Great Talk About Education, Creativity, and Individual Differences

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/66

Sir Ken Robinson

My notes from the talk:

Education is meant to prepare us for a future that is uncertain.
Creativity is now as important in education as is literacy.
Child says, “I’m drawing a picture of G-d.” Teacher said, “But nobody knows what G-d looks like.” Child says, “Well, they will in a minute.”
Three kids playing the wise men in a school play. The first one says, “I bring you gold.” Second, “I bring you myrrh.” The third says, “Frank sent this.”
Kids will take a chance. They are not frightened of being wrong. If you are not prepared to be wrong, you will not come up with anything original. We run our companies – and national education systems – to penalize mistakes. We are educating people out of their creative capacities.
We don’t grow into creativity. We grow out of it. Or, we are educated out of it.
Shakespeare was once seven. He was in somebody’s English class. How frustrating would that have been!
Every education system in the world has the same hierarchy of subjects. Math and science, then humanities, then the arts. There isn’t an education system in the world that teaches dance with the regularity with which we teach math. As children get older, we begin to concentrate on the areas from the waist up. And then we concentrate on one side of the brain. In fact, if you really look at our educational system, the whole thing is structured to produce university professors.
For university professors, their head is just a transport mechanism to get their heads to meetings.
Our education system is predicated on the needs of academics. The academics have designed the system in their image. It is causing academic inflation.
Intelligence is diverse. We think about the world in all the ways we experience it.
Intelligence is dynamic. The brain is not divided into compartments. Creativity is the process of having original ideas that have value. It typically comes from interdisciplinary interactions and ways of seeing things. Corpus callosum, which joins the two halves of the brain, is thicker in women. This makes them better at multitasking.
Intelligence is distinct. The lady who did Cats was taken to a doctor when she was eight because she had so much trouble concentrating in school. The doctor listened, and then said “Mrs. Lynn. Jillian isn’t sick… she’s a dancer.” So she took dance lessons, and found her gifts. How much better than putting her onto Ridlin.
We have to rethink the principles on which we are educating our children.
If insects disappear, life on Earth would end. If people disappeared, all other forms of life would flourish. (J. Saulk)

Architectural Bias

I have been musing for a week, or so, about a problem that I am dubbing "architectural bias." The basic issue is this: Information systems are frequently used to provided information to people to support (or 'scaffold') their decision-making. But since the outcome of any rational decision depends on the information available, it is plausible that differences in the choice of information to present, or the means of presentation, would influence the decision that is made.

How information is represented to a person by a computer is often the result of earlier choices made by the architect(s) of the system. Therefore, my question is "to what degree do choices made by the architect of a system impact the quality of decisions made by users of that system?"

If you make the leap to considering the differences in how people interpret various media, this rapidly becomes a UDL issue.

How so? Let's take a hypothetical business decision, and match it to a corresponding portfolio of information. Let's say that it is a decision about purchasing a product... a book, for example. You need a book about UDL. Okay, what information systems do you have available to support your decision making, what information do they provide you, and what media do they use to convey that information? Let's say you are going to use Amazon.com as a decision support system. Amazon will provide you with details about the book, a list of vendors which offer the book, prices for the book and for shipping, pictures of the book. But if all of the vendors offer the book for the same price, how do you decide? What role does the order in which they are presented to you play? Is this order a function of the system architecture? Certainly. What if there are vendors which differentiate their listings with flowery words, or with appealing graphics. What if one of the vendors has a video clip of an attractive person telling you how much cooler you would be if you bought the book from them?

Arguably, this particular example may sound a bit more like a Madison Avenue marketing analysis than a UDL situation, but I think the core issue is an important one. In all sorts of systems we influence user behavior through the choice of information that we provide them, and the media which we use to convey it. However, I've never heard or read anyone discussing the role that this architectural bias actually plays in user choice.

Not directly UDL Related, but cool...

PBS is premiering a 10-part series this Sunday called "Carrier." It's a documentary about Navy aircraft carriers and their crews.

http://www.pbs.org/weta/carrier/

From the preview, it looks like they did a pretty good job of capturing the almost surreal experience of being onboard. Not an easy feat. Brings back a lot a of memories. Makes me very glad that I served, and that I chose to come back to dry land after my third cruise.

Homework 4 - Graphics

I'm not sure why Blogspot has put this huge gap at the front of the entry, and I haven't figured out how to get rid of it... but the post is below the white space.

