'eLA 2008' is the short version of 'eLearning Africa 2008' conference. It was held in Accra, Ghana 29-30 May 2008. I was privileged to participate in it. Just like it happened one year ago in eLA 2007 (in Nairobi), I met new friends, got new ideas, attained new knowledge and got new inspiration. What remains is for me is to use them to improve my life and the life of those around me.
I should soon write specific posts on some of the the people I met, the knowledge I acquired, the things that inspired me. Web 2.0, some amazing technologies and some personalities will definitely be part of the posts. I will not be fair not to talk about the roads in Ghana, the food, the weather and the vehicles.
The trip to Ghana was not uneventful - fuel and a technical fault in the plane are the highlights that stand out. I think it will be fair to write a complete story after experiencing the return leg (I am still in Accra as I write). I am scheduled to leave Accra next week but I am already home sick so I should change my itinerary and get back home sooner. Watch this space for more about eLA 2008 and my first time in Ghana.
Saturday, May 31, 2008
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
Arbitration: any lessons?
I love football (soccer) not only because it is the game I have played the most so far but also because it teaches us lots of lessons. The major lesson it teaches is one of my favourite subjects, teamwork.
There are several issues related to teamwork that one can pick up from a soccer game - whether as a player or simply as a spectator. Obviously there is more to learn about teamwork from the players than other participants in the game. In this post I pick on one aspect that could easily be missed since the lesson it teaches about teamwork is often blurred hence missed by many.
Any football fan following the latest games in Europe will at this point in time (time of posting) recall last night's leg of the European Champions League quarter final at Anfield in Liverpool, England. Liverpool FC were 4-2 victors over Arsenal FC (as judged by the arbiter). The Arsenal FC's manager, 'Professor' Arsene Wenger, attributed his team's exit form the competition to two poor decisions by the referees (arbiters) - one in each of the two legs. The result for the two legs is 5-3 in favour of Liverpool. That reminded me of the authority and sometimes flaws in arbitration with their associated consequences.
What has this got to do with teamwork? I believe that it is known to most (if not all) adults that in all teams there can be and actually there are conflicts. They should be expected and should not be feared. Patrick Lencioni in his book ("The five dysfunctions of a team") lists the fear of conflict as one of the dysfunctions of a team. A good team leader or team member must always expect conflicts to arise and most importantly know how to deal with them.
In my little knowledge of conflict resolution, I know that it could be a one stage process (with a good outcome) or a multistage process (that could sometimes have no good outcome for at least one of the parties).
Negotiation between the affected parties is recommended as the first step in conflict resolution. It is the one with the most promising long lasting outcome. Once this fails then third parties emerge hence reducing the chances and quality of acceptable outcomes.
The logical step following a failure in negotiation is seeking mediation. In this case the two affected parties will themselves decide and agree on an outcome without any influencing decisions from the mediator. The role of the mediator is to provide the environment for and moderation of the negotiation process. The affected parties make the decision. Should this fail, then the next logical step is arbitration.
In arbitration, the affected parties surrender their authority to arrive at a compromise decision to the arbiter. The two must now take whatever decision comes out of the arbitration process. In this case one party will always cry while the other rejoices - both cannot rejoice (at least not openly) as it may happen in the previous two steps.
That is not all. The fourth option is attempting none of the above thus outright disagreement between the affected parties. In this case, these parties can no longer work together as a team! I also believe that after arbitration, the chances of the affected parties working together (again) as a team is significantly reduced. How would you therefore choose to resolve conflict between team members? I am personally inclined to avoid the last two options - arbitration and outright disagreement.
So, what has this got to do with the soccer match referred to above?
The outcome of the alleged poor decisions by two different arbiters officiating in two different matches involving the same teams and played in two different locations in England within a space of one week strengthens my belief that arbitration may not necessarily please both parties. One referee denied Arsenal FC a seemingly genuine penalty in the first leg and one week later, in the second leg, another awarded a seemingly unconvincing penalty against Arsenal FC. Liverpool FC went away the rejoicing party while Arsenal FC cried on both occasions of arbitration supremacy.
