There was a time when I wanted singular focus — an unadulterated fixation on my scintillating sermon — from every set of eyeballs when I was on stage in the classroom.

I was raised to believe the educator was the ‘sage on the stage’.

Maybe you were too?

Maybe you still are?

If I were a high school teacher or a higher education professor today though, I’d be thinking twice about that philosophy. If I were a corporate trainer (I really do hate that term) or a Chief Learning Officer (wait a minute) I’d also be thinking if my approach might need to be altered.

Do educators of any stripe really believe learning solely happens through the lecture? Sure, there are times where said ‘sage’ should be pontificating from the pulpit to the pupils, but this doesn’t have to be the sole means of instruction.

But, let’s keep calm and carry on with the lecture in the classroom for a moment.

I don’t believe the lecture should be completely abandoned — and I do think we still need to tear down the walls of the classroom — but I do believe there is one issue that needs to be remedied once and for all.

Teachers, principals, professors, trainers, facilitators and lecturers alike … let’s N-Screen the classroom once and for all.

There was a time not too long ago when you might have attended a corporate training event and the facilitator made you drop off your mobile device at the back of the room. There was a non-descriptive box found at the back table and there may even have been a sign that read, “Park Cell Phones Here Please“. That same facilitator explained she needed your undivided attention because the forbidden fruit of your cell phone was ultimately going to cause you to perform a sin so you might as well separate yourself from the temptation. Unless of course there was a priest in your class, but that’s just a weird anomaly.

You know it’s true.

What about the various (and many) school boards who continue to ban cell phones, tablets or laptops from the classroom by students who are simply trying to enact their own BYOD — bring your own device — policy for themselves? Picture the following. Jasmin and Kuldeep show up on their first day at the new school. At the old school in a different part of the country they were able to bring their iPad’s into the classroom because their (then) forward thinking teacher and administration said it complemented their ‘pervasive learning‘ strategy. What happened on day one of the new school? Both Jasmin and Kuldeep were informed by the school principal that they need not bring in their iPad’s because “computer class happens every Day 3 on the schedule.”

You know it’s true.

Teachers, principals, professors, trainers, facilitators and lecturers alike … let’s N-Screen the classroom once and for all.

Let’s first acknowledge that although you may be a subject matter expert in your domain — whatever the domain — you still don’t know everything in your sphere of competence. Get over it. So, if you agree that you don’t know everything, why not let your students ‘plug in’ to complement what you’re saying or to reinforce the exercises or discussions you’ve put on the docket. Let your students use a device that is connected to the internet to not only help their own acumen but yours and the rest of the group.

That’s an example of N-Screen.

The group will undoubtedly be listening to you while you’re speaking and dancing around with your flipcharts and slides, but you will create a classroom environment that is both fluid and connected. It’s not a distraction, it’s simply another tentacle. It’s a reinforcement.

Second, as a teacher, principal, professor, trainer, facilitator or lecturer, perhaps you can begin utilizing the N-Screen directly into your material. When I’m at a conference — whether as a speaker or an attendee — I love when there is an opportunity to engage through polling/quiz devices. That makes me feel a part of the process whether I’m the speaker or a bum in a seat.

If I’m actually teaching, I might alter my delivery to incorporate said mobile devices … presuming there is internet connectivity. Online scavenger hunt? Why not. A race to find three additional facts about the content you’re currently plowing through? Sure. The use of the web to complement an in-session group activity? You better believe it. Free surf time on the lecture at hand? Is it any different from allowing a smoke break and people talking about the class or content?

When I’m speaking, I’ve been known to tweet from the stage — while speaking — or give away free copies of Flat Army to those that have used a device to connect with others through the event hashtag. I scan the stream before I go on and head out into the audience at some point during my talk to drop off the book to the unsuspecting Twitter handle/peep.

These are examples of an N-Screen in the classroom.

To my brethren in the overarching teaching space; the digital device train has left the station long ago. No, not everyone has a device, but we’re getting close. And yes, etiquette, exemplary practice along do’s and don’ts might have to be taught and/or communicated. The question that remains is whether you are prepared to not only incorporate an N-Screen into your classroom but whether you are also going to modify the way you actually teach.

Are you ready to N-Screen the classroom?

Because it was North Carolina there was even a pig roast. Sadly, I couldn’t find an apple.

To get from Vancouver to Winston-Salem, I took planes interconnected by the Star Alliance family – Air Canada and United Airlines – and since that trip I very rarely diverge from the family.

I’m a loyal customer racking up (according to a recent personalized infographic sent to me by Air Canada’s loyalty program) over 2 million miles of business. Suffice to say that I’ve had a few apples in various lounges unlike Miss Piggy in North Carolina from above.

I fly a lot with Air Canada, a little bit with United Airlines and when Europe or Asia beckons I hitch on to the Star Alliance family. That’s another way of saying I am well versed with the boarding drill as well. When it comes to Air Canada I have memorized (in both official languages) the recorded message that plays before boarding the plane. It’s no badge of honour; ask the goats.

But this past week I clued into something that alarms me on several levels.

Whilst getting ready to board a flight, standing at the front of the queue as I always do waiting for Air Canada Elite members to be called, I noticed a gal in a wheelchair to the right of the desk. She was inching her way to the agent’s desk desparately trying to part the sea of able bodied humans in her quest to board the plane.

As I waited — watching the situation unfold — the Air Canada attendant summoned me to the desk so I could present my boarding pass and passport.

“Elites, let’s go,” he said motioning towards me and the queue of 20 odd people behind me.

Now, what normally happens on an Air Canada flight is a call out for those needing assistance — like our wheelchair friend, parents with kids, other requirements — before the ‘Elites’ parade down the boardwalk.

I wasn’t paying attention to the message that had just finished playing. I’d heard it a thousand times before.

