So it is maybe not such a good idea to make things look too serious and scrupulous if we want to effect behavioural change. On the contrary, is it maybe a sign of being unprofessional if we try too hard to look professional?
More information on “It’s Nice That“.
Over the past few weeks, two persons asked me the same question that I was unable to respond to – which was very strange: They asked me: “What is your approach then?”. I asked them “What do you mean, which approach?”. One of them pointed out that in a conversation, of more than an hour, I had constantly suggested that there is something like an I-P-K approach, without ever making it explicit. The second instance was the editor of our handbook. She came back to us after her first read through asking: “You constantly use the term “our approach” without ever clarifying what it actually is…”.
I realised that although I had a sense that there is something like a red thread that runs through our facilitation and change work, I constantly tried to avoid spelling it out in explicit and clear manner. What ensued was a debate, whether it was an “approach” in the first place – or rather a method, a style, a worldview, a set of principles? But since our handbook is in the making, I no longer had a choice. Or rather a good invitation to get to terms with it. I gave it a try. Read on here:
Time and again, we come back to the question of how to create a knowledge sharing culture. One of the constantly recurring points is: we need to stimulte people by building KM into the performance management frameworks, we need to provide all sorts of incentives.
Well, maybe we – once more – have been on the wrong track. Watch this – and think again…
http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation.html