Thanks to soccer for bringing out these lessons.
There are several issues related to teamwork that one can pick up from a soccer game - whether as a player or simply as a spectator. Obviously there is more to learn about teamwork from the players than other participants in the game. In this post I pick on one aspect that could easily be missed since the lesson it teaches about teamwork is often blurred hence missed by many.
Any football fan following the latest games in Europe will at this point in time (time of posting) recall last night's leg of the European Champions League quarter final at Anfield in Liverpool, England. Liverpool FC were 4-2 victors over Arsenal FC (as judged by the arbiter). The Arsenal FC's manager, 'Professor' Arsene Wenger, attributed his team's exit form the competition to two poor decisions by the referees (arbiters) - one in each of the two legs. The result for the two legs is 5-3 in favour of Liverpool. That reminded me of the authority and sometimes flaws in arbitration with their associated consequences.
What has this got to do with teamwork? I believe that it is known to most (if not all) adults that in all teams there can be and actually there are conflicts. They should be expected and should not be feared. Patrick Lencioni in his book ("The five dysfunctions of a team") lists the fear of conflict as one of the dysfunctions of a team. A good team leader or team member must always expect conflicts to arise and most importantly know how to deal with them.
In my little knowledge of conflict resolution, I know that it could be a one stage process (with a good outcome) or a multistage process (that could sometimes have no good outcome for at least one of the parties).
Negotiation between the affected parties is recommended as the first step in conflict resolution. It is the one with the most promising long lasting outcome. Once this fails then third parties emerge hence reducing the chances and quality of acceptable outcomes.
The logical step following a failure in negotiation is seeking mediation. In this case the two affected parties will themselves decide and agree on an outcome without any influencing decisions from the mediator. The role of the mediator is to provide the environment for and moderation of the negotiation process. The affected parties make the decision. Should this fail, then the next logical step is arbitration.
In arbitration, the affected parties surrender their authority to arrive at a compromise decision to the arbiter. The two must now take whatever decision comes out of the arbitration process. In this case one party will always cry while the other rejoices - both cannot rejoice (at least not openly) as it may happen in the previous two steps.
That is not all. The fourth option is attempting none of the above thus outright disagreement between the affected parties. In this case, these parties can no longer work together as a team! I also believe that after arbitration, the chances of the affected parties working together (again) as a team is significantly reduced. How would you therefore choose to resolve conflict between team members? I am personally inclined to avoid the last two options - arbitration and outright disagreement.
So, what has this got to do with the soccer match referred to above?
The outcome of the alleged poor decisions by two different arbiters officiating in two different matches involving the same teams and played in two different locations in England within a space of one week strengthens my belief that arbitration may not necessarily please both parties. One referee denied Arsenal FC a seemingly genuine penalty in the first leg and one week later, in the second leg, another awarded a seemingly unconvincing penalty against Arsenal FC. Liverpool FC went away the rejoicing party while Arsenal FC cried on both occasions of arbitration supremacy.
Thanks to soccer for bringing out these lessons.
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Do you love your country - how do you show it?
Some of you have traveled widely and have met quite a number of good people in the countries you have been to. Do you bother to find out from them or do they tell you why they are nice to you? The reason you got was probably different from what I got recently.
For the few times I have traveled, I have met a few people I have perceived as nice to me but did not ask them why they behaved so until recently. I met this genuinely nice African (in a multi-ethnic country) who gave me something to think about. This person was very kind. One can see this obvious fact a few minutes soon after interacting with this person so the personality factor was a given. I told them they were a rare kind of person in dealing with foreigners - a special kind heart. This person told me that they had the name of their country to protect. They did this sacrificially (or is it patriotically).
