Category Identity

Entries 4 Total

Ten Organizations

Aug 24, ’10 4:52 PM

Had my first day of class today. What an unusual experience to be sitting in class again after a long hiatus. The title of the class is “Design in Management” and the structure and content (from a glance at the syllabus) is similar to the DMOC class at CMU. Parts of the class include “The Art of Management” and, of course, “The Nature of Design.”

The question I want to address in today’s post is personal and it’s an exercise to see how relevant the idea of organizations is. How much do organizations impact my life? It stems from something that was addressed in passing during today’s class (that all of those in the room could probably jot down and discuss at least 10 orgs in our lives) along with this article I came across the other day. Drucker called management “the most important innovation of the 20th century,” and I am certainly – to an extent – a product of the 20th century. So the question – what are 10 organizations that are relevant to me?

  1. Institution of family (wife, mama, papa, brother, in-laws)
  2. Local church (also an institution and probably better described as an organism rather than an organization), other churches from my past, other Christians
  3. My friends
  4. My physical environment (the greater Cleveland area, Ohio)
  5. My country & trans-national country (Korean America/Korean diaspora, America, political association)
  6. My education (various universities)
  7. My work (Marriott International, past jobs and professional networks)
  8. My life brands (Apple, Whole Foods, JCrew, PNCBank, Coca-Cola Company, Moleskin, etc)
  9. My digital environment (Facebook, WordPress, LinkedIn, Twitter, etc)
  10. My interests & hobbies (music, design, food, etc)

What’s striking is that one could easily write a college essay saying that the accumulation of these 10 organizations makes up what is called my identity. However, I’d like to think that my identity transcends the wrapping of these organizations. I’ve also noticed that the resulting list is different from what I intended to do – I thought the exercise would yield the top 10 brands in my life but it ended up as a list of major groupings rather than individual brands. I suppose this framework reflects the way I want to view organizations since individual brands are constantly changing in my life. This makes this list more stable (i.e. individual friends may change but friends as a group will always be a vital organization). I also wonder why I separated the digital from the “real” physical environment. I wouldn’t be surprised if these two categories merged in the years ahead.

Comments (4)

Creativity, Organizations, and Identity

Dec 30, ’08 6:17 PM

Teresa M. Amabile & Mukti Khaire wrote an interesting article for October 2008′s HBR titled “Creativity and the Role of the Leader.”

To answer the question, “How can organizations foster a culture of creativity?” they propose 6 guidelines. One of them is open the organization to diverse perspectives. When they discuss enhancing diversity, they state three main points:

  1. Innovation is more likely when people with different backgrounds/disciplines participate.
  2. Open-source innovation is relevant today and may very well be the “future of innovation.”
  3. Diversity within an individual enhances creativity.

It’s the last point that I’m interested in. There has been a study of individuals and how their diverse identity can enhance creativity (Jeffrey Sanchez-Burks and Fiona Lee from Univ. of Michigan, and Chi-Ying Cheng of Columbia Univ.). Here is an excerpt from the HBR article:

Their reserach (Sanchez-Burks, Lee, Cheng’s) focuses on people who have multiple social identities, such as people who are both Asian and American, or who are both women and engineers. Social identities often have distinct knowledge associated with them, and to the extent an individual is comfortable integrating multiple identities, his or her knowledge sets can combine productively. Indeed, through two experiments, these researchers found that people with higher levels of “identity integration” display higher levels of creativity when problems require that they draw on their different realms of knowledge. (One experiment asked Asian Americans to invent new forms of Asian American fusion cuisine, and the other asked female engineers to imagine new features for a cell phone for women.) This research sparked a great deal of personal interest and has implications for management. If managers cause people to suppress parts of their identity, they limit potentially valuable sources of creativity. If managers can encourage identity integration – think of female engineers working in an environment where they don’t feel they have to dress like men – people may be more innovative.

