Saturday, November 22, 2014

Why great ideas are opposed? How do we learn? And why the Cloud will change every aspect of how we live bringing about more computing intelligence than ever perceived

In ~2005, I was doing a bit of research on algorithms with an ambition to build a mobile personal assistant. I theorized that a virtual assistant coupled with the power of web search using schematized data can help reduce complexities we face as humans as a bi-product of the ever increasing information availability. A set of specialized inter-communicating software agents mimicking human-experts in diverse fields could collaborate to share information in their subsequent areas of knowledge would potentially bring about group intelligence (this paper from Princeton explains a few of the concepts). The cloud as we know it today was not quite there yet.

I was focused on borrowing concepts from biological systems. It couldn't be more obvious to me at the time that in computing and software design, we base much of our approaches on already existing natural systems and algorithms. Even today (only a decade later), we continue to observe more and more traditional aspects of our lives move into virtual ones – consider Aviation or Facebook as an elaborate broader examples.

One of the most interesting concepts I stumbled upon at the time was that of schema (plural schemata or schemas). Schemata help us store information in categories and define the relationships between things. It’s a framework that represents the world around us allowing for easier absorption of new knowledge. Schemata are the reason why we learn slowly in the beginning and yet get incrementally better at doing things after repeating them because we reinforce elements in our schema. It is also why, we start to teach our children with the basics first and then later we add more abstract concepts. However, it is also the reason why we’re very stubborn and once we manage to find some beliefs to cling on to, they are very difficult to modify.

A schema is a living entity that gets modified with each new piece of knowledge acquired. It constitutes our cognitive learning abilities. Schematic learning uses previously learned ideas, concepts to understand and simplify new learning. Schemata have a huge influence in determining how new information is processed and how long it is retained. These Schemata guide encoding, organization, and retrieval of information (Ormrod, 2004). They are a closely connected set of ideas that are related to a specific events or objects. They are developed through a person’s experience with objects, people, and events in the world. In addition they are emphasized or de-emphasized through a system of feedback based on experience. People store experiences and associate them with words - A word alone is less meaningful unless it is contextualized with some background information or an event.

As humans, we’re seeking to formulate an understanding of the world around us and build a structure which allows us to feel a certain level of comfort and security – we want to feel that we know something. We also despise changing this complex mental model and the more elaborate the model is, the harder it is to modify or break down. Consider why cultures norms are so ingrained into our thoughts and habits. We learn by taking in new information, but we first check against our schema (i.e. experiences) to understand where this new knowledge might fit. It helps us make sense of the world around us. Most situations do not require complex thought when using schema. It’s a simple input-output scenario; we simply do a fast computation and retrieve from existing structures (the sub-conscience) whether the information already exists or if there is something similar to it. In the cases when the information is new, we try to classify it somehow into existing structures. We run into trouble a bit when the new knowledge contradicts our internal structures/beliefs. It confuses us as we get faced with the fact that it doesn't fit anywhere and may require us having to re-structure. This is time consuming, requires energy and requires lowering our self-esteem in order to accept it. Thus, new and contradictory concepts are hard to accept. Consider why new paradigms and ideas are initially ridiculed if not violently opposed at first. “The earth is not flat!!!?” – The list is infinite.

New knowledge and information are in endless conflict with the concept of security and self-esteem – it’s an incessant battle. The more complex and sturdy our schema is, the harder it is to change it because it threatens out self-worth, confidence and our very sense of security. It defeats the Maslow hierarchy of needs.

Consider children with virtually no schemata in place and their ability to absorb new knowledge. Although, there are many other variables allowing children to be like sponges, schemata coupled with their yet-to-be-developed self-esteem and sense of security makes them ripe for super-human learning capability.

In psychology, general intelligence is classified into fluid intelligence which is the biologically crystallized intelligence which is the ability to accumulate knowledge through life experiences and utilize previously acquired knowledge. Not much can be done about the first type, but the latter is where we excel and this is where software has not yet ventured.
predetermined reasoning capacity and

Civilization started with classifying and organizing information. This produced refined knowledge and wisdom. The internet broke the barrier of location and time and allowed for the genesis of new types of information. Search engines facilitated the information retrieval and transformed our lives. Our software began to exhibit small pockets of intelligence mimicking human-like cognition. In the 1980’s a chess powered computer game was a marvel to observe. The
evolution of this intelligence began to increase with software complexity. However, there was a limit – one related to storage.

