If you deal with documentation or knowledge, you’ll always have reading to do.

With the thousands of words coming at us every day, all day, it’s common to feel overwhelmed. This is an even bigger issue in the current times, with communication over the screen rather than in person.

Thing is, it’s not going away.

Reading speed varies but averages at 300wpm. There’s about 300 words on a page. So, a 25-page document will take 30minutes to read properly. There’s no way around it: the time must be put aside. And yes, it might mean something else doesn’t get done.

There’s a continuum that we’re always on when it comes to documentation and knowledge. It’s like an infinity symbol, and we’re just moving along and back and up and around this continuum.

If you deal with documentation or knowledge, you’re always doing one of these activities: reading, writing, editing, approving, retrieving, using, storing, redirecting, reviewing, planning, or thinking.

Considering that we’re always doing one of those activities, it’s fair to think we’d have effective and efficient ways to do each of them. But alas, I think it’s fair to conclude there’s room for improvement in methodologies around all of them.

I was inspired today hearing an interview with Dave McGillivray. Among many other things he does, he’s the race director for the Boston Marathon. He’s currently pivoted to helping plan vaccination ‘event’ locations – good move.

He observed that in a community, setbacks are often followed by even stronger comebacks. I like that idea.

Examples are the 1950s after WWII, and the 2014 Boston Marathon after the 2013 bombing.

Obviously, we’re in the middle of a setback right now. But won’t the comeback be superb.

This can also apply to smaller events and our personal lives: strong comebacks after a setback.

We’re all in a state of work. Going to work, working hard, putting in the work, busy at work.

To “work” is to take part in an “activity involving mental or physical effort done in order to achieve a purpose or result”. So, all that work done that does not actually achieve a purpose or a result, can be reconsidered…. because it’s not work.

I like the physics equation for work, which equals force times displacement. So that means we exert a force, which causes a change. If there’s no change from the force of our work, then, it isn’t.

On February 10th, 11:30am Brisbane time, I’m continuing the “Beyond 100 words” monthly webinars; this month it is about “credibility beyond credentials”, including recognition of the context with competence.

Competence has context. Without knowing context, we can’t possibly know all the information. Context includes things like background conditions, past history, and participant expectations, and infinite other factors. We also need to be very certain of the why, who and how of measuring competence.

Perspectives change if we’re looking for deep expertise, or wide generalist knowledge. Perspectives on competence also change if the work to be done is repetitive or creative.

A job interview, a promotion, or applying for a credential like chartered accountant or registered engineer inevitably requires the seeker to demonstrate competence.

Some competence is tangible: take a test, build a chair. Some competence is harder to measure: relevant experience; the right problem-solving approach.

Evidence of competence tends to be through stories and recollections by the interviewee of past behaviour in various situations.

On the 10th of each month, I’m giving a 30minute webinar on a topic related to these daily posts.

Episode 2, on February 10th 11:30am Brisbane time, is about “credibility beyond credentials”, including measurement of competence.

Competency framework assessments require users to declare whether they are ‘competent’, by ranking themselves at some level or some categorisation.

The one liner, “identify your competence level”, is loaded with the unsaid work that is required. It’s not often taught or laid out clearly.

I think competence is assessed through pictures and words (outputs), behaviour (interactions with others), and references (stories people tell about you).

On the 10th of each month, I’m giving a 30minute webinar on a topic related to these daily posts.

Episode 2, on February 10th 11:30am Brisbane time, is about “credibility beyond credentials”, including defining competence.

On the 10th of each month, I’ll do a 30minute webinar on a topic related to these daily posts. Episode 2, on February 10th 11:30am AEST, is about “credibility beyond credentials”.

Competence and credibility are similar, but not the same. “Competence” can be defined as having knowledge, skills and experience on a task or topic. “Credibility” is about being trusted, convincing and believable. A combination of competence and credibility brings respect.

Competence is simply expected for any role. An accepted method of ‘declaring’ credibility is through credentials – degrees, awards, titles. But there is so much more to it than that.

On the 10th of each month in 2021, I’ll be doing a 30minute webinar on a topic from my daily posts.

Episode 2, February 10th at 11:30am AEST, is about “credibility beyond credentials”.

Sure, credentials are important. But with information so freely available now, and with some credentials easily achieved, credibility is not solely demonstrated by credentials anymore. It’s up to us to display credibility through actions and behaviour.

Structured, organised, demonstrable credibility applies to work-life, as well as hobbies and other goals. Like, say, doing five long-distance triathlons. Achieving that “credential” will be part of this story as well.

The Dewey Decimal System (DDS) is still in use in thousands of libraries around the world. It’s an efficient and consistent way to categorise and store information, by grouping books (knowledge) into standard, expandable categories.

Before the DDS was created in 1876, libraries sorted books in the sequence that they were acquired. That made it difficult to find books later when you’re looking for something specific.

Our email inboxes tend to be more like the 1860s way of storing information. The flexibility is a paradox: because we can sort it any way we want, we don’t sort it at all.

I can’t properly attribute it because I can’t recall where I read or heard the concept of ‘life is improvisation’.