I responded to the Air Canada agent rather foolishly and asked, “What about the woman in the wheelchair over there,” pointing to her as she approached the desk to his left.

“They changed everything a month ago,” remarked our clearly disengaged agent. “Elites now go first, then assisted help and then everyone else,” he concluded.

I was stunned.

Mostly because I would never put myself ahead of anyone needing assistance but in the moment curiosity got the best of me.

“Were you consulted on the decision,” I asked while fumbling (on purpose) with my passport and boarding pass.

“Do you think ‘they‘ would ask us first?” replied our now agitated agent. “We would never have suggested such a change.”

“We should let her through,” I retorted. “You clearly believe she should have that right — as do I — so let’s defy management’s orders.”

“Sir,” our agent said rather morosely, “I just can’t do it. It’s not my call.”

So, I had to submit my passport and boarding pass and enter the plane. As the ‘Elites’ planted themselves in the first 12 rows of the plane … only then did our wheelchair friend board.

Of course it took another agent to literally carry (you might call it dragging) this woman to her seat. The process took about 5 minutes.

As she passed me I said, “Sorry you weren’t able to board first.”

Perking up with a smile that stretched from seat A to seat F she said, “Thanks, but it’s not a big deal. At least we’re on time.”

What character.

Why does this scenario irk me so?

I obviously only have one piece of evidence; the agent’s assertion that Air Canada management made a decision without the involvement of frontline customer facing employees. Perhaps there is more to the story. But if it’s true, it’s another classic example of fiefdom based management decision making without the input, ideas and innovation of its most important asset … its people.

I don’t mind the privileges that come with being an Elite member of the Star Alliance family but boarding a plane before those that need assistance is deplorable. It reeks of hierarchy and elitism and it’s plain wrong.

Dear Air Canada, how about you start collaborating as a unified team and avoid culture crushing and employee disengagement acts (not to mention public relations nightmares) like the one depicted above?

At a minimum, go back to the previous boarding announcements and boarding process.

Next time I fly with you I’ll even offer to be the announcer.

PS. I published this at 35,000 feet while on one of your competitors aircraft.

• leadership development;
• social collaborative tools; and
• all things related to learning.

One of those pillars — the learning space — is where I started my career. I owe much of what I have today in my professional life to the learning space, be it K-12, higher education or the corporate sector.

But it’s the corporate learning sector in particular where I believe a new ‘learning arc’ must be developed. It must shift from Status Quo Ante (as was before) to Ad Meliora (toward better things).

Two of my dear friends and colleagues — Marcia Conner and Kerry Brown — were thinking the same way and so we put our collective heads together and developed a manifesto for you to read, and ideally, to be inspired by.

As we state,”the corporate learning field is in dire need of bravery, insight, creativity and boldness.”

Use as you see fit and imagine a new ‘learning arc’.

Imagine “learning nouveau”.

I do a lot of reading. 

I properly read a few books a month, I skim or power-read a few more and I’m always digesting blogs, research papers, articles, tweets and other social bits and bobs.

Perhaps you do the same?

In 2012, Pew Research asked Americans how many books they were reading on an annual basis and the results broke down as follows:

• 7% of Americans ages 16 and older read one book in the previous 12 months
• 14% had read 2-3 books in that time block
• 12% had read 4-5 books in that time block
• 15% had read 6-10 books in that time block
• 13% had read 11-20 books in that time block
• 14% had read 21 or more books in that time block

I guess I’m in the last bullet. Equally interesting, however, was how Americans were actually reading those books:

• 89% of book readers said they had read a printed book. This translates into 67% of all those ages 16 and older.
• 30% of book readers said they had read an e-book. This translates into 23% of all those ages 16 and older.
• 17% of book readers said they had listened to an audio book. This translates into 13% of all those ages 16 and older.

Can you read an audio book? (just kidding)

But what does reading have to do with me speaking at the World Business of Leadership Summit?

Over the last few years I’ve definitely increased the number of books I’ve been reading AND the number of conferences I’ve attended … but there is a catch.

Although my attendance at various conferences has increased … my participation at them has decreased.

How is that possible you knucklehead?

I’ve been fortunate enough to have been invited to speak at a number of conferences over the last few years but because I have a real job and because I’ve increased the amount I’ve been reading, I typically go to a conference for the speaking opportunity, mingle with a few people, and then depart the conference to attend to my job or my reading … or life in general. (remember, I have three goats, Denise, a cycling hobby, etc.)

I don’t actually get to listen to the other speakers or partake in some of the sessions.

But, coming up for me is the World Business of Leadership Summit and not only do I get to speak, I am going to attend (and participate in) several of the sessions found on the agenda.

It is a stellar event. (and I’ve read pretty much anything the speakers have previously written) There are 3 key reasons why I’m excited:

• First off, the conference is spread out between June 17 and June 28. What else is cool? You don’t have to leave your home, office or wherever you happen to park your back side. It’s conducted through virtual tools the entire time. (just pay that internet bill)

• Second, there are 1-3 sessions each day that you can attend. They are 100% live so you can interact with the speaker through a Q&A during or following the speaker’s timeslot. If you miss one … don’t worry, each of the sessions are recorded and you have up to 6 months to view them. (of course you miss out on the live interactions and you still have to pay that internet bill)

• And finally there is the talent. Imagine a conference spread out over two working weeks where you can tap into the leadership minds of Jim Kouzes, Charlene Li, Chester Elton, Jody Thompson and Marshall Goldsmith amongst 20 others including … even me … from the comfort of your fingertips.

In a strictly platonic way of course.

If you’re interested, why not join me as a fellow attendee at the World Business of Leadership Summit. 

Click the graphic below to register.