How many of us behave naturally well towards foreigners as an obligation to contribute ('2 cents') towards our country's good name / reputation.
Do you love your country? How do you show it to foreigners?
This reminds me of my country's motto, "For God and my country". Ugandans ought to, therefore, do all things for the glory of God and their country. What a tall order! I think Ugandans have always been nice to foreigners as a personal conviction largely based on cultural and religious obligation rather than patriotism. We ought to think again and add a third factor - our country.
Uganda Oyee!
For the few times I have traveled, I have met a few people I have perceived as nice to me but did not ask them why they behaved so until recently. I met this genuinely nice African (in a multi-ethnic country) who gave me something to think about. This person was very kind. One can see this obvious fact a few minutes soon after interacting with this person so the personality factor was a given. I told them they were a rare kind of person in dealing with foreigners - a special kind heart. This person told me that they had the name of their country to protect. They did this sacrificially (or is it patriotically).
How many of us behave naturally well towards foreigners as an obligation to contribute ('2 cents') towards our country's good name / reputation.
Do you love your country? How do you show it to foreigners?
This reminds me of my country's motto, "For God and my country". Ugandans ought to, therefore, do all things for the glory of God and their country. What a tall order! I think Ugandans have always been nice to foreigners as a personal conviction largely based on cultural and religious obligation rather than patriotism. We ought to think again and add a third factor - our country.
Uganda Oyee!
Saturday, February 2, 2008
Degree from the Market place and not the University
On Saturday 2 February 2008 I was one of those who attended a seminar organised by Akamai Uganda on goal setting. There are several things I learned from that seminar that I could (should?) share on this blog. One that I must write about immediately is the concept of a "degree awarded by the market place".
This phrase was used by one of Uganda's Dollar multimillionaire. The short and long of it is that he runs several businesses including hotel, property (real estate), telecommunication services, energy, etc. He told the meeting that for each of the businesses he gets into, he makes sure he learns a lot about it through reading books related to that business and also the experience he gains in the process of running the business. For each of his several successful businesses, he has so much knowledge that he equates it to a degree in the respective fields. He therefore, because of the success bestowed upon him by the market place, considers that the market place has found him worthy of degree awards - he passed all the tests and examinations with distinction. He believes that he has up to 9 degrees now based on how much he knows about specific businesses.
Some questions:
1-How many degrees do you have? Who awarded them to you? How much do they help you to make money and how much money?
2-How can universities tap the wealth of experience and knowledge from practicing businessmen and integrate them in their teaching curricula?
3-I believe that if one sat at the feet of this businessman (with degrees from the market place), they would get sufficient knowledge to start them off in their journey to creating wealth. How many people would become wealthy if they sat at your feet to learn from the knowledge you have gained from your degree(s)?
The advise about reading is that each of us should put aside some time everyday to read about the businesses we are engaged in. That way, we could learn and excel in our businesses and possibly get degree awards from the market place. By the way, this is not a paper award we are used to but I think it is wealth created through the success of that business.
This phrase was used by one of Uganda's Dollar multimillionaire. The short and long of it is that he runs several businesses including hotel, property (real estate), telecommunication services, energy, etc. He told the meeting that for each of the businesses he gets into, he makes sure he learns a lot about it through reading books related to that business and also the experience he gains in the process of running the business. For each of his several successful businesses, he has so much knowledge that he equates it to a degree in the respective fields. He therefore, because of the success bestowed upon him by the market place, considers that the market place has found him worthy of degree awards - he passed all the tests and examinations with distinction. He believes that he has up to 9 degrees now based on how much he knows about specific businesses.
Some questions:
1-How many degrees do you have? Who awarded them to you? How much do they help you to make money and how much money?
2-How can universities tap the wealth of experience and knowledge from practicing businessmen and integrate them in their teaching curricula?
3-I believe that if one sat at the feet of this businessman (with degrees from the market place), they would get sufficient knowledge to start them off in their journey to creating wealth. How many people would become wealthy if they sat at your feet to learn from the knowledge you have gained from your degree(s)?
