Recent Posts

5 Tips to Double Your Writing Productivity


Some people are writing machines. They get an idea, pound it out in minutes, post it to their blog, and move on to something else. For the rest of the world, writing is often slow, grinding work.

But it doesn’t have to be. Anyone can write faster if they follow a 5-step formula for writing more efficiently. I call it S.P.E.E.D. Writing.


  1. S: Select a topic
  2. P: Prepare your facts
  3. E: Establish a structure
  4. E: Eliminate distractions
  5. D: Dash to the finish

For Brief Detail visit: CopyBlogger

Stumble
Delicious
Twitter
Technorati
Facebook

10 Steps to Becoming a Better Writer


  1. Write.
  2. Write more.
  3. Write even more.
  4. Write even more than that.
  5. Write when you don’t want to.
  6. Write when you do.
  7. Write when you have something to say.
  8. Write when you don’t.
  9. Write every day.
  10. Keep writing.
Stumble
Delicious
Twitter
Technorati
Facebook

Strategic Leadership and Decision Making

Tactics and Techniques for Evaluating Consensus Team Decision Making

GENERAL

Many teams are accustomed to evaluate their performance systematically and regularly. Sometimes the results are measurable and dramatic: a patient dies during heart surgery and the post-mortem reveals that it was the result of a particular effect that was not the fault of the surgical team, though it may be something that could be noted for the future. The pitching coach of the Baltimore Orioles charts each pitch during the course of a game, not only counting the number of pitches, but whether it was a curve ball, a fast ball, and so on, and exactly what the situation was in the game at that time. And while there may be some differences in evaluating decision making teams in industry or in government, the fact that their work is important--it can affect policy, finances, national security, and so on--should lend some urgency to devising ways in which evaluation of the decision making process is measured in those environments, or that it is at least observed and recorded anecdotally.

We have noted in previous chapters the importance of evaluation to the decision making process. There are two kinds of evaluation described: one is a simple after-action review (annex 1) that could be used immediately after the conclusion of a team decision making meeting to get a general set of impressions and immediate feedback from a meeting; the other evaluation is one that is specifically designed to yield information on the leader of a team using some form of consensus decision making. Whatever instrument and timing you choose to use, the objective is to obtain information that could be used in organizing and conducting future meetings. Each of the evaluations will be discussed.

AFTER ACTION REVIEWS

A. TEAM EVALUATION. The most likely evaluation is apt to be an evaluation of the team by its own members, or in some cases by a process observer in concert with the team itself. Annex 2 of this appendix provides a set of observations that could be used to facilitate such an evaluation. Even though a set of leading questions is provided in annex 1, it is important to observe that there may be no singular format, nor list of questions for conducting an after-action review. That may be because no two teams, or decision making situations are the same. Thus, one of the tasks of the leader, or someone designated as a process observer, is to select questions based upon the circumstances, team composition, and observed decisionmaking process. Samples of leading questions that can be used in AAR's are itemized in the annex 1; this can be administered anonymously to the whole group at the conclusion of a session, and the inputs can be analyzed by the team leader and the team in preparation for subsequent sessions. This is a qualitative evaluation instrument, and is dependent on the feelings and perceptions of the participants. The accumulation of many comments that might suggest the presence of the same phenomenon by members of the team is a cause for adjusting the process model in some way. For example, if too little time is allowed at the end for review, you might adjust the "management element" of the model; or, if some people feel that they had little opportunity to participate in the discussion, some parts of the conceptual component might be adjusted for the next team meeting.

Former Army Chief of Staff Gordon Sullivan, describes an AAR as it was used to "create a structured way of facilitating learning from complex experiences that are often very ambiguous." ("Hope is Not a Method," Gordon R. and Michael V. Harper, What Business Leader's Can Learn from America's Army, Random House, New York, 1996). General Sullivan describes an AAR as a step in helping the Army to learn about what it was doing, and how to do it better. In his view, it is something that takes place after every significant event. Someone who has been with the team, sits down with them and they discuss what happened. It requires an awareness of what did happen, what should have happened, and what could have been done differently to achieve the objectives in a more efficient way. It takes time; it needs to be handled in a non-threatening way; and, it is hard. But the outcome yields a much improved sense of what happened. And, if this leads to improved performance, then the investment seems worthwhile. The context of the AAR, in General Sullivan's view, is organizational improvement through learning.

