Education Innovation

9 Signs of a Losing School

From the Idea Management Systems blog comes this post The 9 Signs of a Losing Organisation

1. Fuzzy Vision
2. Lack of Leadership Skills
3. Discouraging Culture
4. High Bureaucracy
5. Lack of Initiative
6. Poor Vertical Communication
7. Poor Cross-functional Collaboration
8. Poor Teamwork
9. Idea and Knowledge Management

Do any of these jump out at you?  One of the least obvious for education is number 9, Idea and Knowledge Management. Too many teachers are spending too much time in their rooms and not enough time sharing their ideas, knowledge, and wisdom. Too many principals and educational managers are not encouraging or putting in place systems for formal sharing of ideas and knowledge. 

Technology allows teams to connect to islands of expertise located in any geographic location. Technology allows teams to archive their learning and share with others. Knowing what others know and sharing what you have learned is what I refer to as Wisdom Stewardship. Technology makes it easy for educators and schools to be good stewards of available wisdom and to know what others know. This is the where I see PLCs transitioning to Professional Networked Learning Collaboratives, designed with knowledge management in mind. The sum result is that technology allows the Professional Networked Learning Collaborative to “Know What Others Know” (K.W.O.K.).

No school staff knows how much they know until they know what each other knows. (Read it again!)

Catalytic Questions:

What places are you failing to look for ideas or answers to problems?

In what ways could you get curious about what your staff knows?

How might your assumptions about knowledge and ideas be getting in the way of learning from your staff?

What if you were able to know everything your staff knows. How might that change instruction at your school?

What might you have done in the past that could be applied to Idea and Knowledge Management at your school site?

What resources or solutions are available to you that you may have overlooked?

Turning Your School Into A "Skunk Works" of Lateral Innovation

Innovation should not be linear. Most of us are familiar with examples of the great innovation teams from the business and engineering world. Examples such as Xerox- PARC’s group, to Apple’s Macintosh group, to Lockheed Martin’s famous “Skunk Works” have lead many of us to believe that innovative ideas should be developed by groups of “creative people” somewhere outside of school and then be brought into the school for teachers and administrators to execute. That is linear innovation and linear innovation should not be the goal of schools and school districts. Innovation should not be separated from schools and the district.

Group Genius author Keith Sawyer puts is this way..

“If innovation is linear, the idea stage can be separated out and placed in a more creative unit of the organization, and the execution can still take place in a more traditional bureaucratic structure.”

Many of us have been conditioned to believe this is the way is should work in our schools. Let the experts come up with the ideas and then tell us what to do. But if we allow that mindset to continue then the schools or school districts never develop the capacity to bring their creativity, knowledge, and ideas to bear. Simply sitting back and waiting for other to think it up for us does nothing to develop innovation abilities.

Sawyer points out that,"... although separation can be good for short-term creativity, it interferes with long term innovation: An isolated “skunk works” usually has trouble communicating with the rest of the organization because innovation requires collaboration across the company.”

In other words, for the long-term benefit of the school or district, the best innovation is not linear, but lateral. We need to innovation and create together because everyone at the school or in the district is needed to collaborate on the new idea of innovation to effectively implement it and embed it. Collaborating laterally, across the team, the grade level, the department, the school, and the district.

Different cultures, different styles of communication, and different perspectives are natural barriers to those on the outside of the school or district. It makes it difficult to interface with the school or district, which are being asked to execute their innovations.

“The skunk works model places all its hope on one big flash of inspiration that must come from a select group of special people. But we’ve seen that even the most transformative new products and systems emerge from many small sparks of insight. Successful innovative companies keep these small sparks inspiring the next one.”

Lateral innovation occurs when teacher and administrators working next to each other day-in and day-out collaborate on these “small sparks” of insight and inspiration to produce innovation from within. These innovations are more likely to overcome the barriers that innovation from outside faces. Lateral innovation has more buy-in, is more contextual, and more focused.

If you want to make innovation a strength and capacity of your school or district, don’t look outside for linear innovation, but look inside for lateral innovation.

How Important Is It For Educators To Have "Vital Friends" At School?

