Tiger in the Cage: Learning Unleased

Lately I've been inundated by by requests to explain the benefits of games in learning and strategy. Without doing a rehash of a previous post (or writing a thesis), I'll keep it brief and simple. Games give us the opportunity for self-paced exploration of issues through play in a safe-fail environment. 

And why do we need a safe-fail environment? Because our traditional education system and work-place socialisation has made us all proficient in rote-learning and anal about exploring and making mistakes. Not the best preconditions we need for a future driven by creativity and innovation. 

Psychologist Michael Apter proposes that adult learning and pleasure through gameplay is dependent on a protective frame around a perceived challenge. He has a wonderful analogy of a tiger in a cage to illustrate this point.

Imaging approaching a tiger enclosure: An empty cage will produce boredom for you. A tiger without a cage will produce anxiety. A tiger in a cage will evoke pleasurable curiosity and excitement. A serious game therefore aims to eliminate boredom and anxiety and stimulate curiosity and excitement. 

Apter maintains that the frame, or the game, is the safe space in which the player can play and where the 'real world' won't directly intrude or have consequences after we play. The value here is in the experience of enticing human curiosity, energy and engagement to emerge from behind anxieties of getting it wrong or looking like an idiot. The learning comes indirectly through engaging people with all their capabilities and not limiting them to their fears. 

People are naturally curious and love to learn. However the boredom and anxiety that our real world systems often produce prevent us from realising our full potential.

Let the Games Begin!

Amazing news to share with you – the Galapagos team has been selected to participate in the finals for the serious games competition run by ABC and Screen Australia.

Hold-on, let me backtrack a bit…

In May 2009 the Australian Broadcasting Commission (ABC) and Screen Australia ran a competition calling for serious games proposals. The prize for the winning team was posted at $325,000 to go towards the full development of their game which will be hosted on ABC’s website and on an international portal for serious games.

The concept of Galapagos as a serious game had already been in development over the last 18 months based on my doctoral research and business strategy experience. When the competition was announced, I teamed up with games designer Joe Velikovsky and a leading games development studio, RedTribe which is headed by the amazing Chris Mosely, and Marcus Gibson, a specialist sustainability consultant (and an Al Gore collaborator to boot), to prepare a submission. 

A total of 53 submissions were received by ABC-Screen Australia and 5 finalists were selected to enter into the next phase of the competition – and Galapagos was one of those teams. 

The five teams attended an intensive serious games workshop run by X|Media|Lab in Sydney 12-14 June and we are now given 2 months to produce a final game design document. The other 4 teams we met and socialized with over the three days are very impressive. And despite the fact we are all “competing” for the final prize, we are all winners.

On behalf of our team I would like to thank ABC and Screen Australia for this great initiative that supports the serious games industry, and for selecting in our team as a finalist. It is truly an honor!

I’ve established a separate blog at http://galapagosthegame.wordpress.com as a forum for collaborating with any interested members of the community who would like to be part of our extended team. Our final submission is due in August 2009 – come and be part of the journey!

The Emperors New Clothes

This week I was rattled by a two day symposium I attended on climate change. The speakers were divided into two basic camps. The largest one was full of well meaning presenters that spoke about policies and actions and measures and metrics. Their focus was on adaptation strategies in getting ready for the effects of climate change. 

The smallest camp (and by far the most interesting) emphasized the need for a fundamental shift in our thinking and a complete renewal of our assumptions about our socio-economic-political systems. Because our systems are in meltdown we need more than adaptation, we need wholesale renewal and reform. 

Scientists have been warning us for decades about environmental calamity (that will lead to economic and social shocks) however our political and business leaders have let us down badly. Dr Richard Hames claims that we are floundering the the shadows of the old paradigm. The environmental and economic crises we are currently facing have been framed within the context of our current mental models and our 'leaders' are developing solutions that only continue to prop up the current aging paradigm.  

Our post-industrial socio-economic system is based on linear thinking, a  limited accounting system and flawed assumptions that are still touted as universal truths by lobbyists funded by industries that have invested heavily in the status quo that profit off our society's addiction to oil and coal and petrochemical products. These are the merchants that are spinning the cloth from which we are tailoring our climate-ready public policies. 