Historically, software had plenty of pre-programmed reasoning ability built-in, but made fewer strides on learning to extend its crystallized intelligence – This was primarily a centralization and permanency challenge. In other words, the potential for stored schemata were simply not possible since crystallized intelligence could not be permanent to build one.

When you consider stand-alone personal computing devices, you can imagine that it is hard to acquire this type of crystallized intelligence when software is fragmented across devices. With the cloud center stage, we have reached a very interesting milestone in technology where once decentralized systems can now accumulate intelligence in a centralized manner. Ironically, the cloud solves a dual challenge. The first is the retention one allowing the preservation in the form of an individual crystallized intelligence. The second is the possibility of mimicking the behavior and intelligence of communities. The result is likely to be unlike anything we’re ever known simply because the internet collapse all borders and allows for this massive global humankind-schema to be born.


So what do you think is possible?

Sunday, November 9, 2014

Leadership and innovation at the country level

I have been in Estonia for a couple of years now on a full time basis. Although I visited Estonia regularly for the past 15 years, the experience of living here, gave me a deeper and far more interesting view of the dynamics that have taken place in this country pertaining to technology.

At first sight, one can easily miss the technological revolution that took place in Estonia in the Post-Soviet era if one just focuses on the pronounced rural life that dominates most of the land. But one cannot really miss it once you interact with the system. Some claim that Estonia now has more start-up per capita than the Valley.

9% percent of global Billion dollar exits have come from Nordic countries since 2005. The theory is that the smallness of Estonia coupled with the small population in addition to security risks posed by their prominent neighbors, pushed the country to excel and take leadership in certain areas. And in the absence of an infrastructure in the Post-Soviet era, that land was just ripe for that thing to be technology!

Some of the e-experiences ranging from e-voting, paying for parking with a phone (since probably the last century), the amazing digital banking, the school system, the 4.5 minutes tax filing, public transportation, and every service you can imagine are simply something Estonians are proud of and rightfully they should be.

Estonians brought forth lots of start-up success stories in the past including the ubiquitous Skype of course as well as an interesting pipeline in the making securing the country the title "tech powerhouse". Lots of investments in Apps, Mobile, Banking and many new comers like Taxify, Transfer Wise, GrabCat (a recent exit by SSYS  3D printing company), Mobile billing, Teleport, BuildIt and lots more. Very impressive! Estonia definitely took the plunge with the national identity gone global. The e-Estonia initiative has been gaining some momentum with global aspirations.

Interestingly, the start-up friendly government is helping push the envelope via enabling investments, facilitating the inflow of talent and programs with a focus on a mobile digital society. Additionally, there are close ties with Silicon Valley and other large metropolitan cities around the globe to encourage investments and deployments. I understood the president is personally interested and taking an active seat driving some of these programs.

Another aspect that is interesting for start-ups is that the local market is tiny which means that new companies must have broader global views and ambitions if they want to do well.

I get a kick every time I visit the main site for citizen services (see below). There are two options (Citizens and Entrepreneurs). I think that says it all.


By any means, it's not perfect - there is some bureaucracy as well just like every other place, but just in smaller doses. I know I am probably less exposed to this by virtue of being a foreigner. In most of my interactions, where bureaucracy is about to show it's ugly face, I seem to have the advantage of speaking in English and the primary concern of the person I am speaking with is to understand and make the conversations short so they place less of an effort on fencing. I suspect others may have a different view or experience.

The bottom line, is that Estonia is in the vanguard of of all digital societies on earth and is headed in a unique direction. With continued government support and the e-residency program, you can bet that the number of start-ups with global penetration will double or triple within the next five years. 

Sunday, February 21, 2010

Ethical Leadership

Leadership Ethics

o    Very little research has been published on the theoretical foundations of leadership ethics.

o    There has been many studies on leadership, but little has been related to leadership.

o    One of the first leadership ethics writings appeared in 1996 by W.K. Kellogg

 

Ethics defined

o    Development of ethics theory dates back to Plato and Aristotle.

o    It is concerned with the kinds of values and morals an individual or society finds desirable.

o    These are rules and principles that provide the basis for understanding what it means to be a morally decent human being.

o    The choices that leaders make and how they respond to a given circumstance are informed and directed by their ethics.

