Rapid changes and profound disruptions are creating a shift in human consciousness. People are more deeply conscious now than ever before. People are leaning towards more collaborative, participative, transparent, creative, and innovative interactions and relationships with others – interactions and relationships that are meant to bring out the best in individuals and organizations, and transform communities for the better. This is what the Art of Hosting is all about.
The Art of Hosting is an approach to leadership that scales up from the personal to the systemic using personal practice, dialogue, facilitation and the co-creation of innovation to address complex challenges. The global community known as “Art of Hosting” gave its name to the facilitation technic it origin from. Today there is numerus of independent institutes practicing the Art of Hosting within and outside the global community.
Building Sustainable and Resilient Communities
Today’s communities face unprecedented challenges that affect the well-being of their constituents and the community as a whole. What the Art of Hosting does is it guides participants in building unique relationships with their community. It is through collective learning that a community or an organization finds solutions the fastest way. Through the Art of Hosting, it’s possible for people to learn together and build partnerships that help them work better. The Art of Hosting allows individuals to connect with other heads of resilience and sustainability movements, deepen such connection, and come up with plans and practices to achieve a sustainable and resilient community.
When the world’s best entrepreneurs come together and realize a shared vision that will change the world for the better, we have what we call collaborative entrepreneurship. It’s an improved version of social entrepreneurship in which instead of helping entrepreneurs individually, entrepreneurs from different places are gathered to support and engage with other entrepreneurs. The Art of Hosting encourages entrepreneurs to engage in deep and meaningful conversations with other entrepreneurs, and work together towards a common goal.
Pre-sensing, participation, contribution, and co-creation are the four-fold practices that make the Art of Hosting unique and engaging. It begins with bringing our undistracted and prepared self to any situation or event that we’re in. We need to “host” ourselves first we’re able to “host” others. We need to be open to ourselves first before we welcome the thoughts, feelings, and ideas of others around us. Being present also means being aware of our environment and the people around us. The next thing we need to do is to participate and practice conversation. And the only way to effectively do this is to speak our truth in a genuine way and listen deeply and with an open heart to the people around us. The third practice is about hosting conversations. As the host, we take responsibility for building and maintaining a realm in which people can collectively work at their best. We should be willing to start conversations that matter and ensure that we get meaningful and useful answers, learning, and insights from such conversation. Finally, we have co-creation. Here, we’re not mere audiences but key persons who positively contribute to the group. It’s more than just doing things together. It’s about sharing our knowledge and experiences with other people.
People are at their best when they engage in meaningful conversations and create deep connections with people around them. The Art of Hosting is a gateway for individuals to respond to challenges and problems in innovative, creative, unique, and effective ways. After the workshop, people get better at decision-making, their relationships towards other people improve, there is more room for innovation, and people respond better and faster to challenges and opportunities. The fact that the Art of Hosting is considered as the best dialogue tool to encourage people towards social and economic cooperation simply means that it is geared towards creating a more sustainable future for communities, businesses, and organizations. The Art of Hosting is a giant leap from existing traditional leadership practices that are more often than not considered outdated and ineffective.
For nearly a century creativity has been understood as a key ingredient of business creation across thousands of design who took shape as product, service, solution and social planning. Participative innovation comes with a new set of values to reinforce the creative potential of organisation. Participative innovation is ether understood as an internal phenomenon of organisation or a manifestation which is happening outside the boundary of the corporate structure. Initially we would have a look to both the aspects. In house participative innovation refers to the fact that workers and managers associate to create new business models and solutions for the consumers. We call participative innovation the point that the workers who are involved in the creative process are not supposed to be in charge of innovation contribution. Participative innovation implies that an organisation would have adopted a politic of democratization of the creative process across its managerial layers to leverage new business opportunities. For the past 3 decades, participative innovation has grown significantly. The company Google who institutionalized this value, made it mandatory to workers to involve themselves in prospective projects a certain amount of time from their schedule. It is believed that number of Google innovation came from this initiative. Giving workers some freedom to problem solving in the ever fragmented industry leads companies to new areas of business development. Today, there is a common acceptance that participative innovation is promising. More recently participative innovation has got a new sense by including public and user participation. Participative innovation advocates the importance of including the user on the conceptualisation of product, service and policy. This second aspect of participative innovation interest us more particularly has it may lead to social entrepreneurship.