Paul Gilding boldly spoke about business as usual as being dead and as a global economy we have hit the limits to growth. Population growth coupled with unyielding demand for material wealth accumulation has already exceeded the Earth's carrying capacity. This means that we will not see the recent past levels of business and economic growth again and that as a global community we need to get our heads around what that actually means. Paul claims that what lays ahead of us are major systemic and discontinuous changes and a transformation of every aspect of the economy.  

So why was I rattled? Because the most enlightened and passionate speakers spoke of the the need for fundamental change in the way we think and the way we live. We're talking systemic changes in every individual, in every community, in every country, on every continent. I know how difficult that this and how long it takes just in the organisations I work with. Multiply that across the planet, and... how much time do we have again?

There was one important point that every speaker agreed on.  The fact that we are experiencing an amazing coalescence of humanity on the issue of climate change. We have finally hit the tipping point in our communities and the leadership, innovation and initiatives at the grassroots level surpasses that shown by industry and government. I have no doubt that we have the capacity to change, but communities must be told the truth and vested interests must get out of the way of the truth. 

Sadly though, at the end of the symposium I felt that government was handing out the emergency manual and telling me to do up my seat belt, put on my oxygen mask and take the brace position. 

The things they don’t teach you at business school

How many of you went to business school with high hopes then found yourself years later, in more debt and caught in the real world with your pants down?

Now I’m not saying that you’re wasting your time (and money) going to business school, far from it. I’m a knowledge junkie and a great believer in lifelong education. But knowledge and education don’t necessarily mean the same thing anymore.

Strategically,  we manage within a paradigm and lead between paradigms. Most of our business schools are well versed in the ‘managing within a paradigm’ model but are hopelessly under-prepared in the ‘leading between paradigms’ arena.

I am so inspired by the works of Umair Haque who is in the business of radical management and strategic innovation. This is what he has to say about the where to from here for business and government:

Tomorrow will not be like yesterday. This is no mere recession: it's a tectonic global shift in savings, consumption, and investment.

20th century business isn't fit for 21st century economics. Yesterday's businesses were built for a world of overconsumption, artificially cheap production, symmetrical competition, and macroeconomic stability. That was yesterday.

Tomorrow's market leaders have new DNA. The next-generation leaders look and feel radically different because they were built for 21st century economics, not 20th century economics. 

Lectures, case studies and exams (followed by hierarchies, closed systems and a lack of real accountability) aren’t going to cut it in this new world. Even Harvard is now an active participant in the heated debate over whether business schools are responsible for the current economic crisis. So where does that leave you and me with a degree that is almost as embarrassing as owning a V8 car?

My view is that the system is flawed but it’s not (yet) broken.  We can still leverage what we have learnt about processes, frameworks and models to continue in our own adventures in enhancing, expanding, testing and sharing knowledge. Above all, we can all exercise courage in unhinging ourselves and joining Umair Haque in seeking radical innovations in how we lead and organise ourselves through the current paradigm shift we are facing.  This is after all an amazing time in our history.

 

i-Simplicity

As a systems thinker I am often accused of over-complicating and over-analyzing (mind you, usually by people who under-analyze...oh, think I just did it again). 

The paradox in this however is that while I may 'over-analyze' at the beginng of the problem solving process, my solutions are usually simple ones, out of the box or out of left field. 

However this weekend I had a wonderful experience of caught out after a seamless transition from a Blackberry to an iPhone.  In my head I carried the paradigm of the complicated and drawn out experience of setting up a Blackberry device with my multiple email accounts and hooking onto RIM's system. When I went looking for this complexity in setting up the iPhone, I didn't find it and assumed that I would not have the same level of control and functionality. But I was wrong. 

The meta revellation:  I didn't see what I was looking for (complexity) and couldn't see the brilliance in the elegant simplicity that was right there in front of me.  However once the new solution is obvious, the old paradigm is shattered and we all move on to another new level. 

How many paradigms in business and government can do with an i-revolution right now?

Invest in entrepreneurship

This post is a tribute to support Jasmin Tragas’ initiative to raise money for the entrepreneurial ventures of women living in poverty in the Philippines. Incentive House has kindly offered to donate $1000 for a total of 10 posts written by Australian bloggers for the cause. This is my humble contribution.