The objective of our fourth lab is to use pictures as a communication tool. I chose to employ graphics to try to describe a framework that I've been developing to analyze information work. I'm leaning in the direction of calling it something business-ish like "the intelligence value chain" or the "information value chain," but these carry some connotations that I haven't fully considered. So, for now, I'm calling it the "Information Value Spectrum." I believe that the key to developing a useful process is to have computers and people interacting at the "Effective Collaboration Interface." In other words, computers should be used to convert data into information, and then communicate that to people. People should then incorporate this into their knowledge and apply wisdom in handling complex problems. Here's my attempt to explain this with graphics:
	The font was chosen to convey a techno affect. Even though it is a bit less readable, I think it provides a better feel.
	The overview provides a strategic framework. In particular, it specified that there are four components to watch for in the first part.
	I've struggled with using pictures to represent the concept of data. But by using the clouds, I attempt to imply that data is a bit ethereal. In particular, the space between the clouds shows these pieces of data to be isolated from one another.
	The richness that is created by connected data to create information is shown by expanding the picture, and converting the name and phone number into a caption.
	This picture is intended to convey the affect of making a decision and taking action. I think it's pretty obvious that she's calling someone. The caption enhances this by stating who she is calling.
	This picture was chosen to convey people who understand the importance or the impact of something they have learned. So the story is that their ability to see the value of Pat and Jill's new idea is an example of wisdom. Computers do not react to things the way the people in this picture do.
	Now I go back and use graphics to restate that progression, adding that it's really moving from a sort of simple intelligence to a complex intelligence.
	The picture stays here as a reference point as I begin to explain how to use it.
	Rather than just labeling the axis "computers" I include an icon as a graphical queue.
	The curve shows how computers are excellent for for processing simple data, but become progressively less good as you move toward wisdom.
	I leave the graphic in place while continuing with the explanation.
	Again, an icon for people rather than just a label on the axis. Also, the computer icon is dimmed to draw focus to the relevant topic: people.
	Now the curve for people is added, overlaying the curve for computers. The graphic makes the point that people and computers are perfect opposites in this model.
	For a totally new concept, I didn't know how to start of with a picture. Perhaps I could have started with the picture from the last slide, put an arrow at the intersection, and then asked a question like, "so what happens here?"
	Back to the graphic, with both icons at full brightness to convey that they are both in focus now.
	And now the icons are dimmed, so that focus is drawn to the arrow in the middle.
	Summary is just in text because the graphics wouldn't fit well here. In order to summarize the whole lesson with pictures, I'd probably just need to review the whole sequence of slides quickly.

Web 2.0 Video

During the presentation I attended at lunch today, the presenter shared this video with us. It's a thought-stimulating short movie describing the evolving relationship between people and information technology.

The Web is Us

We used to talk about technology as a tool. It is becoming more acceptable for people to talk about human-technology collaboration. I'm still of a mind that the next step is more accurately described by the word "convergence."

Stolen from Karen's Blog

Good article from Cringely...

http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2008/pulpit_20080321_004574.html

Convergence as a Life and Death Issue

I read an article this morning that highlights a problem with the interface between people and technology. The title of the article is Misdirected Email Doomed Convoy.

How many times have you received an email that was actually intended for someone else? I have actually built a collection of these stories that I use in class to scare my students into paying closer attention to detail before hitting "send."

This article says that an email sent to a wrong address kept a convoy from receiving updated instructions. 10 people died (another is missing in action, but presumed dead) and 17 were wounded.

How difficult is it for a person with average text abilities to mistype a word, or an email address? Of course, we all do it all the time. In fact, even professional writers still rely on professional editors to proofread their work. Isn't it then reasonable to assume that there is a high likelihood of errors in any typed text? Is it also reasonable to assume that there would be a higher likelihood of errors among a population with text disabilities?

Email, ladies and gentlemen, is not a UDLified communication tool. In fact, it isn't even a very sophisticated tool for people with high text abilities. It's popular because it's a cheap way to communicate. (Reference Tom Malone's The Future of Work).

My point is that it is important for us to step back and look strategically at our world. Businesses, educational institutions, and military organizations are all complex systems. Systems are composed of people, processes, and technology which are coordinated to achieve a desired result. We need to understand where to use each of those elements within the system, and how they interact. Allowed to evolve without regulation, systems take on unstable forms and eventually collapse.