Tom Rath, author of the great book Vital Friends, conducted a massive study on the power and impact of friendships, especially friends in the workplace.
Tom asks a series of interesting questions…

"Educating oneself is the foundation of our learning systems, and it’s obviously a worthwhile pursuit. But is there any chance it’s time to add the next element? Have you ever taken a course in friendship? Could a second-grade student, a high school student, a college freshman, your boss, or even you benefit from time dedicated to this pursuit. If we have already spent significant time on self-development, is it possible that most of the magic- our room for rapid personal and professional growth- lies in developing our friendships?” 

Rath defines Vital Friends as

“Someone who measurably improves your life.” and “ A person at work or in your personal life whom you can’t afford to live without.”

Imagine a staff development training session dedicated to helping you make better friends with the people you work with. Imagine a staff development session that focuses on helping you a few of your colleagues develop deep meaningful friendships. Is it important?  You bet! 

I think back to the tragic suicide of an teacher colleague with whom I worked for several years, who felt that life had no meaning because of a lack of true deep friend relationships. They didn't want to go on living without friends. Could it have been prevented with just one vital friend at work?

Some of the findings in Vital Friends include…

• During our teenage years, we spend nearly one-third of our time with friends. For the rest of our lives, the average time spent with friends is less that 10%
• If your best friend has a healthy diet, you are five times as likely to have a very healthy diet yourself.
• 83% of people bring different strengths to the relationship that their best friend does.
• Only 18% of people work for organizations that provide opportunities to develop friendships on th job.
• Without a best friend at work, the chances of being engaged in your job are 1 in 12.
• People with at least three close friends at work were 96% more likely to be extremely satisfied with their life.
• Only 20% of employees dedicate time to developing friendships on the job.
• Fewer than 1 in 5 consider their boss to be a close friend.
• Employees who have a close friendship with their manager are more that 2.5 times as likely to be satisfied with their job.
• 17% of employees report that their manager has made “an investment in our relationship” in the past three months.
• When managers discuss friendships with employees on a regular basis, it nearly triples the chances of employees having a “best friend at work.”

The evidence is from the research conducted by Tom Rath is clear. We are better when we work with people we can call friend.

Principals, how would this knowledge impact your grade level placement of teachers?

Would this change the kinds of things you talk about with your teachers in goal setting or evaluation meetings? 

What kinds of things could you do to help teachers develop relationships with each other and what could you do to improve your relationships with them as individuals?

Teachers, when you consider the number of hours, days, and weeks spent at school, are you thinking about how much you need a friend or friends at school?

What would the impact of vital friends be to Professional Learning Communities?

Listen to an interview with Tom Rath.

Having Fun? 11 Questions For Analyzing Your School’s “Levity Effect”

Are you having fun at work? Is your school a fun place to be? According to Adrian Gostick and Scott Christopher, authors of the book The Levity Effect: Why It Pays to Lighten Up, “If people are having fun, they’re going to work harder, stay longer, maintain their composure in a crisis, and take better care of the organization.”

The following questions were adapted from the book.

Grade the following questions on a scale of 1 to 5

1= never
2= hardly
3= neutral
4= most of the time
5= almost always

1. Are new teachers and staff are made to feel welcome?

2. School meeting are positive and light?

3. Does your school have fun activities at least once a month?

4. Is it common to hear teachers and staff laughing at school?

5. Can you be yourself at school?

6. Does your school have a lot of celebrations for special events?

7. When brainstorming ideas, do teachers like to have fun?

8. Is your principal usually optimistic and smiling?

9. Would your students say you are fun be in class with?

10. Do you have friends at school that make you laugh?

11. Do the teachers and staff at your school have a good time together?

According to Adrian Gostick and Scott Christopher, a score of 40 or above indicates your school has a great environment. A score of 30-40 means your school needs to lighten up. A score of 30 or below means you have “terminal seriousness.”  Remember, we are working with kids. You need to have some fun.

The Three Sins of Teamwork at School

If you are creating pockets of teamwork without creating school wide teamwork you creating the wrong kind of teamwork. If you “talk the talk”, but don’t “walk the walk” yourself on teamwork, you are creating the wrong kind of teamwork. If you require teams to do everything, even when there is no need, you are creating the wrong kind of teamwork.