I have been a contributor to microfinance projects for many years now for initiatives in Africa and Asia.  I suppose it is my way of reconciling my deeply held beliefs for social justice with my love of travelling to these amazing countries, and with the living I make as a business strategy consultant.

 I’ll never forget the first time I really understood the impact that such projects have on the people that are directly affected by them.

It was my first project in helping finance a women’s shelter in Zimbabwe about 20 years ago.  This shelter housed women who were survivors of abuse and poverty and provided the resources needed to make hand-made crafts, mainly jewellery, baskets, clay pots and figurines that were sold into the tourist markets. From the money they earned, they were able to send their kids to school, feed them, shelter them, and eventually pay back their loans.  Money paid back went to start up another shelter, and so on.

A year or so after the shelter had been in operation I decided to pay them a visit before starting a trek across southern Africa. The response to my arrival was overwhelming. I was welcomed into the village with celebration and tears of gratitude. What little they had they wanted to share with me.

The shelter had created an entire ecosystem of trade and community building. Surplus income generated from the crafts was used to build a water-well and start a community garden. This then improved the health and well being of the community which attracted more people into the community and the shelter’s business grew.

My small investment gave these women and their families the dignity, independence and confidence that poverty and abuse had robbed from them. Never underestimate the power we all have to make a difference to the life of others. 

Other great posts to read in this series are Gavin Heaton, Des Walsh, Matthew Wilson, KerrieAnn Christian.

Creative Visualisation and the Art of Business

Business can learn from the arts. And this is especially true for entrepreneurs who are in the business of creating something out of nothing but an idea. So how do we develop such ideas, whether you are entrepreneur, a bureaucrat or a research assistant? Vincent van Gogh said it perfectly:

"I dream my painting, then I paint my dream."

Dreaming or visualising a new creation starts with lifting our thoughts out of the “what is now” to the “what could be tomorrow” and then taking definitive action.  

This is easier said than done as there are conscious and sub-conscious limitations that hold us back in this creative process. What are these limitations? Entrained thinking, systems capture, self-limiting perceptions and fear (see my earlier posts on Thinking Outside the Fishbowl).

There is an extensive body of work and resources out there on creativity and innovation that I have discovered through personal research and post-graduate study. However far the most impressive that I have found is Theory U developed by Otto Scharmer from MIT. Here is an outline of the process of creative visualisation and action that stems from a deep dive into your inner most drivers of who you are, what you want to be and what you want to acheive.

The process looks easy enough but it isn’t. 

(meaningful pause: if you’re looking for a 3-easy-steps-to amazing-mind-blowing-success-without-getting-out-of-bed-blog, this ain’t it. But if you’ve read this far, I guess you already know that). 

This is a deep dive into your inner self:

1.      SUSPEND: what you already know.

2.      DEEPDIVE: into your material, your thoughts and intuition.

3.      LET GO: of everything you think you know and want.

4.      PRESENT: fix yourself in the here an now (not yesterday or tomorrow, now).

5.      EMERGENCE: with an open heart and open mind, see what emerges, let the ideas flow and observe them. Don’t grab onto anything just yet, just let them float around you.

OK the above is actually the dream sequence – “I dream my painting…” The next is the action or painting sequence: “I paint my dream”.

6.      ENACT: select the ideas and start planning, designing and creating.

7.      EMBODY: the act of building, testing, recreating.

Note that all the hard work lies up front. I cannot emphasise this enough, Pareto's 80/20 rule applies. Without this groundwork, the outcome is severely limited. How many times has your organisation (or even you) jumped into action that was half-analysed, half-hearted and ended up a half-success?

The important thing to note about the U process is that everyone has their own way of getting into that space and into each sequence. You can do what Vincent did (get wasted in bars, lose yourself in unrequited love and cut off body parts) or find what ever works for you in harnessing your inner power to achieve your full potential.

I am currently working with two entrepreneurs using Theory U – one in the software space and the other in the animation business - and I use it myself in my new start-up business in serious games.  We are always uncovering the different amount of ways our thoughts and actions limit ourselves and the growth of our respective businesses.  And each time, we revisit the U process and discover something new about ourselves and where we want to be.

We keep bouncing around and fervently asking each other as we turn each corner, are we there yet?

But it’s not about the destination, is it?