We might be judging other parents, other children, other families, our better half, our own children … whatever the scenario, we’re judging. For the most part I hope we judge as a way of learning; questioning the ways and methods of others to better ourselves as a parent and as a human being. But, there are times we judge in somewhat cynical ways yearning for mistakes or saying to ourselves, “see, I told you so.”

Denise and I, as parents of the three goats (now aged, 10, 7 and 6) happily encourage them to publicly blog at their own domains:

• www.clairepontefract.com
• www.colepontefract.com
• www.catepontefract.com

If you weren’t aware of it, are you now judging us?

If you were aware of it, are you still judging us? And is it a positive judgment or a negative one?

Why do we encourage (and ultimately allow) three young children who technically aren’t allowed to be on Facebook yet to publicly and openly blog?

There are a few reasons, so let us try to help with the rationale.

• Writing, Motor and Memory Skills
  • First and foremost, this is a chance for the wee goats to practice their writing skills. Now we know the naysayers will say, “isn’t a pad and paper in a diary just as effective?” Sure … we encourage writing on paper as well through the creation of stories, booklets and cards. But hammering out a blog post using Gutenberg’s invention (whether on a laptop or their iPad) is both a writing skill as much as it’s a motor and memory skill as they learn the nuances of the QWERTY keyboard.
• Motivation and Reward
  • The thrill of both pressing the button ‘publish‘ and knowing others might read their thoughts is both motivating and an intrinsic reward. Secondly, when a comment comes into their site as a result of their post from relatives, friends or yes even strangers, it both reinforces the motivation to write and it too creates a human connection reward. (plus the comments often have some form of learning in it as well for the goats)
• Creativity
  • Blogging inspires creativity. At least in our house, there are no rules to what they might write about … so long as they are writing. Claire may write about a science experiment she conducted at home, Cole might want to create a presentation about sharks or Cate might want to regale you with her love of gymnastics. Whatever the case, they are encouraged to be creative and think ‘outside the box‘. There are no rules to what they can write about.
• Everything is a Teaching Moment
  • Before you think Denise and I are complete lunatics, each post is vetted by the parents and often it’s a group writing exercise. With Denise and I both being educators, we’re using the act of blogging to help reinforce life values alongside life skills. Claire wanted to write about Rosa Parks (how cool is that?) and we had a great discussion about the Civil Rights movement at the dinner table that night. The same thing goes for War, which Cole wrote about once. Everything is a teaching moment.
• Digital Literacy Skills
  • Of course, one of the easier skills we’re teaching is digital literacy. Claire started blogging when she was 7, Cole when he was 6 and Cate when she was 5 … and in each case, the goats are learning the ‘in’s and out’s’ of researching online, finding photos, checking facts (if applicable) as well as using the WordPress application on a laptop or as an app on the iPad.
• Memory Keeper
  • As they continue their journey on the train of life, we reckon the blog posts that they write will (or perhaps can) act as a new way of documenting life itself. We hope it becomes a looking-glass to the past for each of them; a 2.0 way of tapping into past memories AND learning.

Each comment that comes into the sites are first vetted by the parents. Each post is ultimately pre-approved and there is a grammar and diction lesson that goes with it before publication.

And yes, we teach the goats about not only digital citizenship but digital safety. Sure, their names are ‘out there’ on the Internet for all to see, but safety goes hand-in-hand with our teaching efforts not only online but in the physical world too. To us, digital safety is an extension of physical safety.

We’re proud of the goats. We’re proud they love writing on their blogs. We don’t judge other parents for NOT encouraging (or allowing) their children to blog. But, if you are judging our parental choice on this particular matter, we hope you can now see (openly and publicly) why we’re encouraging it in the first place.

Thanks for reading.

Love, Dan & Denise

The fact it was first published in 2009 still gives me goose bumps. Simon was — and continues to be — ahead of his time. If you haven’t done so already, watch his TEDxPuget Sound Talk to get a condensed 18-minute version of his fantastic hypothesis and theory centered (literally) on The Golden Circle.

But you really should buy the book. (support those authors – we need new ribbons for the typewriter)

Aside from a man-crush on Simon and being highly influenced by his book, I was struck by the simplicity in his overarching point:

“People don’t buy WHAT you do, they buy WHY you do it.”

In my personal situation, the WHAT is clearly the Flat Army book — and the other pieces that are going along with it now or in the future — but the WHY is something I care deeply about.

I hope you do too.

I hope the WHY is why you might have bought the book in the first place, wanted to hear me speak, or continue showing up at this site.

I hope the WHY is why we might share a café, beer or an exchange on social media.

WHY art thou?

The WHY of Flat Army is simple … I’m fed up with the current state of leadership.

I’m fed up with current levels of disengagement in the organization. I’m fed up with pervasive levels of command and control in the organization. I’m fed up that although zillions of books have been written about ‘leadership’ over the past 30 years we have witnessed no discernible difference or improvement in employee engagement. I’m fed up that leaders have not truly recognized that an engaged employee will and can result in improved levels of productivity, customer satisfaction and yes … business results such as revenue or profit or shareholder return growth.

Put slightly more succinctly and with less ranting venom, the WHY of Flat Army is:

to improve levels of organizational and employee engagement and to make leaders and the organization more collaborative such that work gets done in a more harmonious, meaningful and productive manner for everyone.

My WHY is my passion for people. Whether employees, leaders or anyone in between, I believe the organization needs to become a mecca of togetherness.

My WHY is my wish for employee engagement to actually become the state in which there is reciprocal trust between the employee and leadership to do what’s right however, whenever and with whomever.

I wrote Flat Army inspired by the WHY that Simon puts forward in his ground-breaking book.

Now you know WHY … WHAT are you going to do to change employee engagement in your organization and/or leadership style?

It still is really cool.

I haven’t used it in a couple of years, so after two days where I was on four planes and in three cities, I decided to vegetate on the couch and take another look at my LinkedIn network … graphically speaking.