Berkley and INSEAD professor Morten T. Hansen’s, book Collaboration: How Leaders Avoid The Traps, Create Unity, and Reap Big Results, describes what he calls the three sins of teamwork.

Sin 1. Small Teamwork Kill Collaboration
Principals who insist that certain grade levels or teams display teamwork, but then let other grade levels or teams work as a group of individuals kills collaboration. Teachers are going to ask themselves, “Why should I have to work as a team, when they don’t?”

“When managers start instilling teamwork in their own units and not across the rest of the company, it leads to pockets of local teamwork, but not companywide collaboration. The company becomes ‘teamy’ but not collaborative.”

If a principal is going to preach teamwork, then it has to be for everybody. Requiring some to collaborate while letting others continue in a “privatized” or “hoarding” fashion is one sure way to quickly kill collaboration across the campus.

Sin 2. Everybody Do Teamwork Now (Except Those of Us at the Top)

If your superintendent or director communicates that teamwork is way, then he or she better well display him or herself.

“When leaders give a sermon about the value of teamwork to the troops, and then ignore it themselves, they are not promoting collaboration.” Hypocritical leadership is bad enough, but preaching teamwork and being a non team player is going to kill collaboration across the district, among principals, and among other departments.

“To unite a company, the top team needs to be united, too.”

Sin 3. Teamwork Becomes the Point of It All
Not everything at school needs a team to accomplish it. Sometimes, teamwork just winds up complicating the issue. It doesn’t take 5 teachers to make a recess duty schedule or order flowers for somebody’s birthday. Not every decision or task takes a Professional Learning Community to decide or complete it.

“Teamwork, when practiced incorrectly, becomes the sole purpose: ‘The leader says we need to do teamwork, so we better do teamwork, all the time.’ People’s judgment about when to work in teams---and when not to—gets corrupted by a norm that says, ‘You should do teamwork.’ As a result, people work in teams when they shouldn’t, as when there is no compelling reason to team up…”

The bottom line is it’s all about results. Sometimes the team, the Professional Learning Community is the best means to those results, and sometimes not. The goal of collaboration and teamwork is not collaboration and teamwork, but effective outcomes.


School leaders who promote teamwork and collaboration must be careful to avoid these three “sins” of teamwork. People can often hide behind a team and not do what their individual responsibility requires of them. All collaboration all the time can be used as an excuse not to share or do your part, because they assume someone else will share. Leaders need to take care that they look out for and avoid the three sins of teamwork.

Educators need to participate in what I call Ambidextrous Professional Learning Communities. The Ambidextrous Professional Learning Community requires high levels of collaboration and teamwork, but also high levels of personal responsibility and accountability, and avoids the three sins of teamwork.

Stop Standing Still, Quit Playing It Safe: The Dip by Seth Godin

“The time to look for a new job is when you don’t need one.  The time to switch jobs is before it feels comfortable.”  Seth Godin

Comfortable. My guess is that many teachers would love to teach the same grade or subject, at the same school, in the same district, with the same teachers, for the entire length of their careers. It is safe, predictable, and comfortable. It is also dangerous to you becoming a better teacher.

Seth Godin, in his beautiful little book The Dip, explains why quitting, yes quitting, can sometimes be a valuable tool.

“Doug needs to leave for a very simple reason. He’s been branded. Everyone at the company has an expectation of who Doug is and what he can do.” Doug could be teacher at your school. He has taught the same subject or grade for several years. He is good at it. He is on the same committees year after year. He is good at that too. But is Doug growing as an educator? Are you?

“If he leaves and joins another company, he gets to reinvent himself.”  Could a new school or grade level help you reinvent yourself?  Could a new challenge be just the thing to push you out of your comfortable safe zone, and into a new period of challenge and growth? 

According to Seth Godin, “If you are trying to succeed in a job or a relationship or a task, you’re either moving forward, falling behind, or standing still. There are only three choices.” Obviously we don’t want to be falling behind. Standing still is a very easy and very common choice. Standing still is safe. Standing still is predictable. Standing still is comfortable.