While annex 2 provides a means for a paper and pencil evaluation, it can be done using, for example, a GroupWare systems environment; both can be paired with an oral feedback session. If the leader is committed to team improvement through learning, there is no limit to the ways to gather data and have the team consider its performance.

B. LEADER EVALUATION. At times there may be a particular value in having the team, or at least some members of the team, evaluate the performance of the leader; annex 2 provides such a format. An aspect of this format is that it provides a quantitative dimension to other information gathered by using only annex 1. Annex 2 seeks to gauge the conduct and performance of the team leader more discretely than other commentary might allow. Such an evaluation of the leader might be done during times of training, or even in actual practice if someone is concerned about the progress of the team and wishes to have some more direct feedback to the leader about his or her performance.

There are three distinct considerations that should be kept in mind; each is put in the form of a question:
  • Why Focus on the Team Leader?
A leader has, or can have, profound effects on a team. More than any other member of the team, the leader (by definition, an input) can influence the decision making process. Process is a function of inputs. Therefore, any evaluation of the team leader is a "process input." The idea of evaluating the team leader's behaviors may be very threatening to many people, especially those who have matured inside very structured, hierarchical organizations. If anything can put leaders outside their comfort zones, it is being evaluated. However, what we're interested in evaluating is not the leader so much as the leader's behavior.

A team leader, in the scientific and academic sense, possesses a set of values, skills, attributes, prefer-ences,knowledge, and experiences. When facilitating the decision making process, the leader displays his set of values, skill, etc., through his behavior.

Because we can observe a leader's behavior, we can measure it. This is much easier to do in an objective manner than with an amorphous group of people who form a team. The level of complexity is much reduced, and observations can be focused.

  • What Do We Want to Measure?
One way of answering this question is to consider the framework offered by the model; that is, the tri-partite notions of High Conceptual Level, Prudent Consensus Appraoch, and Vigilant Decision Management. There are certain aspects of each of these areas that can be framed into specific questions. We want to measure the leader's performance, to increase everyone's sensitivity to the pillars, and to focus on certain areas so that they are adverted to during actual decision making situations. As a reminder they are:

-High Conceptual Level

Did the team leader adequately identify and define the problem(s)?

Did the team leader specify major tasks and products?

Did the team leader specify desired and undesirable outcomes?

Did the team leader specify priorities and adjust as necessary?

Did the team use all appropriate frames of reference?

Did the team leader specify a temporal perspective?

Did the team address short-term and long-term consequences?

Did the team examine and clarify assumptions?

Did the team war-game outcomes and consider all consequences?

Did the team use divergent and convergent thinking?

Did the team consider the moral implications of the decision?

-Prudent Consensus Approach

Did the team leader define roles and functions?

Did the team include all affected team members in the debate?

Did the team compensate for any absent or overworked member?

Did the team leader avoid being autocratic by sharing power?

Did the team leader micro-manage?

Did team members provide each other with full access to information?

Did the team keep communications channels open?

Did the team focus on mutual problems/issues, not personalities?

Did the team address winning issues first?

-Vigilant Decision Management

Did the team track real time information?

Did the team build multiple, simultaneous alternatives?

Did the team rely on expert advice?

Did the team leader try for consensus, but not delay the decision?

Did the team meet goals on schedule?

Did the team leader redirect tasks as required?

Did the team leader plan for and use a final review period?

Did the team leader schedule pauses for introspective looks at process and product?

  • How Do We Measure Performance?
In a particular scenario, and at the conclusion of a meeting, all participants will be asked to complete a peer rating feedback sheet ; a sample is provided in annex 2 on the performance of the leader. The leader will evaluate him/herself also. The evaluation sheet is focused on measuring how well the leader managed the group's decision making process. Someone will be designated to collect all of the leader evaluation sheets and collate the responses, and subsequently to share the results with the leader in a private feedback session.