To demonstrate the potential of participative innovation I shall dress a parallel with design thinking that is most of the time a non-inclusive discipline. Bruce Nussebaum has demonstrated that failure in design thinking is due to monopolistic approach by most companies and political groups towards the society with regards to value creation. Rather than wanting to “change the world” through design thinking and business it should be like society leaders support people in making the world as they want using participative innovation. In short, it is questioned that shifting the power of design thinking from the designer’s hand to the common man’s hand could lead to a more effective way of producing innovation. In this research I try to demonstrate that social changes lead people to be increasingly reactive to systems and solutions presented to them. We witness a re-appropriation of the industry, the politic and the social.
At the lecture of sociological concepts of identity, and essays from notorious designers, philosopher and business mam we assume that our economy could be at the beginning of a new economic order that would give power to consumer as a democratic necessity to balance the corporate lobby. This approach sometimes referred as ‘prosumerism’ would radically transform the purpose of design in the corporate environment. It is therefore believed that corporate would be re-elected to the role of social enabler rather that been the creative think- tank of the consumerist society has it has been the case since the Second World War. However, participative innovation leads to large questioning in time of economic recession and environmental instability. Participation is negatively associated to “working for free” with concerns in terms of intellectual properties. Today’s businesses are facing the issue of associating with the consumer through participative innovation while maintaining a climate of fair exchange.
By stimulating participative innovation business and society put themselves at risk that a large part of the creative potential slip from their hands and get developed by third party individuals and organization. However participative innovation requires the nest of a cybernetic environment for business development what make it mandatory for businesses to concede part of its intellectual production. As Prahalad and Krishnan mention in the New Age of Innovation; “"No firm is big enough in scope and size to satisfy the experiences of one single consumer" and that is the whole challenge of a participative innovation approach. User requirement get so fragmented that no business can have the capacity of responding to all the facet of the consumer experience. This statement also implies that ultimately, firms would depend on individual and/or start-up to generate the value necessary to respond to the needs of unique consumers.
Prof Chris Goto demystified mindfulness as a kind of consciousness discipline that exists in the intersection of myriad forms of knowledge and inquiry rooted in the creativity and openness of contemporary science.In this blog we too take same path to decode mindfulness but in more fun way.
Mindfulness is a requirement for well being.It is understood differently by different people and so have different reasons for motivation to perceive it and preconceptions to reject it. As a gospel truth mindfulness can be achieved in various means and preconceptions are just myth.
Researchers are grouped reasons for motivations of mindfulness interventions into following :
Motivation: Scientist is contemporary image of mindfulness as a scientific technique or technology that is deployed in secular context and often for therapeutic purposes.
Interpretation: The scientist represents the modern tendency to be operational and instrumental mindfulness, either as a neurophysiological phenomenon or as a psychotherapeutic protocol. The scientist is fundamentally interested in experimentation that produces an objective evidence base for claims about the efficaciousness of mindfulness in various ways. For the scientist, the meaning of mindfulness emerges from this evidentiary base; there is no originary or 'real' meaning other than what is revealed through experiment and observation.
Problem of denial: Has no link to the base of spirituality
Problem of Origin: Cultural skepticism, as it is not originated or researched from popular places it is not authentic or unscientific
Problem of rationality: Scientific errors as its related to humans, fabrications in research.
Motivation:- The Monk expresses our ideal of enlightenment and our emancipation from the confines of every day knowledge and wisdom. T
Interpretation: Monk represents a more spiritual and reverential approach to mindfulness, seeing it as a means of self-cultivation, self-transformation, and practice. The monk is fundamentally interested in the way that the practice of mindfulness seems to transform the practitioner, enabling them to reside in more compassionate space, opening doors to deeper levels of self-reflection and ethical development. At the same time, the monk sees mindfulness as a way to address the general and universal problem of suffering in the world. Genuine or real mindfulness is described in ancient texts, and we come to understand the true meaning of those texts only through our subjective practice in the present.
Problem of Orientalism: - It is Asian in origin how can it fits western cultures.
