Tag Archives: Leadership

Recruiting for Wearables & Presence Study, update

Now comeWearable Technology Beyond the wrists the moment of truth, my dissertation research study on Wearables and Presence in the workplace will kick off in a month.   The study should help us understand if using wearables can be an intervention for improving presence (in the moment: sense-of-self and sense-of-others). The devices in the study are in the monitor-alert category.    It is an independent scholarly study (not market research) for a doctoral dissertation in Human and Organization Systems at Fielding Graduate University.

I have 100 devices for the study and have just decided to open it to unreleased devices.  More data is better.

Are you a wearable developer and have at least five finished prototypes that can be used for the length of the six week study (starting November 1st)?  Please contact me before October 22nd to discuss. You would need to be able to provide customer support for the participants for the six week study to be sure the results are not skewed from improper use or device failure in pre-release.

Recruiting participants: Are you interested in wearable technologies’ potential beyond utility and/or your ability to be present with yourself and others?  The demographic for the study is mid-career professionals in the workplace.  The modern workplace can have many forms, so this includes virtual office, office and combination situations.  Participants should not currently be using another monitor-alert wearable.  SF Bay Area participants preferred, for ease of distribution and return of devices.  Although some devices will come from other areas (Tel Aviv, London, Toronto, so far) so there may be some local clusters if enough participants.  If you have your own device but have not started using it yet, you may also be able to participate.  Contact me to discuss.  The commitment is: 6 weeks (5 weeks of device use),  Three times weekly online assessment completion (5 min. each), 15 minute exit interview at completion of study.  Your personal device data remains private to you.

As I kick off, I must just give a shout out to the amazing wearable community (tech, wellness and neuropsychology) for your incredible support for this study by providing knowledge, enthusiasm, contacts and/or products: Misfit, Ring.lyVirgin Pulse, Jawbone, Interaxon, UpRight, Samsung, Spire, OhMiBod, Vibease and WearableWorld.  I look forward to sharing my findings and contributing to the knowledge on Wearables Beyond Utility!

hforbesoste (at) email.fielding.edu

flattr this!

“Who’s Next” goes to Hollywood

Off to Hollywood and The Swedish Affair this weekend. I was invited to share “Who’s Next: Leadership in the new Social Paradigm” as a transmedia project accelerating leaders evolution. Wish me luck! I’ll keep you all posted!

Interested, check out http://theswedishaffair.com

flattr this!

Future Leadership – Sketchnotes

20130226-095515.jpg

This morning’s presentation was an interesting blend of transformational leadership, action versus reaction, connection and context. Maria Gustafsson of Actea Consulting spoke with passion from a perspective that I share on the application of leadership to all areas of our lives and organisations. I am looking forward to continuing our conversation on the applied use of social and transformational leadership theories into organisations. Theories are all fine and good, but without implimentation in practice they are just talk.

flattr this!

Measure Engagement: Micro-Engagement with Macro-Impact

ROI of Engagement and the value of relationships is no new conversation. What is new is how we develop and maintain the relationships, especially as leaders. In developing leadership seminars for the new social paradigm, we came across the same challenge of measurement but looked at new solutions. “Quick and dirty” ROI measured from campaigns and their impact is not relevant or feasible when talking about social leadership. Unlike a short term campaign or solution it is a long term adjustment to culture and approach to communications.

 

Finding the tools that can help us measure more effectively are a start. Of course, looking at numbers of connections give us one view. Yet, they present several problems in themselves and only show us a small part of the greater picture. The greatest being that leaders are predominantly absent from these tools (Forrester Research), and resistant to entry for fear of exposure or distraction. Another being the need for measurement of network engagement that occurs outside these sites (intranets, industry specific networks, public following, etc.). Then of course there is long term and the secondary effects, the MacroImpact.

 

Klout.com does a great job aggregating the numbers of followers on Twitter, links on LinkedIn and friends on Facebook and their influence to see what kind of a role individuals play and their online influence. It may not be the MacroImpact we require to create the argument for investing in teaching social leadership, but it is a good place to start. Then we need to look at layering of other factors, after all, changing behavior and culture is no “quick and dirty” fix.

 

BUSINESS IMPACTS: To start with there are several areas from which we can measure shifts that are have MacroImpact from the Leader’s MicroEngagement (must be measured over time). Of course this assumes establishing a baseline and keeping in mind other externalities that can cause spikes:

 

* INCREASE/DECREASE in new applications for jobs under leader’s management or control
* ATTRITION of existing employees desire to stay/leave working with the leader
* TEAM COHESION project completions advance of schedule, faster to market cycles
* INNOVATION cycles decrease with open acceptance of new ideas within clear parameters
* IMPROVED HEALTH decreased stress from greater job satisfaction, less sick days
* PARTNER/CLIENT LOYALTY return clients and partners desire to continue relationship
* COLLABORATION new opportunities in-industry based on respect for knowledge and trust
* LEARNING community shortens time to response from internal subject matter experts,
saves need hire external consultants when knowledge available internally
* MEETING lengths and volume decrease due to better collaboration and clarity in
communication
* AGILE RESPONSE to opportunities and threats in PR through direct engagement savings in
“Fire fighting” and valuation dips

 

This is just a first “whack” at a list as we look into measuring tools to pull together for leaders to understand their own MacroImpact and for organizations to evaluate their social leader’s performance. I would love to hear your thoughts on what other factors could be included, and what tools can be used to measure this effectively. It is not simply performance review we are considering, but rather effective engagement.

flattr this!