mondaydots

release the keynote files

I am really excited to let you know that I am releasing the raw Keynote files from my mondaydots videos/presentations. 

I have had quite a number of requests for these files from viewers and one of the core reasons I started the blog was to help people improve their presentations. 

I hope these files help, and if you make something incredible - please be sure to share it with me and I will repost it (with your permission) so everyone can learn from it too!

gamble model: download "the gamble model" file

why dots?: download "why dots?" Keynote file

cuts! panic! value?: download "cuts! panic! value?" Keynote file

goals and alignment: download "goals and alignment" Keynote file

disruptive innovation: download "disruptive innovation" Keynote file

mind the information gap: download "mind the information" gap Keynote file 

I can't post them all, as some include images I purchased from iStockphoto.com. Posting them would violate my license agreement. 

I would like to start posting these Keynote files with every post. This will encourage me to use my own images or draw my own for future posts (be very afraid!).Thanks for reading and I look forward to your feedback. 

relativity and immediate gratification

watch "relativity and immediate gratification" on vimeo

note: Ever since I started mondaydots my friend, Professor Doolittle, has encouraged me to read Back of the Napkin. I finally did this past week and I can easily say it is one my favorite books. I used the SQVID process from his book to refine some of the ideas in this post. If you are interested in the drawings, you can find them here

Transcript

Most people believe that the inherent need to satisfy immediate gratification stems from greed, a lack of self control, or the ability to sacrifice a smaller short term gain for a greater long term gain. While I agree, I also think that some of our short sighted decisions stem from the natural way we compare alternatives in the decision making process.  In fact I think the real cause of immediate gratification can be found in this picture from Dan Ariely's "Predictably Irrational". Which of the darker dots is larger? In this illusion it looks as though the dot on the left is larger. If we do a quick measure, we can easily see that the dots are in fact  the same size. Even with this newly minted knowledge if we loose the ruler, our eyes go back to seeing the dot on the left as being larger.  

principles of contribution

Watch "principles of contribution" on Vimeo

Transcript:
In our last post we promised a follow up for making your contribution social media ready. We have a few basic principles that if followed can help your content avoid being ignored and capture the attention of your second and third circles.

The first of these principles is to lead with passion. Find something you are passionate about and pursue it. We see so many people using social media just for the sake of using the technology or for shameless self promotion. If you aren't passionate about your work it will show in the quality. If you want your contribution to capture attention, put your heart and time into it, there are no shortcuts. 

contribution = rockstar

Watch on Vimeo

Social media and networking have fooled a lot of people and companies into thinking they are rockstars. Unfortunately the ease of access and near zero cost of distribution have created an internet that sounds a lot like this. (bad music playing) The abundance of fake rockstars have created an audience that is willing to be your friend, but not willing to listen to what you have to say, buy your product, or help you get a job. 

behavioral economics of intrinsic motivation

watch "behavioral economics of intrinsic motivation" on vimeo

Transcript:
One of the most basic questions I hear from managers is: How can I do a better job of motivating my team? Should you use a bigger carrot or a sharper stick?

disruptive innovation

watch disruptive innovation on vimeo

For the last few years I have been fascinated with Clayton Christensen's theory of disruptive innovation and its application to business, politics, education, and insurgency models. What I find most interesting is that his theory, featured in both The Innovator's Dilemma and The Innovator's Solution provides a prescription for a small entrant with less resources to compete with and beat a large incumbent.

active inertia

watch active inertia on vimeo

Transcript for "active inertia":

In my Gamble model post I argued that the military, like most large organizations is incredibly inert to change. I made the case that most organizations are unable to change because of an entrenched culture. Individuals that try to enter the organization with different thoughts and views usually get frustrated, leave, or quit because reward structures are rarely set up for innovation. The individuals that do move up share the values and beliefs of the current leadership and are promoted. This self perpetuating cycle doesn't allow for the needed influx of innovation to keep up with environmental change and the organization usually dies.

Don Sull has come up with another concept to explain why most large organizations go bad. He calls the concept "active inertia". In it's most simple form, active inertia is described as a company that is facing a disruptive shift in the market and instead of adapting to the change, the organization simply accelerates the activities that succeeded in the past. What is interesting is that Don argues that the things that made the organization successful in the past, actually create the pitfalls after the market disruption. Take an organization built like GM. GM was so focused on competing with Ford and Chrysler that they failed to see the signs that Toyota was causing a disruptive shift in the market. The way they framed the their "competition" blinded from the market shift and their real competitor.

goals and alignment

watch on vimeo

One of the most basic problems I see in business today is the misalignment of the organizational structure. The process of moving an organization toward a goal in a timely manner seems simple enough, yet I see so many business go lopsided and fall short of their goal.

cuts! panic! value?

cuts! panic! value? on vimeo

The state of California is up against an interesting problem - How do you do more with less? I have always found the process of public policy decision making fascinating. The process is well modeled by Neal Mitchell's public policy triangle. It is simple: decision makers must decide which initiatives to fund in order to create the most value for their constituents. If you follow Steven Covey's example of starting with a defined end state: the goal is to achieve stasis through creating the most value for your constituents by funding the right initiatives, while keeping a balanced budget.

why dots

A question I get a lot is- why dots? At first the question was tough for me to answer, but after a little introspection I came to a simple conclusion: a dot is such a basic representation that it can be anything.

Dots can be part of larger organizations, or they can go off on their own. Like you and me they have to climb social, political and workforce ladders. And like in the real world, when a dot at the top is angry the news rolls down hill. There are even some dots that you wouldn't want to see when they get angry.

While I think the simple explanation that a dot can be anything is good, I think there is a deeper and better reason.

It was put most elegantly in one of my favorite books, Understanding Comics, Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art, by Scott McCloud. Scott states "that by de-emphasizing the appearance of the physical world in favor of the idea of form, the cartoon (or in this instance the dot) places itself in the world of concepts." A good expalanation of this statement is found by looking at this set of images (see video above). In this context, all of the images are representations of me. As you progress from left to right the representations get less and less detailed until eventually I am represented by a dot. My picture is the most physical representation of me and the dot is the most conceptual.

While both represent me; they are not equal substitutes for building models, and it is this difference that explains why dots are the best tools for modeling. Imagine if I tried to model a hierarchical organization using my picture to represent each position. First this would be one scary organization and second it is difficult for someone besides me to identify with.

Moving towards a more conceptual representation makes it easier for some people to identify and possibly see themselves somewhere in this organization. This representation also makes it more difficult to judge race, gender, ethnicity, and form prejudices about the individuals.

Yet if we move to a representation of dots, it becomes almost impossible to form any prejudices against the dots; you can only judge that they are round and grey and that there are some dots lower in the organization than others. This is what explains why dots are the perfect way to model complex problems, ideas, and solutions. Because if you can't judge the dot as something that is different from you, it makes it that much easier for you to see yourself, your boss, your employee, your car, your autocompany, your president, your family, your organization, your country in the same situation as the dot or dots; which means the model will be easier for you to understand and apply to your life. This is why I use mondaydots and why I think you should too. Thank you for watching