Problem of Trappings: We should sit in way and dress in a way, we may recite to do mantras, it does not go with my beleifs etc
Problem of Secularism: It is associated with religion ideologies etc
Motivation: This warrior represents the human aspiration where his/her psychic integrity is tested and cultivated in extreme face of danger, violence, and death. In the end, its abandonment of their sense of self and their actions must be in the service of a greater good.
Interpretation:- The warrior represents a vision of mindfulness as a technique to cultivate discipline, awareness, and skill. The warrior is fundamentally interested in the way that the continued practice of mindfulness meditation seems to enhance concentration and focus, and leads to greater mental tranquility, thus enhancing his/her ability to perform intricate skills with calm discipline. At the same time, the ninja represents the hope that advanced cultivation will lead to the development of superhuman skills and abilities. For the warrior, the seeds of genuine or real mindfulness is found in ancient texts, but understanding these seeds requires that a student practice for themselves under the guidance of an accomplished teacher.
Problem of discipline: Practice for long periods and to carry it on to perfection even if its hurting.
Problem of Fighting :-It involves the cultivation of esoteric powers.
Problem of fear: It is concerned with the death of the self.
Motivation:- The Zombie is about learning to dissemble and eradicate our ego, our personality and ultimately our sense of self itself. It involves abandoning rationality and instrumental reason and critical judgment.
Interpretation:- The zombie represents the fear that mindfulness is really a way to tranquilize people into docility and acceptance. That is, the zombie unifies mindfulness with mindlessness. Unlike the monk and the ninja, who see mindfulness as a way to enhance positive aspects of life and reduce suffering, the zombie embodies the idea that mindfulness actually prevents people from taking control of their lives and acting positively in the world. Instead of acting, the zombie just accepts things as they are. Instead of doing something, the zombie just is. The mindfulness zombie is the nightmare of a 'zero-level' of human existence. We merely respond instinctively to whatever happens around us. Reducing ourselves to a kind of zero level of consciousness as the treatment or eradication of stress.
Problem of the self: - It is considering as retardation or death
Problem of irrationality: - stepping outside goal-oriented and discrepancy-based thinking collapse of thinking
Problem of humanity: - On being without stress means that we're no longer fully human.
Motivation:- A counter-cultural radical embodying political protest against the rampant materialism and ambition of capitalist society through practices of self-transformation.
Interpretation:-She represent having dropped out of human society by giving up one instrumental reason and conventional conceptions of self-hood. So the hippie is a model of coping with modernity and of failing to cope with it all at once. The hippie is both the dream for some and the nightmare for others. When it comes to mindfulness then, the model of the hippie expresses all kinds of often conflicting preconceptions about the psychological and social significance of the practices involved.
Problem of conflicts: Conflicting about the psychological and social significance of the practices involved.
It’s been said over and over many times – happy employees create a highly productive company culture. But as straightforward as it may seem, why do a lot of organizations still get trapped in the same pitfalls that have been around for ages?
Employee engagement is one of the most difficult conundrums facing businesses that want to grow. In a time of economic downturn, businesses are pressured to increase productivity to avoid further costs, interruptions, or losses, leaving out employee satisfaction in the process. It’s highly tempting for employers to just focus on extreme productivity and disregard the fact that employees also need to be happy in their roles.
When it comes to real-life business practice, a lot of companies still end up applying traditional relationship of authority which leaves employees disengaged and dissatisfied with their work. In fact, Gallup’s most recent data shows that only 13% of employees worldwide are engaged at work. Creating a climate of trust between an employee and an employer is hard. And the so-called “engagement programs” that are meant to keep employees committed and productive are doing more harm than good. They often tend to be greedy strategies to get more work done with fewer resources.
France and its Happy Workforce
We all know that France has a reputation of having lazy employees. However, contrary to popular belief, its workforce is not as unproductive as they seem. And this is because of one simple yet powerful mindset they possess – embracing the concept of happiness at work. They started by figuring out what their workforce really needed, from mandating shorter working hours to creating labor policies that value their personal and social lives. Most French retails groups have now taken the politic of happiness at work tempting the public sector to do the same.
What is Happiness at Work?