It’s stuck with me, though, because I tend towards schedules and structure and lists and processes, with goals and outcomes.

It’s stuck with me, because as the song goes, there’s “no dress rehearsal, this is our life”*.

But of course, life is one big improvisation. Things don’t always go to plan. Perhaps they rarely do. We can have plans and structure, but we’re also constantly improvising. And as I read or heard, wherever it was, good improvisation needs practise too.

—-

*(I can and will credit that song lyric, it’s from “Ahead by a Century”, Tragically Hip. …. and I’d better, because any Canadian Hip fans out there will call me on it.).

For every rule, there are exceptions. We learn about this for the English language (“i before e except after c); we learn this in math (statistics, imaginary numbers, LaPlace Transforms).

In many things (height, test results, random events) there is a bell curve, with most results in the middle (average), and tails on each end which are the ‘exceptions’.

So a perplexing problem is whether to make rules for the norm, or for the exception.

And the answer is changes depending on the context. Rules for recording data is one thing; rules for battling a pandemic are something else completely.

Online databases for knowledge management are useful and important. Being able to find information quickly is just expected. Similarly, a structured filing and folder system for your own information and knowledge that you keep online is even more important. But it’s not quite the same as an actual library.

I remember getting lost in the library stacks. Browsing for a book in the library or bookstore is a very different experience to searching an online database. In the tangible world of books-on-shelves, there’s the unexpected delight of a subject-adjacent book that you weren’t looking for. That doesn’t happen in databases.

It’s a ubiquitous goal to have ‘good communication’ in a business, or as a personal skill. It shows up in business strategies, leadership development, and plain old-fashioned meetings.

Like many concepts, communication is context specific.

When talking about ‘improving communications’, keep in mind the context. There are four aspects to consider: verbal or written, and informal or formal.

• Verbal/informal = small talk, networking

• Verbal/formal = speeches, presentations

• Written/informal = email, instant chats

• Written/formal = reports, papers.

Just referring to ‘improve communication’ isn’t enough. Each of the above concepts requires a different strategy for improvement, if they really are so bad.

Sorting through the enormous amount of documentation we receive gives everyone a headache. Most of the time, it doesn’t get done well.

Well, it’s never going to be less. In fact, it will only probably grow to be more. So rather than wishing it would stop, we need to tame the beast that is information management, on our own.

Companies spend enormous amounts on IT systems, document control systems, and knowledge management databases. These are useful in their own context. But to win at knowledge management, and to lead by demonstrating productivity, have an information management system of your own.

We are social beings. It doesn’t matter what controls or restrictions are put on us, eventually we will default to being social.

I had the fortunate opportunity tonight to re-connect socially with colleagues this evening, as social events slowly and cautiously kick off again.

The underlying ‘joy’ of the event reminded me that while screen-based interactions are a reasonable substitute, it will never replace the real thing.

We need eye contact, we need body language, we need the frisson of connection that happens when souls meet. This is the strength of human interaction. We will do it with abandon again.

When faced with overwhelm and burnout, simplify. Easier said than done, I know.

A good practise for simplification is to spend some time thinking about categories or structure. This helps simplify some of the overwhelm.

For example, some categories of uncertainty itself include:

• Situation – when the uncertainty is outside your direct control

• Information – when you have incomplete or dubious data

• Decision – being faced with decisions which can be right, wrong, or neutral

• Behaviour – having to consider whether “they” (others) will do the right thing.

Categorising brings some structure and certainty, which can help to narrow down the issue towards resolution.

I wonder if we’re moving from demonstration by outputs (design drawings, reports, calculations, costings, structures), to simple declarations about what should happen.

It’s fairly easy to assert expectations:

• “Our principles are a-b-c”;

• “Doing ‘x’ could contribute $65B to annual revenue”;

• “We will collaborate with all stakeholders”.

These declarations are important, to a point. They are empty if there is no demonstrable facts, knowledge, or evidence behind the declarations.

• “A-b-c” principles must be demonstrated through behaviours and outcomes.

• “Doing x” needs design data, real costings, provable results.

• “Collaborating with all stakeholders” almost never happens, so declaring it is fraught with disappointment.

Many years ago, a fashion fad existed with ‘reversible’ items of clothing: shirts, skirts, jackets. It gave you two outfits with one buy. I owned a reversible jacket that was purple on one side and had some bright yellow on the other. (It was the 80s, what can I say).

If something’s reversible, you can switch it, without significant consequences. When it’s irreversible (like just about all clothes nowadays), reversing has consequences.

Think about decisions in that context and make reversible decisions quickly. Take more time on the irreversible ones. The hard part is knowing how reversible it really is.

I’m currently wrestling with the inevitable change in eyesight, which happens to most of us at a certain age. I’m also convinced it has something to do with months spent looking at a computer screen instead of looking into a room and varying depth-of-field adjustments.

The subsequent fixing process has forced me a couple of times to briefly go without any eyesight correction at all. The inability to see details made me very uncomfortable, cautious, and nervous.

In a mental leap to applying this to leadership at work, having clear vision helps take away so much uncertainty about the details.