Fall cleaning: purging good ideas

Today I started cleaning out my cubicle. I have saved massive amounts of “good ideas” over the past 10 years and this was the time to start purging all the associated paperwork that went with them. I didn’t realize how hard it would be. None of the problems that they address have been solved. To see so much wasted talent that had been poured into those ideas by so many people both inside the community and out saddened me deeply. Especially as the next crop of good ideas are just variations of the same ideas I threw away to solve the same problems that haven’t yet been solved. I have never underestimated the challenges in making innovation happen but now I wonder if transformation of a deeply hierarchical bureaucracy is really possible. If the system doesn’t ultimately win over the talented employees trying to do what is right. I hope that I am wrong but I keep seeing indicators of a return to mediocrity and business as usual instead of working through the challenging change times.

Can innovators and change agents survive in performance-based evaluation systems?

Today I received my first performance-based evaluation. The new system has been much cause for complaint but I was willing to give it a chance. Partly because I have never doubted my ability to perform. I set my own personal objectives and they have always exceeded those set by my employers. I was concerned about the possibility of misuse of the performance-based objectives to drive analytic skills toward mundane bean-counting quotas instead of letting employees rise to brilliance. But I hoped that managers would be able to walk that fine line between abuse and leadership. I was foolish in the extreme to think that such visionary leaders existed. So today I learned that senior leadership in the office drove evaluations to meet a bell-shaped quota of performance scores. And any failure to achieve one objective was cause to drive the score lower to the point that I am in the middle at a 3.5 out 5.0 – merely “successful”. Considering that 95% of my evaluations over my career have been above average, “successful” is a slap in the face.

But what saddens me most is that I consider this  a sign that the job that I do as an innovator and change agent is not considered valuable to accomplishing agency missions (I do not consider it a personal assault on my performance). The very nature of my job is about connecting people, collaborating and sharing knowledge, steering new tradecraft and acting as a catalyst for change. And I have just been told that my work is just average despite an amazing year of making changes in attitudes happen in how multiple organizations look at the national security implications of social media.

As if that is not bad enough, there is a move to standardize performance objectives among people who have very disparate missions. It would be like assigning the same objectives to the salesforce that you assign to the knowledge management team. Both are working toward the same goals to make the organization more effective but they do it very differently. So now I’m wondering what other organizations do to manage and evaluate their innovators and change agents. Can innovators/change agents survive in a performance-based evaluation system where objectives don’t permit agility and ability to innovate. I’d love to hear any experiences that you have had.

I have resisted leaving government like so many are doing because I feel that there needs to be internal change agents with thick skins (and maybe skulls) willing to try to break down walls regardless of how it hurts your career or other aspects of your life. Now I’m beginning to wonder at the value of trying to improve the way we do business. Should I pour out the rest of my life into an organization that cares nothing for its most precious resource – its people? Because I was not the only one being shaped by this bell-curve performance based evaluation process.  I know I won’t give up because it’s not in my nature. But I just wonder what I should do from here. Can I in good conscious continue to fight to improve an organization that fiercely resists the changes needed to transform it.

Are You on the Global Frequency?

I started writing this entry after a talk by John Kao fired up my imagination in late 2007. I have long known of his reputation as an innovative and creative thinker, but never had the opportunity to actually listen to him before. John had recently published a book about innovation as an element of national policy that was missing in the United States. Throughout his talk, he gave us great insights into some of the countries who were embracing innovation at the national level and having great success like Singapore in establishing an international relationship in life sciences innovation to include luring top talent away from their respective countries like the former director of the NIH or Stanford’s Medical College. By the time he was done, I was ready to apply even though it’s been a long time since I finished my degree in biological sciences.

“Are you on the Global Frequency” actually refers to a question that was asked during the final Q&A session about where the Intelligence Community (IC) should go – what should be the IC’s vision. John had referenced the vision put forth by Warren Ellis in his amazing book called “Global Frequency: Planet Ablaze” earlier as a means of visually communicating the story and the need for innovation. He went on to talk about the birth of the IC as a wave of innovation itself after World War II that has been forged into a deep hierarchy since then. He had no ready answers but suggested that looking to the Global Frequency to find answers.

So I picked up the book right before Christmas. Least you think this is a standard “five-steps and you’ve got it” book, guess again. This is an action packed, professionally illustrated graphic novel (aka adult comicbook) with great artwork and a scarcity of words that leaves a lot to the interpretative imagination of the reader/viewer. After reading both graphic novels, I began to wonder how it could apply. It seems to me that the concepts behind the Global Frequency include the collective intelligence of a global organization of 1001 deeply specialized experts in far-ranging skills from bio-weapons engineering to Le Parkour Runnng who are tied together by an amazing global communications system. When the call goes out to activate select members, they are “on the global frequency” and ready for action whether that includes advising a group on some aspect of an operation or conducting the actual operation itself. Members are selected when the problem arises based on the nature of the problem or threat and the unique skills of those members selected. At the heart is a centralized hub/knowledge base with access to global information run by one of the members (known as Aleph) with special skills known as “superprocessing” (handling separate inputs while performing multiple complex tasks and running deductive strings) and a true leader (vice inadequately trained manager) with a deep grasp of human nature who gets involved without getting in the way. All of them are tied together by their passionate willingness to accomplish their mission even to the point of sacrificing their lives.

Now some of what happens in the novel is unrealistic in relation to the role of the US Intelligence Community and seems a little hard to think about how it might transition into reality. Until you start thinking about concepts like Knowledge Ecosystems with extentions into virtual worlds that David Bray had been researching while at Emory University. Finally I had a chance to begin to look at some of his papers and found his video on National Security Projection 2019 . And while the video doesn’t take you into the graphic novel or virtual world, it does remind you of where we may be trying to go with the Intelligence Community and possibly even farther into full partnership in a global organization where we connect with partners in plans, policy, operations, research and acquisition as well as the more normal partnerships in intelligence analysis. Some of that is starting to unfold on various government domains (e.g. Intelink, A-Space, Bridge) and as a result of connections through social media that are creating new communities and networks for everything from disaster relief to grass roots activism to health reporting. A lot of hard work and challenges lie ahead to achieve a vision of a global collective intelligence that is “on the global frequency” and focused on the good of all. But won’t it be fun when the story of all our efforts gets written not in a graphic novel but a virtual world that is globally connected at multiple security levels.