A great number of large, medium, and small private and public institutions are starting to embrace the concept of happiness. But what exactly does happiness at work mean? Happiness at work may mean differently to different people. It could be a job where people can fulfill their personal interests – a job that allows them to get closer to what they really like and love. It could also mean that an employee’s strengths and efforts are widely recognized. Or it could mean providing employees regular feedbacks and thanking them for their genuine care and attention towards the business. Happiness at work could also mean ending a hierarchical employment system and putting the focus on collaborations and partnership opportunities instead. Oftentimes, it’s not so much of the salary, though it can also factor in on the happiness level of employees. More often than not, the factors are interrelated. Bottom line is, happiness at work is achieved when we feel good about ourselves in the work we do, it’s when we are able to give valuable contributions and get appreciated in return. It’s the feeling of belongingness, of enjoying our social relationships.
Like an Old Family Business
Is the concept of happiness at work new? No, it’s not. It’s just an old family business culture applied to corporations. Think about it. In the traditional family business, all participants get the work done regardless of hierarchy, department, and silos. Everyone helps each other to make the whole thing work. That’s the kind of mentality corporations are looking for while engaging into the concept of happiness at work. It sounds simple but it’s hard to execute when people have been used to hierarchical procedures. Fortunately, workplace happiness and satisfaction collectives and workshops abound. Today’s organizations are lucky to have resources at their fingertips. SYPartners, Ahead and KYU to name a few helps organizations and individuals transform themselves and their respective organizations using business leadership strategies that encourage collaborations. These agencies focus on changing traditional work cultures and promoting effective partnerships through different networks. Aside from discovering new things about yourself and others, you’re given a chance to widen your connections that could prove to be beneficial in the near future.
There’s No Turning Back
Like any other ideas, embracing the concept of happiness also has a risky side. Once you’ve fully embraced this concept, you cannot come back to old practices anymore. Once you have given your employees the freedom to manage their time and responsibilities according to what they believe is the best for the business, you won’t be able to take back the freedom you’ve given them.
Freedom can come with a price that’s why as a leader or an employer, you have to make sure you still maintain a certain degree of authority and professionalism. In the end, it’s all about the equilibrium of every aspect of human life and work life.
There is no place for individualists in this day and age of collaborative economy. Today’s business culture is moving from an “I” to a “We” perspective which speaks so much of the desire to include everyone in the process of a creative economy. It’s a concept that links social responsibility, corporate performance, and business excellence altogether. It’s an idea that values teamwork over self-interest as the driver of business models and economic systems.
We vs. I
Just how powerful is our choice of words in the way we deal with others and build personal and business relationships? Well, it’s powerful enough to make or break our success. Our choice of words is powerful enough to change views, opinions, actions, and situations. Take the power of “we” for example. Choosing “we” over “I” can prove to be one of the most crucial factors in creating a positive, creative, and productive workforce. In fact, there’s even a study suggesting that people who use pronouns such as “I,” “my,” and “me” tend to have an inward focus of their thoughts, feelings, and behavior. Meanwhile, those who used “we,” “us,” and “you” showed an outward focus and considered the feelings, thoughts, and behaviors of others. Furthermore, the study revealed that people with lower status were more inclined to use the pronoun “I” compared to individuals with higher status who tended to use the pronoun “we”. The “I” perspective not only promotes selfishness, but it also lowers the morale of individuals, and disregards the efforts of others. The “we” perspective, on the other hand, creates a harmonious relationship among individuals and avoids unhealthy competitions brought about by self-centeredness. Admit it or not, partnerships, trust, and collaborations are as crucial or even more crucial factors than salaries and perks in any organizational setup. A lot of individuals, no matter how high-paying their jobs are, quit when work becomes too individualistic and competitions abound. This also speaks true for some people who, despite having a lower-paying job than their high-paying counterparts, remain committed to their work because they are engaged and their efforts are being acknowledged. Now, what does this study say about leadership? Or what does this even have to do with leadership?
Leader vs. Boss
Would you rather be a leader of a boss? If you think you’re the type of person who tends to use or apply the “I,” “me,” or “my” concept a lot, then you’re likely to be identified as a boss. On the other hand, if you’re the type of person who always considers others in your decisions or actions, then you’re likely to be called a leader. A leader empowers and serves others while a boss wants power and demands to be followed. A boss instructs while a leader mentors others hands-on. A leader inspires while a boss uses fear or authority for people to comply. Why do these things matter? Truth is, the more that we engage others in our endeavors, the more that we become effective and productive. By being a leader and bringing out the best in others instead of focusing only on your own goals and growth, everyone is given the opportunity to rise, grow, succeed, and discover their potentials that would not have been possible if teamwork did not exist.