 

Ethical theories

Ethical leadership theories fall into two categories

o    Leader's conduct (Their actions)

                                    i.            Consequences (Theological theories) - Focus on what is right and what is wrong.

1.       Ethical Egoism - An individual should act to create the greatest good for themselves. A leaders should take a career that they would selfishly enjoy (Avolio & Locke, 2002). This is closely related to transactional leadership theories. For example, a middle-level manager who wants their team to be the best in the company is acting out of ethical egoism.

2.       Utilitarianism - We should act to create he greatest good for the greatest number. Maximize the social benefits while minimizing the social costs (Shumann, 2001). Example: when the US government allocates a large portion of the federal budget to the health care instead of catastrophic illness, it is acting out of the utilitarian ethics.

3.       Altruism -  This is the opposite of Ethical Egoism and is concerned with showing the best interest for others even when it runs contrary to self-interest. Authentic transformational leadership is based on altruistic behavior (Bass, Steidlmeier, 1999).

                                  ii.            Duty (Deontological Theories)

§  This is telling the truth, keeping promises, being fair, independent of the consequences.

§  Actions should not infringe on others' rights and should not further the moral rights of others.

               Leader's character (Who they are)

                     Virtue-based theories -

1.       These are not innate, but can be acquired.

2.       They are rooted in heart of the individual and in their disposition.

3.       It focuses on telling people  "what to be" as opposed of "what to do"

4.       Examples include courage, temperance, generosity, self-control, honesty, sociability, modesty, fairness, and justice.

5.       This theory is about being  and becoming a worthy human being.

 

Centrality of ethics to leadership

o    The influence dimension of a leader requires that they have an impact on the lives of those they lead. To make a change in other people carries with it an enormous amount of ethical burden and responsibility.

o    Leaders have an ethical responsibility to treat followers with dignity, respect, as a human being with unique identities.

o    The "respect for people" demands that a leader be sensitive to follower's own interests, needs, and conscientious concerns.

o    Leaders play an important role in establishing the ethical climate of the their organizations.

 

Heifetz's Perspective on Ethical leadership

o    A psychiatrist who observed world leaders.

o    His approach emphasizes how leaders help followers confront conflict and effect changes from conflict. It is about helping followers deal with conflicting values that emerge in rapidly changing work environments and social cultures.

o    His approach deals with values.

o    Leaders must utilize authority to immobilize people to face tough issues.

o    The leader provides the holding environment in which there is trust, nurturance, and empathy.

o    The leader's duty is to assist followers in struggling with change and personal growth.

 

Burns's Perspective on Ethical leadership

o    Transformational leadership places a strong emphasis on followers' needs, values, and  morals.

o    It involves attempts by leaders to move followers to higher standards of responsibility.

o    It is the responsibility of the leader to help followers assess their own values and needs in order to raise them to a higher level of functioning, to a level that will stress values such a liberty, justice, and equality.

 

Greenleaf's Perspective on Ethical leadership

o    He developed a paradoxical approach to leadership called "Servant leadership" in 1970s

o    It gained increased popularity in recent years.

o    It has a strong altruistic ethical overtone and emphasizes that leaders should be attentive to concerns or their followers.

o    He argued that leadership was bestowed on a person who is by nature a servant. The way an individual becomes a leader is by first being a servant.

o    A servant leader focuses on the needs of the followers and helps them become more knowledgeable, more free, more autonomous and more like servants themselves.

o    Servant leader has a social responsibility to be concerned with the have-nots and to recognize them as equal stakeholders in the organization.

o    Greenleaf places a great deal of emphasis on listening, empathy, and unconditional acceptance of others.

o    Many of these ethical theories emphasis that the relationship between leader-follower is an "ethical" one and it s related to the "caring principle"(Gilligan, 1982).

