no matter how tiny, surprises will happen and we can have encounters, unanticipated, unforeseeable, and unimagined that will make positive change, give new meanings and add depth to our existence. New lessons we can take and apply to other things. New perspectives we can carry with us to enrich our consciousness and lives.

What made me think of it was a conversation I had yesterday with a woman friend of mine. I was relating to her some of my experiences about re-energizing my consulting business and she said. “You know. Some people don’t have the luxury that you do. They have mouths to feed and they need to have a job.” 

I was shocked. I felt like someone had just slapped me along side my head. When did the idea of starting a business become a luxury?! I don’t know any person who has started one, who thinks so. Most think it is damn hard work and wouldn’t it be a luxury to have a nice, cushy job to go to everyday. Let someone else do all the running-the-business worry, stress and hard work. And when did we shift to someone handing a job to us, from us making our own jobs.

So I asked her to elaborate on what she meant.  more …

For the full version, click the link to our audio blog ‘dreaming’ http://www.newworkplaces.com/podcast_blog.html