I just read a very interesting paper called “The Future of Global Action Networks” (look for the document link a little ways down the page). What was interesting, was not necessarily the discussion of “Global Action Networks” but the underlying observations on how they operate and are setup. From my perspective, these approaches to organizations are going to be fundamentally important to the most relevant organizations of tomorrow.
If anyone has done or wants to do a summary of this document please let me know. I’d love to post it here.
This has been one of those rare reads for me… something I’m sure I’ll be referencing for many years to come.
Well, I’m back.
It’s been an interesting start to the year and I’m starting to test some of the examples of this ‘model’ I’ve been developing and have actually, unbeknown to me, wound up in a project that actually represents the model I’m developing (funny how that happens). I guess that’s partly because, as with most things, the model isn’t really new. It’s essentially just an intentional version of the common entrepreneurial approach. What seems to strike people most however is not the approach but the idea that the seed financing happens before there’s even an idea… where there is only an intention for some sort of result or impact.
It’s amazing to watch the resistance come around that one aspect in particular. So much seems to be bundled around money and the power the holder of it can have over those that want it. Mess with money and you mess with control… or so it’s perceived. Really they are separate issues.
In my experience actually, only once money and control are dealt with separately does the ability to set the most helpful controls in place emerge. In a way it serves as a useful test in getting to know a partner. If the conversation gets into the ways of setting up the controls, I know we’re on the same page. If it’s stuck on returns and percentages we’re in opposite ends of the bookstore.
Am curious to see what resistance emerges next. For now back into crafting the docs.
Following up on my conversation post earlier… I just got off the phone with another connection by the same person. The ‘magic’ happened again. This time I consciously took my learning from the previous post into the call and it took the conversation even further. I guess it’s not really magic after all. My gratitude for the relationships I have just continues to grow. Thanks!
I was just helping a client do a last-minute media launch for something we expected to get a lot of traffic. Naturally I asked one of my long-time communications collaborators to help out. He agreed and we agreed on costs etc… quick/fair/reasonable.
Well… as sometimes happens it didn’t come off as we expected and the results were disappointing. I just got a note about this from my colleague with the additional comment:
On another note, given the poor results of this campaign, unless things
change considerably I don’t plan on charging for any of my time; only the
Of course, this is magic to the client’s ears but it’s also a reflection of the trust and professionalism that comes with having a long-term relationship. It’s actions like these that make it possible for companies that are getting going to be able to take some risks… sometimes they pay off… and sometimes they don’t. But, not having to pay for it means they’ll be able to try again.
Yesterday, I had a great conversation with someone that a friend/colleague/client thought might be a worthwhile introduction. And he was right. The conversation was enjoyable and very helpful. Similar to the conversation a couple of weeks ago that had me step back from the full-blown financial model and pitch deck to trying to apply the venturing process I am suggesting to the creation of what I’m building… this one prompted another launch path that fit with both my entrepreneurial drive to ‘push’ something forward, and also with the process I’m suggesting.
What’s interesting is that it wasn’t that it was a new approach that I hadn’t considered but rather the conversation prompted me to revisit the idea and see it differently. And it didn’t come from the direct suggestion or intent of the person I was talking with. So what in that conversation helped it emerge?
- Personally we hit it off with common interests, experiences and perspectives.
- The conversation was a sharing of ideas and experiences vs. an attempt to inform/critique/advise.
- We both were more interested in helping and learning than selling and telling.
I guess the other question to ask is what prompted the conversation to happen?
- My friend/colleague/client knew me, who I am, and what I’m working on.
- Something in his conversation the person he connected me to gave him the impression that there would be a) a personal connection b) the potential for either one of us to be helpful to the other.
- He took the initiative to make the introduction.
So what? I guess it comes down to:
- Nurture meaningful relationships
- Share what I’m working on and what I need to make it happen
- Make and follow-up on connections for and by those I have meaningful relationships with
- Be helpful
- Interact by sharing and learning
Oh and now that I can harness that entrepreneurial drive again… back to work on the other launch path!
Thanks for the conversation!
So here I start… in that period where an idea shifts, changes, grows, implodes… and hopefully emerges better.
I took some time this summer vowing not to make any commitments to any project until the fall… and to not launch anything new on my own. In September I emerged refreshed from some time with family and some time with myself… alone. The product of that time was my best attempt to describe what it is that I do and where I want to focus:
“co-creating entities and initiatives in service of restoring balance among people and the planet”.
A little wordy but captured a lot of meaning for me. Of course, my first bit of work was to engage with those that are doing some work in the area of ‘restoring balance’. It wasn’t long into that that I realised that somehow, in the midst of those conversations, I began talking of that statement as a project I was working on. There went the commitment not to start something on my own.
The underlying beliefs that began to form were that:
- venturing is one of the most powerful tools in creating systemic change
- ‘social entrepreneurs’ are leading the charge but they can only do so much (it’s hard to create new entrepreneurs)
- it IS possible to ‘manufacture’ companies for specific purposes (without requiring entrepreneurs)
- some keys are in setting-aside seed investment for a specific topic, determining the root cause, engage the community in formulating and developing the solution, and having dedicated trios (initiator, facilitator, and analyst) shepherding the process from set-aside to launch.
Over the past two months I’ve explored this idea taking it as far as drafting up my financial model and pitch deck… and a week ago was kindly reminded of the opportunity to walk the talk.
My challenge, is the model I am proposing turns the traditional venturing process around with having the seed funding set-aside up front which then motivates a process of community engagement to uncover rout causes to issues and subsequently the solutions to them. I fundamentally believe in the approach, but my instinct has me chomping at the bit.
As the year winds down I’ve initiated a few more conversations with key people I see as thought/action-leaders in some of my key communities. I don’t know what to expect from them as I’ve sent more of a thesis rather than my more conventional pitch. What I hope though is to have a better sense if I should walk the talk or get back to running.
I guess it’s the entrepreneurial drive… but it’s amazing how hard it is to sit still.