 

Principles of ethical leadership

Northouse has listed five principles of ethical leadership. Actually the origins of these

can  be  traced  back  to Aristotle.    These  principles  provide  a  foundation  for  the  development  of

sound ethical leadership. According to these principles ethical leaders respect others, serve others,

are just,  are honest and  build community. To be  an  ethical  leader, we must  be  sensitive  to  the

needs of others, treat others in ways that are just and care for others.

 

 

1.       Ethical leaders respect others

o    Immanuel Kant argues that it is our duty to treat others with respect. One should treat others as ends in itself and never as means to an end.

o    Beauchamp and Bowie (1988) pointed out that "Persons must be treated as having their autonomously established goals and must never be treated purely as the means to another person's goals."

o    Leaders who respect also allow others to be themselves.  They approach others with a sense of unconditional worth and value individual differences (Kitchener, 1984)

o    Respect means giving credence to others' ideas and confirming them as human beings.

o    A leader should nurture followers in becoming aware of their own needs, values, and purposes.

o    Respect means that a leader listens closely to their subordinates, is empathetic, and tolerant to opposing views.

o    When a leader exhibits respect, subordinates feel competent about their work.

2.       Ethical leaders serve others

o    This is based on the concern for others (Ethical egoism)

o    This is an example of altruism.

o    An example of this is observed in mentoring, empowerment, behaviors, and team building.

o    Very similar concept to the "Beneficence" that is taught to health professionals.

o    Senge contended that one of the important tasks of leaders in learning organizations is to be a steward (servant) of the vision within the organization and highlights the importance of not being self-centered, but integrating one's self or vision with the vision of the organization.

3.       Ethical leaders are Just

o    Justice demands that leaders place the issue of just at the center of their decision making.

o    No one should be treated differently unless their particular situation demands it and if that is the case, then the rules for differential treatment should be made clear.

o    Good coaches are those who never have favorites and those who make a point of playing everyone in the team.

o    The golden rule (Rawls, 1971) is to "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

o    The principles of distributive justice includes:

                                    i.            To each person, and equal share.

                                  ii.            According to individual needs

                                 iii.            According to that person's rights

                                iv.            According to individual efforts

                                  v.            According to societal contribution

                                vi.            According to merit.

4.       Ethical leaders are honest

o    Being honest is not just about telling the truth. It has to do with being open with others, representing reality as fully and a completely as possible.

o    There are times of course where telling the complete truth can be destructive and counter productive. The challenge is to strike a balance.

o    It is important for leaders to be authentic, but sensitive to the attitudes And feelings of others.

o    Dala Costa (1998) made a point in the Ethical Imperative book. "Do not promise what you can't deliver, do not misrepresent, do not hide behind spin-doctored evasions, do not suppress obligations, do not evade accountability, do not accept  the 'survival of the fittest' pressures"

5.       Ethical leaders build community

o    Leadership is often defined as the "process of influencing others to reach a common or communal goal." This definition has a clear ethical dimension.  The common goal implies that leaders and followers agree on the directions of the group.

o    Authentic transformation means that a leader cannot impose their will on other. They need to search for goals that are compatible with everyone.

o    Ethical leadership demands attention to civic virtue (Rost, 1991). This means that both leaders and followers need to attend to community goals and not just their mutually determined goals.

 

Maybe the most important thing is to realize that leadership involves values; one cannot be a leader

without being aware of and concerned about one’s own values.   We can say also that  rather than

telling people what to do, we should tell them what to be and help them to become more virtuous.

When practiced over time good values become habitual and a part of the persons themselves.

 

Strengths

o    It provides some direction in how to think about ethical leadership and how to practice it.

o    It reminds us that leadership is a moral process. Other than the transformational theory of Burns, no other theory considered or highlighted ethics.

o    It describes some basic principles that we can use in developing real-world ethical leadership. These ethics have bee present for over 2000 years.

 

Weaknesses 

o     It is still in an early stage of development. It lacks a strong body of traditional research.

o    This area of research relies on the writing of a few individuals, whose work has been primarily descriptive and anecdotal.

 

Leadership instrument

Craig and Gustafson (1998) developed the Perceived Leader Integrity Scale (PLIS).  It is based on the Utilitarian ethical theory. It evaluates leaders' ethics by measuring the degree to which subordinates see them as acting in ways that produce the greatest good for the greatest number of people.

Leave a comment