The advise about reading is that each of us should put aside some time everyday to read about the businesses we are engaged in. That way, we could learn and excel in our businesses and possibly get degree awards from the market place. By the way, this is not a paper award we are used to but I think it is wealth created through the success of that business.
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Ugandan Public Universities search for Professor instead of CEO
If press reports are anything to go by then Kyambogo University will wait for a little longer before they get a Vice-Chancellor (VC) and a Deputy Vice-Chancellor (DVC). The press alleges that there has been a low response to the adverts. I know there could be several reasons for the low response but I also think that the criteria for choosing leaders in government universities have some weaknesses. The one I am interested in commenting about at this moment is the minimum requirements for one to qualify to express interest in being a VC or DVC vis-a-vis the functions of those offices.
I believe that the functions of a VC in a university are those of a CEO and therefore the search committees should be honest and openly embark on a search for a CEO. The basic requirements should be improved upon to reflect this. Currently, the first and foremost requirement is for one to be a University Professor of a certain advanced age. To me, besides being an inappropriate criterion, it unnecessarily narrows down the sample space - we have few Professors in that narrow age bracket. Besides, among the few Professors we have in this category, there are probably very few interested in such positions. This makes the sample space even much smaller! Furthermore, although the small sample space greatly reduces the competition among the applicants, it also has the undesirable effect of reducing the probability of landing on the much needed candidate with CEO capabilities. With all due respect, not just any Professor (in that age bracket) with ambitions can necessarily competently do a VC (CEO) job in this highly competitive and rapidly evolving information age / era.
Besides, the nature of students (and some employers) and their corresponding needs and 'language' have long changed from the 'old' pre-digital accent hence calling for extreme flexibility and quick adaptability of strategies.
I strongly believe that the public universities ought to rethink and start looking for CEOs instead of looking for professors - I do not care whether the CEO is a professor or not. I believe that there is nobody who can guarantee that just by being a Professor of a certain age, one already qualifies to get onto the shortlist for a university CEO (VC). Far from it as we know that to attain professorial title one must excel in research and training in his / her discipline. Very few humble ones pick a few corporate leadership skills along the way.
A university leader need not necessarily be (technically) smarter than the people they lead but should be smart enough to get all those very smart people under his/her leadership to work together as a productive team which is responsive to the clients' needs (students, the parents, the employers, etc) and market trends (local, regional and global).
I personally would settle with a competent CEO who is not necessarily a Professor. The public university search committees ought to reconsider their criteria and focus on organisational leadership abilities rather than prestigious titles earned from showcasing portfolios of largely non-managerial achievements in specialised disciplines. I am aware this piece will make me very unpopular in university corridors and I will probably be called names but that is my opinion - I am entitled to it. I apologize though for hurting some feelings, if any.
I believe that the functions of a VC in a university are those of a CEO and therefore the search committees should be honest and openly embark on a search for a CEO. The basic requirements should be improved upon to reflect this. Currently, the first and foremost requirement is for one to be a University Professor of a certain advanced age. To me, besides being an inappropriate criterion, it unnecessarily narrows down the sample space - we have few Professors in that narrow age bracket. Besides, among the few Professors we have in this category, there are probably very few interested in such positions. This makes the sample space even much smaller! Furthermore, although the small sample space greatly reduces the competition among the applicants, it also has the undesirable effect of reducing the probability of landing on the much needed candidate with CEO capabilities. With all due respect, not just any Professor (in that age bracket) with ambitions can necessarily competently do a VC (CEO) job in this highly competitive and rapidly evolving information age / era.
Besides, the nature of students (and some employers) and their corresponding needs and 'language' have long changed from the 'old' pre-digital accent hence calling for extreme flexibility and quick adaptability of strategies.