Here’s what 1800 LinkedIn contacts look like and their relationship to me and each other.

The audience roared.

I agree.

I have never worn a watch.

Ever.

Well aside from that Goofy watch when I was a wee tot.

To me, watches are a bit like children attractions in Las Vegas. What’s the point?

Given mobile phone penetration is near 90% in the Western world, isn’t it time we gave up our watches? Wouldn’t we be doing the environment a favour if we refrained from purchasing new watches to adorn our wrists? Seeing as the use of mobile phones isn’t likely to be diminishing anytime soon, nor is our passion to upgrade, perhaps we can assist Earth by foregoing the purchase of watches.

I might provide clemency to runners, cyclists and athletes who require watches to time themselves, but do we really need watches in this the age of digital device timekeeping?

I’m on the watch. Go watchless.

Yes, even in spite of Apple’s alleged plans to bring to market iWatch.

Take for example what happens when you forget to brush your teeth, floss or use mouthwash. No one wants green slime oozing out of their mouth like Jabba the Hutt. I think some of it might have actually fallen on Princess Leia when she was shackled to Jabba’s throne while wearing what was the coolest bikini I had ever seen as a then 11-year old boy.

But I digress.

One aspect of Star Wars that goes relatively unnoticed is the galaxy-class mentoring program that is woven into the story arc.

No, I’m not kidding.

How do Jedi’s become a Jedi? It’s a masterful example of a mentoring program.

Anakin Skywalker had Obi-Wan Kenobi as his mentor while he was a young Padawan learning the ways of the Force. He then decided to lose his mind and get all evil — killing ‘younglings’ and ‘Sand People’ along the way — but he knew the power of a good mentor and so he cozied up to the evil Emperor (Darth Sidious) who became his go-to mentor as Anakin morphed into Darth Vader. (it’s a long story, you should watch the movies)

That’s a mentoring one-two punch story of excellence.

But the fact of the matter is Anakin had a mentor at all times.

Obi-Wan himself also had a mentor when he too was a Padawan learner. Qui-Gon Jinn provided guidance, counsel and insight as Obi-Wan learned the ways of the Jedi order.

And what about Luke Skywalker?

Not only did he have Obi-Wan as a mentor through his time on the tropical vacation planet of Tatooine, when he ventured off to everyone’s favourite swamp — Dagobah, a place even Shrek might say “no way am I living there” –  Yoda chipped in with a very hands-on mentoring program as Luke fast-tracked his way toward the status of Jedi.

In summary, the manner in which George Lucas (Star Wars creator) instituted a mentoring program for the Jedi learners was masterful.

What does mentoring look like in your organization?

Do you personally have a mentor?

I like having three; a Millennial, a Gen X’er and a Baby Boomer otherwise known as my Padawan, my Jedi and my Yoda.

As it turns out, cycling is beginning to take over North America as an extra-curricular athletic hobby.

According to the National Sporting Goods Association the number of Americans who ride bicycles is greater than all those who ski, golf, and play tennis combined. According to Outdoor Foundation there were 1.2 billion cycling outings in America in 2011 second only to jogging and running.

This got me thinking about one of my favourite personal passions (cycling) and our corporate organizations.

Maybe if we were to act like a peloton in our organizations, we might see higher levels of employee engagement.

What’s a peloton?

In cycling speak, it’s what a pack of cyclists are called when they ride together. Check out the photo to the right for an example.

A peloton is a massive group of riders who ultimately work together — as a team — to move from one distance to another. Take away competitive cycling competitions for a moment (eg. Giro d’Italia or Tour de France) and think about amateur cyclists going out for weekend rides or events like the GranFondo between Vancouver and Whistler.

These women and men ride together as a team but what happens along the journey?

I mean for the entirety of my life, I’ve always known what I was … be it a son, brother, husband, dad, friend, educator, leader, Manchester United supporter, scotch drinker, Star Wars fan, pain in the ass, etc.

But I’ve never been a published author before.

I don’t have a playbook or a manual that I’m following either. I’m making it up as I go along.

The back cover of Flat Army is one of those examples. While I understand the industry typically defaults to having quotes from famous people waxing lyrical about the contents of said book, I refused and ultimately balked at this approach. My idea at first was to simply have a QR code that — after being scanned — would lead the reader to a video of me talking about the book.

That morphed into what is now on the back cover which is my own definitions of FLAT, ARMY and FLAT ARMY.

On Saturday, April 20 another of those ‘newbie author‘ items sprung into my alter persona. In the confines of a large party room overlooking False Creek in my adopted hometown of Vancouver, roughly 60 people gathered to celebrate the launch of the book. My beloved amongst a few close friends were the master planners; I was simply told to book off the night and not ask any questions leading up to the evening.

It’s amazing to me how powerful the human spirit really can be. The room was full of friendly and loving faces … each with a smile, a hug, a kiss and oodles of well wishes and congratulations for me.

Denise (my beloved) gave a speech that was not only breathtaking, it was amorous.

She read a beautiful poem my father wrote … penned in Stratford-upon-Avon, UK where he resides.

Dave (my artist friend) painted a larger than life-sized replica of the Flat Army cover alongside his usual touch of humour which came in the form of a giant-sized ‘stick your face in this hole and be an author like Dan’ placard.

I received not only a hangover the next day but a visceral reminder the sea of humanity that was in that room for a very special night is why I wrote the book in the first place. The pixels, letters and words in the book are a reflection of the people who have helped shape me into the person I am today. Although I’m affected by many people across this planet of ours, the book launch party and the chance to see so many people face-to-face was a reminder of how lucky I am.

Thanks to those that attended the party. Thanks to those that couldn’t attend. And thanks to everyone in my personal sea of humanity network that has helped shape me into the person I am today.

I am truly humbled. I am equally lucky.

“Don’t worry Son,” replied the Dad. “I’ll get your jacket from the car.”

