Kitchen Cabinet of Mentors

InsideHigherEd has a great post by Owen Stukowski today. Owen writes about the Kitchen Cabinet of Mentors:

Many higher education professionals find mentors with similar backgrounds to seek advice and test their ideas. Borrowing an idea from president Andrew Jackson, what if you create an informal cabinet of mentors from a set of diverse backgrounds? As we build a network of mentors, it is important to have a diversity of viewpoints and connections. Having a variety of mentors will serve as a strong sounding board for professional growth as we face different challenges. Five types of mentors are important to consider appointing to your mentorship cabinet. Each of these types of mentors can contribute a unique perspective to your professional and personal development.

Stukowski identifies four types of mentors in the cabinet:

1. The Friend - who connects your personal and professional life
2. The Role Model - person in a professional position you wish to achive
3. The Insider - long-time member of the organization, can offer a unique perspective
4. The Veteran - industry veteran, usually exectutive leadership
5. The Teacher - imparts specific knowledge or skills

Read more: http://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2011/07/06/essay_on_the_importance_of_having_multiple_mentors

It's 2020: Are you living in the Cloud?

Technology experts and stakeholders say they expect they will ‘live mostly in the cloud’ in 2020 and not on the desktop, working mostly through cyberspace-based applications accessed through networked devices. This will substantially advance mobile connectivity through smartphones and other internet appliances. Many say there will be a cloud-desktop hybrid. Still, cloud computing has many difficult hurdles to overcome, including concerns tied to the availability of broadband spectrum, the ability of diverse systems to work together, security, privacy, and quality of service.

Do you see yourself living in the clouds?

You can read the full Pew Internet report here: http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2010/The-future-of-cloud-computing.aspx

Unsystematic Engineering

Through the years I've often participated on panels convened to study some particular problem, usually at the behest of the government. Typically, these concern some program, project, or issue that involves engineering and science, and one that is not seen to be doing as well as was desired or anticipated. The panel, composed of scientists and engineers, gets numerous briefings from people directly involved and from outside experts. Finally, a report is prepared with recommendations about how to fix the trouble.

In my own experience, these final reports almost always contain at least one of the following three recommendations:

1. Provide more money.

2. Put someone in charge.

3. Do some systems engineering.

Such reports are invariably received courteously by the ­panel's sponsors, but often with muted enthusiasm. I can see the wheels turning behind their eyes. "We knew this stuff," they are thinking. "You people are supposed to give us a technical solution, not tell us how to manage this. You're engineers, not management experts."

Each time I have the feeling that the study's sponsors believe or hope that there is some great new technology that will fix whatever the problem is, but that never seems to be the case. Almost always those involved with the problem are already perfectly aware of every applicable technology. Things run astray when their efforts are poorly coordinated, responsibility is diffuse, and management oversight and systems engineering or architecture at the top level are insufficient.

More at IEEE Spectrum

Intergalactic Computing

Intergalactic Computing

J.C.R. Licklider was a distinguished engineer and visionary computer scientist, often referred to as the “Johnny Appleseed” of computing for his contributions by planting the seeds for the Internet and World Wide Web. In 1963, Licklider was appointed head of the Behavioral Sciences and Command and Control programs at the Department of Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA). “Lick” as his colleagues affectionately referred to him, addressed members of the Intergalactic Computer Group later that year with a memo calling for a network of computers that would allow scientists to collaborate irrespective of distance or computer compatibility issues. Lick referred to the system as an intergalactic computing network, describing it conceptually, "….we could have at least four large computers, perhaps six or eight small computers, and a great assortment of disc files and magnetic tape units-not to mention remote consoles and teletype stations-all churning away" (Waldrop, 2000).

Lick’s vision for connected computing served as the foundational concept for the ARPANET, which led to the creation of a series of military networks including MILNET, SIPRNET, and eventually the Internet and later World Wide Web. In Segaller’s 1998 book “Nerds: A Brief History of the Internet”, Roberts describes Lick and his vision:

"Lick had this concept of the intergalactic network which he believed was everybody could use computers anywhere and get at data anywhere in the world. He didn't envision the number of computers we have today by any means, but he had the same concept-all of the stuff linked together throughout the world, that you can use a remote computer, get data from a remote computer, or use lots of computers in your job. The vision was really Lick's originally. None oof us can really claim to have seen that before him nor{can} anybody in the world. Lick saw this vision in the early sixties. He didn't have a clue how to build it. He didn't have any idea how to make this happen. But he knew it was important, so he sat down with me and really convinced me that it was important and convinced me into making it happen" (Roberts in Segaller, 40).