But is that going to improve you as an educator?  Is that going to improve education?  Obviously, the answer is no. So that leaves us with the choice but to move forward. According to Seth, “Measurable progress doesn’t have to be a raise or a promotion.”  We don’t control those sorts of things in education anyways, but Seth also says, “The challenge, then is to surface new milestones in areas where you have previously expected to find none.” 

So what new milestones could you set for yourself today?  What new skill could you develop? I started “TWittering” and getting interested in using the web as a collaboration tool. What new skill could you develop? I moved out the classroom and into a management position. I try to speak Spanish to my parents. I tying some very uncomfortable things. I still have a goal of earning my PhD or EdD. What goals or milestones could you set for yourself? What are you doing that is "uncomfortable?"

Stop doing what you have always done. Stop standing still.

To complete your Essential Education take a few minutes to watch friend Steve Cunnigham's great video summary of the book The Dip by Seth Godin

Questions of Accountability for Professional Learning Communities

Roger Connors and Tom Smith have written a new book called “How Did That Happen Holding People Accountable For Results The Positive, Principled Way.” What I love about great books is how they frame subjects, even ones we think we know a great deal about, in new ways. That is the case with this book.

Accountability is such a buzzword in education circles. According to the National Conference on State Legislatures, “In recent years, all 50 states have implemented accountability measures in response to increasing concerns about the quality of American education.” With the increasing availability of state, county, district, school, and teacher data, accountability is becoming more of an issue for all educators. Professional Learning Communities are not immune. Connors and Smith explain that we need to understand and examine three axioms of accountability.

The Accountability Fallacy
“…captures a common mistake people make when they assume that other fail to follow through because there is something wrong with them. This false assumption comes easily to most of us because we so clearly see the evidence that convicts the culprits of not caring enough or not working hard enough to get the job done the way we expect them to get it done. Basically, we assume people to be guilty until proven innocent.”

When Professional Learning Communities fail to complete the necessary work of gathering evidence of student learning, or developing strategies to meet the needs of students, examining data, or applying new knowledge team members and administrators often feel there is something wrong with the “offending” member or team. We assume the worst and end up with the worst.

But as Connors and Smith point out, “Real accountability always requires us to begin by looking at ourselves for anything that might be missing.”

Is it possible the Professional Learning Community and it’s members did not have a clear understanding of expectations, or maybe they were focused on the wrong things, or they do not posses enough training, or are struggling with time management issues, or there are personality conflicts, etc. The team has the best intentions, but these “other” factors might be getting in the way of the work.

Real accountability means looking for factors and issues that are at the root cause of problems and not looking for people to punish. Be it team members or administrators, we need to solve and fix problems, and not find “suspects” to “convict.”

The Accountability Assumption
“…dictates the you should always begin with the assumption that, in any given circumstance, people are doing their very best to fulfill your expectations. This assumption, consistently applied, will start the whole journey toward holding other accountable on a positive and principled track.”

Nobody, educators included, want to fail. Professional Learning Communities want to meet expectations and do the work needed to increase student success. But many factors could be getting in the way of this goal. But if you assume that they want to accomplish the goal, that members want to help each other, and teams want to succeed, you can focus on solving issues instead of punishing people.

“The Accountability Assumption allows you to begin with the view that people want things to work just as much as you do.”

The Accountability Truth
“…that when things go wrong, there is usually something wrong with what ‘I’ doing. When you embrace this principle, you take control of future outcomes and internalize the continual need to improve your effectiveness with respect to holding others accountable.”

Each members needs to ask, “Is there something I could have done?” Administrators need to ask, “How might I be contributing to the issue?” When we start asking ourselves these sorts of questions, then we can develop true accountability. Accountability that communicates, aligns, and inspects the goals of the PLC and solves problems.

“When you see yourself as part of the problem, you empower yourself to join the team that will do whatever it takes to solve it.”

CTQ: Change The Question
“With the Accountability Truth in mind you can imagine that asking the question, ‘How did that happen?’ does not generally produce an overly productive conversation. Certainly, understanding what went wrong is important, but this question usually places full accountability on those who fail to deliver and shed little, if any light on what you could have done to keep things on track. That’s one reason you should consider asking a better, more effective question when you feel that people have let you down: ‘How did I let this happen?’”