In the case of these soldiers, the breakdown occurred at the interface between the sender and his/her keyboard. The situation could have been prevented by a more robust interface at the sender's side. Something that provided a scaffold to help the sender ensure that he was typing in the address correctly, and that the address was for the correct recipient. Maybe this is a visual aid, an auditory signal, or just a check routine that runs behind the scenes in the computer.

Beginning the Ending

I've gotten rolling with my final project. I think. What I intended to do is to create a multimedia module which shows what the Information Value Chain is, and applies it to (at least) one realistic scenario. I've presented this framework before in slides where I could talk people through it, but I've never attempted to make it a self-standing module.

What I've found is that it really feels more like I am writing a movie (or video game) than developing a learning module. Except that at every step along the way I have to catch myself and ask, "is that content relevant or irrelevant? Is it socially or culturally biased? How would that be interpreted by someone with low hearing, low vision, low strategic function, etc."

I am firmly committed to making this real and relevant. It is an important and serious topic, and the audience is professional adults. So I cannot dumb it down or make it childish. Not that it can't include humor... but it needs to be appropriate. I normally plan to spend eight hours of development for every one hour of deliverable content. But it looks like navigating the path of developing media with universality in mind is going to quadruple that development time. At least for my first one.

On the upside, with practice this will just become my new process. It will get easier and faster for me as I experiment and incorporate it into my style. And then, I can see how the stuff I produce is going to be better the whole way around.

Education as Punishment

Wow! I got an email from a professor at GSE with a link to this presentation:
http://www.weisserman.com/assets/2008/2/12/cyberactivism.pdf

The slides at the very beginning struck a chord for me. Here is the fascinating series of definitions they give (emphasis added).

1. A voluntary attempt to overcome unnecessary obstacles, in which the outcome is uncertain at the outset, is a game. (Note that this definition includes art as a kind of a game.)

2. A voluntary attempt to overcome unnecessary obstacles, for which an algorithm maximizing the likelihood of a positive outcome exists (regardless of whether its existence is known), is a puzzle.

3. A voluntary attempt to overcome necessary obstacles is either activism or entrepreneurship. Either attempt represents what we will call “projects with a purpose.”

4. An involuntary attempt to overcome necessary obstacles is a duty or an obligation.

5. An involuntary attempt to overcome unnecessary obstacles is a punishment.

Isn't participation in classroom instruction an involuntary activity for young learners, as discussed at length in class? In my domain of interest, the adult workforce, training and education are often equally involuntary; they are either employer-mandated or required to maintain professional competence. So in many contexts within our society, learning is basically a form of punishment.

I'd argue that every media has some "friction" for all learners. But different media create more friction for different learners at various times. Overcoming this friction - these obstacles - is the key to learning.

In UDL-speak, I think I'd call an unnecessary obstacle a "construct irrelevant characteristic of the media for which a learner has low ability." So UDLifying content works to eliminate unnecessary obstacles, thereby transforming a punishment into an obligation. An improvement, for sure, but still not good.

In order to make the next step, and move from involuntary activities to voluntary ones, we need to look at learner motivation and find ways to make learning enjoyable. That opens the door for learning to be viewed as purposeful, and perhaps even fun!

Subliminal Advertising

One of the researchers in my department showed this video during a presentation today. As Ruth pointed out to me, it unfortunately does not have subtitles. It does, however, provide a fascinating illustration of the relationship between perceiving our environment and "creative decision making."

Subliminal Advertising Video

BookBuilder Project

I've got my UDL BookBuilder project up on the CAST site now. It was harder than I expected - meaning it required more creativity than I anticipated - but I really enjoyed the process.

A lawyer buddy of mine is working on a new book called The Search and Seizure Handbook. I thought that would be a cool one to use for this project. Then I went to the screening for DGW and was thinking a lot about civil rights and spectrums of physical ability. That got me even more excited about tackling this particular book, and focusing on ways of communicating the information in engaging ways.

The Search and Seizure Handbook

I used all three avatars, each targeting a different cognitive process: strategic, affective, and recognition. I tried to use language that fit the character's purpose, without "dumbing it down" and making it seem condescending. I'd appreciate feedback on whether other people feel that I have achieved this balance, or have suggestions for improvement.

I also included an audio track of me reading the first page - which is really the introduction to the book.

It would be worthwhile, I think, to go back now and look at content relevant and irrelevant properties of the media. For example, an obvious next step improvement would be a Spanish translation. It is hard for me to imagine how to convey this information with pictures. But I can envision using movies to tell stories which illustrate the principles.