Boom.

“I’ll have an extra-hot double-shot latte please,” Jenny pleads to the barista as she struggles to pull herself together for the 7am start-time in her job.

“No trouble at all Ma’am,” the barista joyfully responds. “Coming right up.”

Boom.

Mark thinks to himself as he strolls down the sidewalk, “what time do I have to be at the gala tonight?” He notices and marvels at a hummingbird family approaching a beatific Trumpet Vine and continues his thought. “Oh right, it’s a 7:30pm start.”

Boom.

Trees in the forest are much like humans on earth. For the most part, we humans crave sunshine, water, the accompaniment of others, a calming breeze against our face, and most of all, peace.

The recent events in Boston, MIT and Watertown go against the wood grain of any tree in any forest in any land on any part of Earth. It’s as though the force of all evil manifested in an axe and our sturdy, trusty, peaceful forest was hacked down tree after tree after tree.

Deforestation of the human spirit – of the human soul – is deplorable, maleficent if not pernicious.

But the human spirit is akin to the trees in the forest. Strong. Resilient. Magnificent. There too is rebirth, regrowth and regeneration. There are forests among you. Rather sadly, there are those armed with the aforementioned axes willing and able to chop away. They want to see the ‘boom’. They are the axis of axes.

With set-your-watch consistency the forest will be there tomorrow. It’s your forest. It’s your life. You must own it. We must own it. Let us not leave it to kismet. Let us bleed courage as sap does from a tree.

Let us remember, We Are All Boston.

You may even call me apolitical.

I always vote, but I often vote based on the issues versus being tied to a political party. I’m politically Neapolitan.

But that doesn’t mean I can’t tell you about a good story that involves Government, regardless of your or my political stripes.

In my home province of British Columbia, Canada, there has been a program in place now — called IDEAS2ACTION — where citizens have been asked to get involved, submit ideas and help shape opportunities for skills development across the entire province.

The process the Provincial Government followed is best summarized by the graphic found below:

There have been over 125 ideas submitted and vetted, with a fantastic accompanying dashboard that depicts the ideas (who they came from) and the action that has been taken by the Government.

There are some fantastic submissions such as:

• Give Students More Exposure to the Trades in Earlier Grades

• Encourage More Tradespeople to Become Teachers

• Invest in Facilities and Equipment for K-12

These ideas are coupled by the actions that have since been taken by the Government.

This got me thinking about Chapter 8 of Flat Army: The Collaborative Leader Action Model which suggests the following:

Implementing Flat Army and the CLAM starts with the principal tenet that we need to open our doors, tear down the cubicles, and invite the entire organization to the table before making decisions or inventing the next new shiny object. Collaboration isn’t easy; in fact, it’s quite difficult. Through this chapter, please root yourself in the know-how that collaboration—as good as it is—always takes longer, but in the end, your leadership style, growth, team unity and organizational prosperity are better off .

The cyclical stages of the Collaborative Leader Action Model are as follows:

connect (with others)

consider (all options)

communicate (the decision and action plan)

create (the result)

confirm (the result met the target)

congratulate (through feedback and recognition)

My hat is tipped to Tanya Twynstra, Executive Director of Citizen Engagement in the British Columbia Government for spearheading the deployment of the CLAM in the province whilst (perhaps) not knowing that she actually was utilizing the CLAM itself. Tanya works for whatever Government is in power; she only looks out for the betterment of the province and its citizens.

In my opinion it’s a great story, regardless of your political affiliation. Mine included.

Visit the IDEAS2ACTION site for more information. It’s a good example of Government 2.0. (if you’re still into those 2.0 monikers)

Why else is employee engagement at deplorable levels? Why else do we see senior leaders failing to adopt social collaborative technologies inside (or outside) the organization? Why else do we see authoritative, autocratic, fear mongering and controlling leaders still operating in vast numbers? Why do we see information and knowledge hoarding?

It’s because the people who act this way are fools.

They have a fear of open leadership.

They are the FOOL.

(It’s an acronym)

Work with me.

In my book Flat Army: Creating a Connected and Engaged Organization I define open leadership as follows:

“the act of engaging others to influence and execute a coordinated and harmonious conclusion”

There are some key words and phrases in my definition that FOOL’s don’t understand nor do they action.

1) engaging others

• Engage with others? Why would a FOOL like me do that? The easier thing to do is to command others and to tell others specifically what to do and by when. I don’t have time to spare, I’m important you know.

2) influence

• Influence? That takes too long and it requires me to slow down my assault on my next career move up the ladder. Forget influencing, I’m going to control everything about this employee, team and any objectives that are currently in flight. I’m a lot like tupperware; I control and prevent the contents from escaping.

3) coordinated

• Coordinated? You mean, like, me and the team have to be on the same page? We have to coordinate our ideas, opportunities and actions before we get anything done? I’d rather stick my tongue on frozen monkey bars. That’s what I think of coordinating.

4) harmonious

• Harmonious? I’m a FOOL; I can’t even spell harmonious let alone define it for you.

If you’re in an organization replete with FOOL’s — or worse — you have a direct leader who is a FOOL, you may want to rethink your current role and place of work.

If you are a FOOL, drop me a line. I’d be happy to chat about the book with you and get you operating in a flat, open manner.

They are:

• Connected Leader Attributes
• Participative Leader Framework
• Collaborative Leader Action Model
• Pervasive Learning
• Collaboration Technologies

Each of the five frameworks has an associated graphic that helps depict what they’re about.

I’ve made available a short presentation on Slideshare where each of those five frameworks and the corresponding graphics are available for you to review. (You can see it below as well)

And not in a ‘geez, this beer tastes great’ way.

The trait I see that causes the most damage or stagnates a team and indirect teams into an endless pit of debate is the ‘no’ trait.

