defense

defense defn

Imagine all the time/money/energy we spend on playing defense.

Imagine what we could do with that.

Perhaps we reconsider proof of things.

_____________________________

a few posts on defense

denial-as-a-reform-strategy
perhaps we all do it. no?
perhaps the more academically minded do it more. no?
defense.. because of our fear of being wrong.great resources everywhere – but in particular:
Chris Argyris:http://pds8.egloos.com/pds/200805/20/87/chris_argyris_learning.pdf
and
Kathryn Schulz:http://www.ted.com/talks/kathryn_schulz_on_being_wrong.html

imagine if these signs of success, connecting and doing things  that matter, becomes nodes over time… 

then all the defense that Argyris brings up – that esp the more academic we are the more defensive we get.. as to who is attributing who, et al.. may fade because
1) connections would show up more
2) connections showing up more – would notify others talking/doing the same..
3) cooler things get done, so less desire to be attributed..
imagine if those that came up with the same thing without even copying each other… find each other.. imagine where they could go..

_______________

chris argyr

reading teaching smart people how to learn

because many professionals are almost always successful at what they do, they rarely experience failure. And because they have rarely failed, they have never learned how to learn from failure. So whenever their single-loop learning strategies go wrong, they become defensive, screen out criticism, and put the ‘‘blame’’ on anyone and everyone but themselves. In short, their ability to learn shuts down precisely at the moment they need it most.The propensity among professionals to behave defensively helps shed light on the second mistake that companies make about learning. The common assumption is that getting people to learn is largely a matter of motivation. When people have the right attitudes and commitment, learning automatically follows. So companies focus on creating new organizational structures—compensation programs, performance reviews, corporate cultures, and the like—that are designed to create motivated and committed employees.

But they talked past each other, never finding a common language 

The purpose of all these values is to avoid embarrassment or threat, feeling vulnerable or incompetent. In this respect, the master program that most people use is profoundly defensive. 

reminds of Descartes (and many others) – saying how difficult it is for academics to revel in change
wurman

rework to betterness

but about all the defense and policy we play out daily.imagine if we woke up everyday and asked what mattered most.. and did that.

and we were connected like crickets even – communication wise (or so i hear.. new to me), so that we really got to experience the thing we were made for.. the thing beyond any one of us.

connecting. co-creating. communicating beyond GB Shaw’s poignant description of how we do it now..

instead of taking on our normal stance of defense/ego/whatever, we realize life is perpetual beta, and we start listening more deeply for the many stories that exist in people.
so instead of defending, we start playing together and off each other.

imagine us deciding what matter and then connecting like that.
betterness. (haque’s book) no?
let’s rework it. (fried’s book)

see where the other route gets us…? no end
.

Advertisements