00:22:45 Lori Creed: Can you speak a little more about design mindset? 00:24:08 Rebecca Ellis: "Jobs to be done" has been a really helpful framework in our org design work. We were fortunate to have a project with one of Clay's proteges. I learned so much from that experience. Christenson's articles on disruption and the innovator's dilemma are also great pre-reads for execs in org strategy and design. 00:24:32 Frithjof Wegener: Bolands work is really interesting on “design mindset" 00:24:48 Diana Polak: Christenson is great! 00:25:10 Lori Creed: Thanks for the references! 00:25:18 Frithjof Wegener: Collopy, F., & Boland, R. J., Jr. (Eds.). (2004). Managing as Designing. Stanford, CA: Stanford Business Books. Yoo, Y., Boland, R. J., Jr., & Lyytinen, K. (2006). From Organization Design to Organization Designing. Organization Science, 17(2), 215–229. http://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1050.0168 00:25:48 Frithjof Wegener: The Callopy and Boland book is still one of the most thought provoking books on management and design I know. Highly recommended 00:27:01 Rob Weinberg: there’s a fascinating article challenging Christensen’s work on disruption from New York Times. I can’t recall the author’s name. 00:32:23 Rob Weinberg: I think it’s more an issue of accuracy and access than honesty 00:33:21 Diana Polak: how does this fit into business process reengineering and knowledge management? Curious 00:33:37 Frithjof Wegener: what do others think of the role of iteration and observations in traditional org design? 00:35:33 Rob Weinberg: there appears to be an assumption in HCD of a problem/solution frame. it strikes me as not as helpful when change is vision-driven rather than problem driven. interested in Jeanna’s thoughts. 00:37:19 Anne Murray Allen: We lead with curiosity and wonder! 00:37:32 Frithjof Wegener: I missed Schön’s work on reframing and design inquiry in the previous visual 00:38:27 Eddie Moore: Jeanna can you talk about problem solving and appreciative inquiry and opportunity framing 00:38:29 Jodie Goulden: Another benefit of HCD process, iteration, prototyping is enabling larger scale participation. 00:41:08 Susanna Hunter: We've used the prototyping in structuring our agile teams. 00:42:04 Bruce Mabee: We often carry out orgs as prototypes, then learn and adjust (or scrap!) 00:42:47 Frithjof Wegener: There is also “design” in designing experiments. Arent there ways to prototype an organization without changing the whole organization? 00:42:56 Jodie Goulden: Bruce, what do you mean? How can you scrap an organization? 00:43:04 Bernard Mohr: @Frithjof - a small example of org design testing and iteration is in <> 00:43:58 Frithjof Wegener: Ah thx Bernarnd, I am indeed moving into org design for sustainability after my PhD ;) 00:44:41 Anne Murray Allen: One way of prototyping without changing the organization is working with an cross-boundary project then have a larger organization reflection/debrief on what was learned by working differently. How do we conserve what worked? 00:45:41 Bruce Mabee: @Jodie. Scrap the design, not the org. Have the people in it and affected by it, come up with different structures, processes, etc., and try a different experiment. Better to be micro-prototyped--small scale whenever possible. 00:45:52 Bernard Mohr: As is often the case it is so important to distinguish between what learning we can take from product design into organization design 00:46:00 Jodie Goulden: :-) thanks Bruce 00:46:17 Rebecca Ellis: Agreed, Anne. Sometimes it is also possible to implement a new design in a small way (pilot) before expanding larger especially where there are many people in the same role (like a call center or large sales account teams). 00:46:33 Jaclyn Sinesi: my team has been able to test/pilot new org design concepts with select teams in our organization that are representative of the larger team that we are designing for. it takes a very close partnership, forward thinking leadership and lots of change management at all levels in the org. 00:47:05 Michael Gold: Or you leave some of the detail design work to be created when you implement the design. 00:47:09 Frithjof Wegener: Is that still change management or part of org design? 00:47:20 Lauren Mobertz: That sounds really interesting, @Jaclyn 00:47:23 Bernard Mohr: @Bruce et al - we need more understanding of how to easily prototype org designs - certainly possible but more difficult than in product design 00:48:13 Michael Gold: @Frithjof - build in from day 1, not as a separate effort. happens with large group involvement 00:48:37 Bernard Mohr: @ Frithjof … change management and org design cannot (should not) be separated 00:48:49 Bruce Mabee: @Bernard. Absolutely! Usually an org is both more complex and more-impactful on peoples' lives. Apple phone may be an exception to this! 00:51:30 Frithjof Wegener: @Bernard: doesn’t good org design make change management obsolete? 