These are lines a leader might say, but leaders are equally influenced by the team she is surrounded by and it’s highly likely she might be fed the ‘no’ ingredient well in advance.

It’s the ‘no’ seed planting approach. Some may call it sabotage.

A member of the team — who reports directly into the leader — is fully aware the leader is more apt to listen to the reasons why something shouldn’t be done (ie. the ‘no’) and therefore begins a proactive campaign of ‘no’ to help solidify the decision that the project should not move forward. Stakeholders from outside the team are blindsided, hurt and confused. Those external members trying to partner on the project thought things were going smoothly until the ‘no’ seed planting took shape and the leader (inevitably you might say) decried the opportunity was wrong. “No, we won’t proceed.”

It’s a knot of no’s.

If a leader is aware of her own personal tendency to say ‘no’ more often than ‘yes’ or heaven forbid ‘maybe’, might she think about hiring a team (or at least a few) who can think in the spectrum of ‘yes’?

I know, I know …

Fair enough.

Let me do my best and help you out in 559 words.

First off, Flat Army is aimed at three audiences:

• Those in charge of the organization on the whole
• Leaders with direct teams and/or teams of indirect teams
• Individual contributors looking to make the leap into leadership

Second, it is a manifesto to change both the culture of your organization or team as well as the habits of leaders and teams. It aims to drive up overall employee engagement by connecting the dots between increased levels of collaboration, empowerment and participation coupled by new ways to lead, learn and share.

When employee engagement increases in your organization or team, when everyone feels as though they have both a say and an influential part to play in the objectives of the organization, productivity will increase and results will improve.

It’s a fact.

The book is broken down into seven sections:

Chapters 1, 2 and 3 are the setup. It discusses the horrific state of employee engagement, culture and command and control tactics on display in today’s organizations. It investigates why we got this way in the first place, and it outlines at a high level what we have to change in order to improve the health of our workplaces.

From there it’s a journey into the Flat Army philosophy aided by 5 key models.

Chapters 4, 5 and 6 revolves around the first of those 5 models; the Connected Leader Attributes. Think of a tree with its roots, trunk and branches. A Connected Leader is one who is becoming, being and going beyond through fifteen specific leadership attributes that will ensure you become a very engaging leader, helping your team and organization do the same along the way.

Chapter 7 surfaces what I call the Participative Leader Framework which requires leaders to employ the CARE principle (continuous, authentic, reciprocal and educating) as well as being able to both consume and contribute knowledge, ideas and content with the organization. This is coupled by the need to build out both your direct personal and professional network.

Chapter 8 is all about a daily leadership habit called the CLAM. It’s my belief that any Flat Army leader in today’s engaged organization must connect, consider, communicate, create, confirm and congratulate through all actions and initiatives.

Chapter 9 highlights the Pervasive Learning model. Quite simply, leadership and learning should always be thought of as part formal, informal and social and this chapter explains how to make it happen.

Chapter 10 cements the new Flat Army style of a leader and organization through Collaborative Technologies. Leaders need to converse, create content and provide context (the 3 C’s) to effectively become Flat.

The final and seventh component to the book (Chapters 11, 12 and the Afterword) details how each of the five models can be put into practice (individually, as a team and through the organization) such that everyone in the organization is singing from the same choir sheet, engaged and being a very productive member of the mission.

You can read Chapter 1 for free or if this has whetted your appetite enough, you can grab a copy of the book over here. (hardcover and ebook versions)

There is also a one-page Flat Army Cheat Sheet you may have interest downloading. (PDF)

Thanks for reading. Hopefully this was enough of a cheat sheet to get you somewhat interested.

No matter what country you live in, the digital golf cart has long left the clubhouse and it is gaining speed on the high-speed golf greens en route toward 100 percent pervasive participation.

What’s missing?

Dare I say a caddy?

Personally, I’d like to see far more senior executives and leaders gripping the social media (and by extension the social learning) 3-wood and driving participation balls as far as they can.

Enough of the putt-putt mini-golf shenanigans; just grip it and rip it.

By virtue of becoming more participative and thus collaborative with their internal and external social media presence, I reckon senior executives and leaders will begin to demonstrate “sideways leadership” in their organizations.

Sideways leadership is like it sounds – leading horizontally and not just vertically. Social media cuts through hierarchy, or as Chairman Harold Jarche of Internet Time Alliance suggests, “hyperlinks subvert hierarchy, and networks subvert standardization.” To be an effective senior leader in any organization going forward, those who hold positions of high authority should begin to lead sideways and join the conversation as peers of the organization.

Rest assured, everyone else in the organization not in positions of power will continue to respect your title, your experience and your authority. You need not worry about your amplitude; the mere fact you are participating in social media and thereby demonstrating sideways leadership will spread at the speed of a tee shot. Think about children who just found out there are free cookies at the back table of a second grade function. That’s how fast news will spread that you’re now a “sideways social media leader.”

At the Yammer corporate blog, author Maria Ogneva has found there to be significant benefits of social networks and social media within the organization, specifically as it relates to CEO priorities. McKinsey believes social media technologies are already in fact extending the organization.

But we’re not quite yet at the tee box, ready to yell “fore.”

In Too Big To Know, author David Weinberger states:

“Whether or not the Web tends to make us more insular, we know that human beings have a tendency toward homophily; we prefer to be with people who are like us. All the participants in this debate agree that excessive homophily is a bad thing.”

By extending this argument to senior leaders, I professionally argue that the reason we don’t yet see the internal or external social media participation uptake we yearn for is due to (at least in part) the natural crowd that has formed with senior leaders.

They have to unlearn what they’ve learned. As they spend most of their time with other senior leaders, who is going to break the homophilic cycle that prevents social media from crossing the chasm of increasing senior leadership sideways participation levels?