This leads to what could be an interesting area of civil rights law: How do we teach people in this country about their rights, and do the approaches that we are currently using include construct irrelevant barriers to learning which make it difficult or impossible for people to actually understand both their rights and their responsibilities? Is the UDLification of our social science curricula actually a required step toward building an educated and informed population?

Subtitles in Windows MovieMaker

Thanks to Jake Ludington for this answer to my question:

Windows Movie Maker Subtitles
Windows Movie Maker includes subtitles as an option in the built in title tool. The disadvantage is the software only allows you to add on title per clip, so a dialogue intense movie needs to be broken into many small clips in order to get subtitles matched up with every verbal exchange. The other disadvantage is very little control over where the subtitles appear on screen. The only option is at the bottom of the screen with either one or two lines of text.

To create a subtitle in Windows Movie Maker, select the movie clip on the timeline by clicking on it and choose Tools > Titles and Credits from the menu. Choose the option to Add title on the selected clip in the timeline.

Thinking about the final project.

As I understand our final project assignment for this class, we basically need to apply the principles of UDL to some sort of instructional module. It seems like the constraints are intentionally vague in order to encourage creativity.

There are three topics that I am considering for the project:
* Real options
* System dynamics
* Information value chain

The first two are fields that I am studying in my courses at MIT. Trying to explain them to other people - with the added challenge of incorporating universal design - would be a good way to reinforce my own learning. Real options could actually by used to place an economic value on UDL versus non-UDL design, so that's kind of a cool hook. But system dynamics lends itself better to graphical explanations, so it might be a bit easier for me, and more effective for the audience.

The third is a framework that I've talked about in earlier posts. It is really an original piece of intellectual work, and because it is mine I know that if I don't do something with it, no one else will. I have been working for a few years to refine it, and find ways of explaining it that are interesting and relevant for other people.

After watching Logan's movie, I've begun to think about how I would describe the framework - and why it is important - through film. So right now I've got some gray matter cranking away on what that movie would look like, and whether it fits with the criteria for our final project.

DGW - Know About It

Wow! Ruth and I went to the Harvard screening of Darius Goes West last night. An incredible story, and a great reminder of why it is so important for us to design our world to be universally accessible. Way to go, Logan!

Whether we are constructing an office building, a tourist attraction, or an educational lesson, we need to understand the whole range of abilities that our audience is likely to have. True universality in anything is unreachable, but by combining sensitivity to the issues with creativity in developing solutions, we can bring the state of the art to a much higher level of accessibility.

Lip Reading and Avatars...

I am working on my BookBuilder assignment. While writing scripts for my little avatar, I was suddenly pulled back into our continuing classroom discussion about supposed "aides" which actually distract learners.

For example, sign or voice interpreters who inject their own emotion into words rather than translating them mechanically.

The avatars in the book builder move their lips when they read the text. But it does not look to me like their mouths simulate the positions required to make the sounds. In other words, the lips move more or less at random, rather than trying to mimic the movements of a person who was actually making those particular sounds.

For people who are good at lip reading, wouldn't this random "noise" drive them nuts?

Would it be better to have the option to turn off the mouth movements, and just sort of have the characters think out loud?

Information Value Chain

This is an attempt at introducing a framework that I have developed called "The Information Value Chain." The framework is intended to break information work into chunks based on the complexity or meaning of the work content. That makes it easier to divvy the work up appropriately between people and computers, so that they can collaborate rather than competing.

I am not thrilled with the content structure or with Humane Design of this presentation, but I think that it demonstrates the technical skills that are required to satisfy the class assignment.

From a UDL perspective:

• Since the content is provided in a written media, the presentation is structured so that I say what I am going to say (strategic framework), then say it, then repeat the structure. The capacity to read English is required for the lesson, but this requirement is construct irrelevant. So that makes it pretty sucky from a UDL analysis.
  
• The audio is simply a music track. It would be better if I had a script, and read it while the slides were playing (auditory presentation of the information to reinforce the written text). But I don't have the equipment to do that well, right now.
• It would also be better to have a picture/video of me, an actor, or an avatar speaking at least part of the content. That would help to create engagement and an affective connection. It would also help to set a pace for the learning, and provide emphasis on important points.
• Technically, because it is a video the learner can stop, rewind, etc. to adjust the pace. Practically speaking, I think that timing of the slides - or having a way to speed them up or slow them down - could make a big difference in improving the universality of the presentation.
• In reviewing the finished video, there is an ironic problem. The building of the IVT model - which is really the guts of the lesson - is so small that it is hard to read the words. I'm thinking that I'd almost need to introduce each word very large, center screen, and then have it shrink into its proper place in the model.
• I made the slides in PowerPoint and then imported them into Windows MovieMaker. I have not played with MovieMaker enough to know whether you can include subtitles into a video that are usable by a text-to-speech device. Does anyone have experience with this?
  