I strongly believe that the public universities ought to rethink and start looking for CEOs instead of looking for professors - I do not care whether the CEO is a professor or not. I believe that there is nobody who can guarantee that just by being a Professor of a certain age, one already qualifies to get onto the shortlist for a university CEO (VC). Far from it as we know that to attain professorial title one must excel in research and training in his / her discipline. Very few humble ones pick a few corporate leadership skills along the way.
A university leader need not necessarily be (technically) smarter than the people they lead but should be smart enough to get all those very smart people under his/her leadership to work together as a productive team which is responsive to the clients' needs (students, the parents, the employers, etc) and market trends (local, regional and global).
I personally would settle with a competent CEO who is not necessarily a Professor. The public university search committees ought to reconsider their criteria and focus on organisational leadership abilities rather than prestigious titles earned from showcasing portfolios of largely non-managerial achievements in specialised disciplines. I am aware this piece will make me very unpopular in university corridors and I will probably be called names but that is my opinion - I am entitled to it. I apologize though for hurting some feelings, if any.
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Appreciative Inquiry (AI)
Uganda hosted the Commonwealth Heads of State and Governments Meeting (CHOGM) in November 2007. By Ugandan standards I think it was well organised. It of course swallowed some significant amounts of money from the government coffers. Based on what I gather from the press and some two personal testimonies, while some individuals smiled all the way to the bank, others came out of it very hurt. Some business deals worked, others unfortunately did not for various reasons.
I did not gain financially (at least not directly). Maybe I was not prepared well enough to grab the opportunity. Well, all was not lost. I participated in the 'free' People's Space - an open forum to every Tom, Dick and Harriet. That should tell you that I did not have a special invite for any of the several parallel sessions that run in the air conditioned facilities in town. I grabbed the opportunity presented to me by British Council to participate in one of its sessions where I was introduced to the concept of Appreciative Inquiry.
While the name was new to me, some of the ideas and principles shared were not new so there was something to learn after all. Of what value is knowledge gained if it is not put to practice and shared? Well, if I fail to put it to practice (which I doubt), I will not fail to share it. This is the reason for this post.
Watch this space for the developing story.
I did not gain financially (at least not directly). Maybe I was not prepared well enough to grab the opportunity. Well, all was not lost. I participated in the 'free' People's Space - an open forum to every Tom, Dick and Harriet. That should tell you that I did not have a special invite for any of the several parallel sessions that run in the air conditioned facilities in town. I grabbed the opportunity presented to me by British Council to participate in one of its sessions where I was introduced to the concept of Appreciative Inquiry.
While the name was new to me, some of the ideas and principles shared were not new so there was something to learn after all. Of what value is knowledge gained if it is not put to practice and shared? Well, if I fail to put it to practice (which I doubt), I will not fail to share it. This is the reason for this post.
Watch this space for the developing story.
Thursday, January 10, 2008
Etiquette for Online Outreach
Each one of you reading this blog and many others do online networking. It is important that we do it right in order to obtain optimal results. Liz Ryan provides some etiquette (netiquette) for online networking.
She states that, "Online networking is all the rage, as Internet tools make it easy for us to reach out to almost anyone who has a presence online. Lofty executives, potential clients, and future employers are within easy reach to anyone with a browser and an email account. But it won't do to rush off and start blasting off email messages to strangers -- that's a recipe for being ignored or added to an email blacklist."
Ms Ryan then goes ahead to provide five tips to get you going towards dramatically improving results of your online networking approach in her article, "The savvy networker".
She states that, "Online networking is all the rage, as Internet tools make it easy for us to reach out to almost anyone who has a presence online. Lofty executives, potential clients, and future employers are within easy reach to anyone with a browser and an email account. But it won't do to rush off and start blasting off email messages to strangers -- that's a recipe for being ignored or added to an email blacklist."
Ms Ryan then goes ahead to provide five tips to get you going towards dramatically improving results of your online networking approach in her article, "The savvy networker".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)