Fast Company posits people and culture are the biggest barriers to digital transformation inclusive to the use of social media. Not surprisingly, if we don’t have senior leaders practicing sideways leadership through social media, that barrier is going to remain. Heck, we still have 44 percent of organizations blocking the actual use of social media at work.

In summary, we know that people (define as you will) are using the Internet more. I’ve got a hunch this isn’t going to suddenly nose dive or erratically stop. Employee habits, therefore, are changing. Not only are they using the Internet more, it is becoming a natural extension to the way in which business is conducted, how learning and communication occurs and how performance is achieved.

It’s time to introduce sideways leadership into the golf bag of all senior leaders.

Originally posted to CLO Blog. Reprinted with permission.

I’m fed up with them.

In 2006, Sarah J. Tracy, Pamela Lutgen-Sandvik and Jess K. Alberts published an influential paper entitled “Metaphors of Workplace Bullying: Nightmares, Demons, and Slaves: Exploring the Painful” in the Management Communication Quarterly.

In it the authors note:

Based on qualitative data gathered from focus groups, narrative interviews, and target drawings, the analysis describes how bullying can feel like a battle, water torture, nightmare, or noxious substance. Abused workers frame bullies as narcissistic dictators, two-faced actors, and devil figures. Employees targeted with workplace bullying liken themselves to vulnerable children, slaves, prisoners, animals, and heartbroken lovers.

I hope you weren’t drinking tea when you read that as it might now be all over your laptop or device.

Seven years later, I’m not all that certain our workplaces have completely eliminated – or even partially eliminated – workplace bullying.

To me, it’s another term for ‘command and control’.

Leaders who believe it’s their managerial right to flash the “I have a more senior title than you” card in favour of getting a decision to go in their favour are in fact corporate bullies.

Leaders who poach internal employees from your team without being proactive and discussing the opportunity or situation in advance with you are corporate bullies.

Leaders who ridicule or berate employees in open meetings – whether on a conference call or face-to-face – are corporate bullies.

Leaders who make impossible demands on deadlines, who set up their staff for inevitable failure, are corporate bullies.

Leaders who take credit for the positive results an individual or team created without said leaders involvement, are corporate bullies.

I’m in the midst of writing the second book. You can see where this is going.

Corporate bullying is a problem. We might coin these types of leaders as ‘Puppetry of the Meanest’.

As some of you might know, I recently published my first book. Excited doesn’t begin to describe how I feel about both the book and becoming a rookie published author. My Dad told me a story once when I was a wee lad about his aspirations to become either an author or a journalist. Back in the day, and the day being the 1950′s in England, my father wasn’t given the choice to choose his career. His own father — the town mayor no less — informed my Dad he was to become an electrical engineer and to forget about a career using Gutenberg’s device of wonder.

Of course when it was time for me to decide what to do with my life, my father acted as a sounding board not the actual speaker of selection. He was a true ‘guide on the side’ not a ‘parental drone with a megaphone’.

Which brings me back to my decision to release an email to 1800 LinkedIn contacts informing them of the availability of Flat Army: Creating a Connected and Engaged Organization.

I debated whether to do it. I truly did. I knew there would be people who simply deleted it and said to themselves, “whatever.” I took that risk. I knew there would be people who might even get annoyed with what they might brand as ‘spam’. I also hoped there would be those that saw the intent of the message which was to simply consider my ask to make others aware of the book.

I got a truckload of positive emails, texts, DM’s and even phone calls and face-to-face high fives to last a lifetime. Many from people I haven’t directly heard from in years.

Since the beginning of 2013, I have tried to do things ‘differently’ with the launch of the book. For example, I created a self-made video for each of the 13 chapters — and released one per week — as a way to provide additional insight into the book. I forbid the back cover to include any recommendations or quotations from others. I didn’t even want an official launch party.

There are reasons to my author idiosyncrasies.

And then on March 24th I sent a direct email to anyone in my LinkedIn network.

There were other actions planned — including press releases / interviews / articles / reviews — but I still believe the direct email to my LinkedIn network was an act of communication and not SPAM.

But there were going to be some who disagreed with me. I’m not naïve; it was inevitable.

This included an individual who is both in the acknowledgments and showcased in the book itself. I consider this individual a true interlocutor and an intellect.

The email I received from this individual started out, in my opinion, as an attack but it swiftly and gently moved into a “here is what I’ve learned from my experience” to a “I think you can do better” denouement.

The attack was as follows:

I feel that spamming me and others with a generic message sent via LinkedIn, in the hopes of getting help with spreading word about the book is the wrong tone considering you’re promoting a body of work you’ve created that dares to help organizations understand “social” for use inside the organization. As an act, this message feels so much like a violation of that.

At first, I said to myself, “Where is the unLinkedIn button” but then I read on.

The email concluded with the following:

I don’t think you really want people to spread awareness of your book. I think you want to build a motivated, self-directed army of fans who feel a kinship with what you have to say, Dan, find it empowering and useful… and ultimately see it as a vehicle to move whatever big rocks they have forward. Don’t give into the seduction of what’s easy. Get personal, where it’s messy, complicated and hard.

And it’s there where I really appreciated the advice, feedback and experience.

For those that believed I may have overstepped email boundaries with a direct yet generic email informing you of the release of Flat Army and asking you to inform your network, I don’t apologize.

That’s right, I don’t.

I asked my entire LinkedIn network for help. I see nothing wrong with that. Aren’t we connected in the first place to support one another?

LinkedIn, at least in my opinion, is the new business card networking machine in our professional world and I would have done the same in 1995 if LinkedIn were around then.

Where I erred, however, was the cadence in which I sent my email communication notices.

What you don’t know is that I had always intended to send a personal note of appreciation and thanks to everyone (and there are over 150 people I signal out in the acknowledgments) a few weeks into the launch of the book. My rationale was to give them some time to see I actually put them in the book versus spoiling the surprise.

