cafecuriosity

Origins

Brak is the largest tell in northern Mesopotamia, towering 40m above the plains, sprawled across an area of 800 x 600 meters. The tell was occupied from 6,000 BC until the early Iron Age. It was one the key Mesopotamian Gateway Cities, lying across the route from the Tigris Valley to the mines due north in Anatolia, while the Euphrates lay to the west and beyond it, the Mediterranean. While Brak Tell is interesting in its own right, it may just have overturned conventional thinking about what precursors were needed for the first civilisations and what forces were at work as cities emerged. Existing models hold that urbanisation was stimulated by the emergence of a single, powerful leader or dominant political elite.  However at Brak Tell, the city's growth seems to have resulted from the organic growth of a series of cluster settlements around the central mound. The development patter of these clusters suggests a level of autonomy from the central mound. Interestingly, the social mechanisms allowing strangers to live close proximity that we take for granted today hadn't evolved at Brak Tell. We always underestimate the impact small, routine behaviours have when scaled up across a culture. Archaeology has only just weaned itself off the pursuit of "big" finds, glamorous kings and sword wielding warriors. It seems, the growth of contemporary complex societies owes more that it imagines to the decision of small groups and doughty individuals to reside in a new pattern of domesticity than to our obsession with royalty. http://www.fas.harvard.edu/home/news_and_events/releases/urbanization_08302007.html    http://www.mcdonald.cam.ac.uk/projects/brak/history.htm   Image: 1. Tell Brak contour plan, 2. Shop ruins, 3. Cuneiform tablet, Tell Brak Project

Rediscovering Identity

What is it about identity that drives us? In philosophy, identity is generally considered to comprise persistence, change, time and sameness. Some philosophers thought identity was a representation of the self, founded on consciousness. In the ancient world, identity was critical in ensuring a successful afterlife. Even today, we invest enormous energy in expanding our understanding of the identity of long dead kings and queens. In July, the effervescent Dr. Zahi Hawass announced the positive identification of a previously anonymous 3,500 year old mummy as being that of Hatshepsut, one of Egypt's few female pharaohs. The project involved using complex and expensive computer tomography scanning and DNA testing. The scan revealed a single tooth in a canopic box carrying Hatshepsut's name. The tooth proved a perfect fit with the mummy's missing molar. On the other side of the world, archaeologists discovered a previously unknown 7th Century AD tomb in Copan, Honduras.  The body was seated upright, wore an elaborate jade necklace and pectoral and was surrounded by grave goods - pottery, shells, and intricately decorated jars. The tomb's design enabled easy entry and they suspect rituals were performed with the bones. Now certainly Hatshepsut had more mojo than more the more famous Cleopatra or Neferti. She stole the throne from her stepson, dressed as a man and declared herself pharaoh. The tomb of the anonymous official from Copan reflected cultural artifacts drawn from communities outside Copan itself. While his personal identify remains in doubt, his cultural identity represented by his grave goods challenges the established view that the Copan Valley complex had an exclusively Mayan identity.

PS. After her death, Hatshepsut's legacy was erased from history. Her image was disfigured, her monuments replaced and records from her reign destroyed - even her death remains a mystery. The ancient Egyptians it seems took identity very seriously!   http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2007/06/27/egyptqueen_arc.html?category=archaeology   http://www.colgate.edu/DesktopDefault1.aspx?tabid=730&pgID=6013&nwID=5017   Image: 1 & 2. Hatshepsut's mummy, Discovery Channel, 3. Allan Maca peers into a 7th Century tomb in Copan, Honduras, 4. Artifacts from the tomb, Raul Mejia

Dressing the Part

CafeCuriosity was seduced by the lush vibrancy of Mayan civilisation at an early age. Exploring Copan's (Nth Honduras) broad avenues with their intricately carved stele brought home the role theatre and costume play in defining not just leadership but a group's cultural identity. During my organisational peregrinations, I've witnessed many change interventions falter by not appreciating the power of symbolism in grounding group identity and reinforcing cultural unity. Many stele depict Copan's rulers in outrageous and elaborate headdresses set off with ostentatious decorations. Recent research suggests Copan's kings projected an evocative image of confidence and the power of their values by dancing in front of their massed subjects. Bit like an Australian AGM but with colour and movement! Intriguingly, this approach also implies Copan's kings were being constantly evaluated by their subjects - and commentators see Australians as hard-bitten! Mayan theatre now playing at: http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/CA/highlights.html

Image: Stela from Copan, Honduras,Takeshi Inomata

Green Means Rain

Feedback loops often fly under the radar in organisational life, yet they display strong parallels to common biological systems. Take the headline; "Satellites Reveal That Green Means Rain In Africa". The article discusses the influence green vegetation has on the amount of rain falling in the sub-Sahara Sahal region. Early rains stimulate growth, encouraging a feedback loop as the greener the vegetation, the more rain falls. In the Sahal, scientists are using vegetation based feedback loops to predict droughts, build better climate models and assist local agricultural managers with their crops. In an organisational context, green signals adaptiveness to change and stakeholder responsiveness. In a team environment, as knowledge, skills, experience and relationships blossom, it becomes progressively easier to foster further collaboration and interaction, creating an effective team. The critical component is usually early success. Positive experiences create a climate for engagement. For a peak at what £370 million buys in environmental research, visit: tp://www.nerc.ac.uk/press/releases/2006/africarains.asp