SUMMARY

Evaluation can provide meaningful developmental feedback to the team as a whole and to the team leader as an individual. The goal of the feedback in consensus team decision making is to change both the team members', and the leader's, focus from output to process. If we focus feedback efforts on process, essentially creating an additional feedback path, we concern ourselves with output as a function of process. To a large extent, process is a function of inputs. Therefore, any evaluation of the team leader is indirectly but influentially concerned about process. Because we can observe a leader's and a team's behaviors, we can measure them.
Stumble
Delicious
Twitter
Technorati
Facebook

Salman Taseer’s son writes shocking memories about his father

By Mariana Baabar

ISLAMABAD: Aatish Taseer, the 29-year old son of Punjab Governor Salmaan Taseer, who is a journalist and lives in London, has written a book, a personal memoir, about his life story in which he has depicted his father in a manner that will shock and repel many of his Pakistani readers.

The book, titled “Stranger to History: A Son’s Journey through Islamic Lands”, is about to be launched in London in a week and in India a few weeks later. Indian magazine “Outlook” has acquired the rights to the book and as a gesture of friendly cooperation, the magazine has agreed to share their breaking story about the book with The News. The magazine will hit the stands in India on Friday.



Aatish has also been interviewed by the Outlook magazine, which says the book is ready to roll and Aatish is on the brink of entering a heady world of book launches and international book tours. It has been published by the Picador India.

According to the Outlook, the book is a fictional version of Aatish’s dramatic life story. Briefly, the story is this: “A short, intense relationship between a Pakistani politician, Salmaan Taseer, and an Indian journalist, Tavleen Singh, produces a child. As the relationship founders, the father (according to his son’s account) abandons the mother and the infant in London.

They move to Delhi, where the boy, Aatish, grows up in an elite Sikh family, but with an awareness of being ‘different’ because of his Muslim and Pakistani ancestry. “Twice in his childhood, he makes long-distance overtures to his father, but is rebuffed. In 2002, at the age of 21, he tries again, by simply landing up in Lahore, and meets with greater success. Salmaan’s political career has waned — the military rules; his party’s boss, Benazir Bhutto, is in exile — but he is, by now, a wealthy businessman and a media tycoon, with an elegant third wife and six other children.

“Relatives and family friends, who have known about Aatish for years, help him find a way into Salmaan’s life. So begins a father-son relationship that is, by no means, easy. And so dies a novel.

“There is this extraordinary story, but what does it mean? It’s not everybody else’s,î Aatish said, while looking back on his struggles five years ago to write that autobiographical novel.“Then came a turning point. In 2005, Aatish, now a journalist living in London, wrote for a UK magazine on the radicalisation of the British second-generation Pakistanis, making the unexceptionable liberal argument that it was linked to failures of identity on different fronts. Chuffed by his first cover story, he sent it to his father, to whom he now felt closer — and was shocked to receive a furious reply, accusing him, among other things, of blackening the family name by spreading ‘invidious anti-Muslim propaganda’.

“The accusations set off a storm of reactions in Aatish, from hurt and defensiveness to confusion and curiosity. How was his father, who (as he was to recount in his book) drank Scotch every evening, never fasted and prayed, even ate pork and once said: ‘It was only when I was in jail and all they gave me to read was the Quran.....(This portion of the text has been deleted as it was deemed unprintable.)

Defending his controversial decision to lay bare personal relationships and conversations, Aatish said it came from his conviction, after the letter incident, that “the personal circumstances contained a bigger story.” He, however, acknowledged that the writing of the book was also a way to overcome the despair he felt at having his relationship with his father suddenly run aground again — “a way to make my peace with that personal history.”

The memoir is a journalist’s engaging travelogue. But where the political and personal come together powerfully is in the last third part of the book, which finds Aatish in Pakistan among the Pakistanis.

