Linking In with Matt
Matthew Richter posts daily comments in LinkedIn—well, almost daily. You can follow him and join the conversation by going to http://linkedin.com/in/matthew-richter-0738b84.
For the benefit of our readers, we decide to compile and reprint some of his provocative pieces from the past. Let us know what you think.
What’s a Professional Post?
I see many people on LinkedIn lamenting the fact that their feeds are resembling Facebook more and more. I think this is an interesting – and myopic – perspective. It is also an excellent lesson on perspective for trainers and designers. Many have networks of diverse groups. These networks contain people with very different careers and professional interests. Times have changed and many professional interests intersect with what was once personal. People post things! Some have meaning to you, some don’t. Some cross a line of etiquette for you in asking their network for help in some way, others don’t. Regardless, these differences are merely ones of perspective. A “Different Strokes for Different Folks” rule of social media. Obviously abuse and harassment are unacceptable. But, posting a meme with some tangential rationale seems quite aligned with this trope. What is a “professional post,” anyway? For us trainers, this is a vital thing to remember. People view their own needs, value, purpose differently than we do. Let it go.
Where Is the Evidence?
Why do you believe what you believe? If you believe a particular training approach is effective, how come? What evidence can you provide that supports the work you do? If you are relying on anecdotes, that isn’t going to cut it. If you are relying on your own individual experience, you might be the outlier. Much of what we do is an outcome of what we believe to be right. Unfortunately, we believe many things that aren’t right when considered against data and analysis. For example, many parents claim their children go crazy when they have too much sugar. There is little evidence to support this old-wives’ tale. The hyperactivity is usually caused by something we then attribute to the sugar. There is a difference between correlation and causality. Or, we think tools like MBTI, Multiple Intelligence, EQ, learning styles, and others are deeply validated models, when the research rigor is specious at best. Google the validity of any of these models. Ignore the posts by companies who profit from the tool. If you like these models, check them out from a research perspective. In summary, test, validate, question, and challenge.
A Paradox of Culture
Can you have a focused organizational culture that also emphasizes diversity? An organizational culture has attributes that may indicate a “no” answer. First, the culture will most likely emphasize a core set of guiding principles. There will be an unstated way of doing things. All of which is fine. There may even be a value for diversity. And, that’s the rub. The obvious diversity components are race, class, and gender. The less obvious are thinking styles, methodologies, and practices. Is it possible to respect and value diversity of thinking styles while at the same time reinforce the need for a specific organizational culture? In other words, can we respect differences and value true diversity if we also try and build a consistent culture that emphasizes sameness by its very definition? The simple, almost banal answer is Yes, of course. The value of diversity in of itself can create a self-fulfilling culture of diversity. Yes, but it isn’t an emphatic yes because we often don’t think through how our drive for culture undermines our simultaneous drive for multiculturalism. The only way to be consistent is to ironically strive for a culture that strives for differences and values alternative perspectives and uniqueness.