Curious about Twitter Chats? If you aren't teaching next Wednesday evening you might want to try it out.

Just for fun--My son Andrew and his friend Tyler cover a John Mayer song.

I thought this link might be of interest. Some blog ideas for marketers.

Consensus-based Decisions

For planning to be successful, an organization needs to have the right people involved and needs to make the right strategic decisions. To that end, making the right decisions often involves consensus decision-making. But…what does consensus really mean?  Consensus is often confused with “consult and decide” and “unanimous” decision-making approaches. Consult and decide usually means that a leader will first ask the opinions of others, and then make the decision on their own…with or without giving a rationale for the decision.  On the other side of the coin, unanimous decisions are full agreement.

In some organizations, strategic decision making is a “free-for-all,” a jumbled and mysterious process whereby a leader tries to decide the strategic priorities for the organization with the group. Often the decision process involves voting, rock/paper/scissors, heated debates, and a hasty drive to make decisions based on the most vocal participants in the group. Unfortunately, these dynamics can lead to win/lose decisions that create water cooler discussion and resistance. However, the most effective strategic decision-making often comes from meetings in which consensus is seen as a process as well as an outcome. Effective decision-making comes from planning teams that understand that a consensus decision is one that all team members can support. They realize that consensus decisions may not be the decisions most preferred by all members. The assumption is that when true consensus is reached through a process in which everyone has a voice, the output usually leads to collective ownership, commitment, and superior decisions.

When I facilitate decision making sessions, I like to use the “70/100 rule” and “Five Finger” method. The 70/100 rule means that the team members are at least 70% comfortable with the decision, but 100% committed to it. The Five Finger method allows participants to provide a show of support for a decision by displaying one to five fingers…see below.

One finger means that you are opposed to the decision and will likely resist it;
Two fingers mean that you are opposed to the decision, but will not resist;
Three fingers mean that you are opposed, but will work for it;
Four fingers means that it is a good idea and you will work for it;
Five fingers means that it is a great idea and you would like to lead it!

The Five Finger method gives everyone a voice and it makes their preference visible to all. In addition, it can create a broader problem solving discussion to work towards true consensus. If you would like your  meetings to be a success, be sure to have a qualified facilitator who fully understands the complexity of obtaining true consensus on your change initiatives.

Google's new glasses!

Google is a very innovative company - their latest adventure involves the development of augmented-reality eye glasses, appropriately named "Project Glass." The company posted a YouTube video this week which has already gone viral, garnering nearly 10 million hits.

The video illustrates the use of the eyeglasses, showing someone wearing the new glasses during his daily life in New York city.  By linking the glasses to an Android phone (using Blue Tooth technology), the wearer can get up-to-the minute news, updates on traffic, location information, take photos, videos, and communicate with friends in real-time.

Check out the link below to view the new product and see the world in a new way. It may not be "rose-colored glasses," but it is sure is a different view of the world and an exciting technology to contemplate.

http://youtu.be/9c6W4CCU9M4

ForestEthics vs Ethical Oil

The Economist reports on the challenges facing a corporation doing the right thing. Chiquita Brands has done a lot to become a responsible corporate citizen from environmentally sound practices to supporting labor unions. This earned it the support of ForestEthics, an environmental organization, when it decided to avoid fuel from Canada's tar sands. This action earned the wrath of another organization called EthicalOil which called for a boycott of Chiquita by Canadians - much to the detriment of Chiquita.  The article reports that Chiquita is not getting the recognition it deserves for all the right things it is doing and raises the larger question - if a company does the right thing and is not affirmed by its customers and stakeholders can it afford to continue to do so and remain competitive?

A Tale of Two Currencies - Myanmar and Somalia

Recent developments in two different parts of the world bring to light the dynamics of the foreign exchange market. The Wall Street Journal reports that Myanmar recently decided to allow its currency (Kyat) to float and raised the question how successful such a move would be without a sophisticated financial infrastructure.

The Economist recently reported the success of a currency issued by a central bank that does not exist. Even though there is dollarisation in Somalia the old currency, the Schilling is still playing the role of money in that economy without the presence of a stable government or a central bank. Some of the reasons for the success are its fixed supply, its role as a "store of value" and being supported by the strong social relationships in Somalia.