Personal disappointment fuses with intellectual outrage in his searing final encounters with his father. And as a traveller trying to make sense of the broken pieces of his own ancestry, he takes political discoveries personally. He is wounded by reflexive anti-Indianism, which he encounters widely in Pakistan, and particularly among the youth.

The book quite clearly rejects the idea of Pakistan (while tacitly endorsing the idea of India), but Aatish still seems to be trying to keep the two. “I hope for this to be a book for Pakistan (though) I know that is a very naive thing to say—Neither with my father, nor with Pakistan, was it written to settle any scores. I hope that despite what looks like a bleak look at Pakistan, it is possible to see a genuine concern and affection for the place.”

The Outlook said the personal story of Aatish, meanwhile, had acquired new twists. Salmaan Taseer, with whom he has had no contact for the past 15 months — though he hears he is upset by news of his book — has been resurrected in the topsy-turvy world of Pakistani politics.

About six months ago, he became the Punjab governor. It is a ceremonial role, but since the dissolution of the Shahbaz Sharif government in the Punjab, the man wields real power — and controversially.

“The timing of the book is slightly insane,” he said, laughing uncertainly. “I wouldn’t have wished for it. He was just a businessman, and that was good enough for what I had to say. He didn’t need to be the governor of the Punjab.”

Is he prepared to lose the relationship with a book like this, coming especially at a sensitive time? “Whether I wrote the book or not, I am definitely pretty much persona non grata,” he said. But then he added: “My father is a bright, intelligent man, and well read. I hope he understands some day.”

Following is an extract of the book: “I had begun my journey asking why my father was Muslim, and this was why: none of Islam’s once powerful moral imperatives existed within him, but he was Muslim because he doubted the Holocaust, hated America and Israel, thought Hindus were weak and cowardly, and because the glories of the Islamic past excited him.

“The faith decayed within him, ceased to be dynamic, ceased to provide moral guidance, became nothing but a deep, unreachable historical and political identity. This was all that still had the force of faith. It was significant because in the end, this was the moderate Muslim, and it was too little moderation and in the wrong areas. It didn’t matter how someone prayed, how much they prayed, what dress they wore, whether they chose to drink or not, but it did matter that someone harboured feelings of hatred, for Jews, Americans or Hindus, that were founded in faith and only masked in political arguments.”

“I rose to leave the room. It was if a bank had burst. My father and I, for the first time, were beyond embarrassment. I returned a few moments later to say goodbye to him, but he had left for the day without a word. The now empty room produced a corresponding vacancy in me that was like despair. I wanted somehow to feel whole again; not reconciliation, that would be asking too much, just not this feeling of waste: my journey to find my father ending in an empty room in Lahore, the clear light of a bright morning breaking in to land on the criss-crossing arcs of a freshly swabbed floor.

“As the crow flies, the distance between my father and me had never been much, but the land had been marked by history for a unique division, of which I had inherited both broken pieces. My journey to seek out my father, and through him, his country, was a way for me to make my peace with that history. And it had not been without its rewards. My deep connection to the land that is Pakistan had been renewed. I felt lucky to have both countries; I felt that I’d been given what partition had denied many. For me, it meant the possibility of a different education, of embracing the three-tier history of India whole, perhaps an intellectual troika of Sanskrit, Urdu and English.

“These mismatches were the lot of people with garbled histories, but I preferred them to violent purities. The world is richer in its hybrids.

“But then there was the futility of the empty room, rupture on rupture, for which I could find no consolation, except that my father’s existence, so ghostly all my life, had at last acquired a gram of material weight. And, if not for that, who knows what sterile obsessions might still have held me fast?”[The News]

Stumble
Delicious
Twitter
Technorati
Facebook

Change Management Process

By Nick Jenkins

The basis of change management is to have a clear process which everyone understands. It need not be bureaucratic or cumbersome but it should be applied universally and without fear of favour.

The basic elements of a change process are:

  • What is under change control and what is excluded ?
  • How are changes requested ?
  • Who has the authority to approve or reject changes ?
  • How are decisions upon approval or rejection are documented and disseminated ?
  • How changes are implemented and their implementation recorded ?