00:51:32 Bruce Mabee: One challenge I face in User Experience models: too often, it becomes a marketing-dominated, "what I like" and skips the invisible engineering, ("does it keep working?" 00:53:20 Bruce Mabee: ...it's often hard to know how the culture will shape over time. 00:53:56 Frithjof Wegener: Garud, R., Jain, S., & Tuertscher, P. (2008). Incomplete by Design and Designing for Incompleteness. Organization Studies, 29(3), 351–371. http://doi.org/10.1177/0170840607088018 00:54:22 Frithjof Wegener: This paper about linux and wikipedia argues that we can’t “finish” designs, because culture etc. keep changing 00:55:01 Bernard Mohr: @ Frithjof First I think we need to separate “org design”” (an outcome) from “org designing” (a process) . In that context, yes, good org designing addresses learning, energy, understanding, support AND individual transformation as part pf the process of designing vs post designing. 00:57:18 Frithjof Wegener: @Bernard: and I think the next steps is seeing that org design as noun and org designing as process come together in experiments. That would be a “pragmatic” approach to (org) design 00:58:59 Jodie Goulden: Lauren yes! 00:59:01 Bernard Mohr: @ Frithjof - interesting … Yes AND I think process and noun come to gather much earlier - would be happy to discuss off line 00:59:07 Bruce Mabee: It's a great time for a shift in power! It's really scary at the top now! 00:59:16 Lauren Mobertz: Yes! Totally. 00:59:38 Dave Jamieson: I have always believed that Org Dev can't be done well without understanding Org Design! 01:00:01 Jodie Goulden: Lauren, I find it helpful to shift the conversation from "convincing" people about this shift to showing that the shift is already happening. 01:00:11 Lauren Mobertz: Good point, Jodie. 01:00:31 Jodie Goulden: ... and helping leaders to be part of shaping the change. 01:01:12 Lauren Mobertz: One thing I also notice is that organizations typically think "designers" should sit in specific areas of the organization, and those are almost never in HR, org design, or org development roles. I wonder why designs skills (service design, experience design, design thinking) dont seem to be valued in the People space 01:01:58 Frithjof Wegener: @Lauren: because design radically rethinks the people space. HR today is closer to Taylor than UX ;) 01:02:26 Lauren Mobertz: Hahaha 01:02:47 Dave Jamieson: it seems to me to be part of how all of these processes have been too fragmented and operate too separtately 01:02:56 Frithjof Wegener: Taylor is “de-humanized” design :/ 01:05:24 Jaclyn Sinesi: my team sits in HR and is paired with the talent function. it makes so much sense from the inside but we often run up against old school expectations about what HR “is” or “isn’t”. that said, I really don’t know what the answer is an where an org design team “should” sit. 01:06:01 Jaclyn Sinesi: we need to test our own org design! 01:07:04 Eddie Moore: If I had my preference, Org Design would sit in Strategy….gives a closer link to Marketing / Design thinking to Lauren’s point….plus a strong working relationship with HR and Finance. 01:07:10 Lauren Mobertz: @Jaclyn when I look at design maturity models, it's really about embedding a design approach in ever area of the org rather than just being the responsibility of one team. I hope organizations can move in that direction! 01:07:45 Frithjof Wegener: The problem is in hierarchical systems the design decisions are taken at the top, not by outsiders or bottom up. 01:08:17 Frithjof Wegener: So even if you do great design, ux testing, have the clients raving, bosses can still chose a different design 01:08:19 Joel Quast: Well said: how can process not be the enemy of mindset? It so often is... 01:09:12 Bernard Mohr: There is an interesting connection between our dialogue about Org Designing and the call for reinventing capiltalism (aka shifting from shareholder to stakeholder orientation( 01:10:35 Frithjof Wegener: Have a look at Rhinelandic organization design 01:10:50 Frithjof Wegener: That picks up this idea of alternatives to Anglo-Saxon capitalism 01:10:57 Dave Jamieson: thank you. Very helpful 01:11:01 Bernard Mohr: @Jeanna - outstanding “input”… so much to be explored here ! Thank you !! 01:11:02 Rebecca Ellis: Great conversation! Nice to *see* everyone! 01:11:05 Joel Quast: Fun chat.. thanks 01:11:08 Jodie Goulden: Very rich conversation in the call and on the chat! 01:11:31 Norma Martinez: enjoyed the conversation Jeanna! 01:11:32 Jodie Goulden: Thanks Jeanna