Despite what we may think, far too often we are prone to include people in projects, meetings, discussions, and events who think like we do, act like we do, and even look like we do.  Don’t get me wrong, there may be someone who makes the cut who doesn’t share our taste in fashion, but dig under the personality hood for a moment to discover the thinking and the acting of a kindred spirit.

I make this point because there the literature is filled with articles talking about our hidden bias.  Most leaders I work with today don’t even refute the premise which was not the case a decade ago.  What is disheartening is not the admission of this bias, but the impact on systems thinking regarding the issues of our day.  I was at a recent community event on the West side of Chicago where I live.  The event was an inter-active panel discussion about food policy or lack thereof for neighborhoods like the one I live.  Over the past 50 years we have become accustomed to thinking out food comes from a supermarket rather than from the ground.  The recent economic crisis has brought the notion of sustainability to a new level as people confront the impact of scarce resources beyond money.

What struck me about the discussion was the hidden bias at work.  The panel while diverse in race, gender, and role, all shared a similar perspective about the issue.  The audience also diverse in race, gender, and role although not as much exhibited a similar convergent thinking.  I left wondering where were those who disagree with the hypothesis presented by the organizers.

Perhaps the greatest lesson of the recent credit meltdown was the interconnectivity of humankind.  When in the past did a mortgage servicer in Sioux Falls impact a sovereign debt investor in Dubai?  What we have not been able to get past is what this interconnectivity means to us in terms of our ability to find an elegant solution for all.  I am not asking human beings to stop acting like human beings.  There is comfort in being with those who have shared interests.  However, we must open the door to all views, and learn how to authentically engage with those who think differently.  This sounds like a platitude espoused from an ivory tower above our heads.  I prefer to think of it as a pragmatic suggestion necessary if we are to determine root causes for the most significant problems we confront. 

On the mundane level simply ask yourself who else needs to be in the room the next time you discuss a contentious topic.  You may find the list longer than you originally thought.

Earlier this year the expression “loose lips sink ships” took on a digital meaning when a Ketchum VP declared Memphis was not his kind of town.

Prior to meeting with executives at Fed Ex (headquartered in Memphis) the VP tweeted his true confession that he “would die if he had to live there”. A Fed Ex employee picked up the tweet, and sent news of this transgression to a wide array of senior leaders at the company defending not only his city, but also the company. For more on this check out Peter Shankman’s blog http://shankman.com/be-careful-what-you-post/.

Talk about your Facebook photo album at your bricks and mortar water cooler, and be prepared for the fire hose of opinion for or against social networking and its tools. Interpretation is in the eye of the beholder, and ironically the Ketchum story is used by both sides as evidence to embolden their position.

For those who remember when the length of one’s hair was a symbol not only of what generation you hailed, but also how progressive your thinking, participation on social networking sites has the same power to instantly divide.  Compliance officers are not known for their comfort with transparency or privacy, and a nightmare come true for them is exemplified by the Ketchum incident.

They should lose sleep at night.  After all it is what they get paid to do. The rest of us should sleep soundly knowing we are helping move our organizations and ourselves to an informed viewpoint about the ways and means of web 2.0 collaboration.

For better or for worse the vows of the digital age are written.  We all agree to uphold these vows knowingly or unknowingly whether we are online or not. Even if you don’t tweet someone who does who is standing next to you as you make an off-hand comment may unleash the full force of connectivity in less than a New York minute.  What do you do?

Opting out entirely is one solution, but there is no guarantee you won’t be found anyway.  Turning back the hands on this clock is harder to do than you think. Unless you are willing to unplug altogether (more on this later as I have friends who have done so) choosing how you engage is a better strategy.  The first step to a powerful choice is educating you on how to be a “good” digital citizen.

As they used to say when I was making my living on a trading floor “the trend is your friend”.  This refers to market motion up, down or sideways, but in motion nevertheless. To wish the market move a different direction than it is moving, is futile.  It has a mind of its own. True, the mind may be nothing more than the sum of all those participating, but the market acts alone.  The same is true of the trend of participation in the digital space.

Facebook users now exceed 200 million, and the bulk of these users are over 35.  For better or for worse these numbers will impact how you and I live and work.  Better to be cause in the matter of this impact than at the effect.  How to be cause in a way that works for you and your organization begins with playing with the tools yourself. If you are not currently on at least one social networking site, get yourself on one today. However, be careful what you say. You never know who is listening.

If you have taught in a virtual classroom, you realize how quickly technology evolves.  What I don’t think most faculty consider is the direct impact that has on how we learn.  Moore’s Law has (the notion attributed to Intel guru Gordon Moore that technical capabilities double roughly every 18 month) certainly   caught me by surprise on more than one occasion.  It seems just as soon as I master one tool, the tool evolves beyond my capacity leaving me in the dust.  In fact, I have seen the technical capabilities of the virtual classroom advance within the semester I taught.

The evolution of technology has eclipsed the evolution of humankind’s ability to absorb it.  However, a new way of thinking about this allows for the evolution of learning.  The podcast discussed this evolution, and gave a link to a blog on the topic.  http://connectivism.ca/ This new way of thinking is called Connectivism, and the virtual classroom three years from now will certainly need to understand this and adjust accordingly.  The idea behind Connectivism is in connecting to others we form competence.  The more connections we make, the more we learn.  What is different about this is technology allows for this activity, and “frees” us from having to remember.  Our knowledge becomes a collective stored in our connections.  The virtual classroom three years from today will have to therefore offer students much more dynamic functionality around organization and tagging content.  Otherwise, the learning will suffer.  This is a huge paradigm shift from traditional pedagogy and frankly andragogy.

For the most current thinking on this topic, I turned to Kevin Kelly founder of Wired magazine.   http://www.kk.org/ I saw Kevin speak last week on this topic at the Learn 2008 Conference at the Masie Center.  He talked at length about the evolution of learning due to this phenomenon.  The virtual classroom three years from now, will be that much more connected through the deployment and “perfection” of Web 2.0 and 3.0 tools.  The emergence of an entire second life through a virtual platform will have a particular impact on learning, particularly learning related to three dimensional topics.  For example, it will be much easier to train students on proper disaster recover procedures virtually than check clearing processes.  Regardless, as educators we will have to evolve as Connectivism grows.  Right now, there are many people who are not connected virtually.  As the social networking sites become more widespread, more people will be learning.  No doubt there is research being done now on how this happens.  We must design our courses with this learning in mind.