It’s interesting to see that finding topics (topoi), or the places to find arguments, is not limited to things in this world as well as ideas in our minds. We can be topics, places of invention. The very nature of being an Asian and an American at the same time … or being an Asian American that can’t be broken down into more fundamental parts, is a place for finding new and interesting actions, feelings, and beliefs (For those who lack internal diversity, the article encourages seeking diverse life experiences).

Add to this a third layer, and what can that look like? For example, what would a car for Asian Americans look like? One part of my thesis deals with football + African + Korean + American (Hines Ward). Jackie Robinson is so powerful and interesting because he brought the concepts of baseball, African, and American together for the first time. Another example I can think of is R & B music which has its roots in a number of things. Even Elvis was an “innovation” or brought forth “innovation” because he was a fusion of Caucasian teen + Rock ‘n Roll.

As stated at the end of the quote above, there is a way to enhance creativity (and perhaps much more, such as culture) by simply understanding a subaltern culture – such as women engineers in an environment that understand them. A case I can think of where the people in charge took this to heart is found at the end of Malcolm Gladwell’s bestseller, Blink. For years, many orchestras conducted open auditions which resulted in an overwhelming selection of male performers. But in the 1980s, orchestras, as Gladwell writes, “started putting up screens in audition rooms, so that the committee could no longer see the person auditioning. And immediately — immediately! — orchestras started hiring women.” As in this example, organizational change does not have to be a long and strenuous process.

I think I have to think a bit more about management’s role in developing creativity.
From personal experience, I do know that it can kill creativity. There must be a way for management to enhance it or design for it …

Comments (4)

Notes to Self

Dec 20, ’08 9:43 PM

Just spent the afternoon reading and had a few random thoughts:

1. A THOUGHT ON GOING TO THE SOURCE

The origin or primary source of something is very important. Hence, knowing the arts (what guides one’s thinking) is just as important than trying to learn all the methodologies that one can choose from to understand a specific subject matter. It’s like having a framework.

Some examples:

  • When looking for concepts for my thesis, I came upon “assimilation/integration” as a possible process in which culture takes shape. This came from a reading of a book on Asian American cultural politics. I was also vaguely familiar with Raymond Williams. However, Dick’s suggestion to go to the source of both authors’ inspiration, Antonio Gramsci, provided a greater insight into a more fundamental concept – “hegemony,” a complex yet fascinating topic. [download thesis]
  • Donald Schon’s “designerly ways of knowing, thinking, and acting” = repackaging of John Dewey’s thoughts on “Having an Experience.”
  • Herb Simon’s thoughts on the artificial echo Aristotle’s thoughts on poetics.
  • Thoughts around “service design” started over a hundred years ago (ex. Kodak’s “You press the button, we do the rest“).

2. A THOUGHT ON DESIGNING PRACTICE & DESIGNING MANAGEMENT

Forlizzi writes that “Participatory Design” and “Experience Prototyping” are attitudinal rather than procedural/prescriptive methods [by Forlizzi]. Is this the same way “attitude” is used by Boland & Collopy when they describe design attitude v. decision attitude in Managing as Designing? [see previous post]

Forlizzi writes, “… the Product Ecology approach involves doing fieldwork over an extended period of time” in her article to show that a comprehensive understanding of people takes time. This is an important point about design research.

However in the context of the professional world, this is not as easy to implement. Due to constraints, such as budget issues, there’s a disconnect in taking our thoughts towards action. Perhaps designing management, with a similar attitude, may help in bridging the gap between what we would like to have done to what we can get done in our organizations.

3. A THOUGHT ON USER NEEDS

A lot of people talk about being obsessed with finding and identifying user needs. When new products create new habits (ex. we need toothpaste to support the activity of brushing our teeth but this is a 20th century product that didn’t exist in, say, the 15th century), have we created a new “need” or is this something that’s been a latent need in individuals all along? If this is an example of a latent need, is there an infinite amount of needs we can design for? Probably not. Or maybe there are certain core needs that can be addressed differently with the changing times. Hmm. [see previous post on habits]

Comments (0)