Often in the group dynamic of Professional Learning Communities, members make assumptions about what has been agreed to, or believe that all have the same expectations of the work to be done, when in fact there is not. Members might not be clear on what common assessment is to be given, what data is to be collected, etc. When the breakdown occurs, team members are quick to want to the offending member held accountable for letting the team down.

Members might try asking themselves, “How did I let this happen?” and discover that they might have bee able to prevent the mistake or issue from happening in the first place. As a “community” member accountability starts with themselves first.

Often administrators are not aware that the messages they are sending their Professional Learning Communities is not the one he or she intended to send. Many times administrators assume that teams understand what it is they want from them, when the teams do not. Unclear expectations, or making assumptions leads to failure. The administrator naturally wants to hold team members professionally accountable, but they key is to ask themselves first, “How did I let this happen?”

“Those two additional words can make a big difference. First, adding ‘I’ to the equation shifts the focus from what everyone else didn’t do to what you can do to improve the situation.”

Changing the question from, “How did this happen?” to “How did I let this happen?” creates positive benefits for Professional Learning Communities and school administrators alike.

Connors and Smith explain that there are 5 powerful benefits to including yourself in the accountability question.

1. “Creates more positive relationships where people feel that you deal fairly with them and acknowledge the whole story and not just the part that emphasizes what they did or did not do.”

2. “Helps you learn from your experiences when things go wrong because you no longer attribute the reasons for failure solely to someone else.”

3. “Gets the process of fulfilling expectations back on track because you are willing to look objectively at ‘what else’ you can do to ensure the outcome now and in the future.” 

4. “Develops a culture where everyone on the team can follow your example and become part of the solution, not just part of the problem.”

5. “Establishes a positive work environment where people give their best effort because they feel motivated by principles that feel right and fair.”

Understanding that there is more to just holding someone to blame for the failure of a Professional Learning Community is going to be a key driver in increasing your school’s PLC effectiveness. Thanks to Roger Connors and Tom Smith, we have a better understanding of accountability and our approaches to it.

The "Loosely Coupled" Improvisational School Organization and Culture

As someone once said, “In any bureaucracy, paper work increases as you spend more and more time reporting on the less and less you are doing”

_{Photo by Durotriges}

According to Keith Sawyer, author of Group Genius, “In most companies, bureaucracy prevents innovation from emerging.”

Education is not immune to the damaging effects of bureaucracy, and in many ways suffers even more due to the number of government agencies adding to the layers of bureaucracy. Federal, state, county, district, and site level rules, regulations, processes, procedures, and mandates have created a maddening level of inefficiency.

Albert Einstein once said, “Bureaucracy is the death of all sound work”

Educators are faced with the task of creating an environment that can harness the wisdom, creativity, and intellect of their teachers and staff as a means of mitigating the harmful creep of bureaucracy. The key is to create schools and districts that are built on collaboration. Collaborative teams that can be assembled to harness their combined talents into innovations and solutions for schools and districts.

As detailed in his book Group Genius, Keith Sawyer describes collaborative organizations. Collaborative organizations are made up of teams who, “…form and reform, their structure emerging improvisationally from the bottom up, and membership is largely self-selected.”

Imagine a school site in which staff members from all grade levels, or department, or other areas volunteer to use the collaborative leverage of the group to innovate ideas and solutions to improve instruction, management, and the operation of the school. Teachers, janitors, counselors, psychologists, coaches, instructional aides, parents, and managers collaborating together from the bottom up to meet the needs of the school site.

Keith Sawyer calls these Innovation Labs.

Education is an ever-changing bureaucracy and districts and school sites must not just deal with change, they must come to expect and even welcome change. It must be embedded into the culture of a school and a district. “Innovation today is a continuous process of small and constant change, and it’s built into the culture of successful companies.”

Three characteristics would be the basis of the collaborative organization and an Innovation Lab. “The culture of the collaborative organization is based on flexibility, connection, and conversation.”