Raising a “We” Culture
Just imagine how fulfilling it is to be able to contribute to your organization, more so on a greater scale. So, how do we create a “we” culture? As the leader, how do you shift from an “I” to a “we” perspective if you’re the “I-centric” type? As a team member, how do you embrace collaboration if ever you’re not used to it?
Today, more and more individuals and teams are shifting their work paradigms from an individual-focused culture to a team-oriented one. The Power of We Consortium (PWC), for instance, is providing the residents of Michigan’s Ingham County a model for organizing and leveraging resources using the power of communication, collaboration, and accountability. The PWC believes in the interrelatedness of issues facing communities and thus, collaboration and engaging all community resources are the only means of solving the challenges effectively. Isn’t it amazing how the power of “we” can create a self-sustainable community? But what’s more remarkable is the fact that we’re able to discover a lot of hidden skills and talents, and maximize the resources we have.
Alternative business schools are also changing the academic landscape by molding learners to be more socially, economically, and environmentally responsible individuals. Take Knowmads for example. More than teaching about the technical aspects of businesses and economies, they encourage individuals to think beyond themselves. They ask questions that make students think deeply and conscientiously. Questions that let these learners create projects or models that impact positive changes to societies. Again, we can see how the “we” perspective, the others-centered mindset can make a huge difference in the world.
In gist, what these two organizations are telling us is that we can cultivate a “we” culture by learning about others – what their strengths and weaknesses are, what they are passionate about, what they can contribute to the group – and integrating the things we’ve learned from others with the things we know about ourselves. Cultivating a “we” culture starts when we stop thinking about ourselves.
Companies and organizations need to give back more than what they take from the environment and the society. For a company to be net positive, it needs to outweigh all the negative impacts on society and the environment with positive impacts. Net positive is a way of transforming businesses by having them innovate their products and services in a way that helps consumers have more sustainable lifestyles and restores the environment.
Why the Need to be Net Positive?
Nothing in this world is permanent. We live in a time of profound disruptions, rapid changes and unprecedented social, economic, and environmental challenges. These factors have made significant impacts on our lifestyle and the way we view our environment. When a business or an organization fails to positively respond to these changes, adapt and adopt appropriate measures, it usually leads to failure and eventually, closure of business. This is why becoming net positive is important. Net positive aims to encourage organizations and businesses to leave a positive impact to the environment – you put more resources into the environment than you get. Is it achievable? Yes, it is.
The 12 Principles
Through the 12 principles of a positive net approach, organizations and businesses understand net positive better which in turn help them adopt this new approach more efficiently. Here are the 12 principles of a net positive approach:
Net Positive Leaders
A lot of companies are already geared towards a net positive plan. Companies like IKEA, Coca-Cola, Capgemini and Kingfisher are among the key organizations making a positive impact to the society and the environment. These companies go beyond doing less to zero harm to the environment. What they do is they set clear guidelines and common set of principles to increase their sustainable practices while innovation. The net positive principle is a great way to avoid companies from greenwashing since in going net positive, you don’t just simply label your products or services as eco-friendly. In net positive practice, you show proof that you are indeed returning more than what you get from the environment. Coca-Cola, for example, returns and restores the water it uses in its products. They’ve set a concrete goal with a definite timeline in replenishing all the water they use in making beverages.
This goes beyond just merely restoring the water they use. Coca-Cola incorporates social responsibility through launching community water projects all around the world. These projects range from protecting watersheds to improving access to potable water. Meanwhile, IKEA’s net positive strategy focuses on generating renewable energy. Energy-saving initiatives such as installation of wind turbines and solar panels on their stores and distribution hubs have helped IKEA reduce their energy use globally. Their strategy is also encouraging consumers to change their mindset regarding energy consumption.
Gearing towards a net positive impact will not only drive a restorative economy. More importantly, it will create societal and environmental values that drive sustainability and help build community resilience.
Patrick Roupin is an expert in innovation, design, strategy & entrepreneurship.
Ashrefunisa Shaik is an expert in organizational transformation & sustainability.