Post by Frank Connolly 15th October, 2012
Compounding this, there is the expectation from above that whatever they deliver must be certain and unable to fail. The irony of this is that because of the expectation of certainty, structured and linear interventions are being placed into shifting and changing environments. As a result many fail given they are designed primarily for ordered and static environments.
The challenging spaces Government works in are changing rapidly and there is less certainty now than there has ever been. If we are therefore unable to see and understand exactly what is happening out there because of this rapid change, how can develop services with any degree of certainty and know how they might impact?
We do much of our thinking and design the bulk of our services with the assumption of an ordered world around us. The reality is that we are confronted with complex and uncertain world which requires very different thinking and action.
This session is designed to provide insight enabling this to occur.
Think Quick is pleased to collaborate with ACIG in providing this unique seminar that will showcase theory, real life case studies and the opportunity to practice the thinking and methods in experiential afternoon workshops.
To download the Action Focused Innovation in Govt brochure.
All participants are eligible for a complementary consulting hour with one of our course directors. This unique offer allows you to follow up the seminar with a private discussion of your own circumstances and challenges.
Post by Frank Connolly 5th September, 2012
Think Quick has just released its new A3 brochure.
Organisations that would like to receive copies of the brochure can contact us here and leave your contact details and postal address and we will send them out to you.
For more information contact Frank on 0400 109727
Post by Frank Connolly 29th February, 2012
One of the most important things we do in organisations is interact in meetings.
Yet 90% of people I speak to indicate their meetings are not as productive as they could be or worse, a waste of their time. There is a general consensus across industry that our meetings are all too often insufficiently focused, lacking sound collaborative approaches, have a limited outcome orientation and consume way more time than is necessary.
The importance of meetings in an organisation cannot be understated. In terms of knowledge-transfer and decision-making our meetings are potentially our most potent method because we:
There are a number of methods doing the rounds that focus on improving meeting processes and many of these work well but the key to effective meetings is addressing the thinking that takes place within those processes. At Think Quick we have facilitated many difficult and potentially difficult meetings using the Six Thinking Hats and have high levels of success.
Not all meetings of course require such facilitation, I suspect a great deal could be run simply and efficiently if the participants could simply develop some tolerance and empathy for opinions that differ from their own. However, we routinely use the parallel thinking of the Thinking Hats when:
The challenge is to incorporate the methods into meetings so they become a part of business practice and are routinely applied. This challenge when accepted is one that can bare great benefits.
To date, just a few of our client’s successes using parallel thinking in their meetings have been:
• Millions of dollars worth of savings in one Department where such saving could not be envisaged prior.
• A $600,000 saving within a business unit as a result of training in the thinking and its subsequent same day application to a key issue.
• The smooth planning of moving 20+ city locations into one newly constructed building.
• A business restructure planned and implemented without any of the associated angst by getting everyone thinking in parallel throughout.
Meetings can be productive, focused and enjoyable. They are the primary engine-room for transferring knowledge and making decisions in organisations, so if you get the thinking right in your meetings right, the flow-on effects are substantial.
Post by Frank Connolly 6th February, 2012
“A huge thanks for what was hands down the best and most practical training I have ever done. As a mediator I loved the close parallels between the Six Thinking Hats and the various stages and foci of mediation, but even apart from that I pretty much started using the training as soon as I walked out the door. ” (March 18 participant)
Join us for an interactive day of learning and the practical application of 10 thinking tools at Melbourne’s most prestigious training venue.
People and organisations are seeking improvement and quality across many areas except that which is the most important – the quality of the way they think. If we improve the quality of our thinking the quality of the actions that follow will improve.
The Six Thinking Hats are designed to dramatically improve the way individuals and groups think. The methods are used to look at issues from multiple perspectives and help teams to move beyond their habitual thinking styles to achieve a more rounded and thorough view of a given situation. In this full day session participants will develop:
a sound understanding of multiple thinking styles,
the ability to design and lay out a thinking process,
The ability to better navigate complex and difficult issues,
the ability to design and facilitate effective, outcome oriented meetings,
the ability to generate genuinely new ideas using lateral thinking methods,
and become more thorough and objective thinkers.
The session will be held at Melbourne’s premier training venue and all participants will be provided with an optional work-based assessment with which to immediately start to apply and embed the methods and practice back in the workplace. Successful completion of this assessment provides the “Blue Hat Facilitator” Pin. Email & telephone coaching will be provided to assist with this at no additional cost.Date & Time : 8:30am – 4:30pm, Tuesday May 29, 2012 Where: The Airlie Leadership Development Centre, 260 Domain Rd South Yarra Value: $550/person with an early rate of $500/person up until May 15
Course Brochure: Six Thinking Hats ALDC May 29, 2012
To Register: Click Here
For more information, contact Frank at Think Quick on 0400 109727, or email@example.com
Post by Frank Connolly 6th July, 2010
It has always been frustrating how these two words have been ill-defined and interchanged in the workplace. The confusion over their definitions has added to the cynicism with which they are greeted and acts as an impediment to their beneficial application.
While differing contexts and needs determine variations in definition, complicated definitions are ultimately unhelpful and only serve to confuse people. Simple definitions with clarity and are most likely to elicit action.
Accordingly, I’d like to distill multiple definitions into simple, broad terms and add a few simple rules of thumb.
“Creativity is somehow bringing something new into being.”
“Innovation is applying that creative something to add value.”
It is only through application and value adding can creative output become an innovation.
Not all creative output will add value, so creativity is not a guarantee of innovation. Organisations needs “idea-creativity” because the development of new ideas and concepts that are developed for “a purpose” have objective value.
Depending on our industry it is important to differentiate between “artistic” creativity and the harder-edged “idea” creativity. I can do some wonderful finger-painting and sit around a team-building campfire singing kumbaya, but is it going to add any form of business value? Artistic creativity may have a subjective place in organisations but when seeking to add value to service delivery and the bottom-line, a far greater focus and objectivity is required.
To spend time arguing about definitions beyond this is often little more than a mental form of punishing that proverbial primate. Argument about strict definitions is counterproductive for two reasons:
1) It wastes time and stops people from moving to action in the form of the experimenting, proto-typing and probing required to uncover new value, and 2) the very nature of creation indicates whatever is produced is new, so how therefore can it be appropriately categorised with any foresight?
Many people argue endlessly about the definitions of creativity and innovation and when this happens more mental energy goes into this, than into the generation of value adding ideas. Debate on the exact definition is unhelpful and acts as a fallback position that simply provides an excuse for a lack of action.
Organisations should take the hint, “Create” and “Innovate” are both verbs and if you’re still talking about them, you’re not doing them.