In his book The Social Psychology of Organizing, Karl Weick suggested what he called “loosely coupled” organizations. Bringing staff members together when needed into loosely coupled teams that innovate, create, and develop solutions for the school or the district. Like Lego blocks that can be brought together, disconnected, or re-formed easily without much disruption to the school or district. The benefit is a loosely coupled organization is much more innovative than carefully planned organizations.

According to Sawyer the, “University of Maryland reviewed the previous ten years of studies of organizational design; their conclusion was that team-based companies performed better than traditional bureaucratic firms.” Team-based schools and districts are better.

The Innovation Lab which is, “made up of people from different corporate functions representing all stages of product development, including purchasing, manufacturing, marketing, engineering, service, and finance—result in quicker product development times.”

The Innovation Lab is faster at solving problems and innovating because of the combined cross functions represented on the team. Breaking people out of their department, district office, or grade level silos allow the Innovation Lab to leverage the various knowledge, wisdom, experience, and insight to the team.

These sorts of teams have also been referred to as cross-functional teams. Regardless the label, imagine the speed and efficiency these teams could bring to solving problems, issues, and innovating ideas at the district or site level. All too often great ideas fail to work because some other concern or issue was not considered and anticipated because all the people that would be required to work together to implement the idea are not at the table at the moment it is conceived and developed.

Instead of running an idea by various departments or concerned persons after the fact, why not include them in the development of the idea. Innovation Labs can experiment with a high number of ideas and innovations because those required to work together to implement the innovations are communicating in real-time. Not in their silos after the fact.

“We’re really collaborating and building ideas together as opposed to the old model where everyone works in silos.”

How can you build a culture that is comfortable with change in your district or at your school? Think about issues and problems that have arisen in the past. How would an Innovation Lab or a collaborative organization have changed the outcomes of those issues and problems? Creating a culture of collaboration could be the key to taking a PLC, a school, or a district to the next level.

None of us is a smart as all of us.

This is why the Professional Networked Learning Collaborative is so necessary. The PNLC model leverages the "loosely coupled" idea due to it's scalable membership. The collaborative includes members of the typical community who are physically present with each other, but also includes community partners, useful outsiders, specialists, consultants, professors, etc. who join the network as virtual team members for a time to help the work of the team. These "loosely coupled" outsiders expand the boundaries of team membership through technology that allows for virtual membership.

The Professional Networked Learning Collaborative creates an environment and a culture that makes innovation and improvisation easier because of the PNLC focus on K.W.O.K. Technology allows teams to connect to islands of expertise located in any geographic location. Technology allows teams to archive their learning and share with others. The sum result is that technology allows the Professional Networked Learning Collaborative to “Know What Others Know” (K.W.O.K.).  Knowing what others know and sharing what you have learned is what I refer to as Wisdom Stewardship. Technology makes it easy for educators and schools to be good stewards of available wisdom and to know what others know.

The Great 8: Catalytic Questions For Your Thinking

1.    What is a stake for your school or district? Can you afford not to create a collaborative organization?

2.    What kinds of questions should you be asking yourself about your collaborative models?

3.    What other organizations can you look to as a model of a good collaborative culture?

4.    What assumptions are you making about the level of collaboration and the ability of your teams? 

5.    What is one step you can take right now to increase the collaboration taking place in your school or district? What might it look like?

6.    Reframe the issue. Is it an issue of flexibility among staff, connection, or conversation? Is it a problem of communication, access, or time?

7.    What criticisms will people have when you begin to create Innovation Labs or great collaboration? Anticipate and plan for solutions. Choose the idea that is easiest to implement.

8.    Can you substitute one process, procedure, and regulation with one that will increase collaboration?

A Hoarding Culture vs. A Sharing Culture

Have you ever considered if your school and district has a hoarding culture or a sharing culture?

In a hoarding culture, teachers and schools keep their expertise, their knowledge, their ideas, and their innovations to themselves. These teachers and these schools get a sense of reward and gratification by being seen as experts, as more creative, more knowledgeable, and more effective. They crave the recognition that comes from getting results that others are not able to achieve and the influence and recognition that comes with it.