The process should be widely understood and accepted and should be effective without being bureaucratic or prescriptive. It is important for the project team to be seen to be responsive to client needs and nothing can hurt this more than an overly-officious change control process. Change is inevitable in a project and while you need to control it you do not want to stifle it.

A typical process might be as minimal as the following:

  1. Once a project document has been signed-off by stakeholders, a change to it requires a mandatory change request to be logged via email. The request will include the nature of the change, the reason for the change and an assessment of the urgency of the change.
  2. A “change control board” consisting of the development manager, test lead and a product manager will assess the issue and approve or reject each request for change. Should more information be required a member of the change control board will be assigned to research the request and report back.
  3. No change request should be outstanding for more than a week.
  4. Important or urgent requests should be escalated through the nearest member of the change control board.
  5. Each change which is accepted will be discussed at the weekly development meeting and a course of action decided by the group. Members of the development team will then be assigned to implement changes in their respective areas of responsibility.

If you have a flexible change request process team members can be encouraged to use it to seek additional information or clarification where they feel it would be useful to communicate issues to the whole project team.

Stumble
Delicious
Twitter
Technorati
Facebook

Change Management - Introduction

By Nick Jenkins

A project of any significant length will necessarily deviate from its original plan in response to circumstances. This is fine as long as the change is understood. If the change is not managed but is happens at a whim, it is no longer a project, it’s anarchy!

Change management is a way of assessing the implications of potential changes and managing the impact on your project. For example a change in client requirements might mean a minor fix or it might mean a complete re-write of the design. Change management gives you a process to evaluate this and introduce the change in a controlled fashion.

Since change is inevitable you need a fluid way to handle the inputs to your project. It is important that the inputs to your project, your requirements and your design, are able to handle change and evolve over time. If your inputs are static, unchangeable documents then you are going to be hamstrung by their inability to keep pace with changing circumstances in your project.

The most important aspect of change control is to actually be able to know what has changed. On one product I worked with 30 or more programmers and there was no real change control. Every day the programmers would check in changes to the software and every night we used to run mammoth automated tests, processing 1.5 million data files and producing about 500 lines of test reports.

One day we’d come in and find that our results had improved 10-20% overnight. The next day we’d come back to find the product had crashed after the first thirty minutes and was unusable. The problem was we didn’t know who or what was responsible, there was no change control. Eventually we implemented a system and were able to make solid progress towards our goals.

Stumble
Delicious
Twitter
Technorati
Facebook

Change Management - Tracking Change

By Nick Jenkins

To make change management easy you need a simple method of tracking, evaluating and recording changes. This can be a simple database or log but in large projects it has evolved into an customised information system in its own right.

As such the system needs to be able to handle:

  • Logging requests for changes against products and documentation
  • Recording and managing the priority of a particular change
  • Logging the decision of a change management authority
  • Recording the method and implementation of change
  • Tracking implemented changes against a particular version of the product or document

The more structured a system the more secure the change control process, but obviously the more overhead. A balance must be struck between the enforcement of proper procedure and responsiveness of the system.

Change management systems are useful for managing everyone’s expectations too. Often decisions are requested by stakeholders or clients and if proper consultation is not entered into they can sometimes assume they will automatically be included (just because they asked for it). If the volume of change requests is particularly high (as it often is) communicating what’s in and what’s out manually can be difficult. A simple, well understood change management system can often be directly used by stakeholders to log, track and review changes and their approval. This is particularly true for projects that span disparate geographical locations where meetings may not be possible.

In many projects the change management system can be linked to (or is part of) a defect tracking system. Since resolution of a defect is, in effect, a request for change both can often be handled by he same system. The change and defect tracking system can also be linked with version control software to form what is commonly known as a Software Configuration Management (SCM) system. This integrated system directly references changes in the software against specific versions of the product or system as contained in its version control system. The direct one-to-one reference cuts down on management overhead and maintenance and allows the enforcement of strict security on allowable

Stumble
Delicious
Twitter
Technorati
Facebook