Social media can be extremely powerful in giving a voice to those of us who felt we previously had none. But the danger to that voice is that we may choose not to listen to all the other voices that are out there. This may be the case with the Urban Outfitter/Etsy.com event.

Amber on myaimistrue website posted an overview of the public outcry against Urban Outfitters for allegedly stealing a design concept from a crafter on Etsy.com.  The overview is called “Anatomy of a trending topic: How Twitter & the crafting community put the smackdown on Urban Outfitters”  .  It’s a very good overview.  However, last night I found a counter point of view from Helen Killer at regretsy.com talking about the fact that this design concept is actually not new and may not really be proprietary (see additional information in some of the comments).   Yet the damage is done.   I saw the first message sent out via twitter from two people I respect with the following comments:

1. Awesome ex of Social Media Muscle! How crafting community used Twitter to put smackdown on Urban Outfitters

2.powerful reminder of how social media has changed the relationship between customers and companies

Had I only seen just the overview article, my personal thoughts would have mirrored the first comment.  But having seen the rebuttal, it forced me to reassess what I think about the possible power of the people to “smackdown” a company and how a potential misunderstanding could be changed.  Especially since it seems that the first article is getting more traction than the second based on a quick query of Google where I found all sorts of people condemning Urban Outfitter for this action.

So how can social media help undo the lack of critical thinking that we may all be guilty of when we start retweeting and blogging without looking at all the facts.

I planted a number of marigolds and some bulbs (lilies, dahlias) along with many herbs and other perennials that caught my fancy. Since it is a container garden, my first lesson learned was that I could not go beyond certain boundaries. So just as I had to limit what I could grow, I need to think about the same thing at work. What limits are realistic (constrained by the environment) and what limits should I ignore (small minded thinking or lack of resources).

At one point I had marigolds in three separate areas that were growing very differently. In one area the leaves were being stripped from the plants. All that seemed to be untouched were the flowers. In another area, they were growing strongly and reblooming time and again.  What could I do to fix the problem?  The following lessons concern mostly this incident but there were some following this.

1. Don’t hesitate to ask questions from many places: I found that I would ask the same question of Google, my Facebook and Twitter networks, and gardening shops. Google was generally the fastest but it didn’t comfort me when my gardening went awry. Gardening shops were not much help; perhaps I need to spend more time building a relationship with one of them.

2. As I investigated the possible reason for the demise of my marigolds, I was directed to take a flashlight out after 10:00pm to see what might be wondering around. As I investigated my garden, I found new insights by changing my point of view to a different time of day. Something that is very key in the workforce – it is too easy to get locked into one point of view especially if you have expertise in that area. {Garden note: I did indeed find slugs and went in search of ways to get rid of them. Again I turned to Google and my networks and got directed to SLUGGO and Beer bath. I tried them both and seemed to have resolved the problem. I don’t know which worked best but at least they died happy.}

3. A key lesson learned came from pondering why marigolds in one part of the garden were doing so well while in the other part they were being systematically decimated in another area. The place in the garden where I have the most problems is the area that I didn’t properly clean out. I decided to use the old leaf debris as ground cover/mulch. I liked the look but it is filled with old debris and therefore those things that are harmful to growth. So in order to nurture new growth and create a healthy environment for long term growth it is essential to get rid of those things that have served their purpose in the past. That is definitely the case with our workplace. While there are many good things that need to be kept and cared for, there is also old debris – old ways of thinking and doing and old technologies – that need to be cleaned out.

4. As time went on, I found that another plant near the dead marigolds was now being eaten. The slugs seemed to be back eating my plants again. This led to a little reflection on how fighting slugs in the garden compares to fighting sluggardly thinking in the workplace. Only temporary successes with current methods; you must be constantly vigilant or tender shoots (aka projects) get eaten alive. But SLUGGO and beer baths did not seem to help so I took another evening trip to the garden to find a new threat – some kind of brown bug. I tried to find out what it was but it remains a mystery although I did try Neem Oil. Not sure whether it worked but the plants seem to be a little better. Just as in the garden, you need to be vigilant and try new methods to combat what seems to be each new threat –prepare a defense in depth in order to nurture growth.

5. Today a very large branch crashed down across my driveway near the front door. Fortunately it didn’t hit any of my garden or power lines or the house. I’m truly thankful I was not parking in that spot today (I often do). The branch seems in good condition but it is so large that I cannot move it. But looking at that branch, I realized that sometimes conditions occur over which you have no control. Perhaps the branch was weakened from past storms; whatever the reason it came down. The same thing often happens in the workplace where events occur that cause people to fail and offices to close. The best thing that can be done is to be thankful for what didn’t occur (e.g. damage to my house, garden, or car) and to consider if anything could have been done to prevent the damage that did occur.

Two good comments came from folks reading a few of my thoughts. They gave me a laugh so I’ll repeat them here.They’ll remain anonymous because I truly forgot who wrote them.

*Heh heh! Had I known that a can of Sluggo on my desk (when applied judiciously) would have helped nurture projects……

*Management sprays RoundUp and calls it MiracleGro……

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” 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.

The idea of being a “knowledge artist” intrigues, inspires and excites me since I think the term probably describes the holistic nature of what I am trying to do better than the phrase  knowledge worker.  That doesn’t mean that a knowledge artist does not experience drudgery at time but uses both art and science to weave many components together to create, use and share knowledge.  My focus tends to be on the visual which is where my personal artistic skills are concentrated.  But art takes many forms.  I have been inspired by John Kao’s discussion of innovation and creativity in his book “Jamming” where he talks about his experiences as a jazz musician.  And I have resonated to David Whyte’s ideas on the use of poetry in corporate America (see his book “The Heart Aroused – Poetry and the Preservation of the Soul in Corporate America”).  I also found Daniel Pink’s book on “A Whole New Mind” enlightening as he looks at skill sets generally designated as right-brained (versus the logical left side of the brain) that have been undervalued.  I started this blog to start discussing these kinds of thoughts to see how we could balance logic with emotion in a way that helps inform intuition (the “ah-ha moment”) and yet cross-checks the imagination.  

I have no idea where this journey to understand “knowledge artists” will be going, but it should be filled with learning and creativity even if the term turns out to be invalid.   I will look forward to hearing all your ideas along the way.