We have all seen it, those teachers who have great ideas but don’t want to share with others. Teachers with special training that keep all the knowledge to themselves to be seen as the “expert.” Teachers who are good with technology but seem to keep the “secrets” all to themselves. Principals who keep information to themselves so as to ensure staff must go to him or her for the information. Even entire schools keep their best practices and knowledge to themselves. This is what hoarders do. They set up silos and keep their knowledge inside.

Sharers know that their fellow teachers, their fellow principals, and their fellow schools can benefit and should benefit from their knowledge, ideas, creativity, and information. Sharers get a “reward” out of helping others benefit from what they know. Sharers attempt to overcome silos by sharing with others so that the entire school or school district can benefit.

Toyota has an approach to knowledge management called “Yokoten.” The Japanese word means “taking from one place to another.” Toyota’s culture is a sharing culture. They correctly understand that knowledge, ideas, and data are organizational resources. A good idea should not be wasted but should be implemented. In addition, and this is key, a good idea should not just be used in a single location, but should be exported to all parts of the organization. Their sharing culture obligates that an individual share with their peers and leaders are expected to circulate good ideas throughout the organization.

In other words, if Toyota ran your school or your district, teachers would be expected to implement good ideas and share with others. Principals would be expected to implement good ideas at their site and share with the rest of the district. Silos would not be allowed to prevent good ideas from being implemented and shared. If the idea is a resource, it is not wasted, it is used and it is shared.

Does your school and district have a hoarding culture? Or does your school and district have a sharing culture? A culture of “yokoten?”

Catalytic Questions:

1. Imagine the benefit to student learning and achievement if every great idea in your district was implemented and shared across the district. Every one. How might you encourage this level of collaboration and sharing?

2. In what ways could you begin to model a sharing culture? How might you use the principle of “yokoten?”

3. What things should you stop doing? What things are getting in the way of collaboration and should be eliminated?

4. How might your approach to collaboration change if you viewed ideas as a necessary commodity or resource for your school and district?

5. In what ways have you encouraged, rewarded, acknowledged, or expected sharing of ideas, knowledge, information, or data?

A Great Video Example of Creating A Collaboration Cascade

I previously posted about creating what I call a "Collaboration Cascade" as I said...

For every grade level team, for every Professional Learning Community, and for every Professional Networked Learning Collaborative in the future, there is or will be a tipping point at which people stop hoarding information and ideas and begin sharing. When this threshold is reached, the Collaboration Cascade begins. (Not be confused with an Information Cascade which I posted about in Information Cascades in Professional Learning Communities)

I choose the term Collaboration Cascade to describe the point at which subject/grade level teams (PLCs or PNLCs) reach a tipping point or threshold when the collaboration of some can cause a cascade of collaboration and cooperation from those who have not been participating or who have been hoarding their information, knowledge, and insight. This is the point of the Collaboration Cascade, a “cascade” of collaboration as more members begin to move from non-participation to participation, from hoarding to sharing, from non-cooperation to cooperation. 

The tipping point or threshold at which teams reach the collaboration cascade will be different and unique for each group, governed by the unique group dynamics of that particular team, PLC, or PNLC.

Via Seth Godin's blog, here is a great example of group dynamics reaching the "tipping point" and the formation of a "Collaboration Cascade." Watch what happens at the 55 second point (fast forward). 

The self-interest of the individual competes against the group dynamics that require members to collaborate, cooperate, share, and participate. For many members their collaboration is contingent on the collaboration of others. In other words, some members will in essence say, “You go first.” Their collaboration will require others to first demonstrate their willingness to collaborate. The question is what conditions must exist to create the tipping point or for members to reach their threshold to create a Collaboration Cascade?

Collaboration is like a dance. Sometimes someone has to go first and get a few others to join in. But, in the end, we all want to dance.

Catalytic Questions:
1.  What role does fear play in holding back collaboration, cooperation, sharing and participation?

2.  The philosopher Epictetus said, “What concerns me is not the way things are, but rather the way people think things are.”  What role is perception playing in preventing a Collaboration Cascade?

3.  In what ways might you provide leadership or an example to influence a Collaboration Cascade?

4.  What is the underlying principle at work in reaching the tipping point for a Collaboration Cascade?

5.  In what ways could you demonstrate the benefit of the Collaboration Cascade? In what ways might you show that you are willing to, “Go first?”