I'm going to work on it some more in the future to make it a bit more usable and better able to stand on its own. This may actually be a good candidate for my final project.

Convergence vs. Competition

I am really intrigued by this issue of collaboration versus competition, particularly as it relates to people and information technology. I have challenged myself to look for examples in nature where two technologies competed, and the outcome was collaboration - aka "convergence" - rather than the extinction of the "loser."

Here are some of the examples that I think fit my definition, broadly:

• Hybrid electric cars (and, by extension, diesel electric locomotives)
• Screw-in flourescent light bulbs
• Steel reinforced concrete

I am trying to think of an equivalent example that is purely a convergence of information technologies. I'm not there, yet.

My goal is to shed light on a path by which I can better understand how people and technology can converge and complement one another. And the concepts of UDL play an important role in understanding how to design the media which will enable interactions between people and technology.

Video and Audio Assignment... Canine Ballet

A canine ballet in one act, subtitled "Merry-Go-Round."


(I think that piece of paper was a UDL article!)

Final Exam Question: Compare and Contrast the works of David Rose and Plato

In a case study class this morning my professor read from Plato's Republic. Listening to the Allegory of the Cave, I was struck by how "UDLish" Plato's perspective is...

Is a resident of the cave (a prisoner, as it were) likely to want to make the ascent to the outer world? Why or why not? What does the sun symbolize in the allegory? And now, I said, let me show in a figure how far our nature is enlightened or unenlightened:--Behold! human beings living in an underground den, which has a mouth open towards the light and reaching all along the den; here they have been from their childhood, and have their legs and necks chained so that they cannot move, and can only see before them, being prevented by the chains from turning round their heads. Above and behind them a fire is blazing at a distance, and between the fire and the prisoners there is a raised way; and you will see, if you look, a low wall built along the way, like the screen which marionette players have in front of them, over which they show the puppets.

I see.

And do you see, I said, men passing along the wall carrying all sorts of vessels, and statues and figures of animals made of wood and stone and various materials, which appear over the wall? Some of them are talking, others silent.

You have shown me a strange image, and they are strange prisoners.

Like ourselves, I replied; and they see only their own shadows, or the shadows of one another, which the fire throws on the opposite wall of the cave?

True, he said; how could they see anything but the shadows if they were never allowed to move their heads?

And of the objects which are being carried in like manner they would only see the shadows?

Yes, he said.

And if they were able to converse with one another, would they not suppose that they were naming what was actually before them?

Very true.

And suppose further that the prison had an echo which came from the other side, would they not be sure to fancy when one of the passers-by spoke that the voice which they heard came from the passing shadow?

No question, he replied.

To them, I said, the truth would be literally nothing but the shadows of the images.

That is certain.

Collaboration vs. Competition

To be, or not to be: that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them?
(William Shakespeare from Hamlet 3/1)

Executive Summary:
As mankind drives to develop more powerful technologies we increase our collective potential and productivity. But many times technology replaces people, and eliminates jobs. The people who do jobs that sit at the boundary of technological replacement have two choices: accept obsolescence, or acquire new skills which have not been mastered by technology.

Does understanding UDL provide insights into ways that society can help people evolve and adapt more quickly to technological change? How can we use our understanding of cognitive processes to ensure mankind is collaborating with technology, rather than competing with it? How much of the "complexity" of the modern world is really just a result of poorly designed interfaces between people and technology?

Detailed Discussion:
As we develop technologies to assist or replace people in the workforce, what are we doing to redefine the role of people in society? As we interact with them more and more, how do we describe the role of computers and technology in society? How do we make sure that people are still useful and relevant? What do we do with the ones who are not?

I do not see this as an obscure, "science-fictiony" philosophical quandary. I think it's a relevant and pressing issue for our society; our economic dominance has been driven by the ability to increase per capita productivity through the use of technology.

We are becoming much better at understanding the unique differences that define children, and how UDL can be used to adapt pedagogy to match a child's strengths and minimize the obstacles posed by their weaknesses. But what happens to those kids when they grow up? Do the limitations they have as a child disappear when they turn 18.