J.C.R. Licklider died in 1990 having worked on core components of UNIX development, network computing, time sharing operations (Project MAC), and professor emeritus at the Massechusets Institute of Technology. His vision for intergalactic computing continues to inspire new platforms and tools for collaboration and information sharing.

How to Sell an Idea to Your Boss

One of the hardest challenges for creative people - especially those working in units such as R&D, design, or marketing - is how to win top management's support for their ideas.

Many feel that their proposals are killed not because they have poor potential but because their boss simply does not understand them or does not even listen to the presentation.

1. Get an endorsement to investigate a business challenge.
2. Design the innovation process together
3. Update executives frequently
4. Involve top execs in the cration of the solution
5. Know your director and manager's hot buttons or challenges (this is my idea....i threw it in here for free!)

Read the full story @ HBR blogs: http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2010/08/how_to_sell_an_idea_to_your_bo.html

Systems Thinking, Systems Dynamics, & Systems Archetypes

Systems Thinking, Systems Dynamics, & Systems Archetypes

Systems thinking is an approach to learning within an organization. The discipline seeks to identify relationships rather than linear cause-effect chains and see the process of change rather than just snapshots.

Feedback loops are critical in systems thinking and help us identify how actions support or counter each other. The process builds on patterns that occur repeatedly. The framework of systems thinking is centered on seeing full patterns and the affect they have on change.

Senge's work in the Fifth Discipline was very popular, but he was self-admittedly not the first to identity systems thinking. The precursor to Senge's work was Argyris and Schon's "Organizational Learning (1978). Argyris and Schon identified 2 organizational models:

1. Model 1 was characterized by manipulative managers, goal-focused culture, and the "cone of silence" where workers keep their head down, do their work, and do not ask questions. This is considered single-loop learning.


2. Model 2 had an emphasis on double-loop learning. For example, when an error (ie. bug or discrepancy) is detected, the organization debates a solution, acts on the change, and generally learns from others.

Argyris and Schon's study found that most organizations do single-loop learning well, but the struggle with double-loop learning. As a result, Senge and others investigated the methods to improve organizational learning ie the "Fifth Discipline."Senge identifies "system archetypes": a way to understand the dynamic complexity of a problem. He describes a scenario where a problem is identified and being familiar with the system archetypes produces a feeling of "deja vu"....a "hey I've seen this problem before" moment. Understanding system archetypes, the engineer might apply leverage in the form of solutions across disciplines, industries, or diverse organizations because he has seen the patterns and can clearly identify the system archetype. It sounds simple, but there must be an awareness by the systems engineer to synthesize the problem, solution, and recognize the system dynamics and related systems archetype.

Putting it all together:

systems engineers would use the systems thinking approach to solving complex problems. Pattern identification, as a result of feedback (including double-loop learning), would help the SE crystallize the problem and craft a solution. If an SE understands system archetypes in the transportation industry, he might apply a similar solution to the manufacturing industry.

Systems architects would also be inherently familiar with the systems thinking approach where they may conceptualize solutions across boundaries in government, industry, academic environments.

Robert Louis Flood wrote a book called "Rethinking the Fifth Discipline. Flood builds on Senge's research and offers his own approach as well as other practitioners. His work revolves around systems planning, critical systems thinking, and system models. The intent is to show how systems thinking may be implemented through various methodologies.

Why were they doing those things in their spare time?

In his latest book, The Great Reset: How New Ways of Living and Working Drive Post-Crash Prosperity published by Harper (April 27, 2010), Richard Florida observes:

"We've mythologized the histories of entrepreneurs such as [Bill] Gates or Steven Jobs or Michael Dell, constantly retelling the stories of these go-getters starting new businesses in their dorm rooms or garages in their spare time. Yet nobody ever asks the obvious question: Why were they doing those things in their spare time? Why isn't the education system structured so that this kind of activity is the very goal? Humans have always essentially learned by doing. The idea that school is the only, or even the main, source of education is a relatively recent development. We need to understand that classroom education is merely one phase of a continuous process of learning, discovery, and engagement that can occur anywhere and anytime. We need a learning system that fuels, rather than squelches, our collective creativity."

Richard Florida's take on the education system is a fresh view. We need to look far beyond the classroom for education. There is much more than education than books, tables, chairs, and chalkboards. Living history, fieldtrips, homelife, projects, sports, volunteerism, vacations, and many other settings are opportunities for education.

What are you doing in your spare time? Where do you learn?