So, in rookie author honesty, I think I messed up with those in my network whom actually make up my ‘direct professional ties’. For even sweeter irony, Chapter 7 — The Participative Leader Framework — is written with the point of direct network ties throughout. Ouch.

Those direct and personalized notes were always coming but I now agree with my friend who sent me the response which, in part, you read above. I should have sent those notes earlier and personalized the launch of Flat Army for this important audience.

I even sent the acknowledgments to Jane Bozarth in advance of the launch for her to read only to realize I forgot to include her. It turns out “to err is human” is one of my finer qualities or I’m simply an arse.

But for the rest of my LinkedIn network … my excitement was (and continues to be) over the moon hence my generic email to you inquiring about an ask. If there is a better way, I’m all ears.

My Dad never had the chance to be an author.

Now that I am and I have vanquished what I believe was a parental mistake on the part of my Granddad, I couldn’t contain my excitement. Equally important was my belief in the thesis of the book that I was comfortable enough asking 1800 people for their help. My ask remains my ask. My thanks to the many who did something about my ask. (Flat Army reached #3 in Canada and #8 in the USA last week in the Amazon Kindle charts for Leadership. There is no way that happens unless the network is spreading the news.)

But, as I often say, Ancora Imparo.

If you recall, I asked people to surface their beliefs concerning “the biggest culture issue facing our organizations today and why?”

There were 39 responses. Wow.

Judging was not easy.

I’d like to thank everyone for participating. Your passion and consternation mixed with analysis and detail was both insightful and at times alarming. I wish I could give each of you a copy.

The winners … with a brief explanation as to why are as follows:

• @Cindy Jensen
  • Your use of the word vulnerable was key. I too believe leaders need to manage (it’s unavoidable) but they need to be vulnerable … opening themselves up to this concept called humanity. Well done.
• @Josh Alter 
  • I believe you are spot on. Although I don’t think an all-face-to-face edict should be forced (ahem, Yahoo!) we need to find the proper balance between F2F and digital. It’s critical for the next few years.
• @Rob
  • Your succinct entry caught my attention as did the point about inertia itself. It reminded of a quote I live by, “To improve is to change; to be perfect is to change often.” (Churchill)
• @Jennifer Lee
  • Your comment was as though you’ve already read the book. Nicely written.
• @Leisa Johnson
  • Resting on past success or the laurels of a good job will do nothing for the Flat Army organization of tomorrow. I enjoyed your point about complacency immensely.
• @Erik Korsvik Østergaard
  • I couldn’t have said it better, “To acknowledge, understand and exploit the fact, that the network based organisation is far superior to the traditional one.”
• @Steve
  • You really made me think about your argument of ‘tradition versus trust’. I hadn’t thought of it that way before. Thank you.
• @Mark
  • You make a strong case for what I wrote in Chapters 2 and Chapters 3. Engrained past ‘management’ and ‘training’ practice needs to give way to the ‘connected leader’.
• @Geoff
  • Wonderful point about time. It may take longer to collaborate and think, but in the end, it will result in a healthier result and organization.
• @Stacey
  • You blew my mind away with the term ‘They’sayers’ and the argument depicted therein. I’d like to quote you in my next book if I can.
• @Jeanette Cefre
  • Two thumbs up. A learning culture is essential in today’s Flat Army organizational quest, and is the thesis around Chapters 9 and 10.

Again, thanks to everyone for contributing. In doing so, you already demonstrated to me you are a Flat Army leader.

For those 10 names above, I have your email address and will forward them off to Wiley who will be in touch with you directly about shipping instructions.

Ancora Imparo

Hooray!

It wouldn’t be in my Flat Army conscience to simply give away the books without some form of collaboration, connection or participation.

Sorry.

To win a book – and yes, it will be shipped to you directly by Wiley anywhere in the world – write down your thoughts in the comment box below as it relates to this simple question:

• What is the biggest culture issue facing our organizations today and why?

It doesn’t have to be about your organization specifically, if you work for one, and it doesn’t need to name names either. There is no length requirement to your response and you can only enter one comment to be eligible.

You can submit a comment up until March 31, 2013.

The 10 winners will be selected by me and announced in this space on Monday, April 1, 2013. (no it’s not an April Fool’s joke, I promise you)

I’ll enjoy reading the issues and your reasons why.

UPDATE: the winners have been selected and books have been shipped. Thanks for participating.

Seems like an innocuous question, right?

According to Portio Research, 7.8 trillion texts were sent in 2011 and 8.6 trillion in 2012. By 2016 they predict earthlings will send almost 10 trillion texts. That’s even more than the total number of complaints Yahoo! employees sent to their HR office this past February.

What’s the rule of thumb for answering a text? Is it immediate? Do you feel the urge to answer a text right away because you’ve set your phone settings to vibrate whereas other notifications — like email, Facebook,,etc. — are simply in your to do list queue?

Is there any psychology research behind our beliefs in texts versus other forms of digital communication?

Have you stopped reading because you’re now answering a text?

Research from Kansas University in 2012 suggested young adults weren’t addicted to texting rather they have developed a compulsion. If a text sat unanswered, after four hours it might be deemed useless thus creating the compulsion to answer quickly. I wonder if it’s similar to the delayed gratification ‘marshmallow’ experiment made famous by Walter Mischel.

Sorry for the white space, I had to answer a text.

As texting becomes the new email for many of us, do we need to think about textpectations? Why is it for many of us texts feel as though they have to be answered immediately? Perhaps we need to establish textiquette.

Or has the text already left the device?

If you missed it, I created a 90-second video outlining Chapter 1 as well.

I’d be delighted to hear your thoughts in this space. (aka … leave a comment)

If you’re interested to purchase the book, feel free to visit any of the online or onsite shops listed over here.