In order to maintain their relevance as technology advances, adults will need to continuously retrain themselves. In what ways can the lessons from UDL be projected beyond the K-12 environment and into the workplace to help our labor force benefit from increased productivity instead of allowing it to be replaced by technology?

MIT Project: Assist Sketch

YouTube - Cool Computer Program

This video shows an example of what I have begun to call the Convergence Challenge. As computers are able to perform more complex tasks, how do we develop ways to communicate - or interface - with them more effectively? What strengths and weaknesses do these interfaces have in relation to the systems by which individual people process information? How do you leverage the capabilities of people, processes, and technology to create sustainable systems which can efficiently create value?

UDL and the Convergence Challenge

Executive Summary:
Businesses are systems in which people, processes, and technology interact to create value. I am interested in the "Convergence Challenge" and how to reduce the friction between these three components as their capabilities become more interchangeable.

I see UDL playing a critical role in finding ways to make it easier for all kinds of people to send and receive information to other "actors" in a business, such as coworkers, customers, suppliers, and information systems. In that sense, UDL is a tool for designing and evaluating human interfaces. And it is a useful tool in tackling the Convergence Challenge.

Detailed Discussion:
I am interested in systems. I am also interested in business. So I have come to see every business as a system of people, processes, and technologies that work together to create value.

Many businesses run into problems because one of those three parts of the system is not doing its job very well. To get things back on track the business can call on different kinds of mechanics to fix each one.

If your people aren't able to do the job, then you call a people mechanic. That may mean sending your people off to class, bringing a trainer in, or providing some form of coaching or counseling.

If your processes aren't working, then you call a process mechanic. This may be an accountant, a strategy consultant, or - the extreme - a specialist to whom you can outsource the process.

And if the technology doesn't do what it should, you call a technology mechanic. These people usually have the word "engineer" in their job title.

That seems simple enough, right? And it seems obvious that you would not want to call a coach in to fix a technology problem. Or call an engineer to fix a people problem. That would be silly!

In my experience, this problem is reinforced by organizational structure. Large businesses have separate C-level executives with separate hierarchies responsible for each of the components of the system. Each is specialized in pushing the limits of its capabilities, and has incentives to do just that.

But the very specialization that we develop in order to create a competitive advantage in one part of the business can end up creating real problems for the organization. The VP of operations may not even notice there's a problem when she sends an engineer out to fix a client's machine, when the real problem is that the client is using the machine incorrectly. The VP may even ignore the problem because broken machines are good for the operations department; they drive service revenues. The VP of sales may dismiss the importance of online ordering because as a seasoned sales professional he knows that "selling is all about personal relationships." Personal sales are good for the VP of sales because they generate high margins and sales commissions, and online sales don't. And the VP of finance may not realize that the revenues generated from that client whose machine we keep fixing are about to be lost because the client can buy a new machine that is better suited to their application from an online store for less than our cost of goods. Typically the finance department lags the trends because it tries to predict the future by having an accurate understanding of the past.

So by not understanding the interplay between people, processes, and technology you can end up with a business structure that is not aligned with the real environment.

Now let's add a small complication. Let's say that there is a job that could be easily done by more than one part of the system. Who decides which part of the system - people, process, or technology - is best-suited to do that job? And how do they make that decision?

This is a challenge that I see businesses facing more often as a result of technological evolution and globalization. I call this phenomenon the "Convergence Challenge."

For example, let's assume that we have correctly diagnosed that an employee is not able to do their job very well. We could use a "people" solution, and hire a trainer, assign a coach, or send the employee to a class. We could use a "technology" solution, and provide them with computer based learning programs or a simulation tool. Or we could develop a "process" solution such as a checklist, a quality assurance process, or a new sequencing for the functions they perform. Any or all of these solution might help, but none of them are free. And each of them may be more or less effective depending on the particular characteristics of the person and the job they perform.

I see potential to use UDL as a management tool for analyzing communication, and separating content from media. This is an important step in deciding whether people, process, or technology can provide the best value in dealing with a particular business need.

While we tend to talk about managers being good in a particular domain, my thesis is that in order to really understand business in today's environment, and to make sound long-term decisions, you cannot afford to specialize in only one area. You actually need to have an above average understanding of people, process, and technology. You need to recognize the dynamic effects of technological evolution and globalization. And you need to be prepared to navigate the Convergence Challenge using tools like UDL.

First Entry

This is the first entry in my blog for T-560.