Photo: www. botanique.org

Curiosity # 6 Advanced Engineering With Dead Cows

War has been described as long periods of dreary routine relieved by moments of sheer terror. So it's hardly surprising that we don't associate combat officers with curiosity. Seemingly James Lockey (1920 - 2006) was an exception. As adjutant of the engineer parachute battalion of the 6th Airborne Division during World War II, Lockey parachuted in shortly after midnight on D-Day June 6 1944. With his commanding officer missing on the ground, Lockey, aged 23, took command of the battalion. When suddenly required to provide an urgent crossing over the River Orne in Normandy, Lockey seized on the idea of using the swollen carcasses of a herd of cows killed in an earlier action as floats for an impromptu bridge. That earned him a place in the official history of the Royal Engineers.  He was later mentioned in dispatches for his efforts. And he put the dead cows to good use. Lockey used to say that his men followed him not so much for his leadership skills but out of a sense of curiosity - apparently they believed there was always something interesting just around the corner!

How many of our contemporary leaders can say that?

Applying A 'Managed Retreat' Framework To Leadership

In my experience, one of the few benefits of regular air travel is the time it gives me to indulge my love affair with New Scientist magazine. From the 1 July New Scientist comes an quirky environmental story illustrating the effects of tidal surges on the rich grazing lands flanking the the Thames River during the last great climate change (a mini ice age) that unfolded during the 14th Century. The surrounding land was fertile and landowners had invested heavily in embankments, walls and ditches to mediate the effects of flooding generated by severe storms. By the end of the 14th C however, many landowners gave up the battle, accepting the long term inundation of their land - a strategy termed a managed retreat. Technically, a managed retreat is a coastal erosion term describing how an area previously above sea level is allowed flood. This process predominantly describes low lying estuarine areas and is typically a response to rising sea levels. As a management theory, a managed retreat recognises long term realignments in momentum, the ceaseless flow of energy forms and the problematic investment of scarce resources in inadequate infrastructure.

However, the managed retreat concept seems to have a neat application to the frameworks we use in thinking about our human resources, foster collaboration and build innovative, adaptable cultures. If only more leaders thought about our organisations or social institutions in terms of their future shape rather than their historical forms.

PS. The Abbess of the Benedictine abbey at Barking adopted her own managed retreat when she exploited the breaches in her abbey's sea walls to capture fish swimming upriver on incoming tides, sparking a crisis for the Mayor of London when a subsequent fish shortage hit the city. Now that's adaptability!

The Perils of A Common Cause

I caught up recently with David Day's superb 'The Politics of War'. (Actually at 704pp it caught up with me!) In it, Day quotes Churchill reflecting on his appointment of a then relatively unknown General Bernard Law Montgomery as the new commander of the British Eighth Army in the Western Desert theatre:

'The more I study the situation on the spot the more sure I am that a decisive victory can be won if only the leadership is equal to the opportunity.' Churchill conceded Montomery was 'disagreeable to those about him' but, as far as Churchill observed, he would 'also be disagreeable to the enemy.'

Churchill with his Victorian values has deftly summed up one of the enduring conundrums of leadership. One which remains with us - even in an age of celebrity leadership.

Values & Decision Making

Values are back in vogue in the heady world of commerce. One-Tel, Pan Pharmaceuticals, HIH, AWB, all challenge our assumptions about corporate values. One definition sees Values as 'the principals and fundamental convictions which act as general guides to behaviour, the standards by which actions are judged as good or desirable.' In short, values are the day-to-day basis for organisational action. For good or for ill, we express our values by what we do in everyday life, in our approach to leadership and in our interactions with peers and colleagues. In exploring issues such as integrity and trust with clients, I've found the following scenario neatly encapsulates some of the underlying dilemmas entangled in values based leadership.

Werner von Braun was an engineering prodigy who had headed up the German rocket program which ultimately produced Hitler's V.2 vengeance weapon. In the final days of World War 2, the Americans and Soviets put moral qualms aside and engaged in a frantic race to sweep up as many advanced weapons programs and key scientific and engineering staff as possible. One of the V.2's key assembly facilities was located at Camp Dora in the Harz Mountains in central Germany. Thousands of concentration camp inmates were worked to death there in horrific conditions. In 1947-8 Camp Dora was investigated for suspected War Crimes. After the war, the US covertly brought members of von Braun's V.2 team to the United States where they went to work for the US Army. Many eventually took out US citizenship, swearing the oath of allegiance en masse in the Huntsville High School near the Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville Alabama on 14 April 1955. Huntsville showed its appreciation by saluting the German scientists and their families with a special dinner .

In February 1955, a top-level Technologies Capabilities Panel set up by President Eisenhower which had been examining the emerging Soviet missile threat recommended the development of a reconnaissance satellite to monitor Soviet activity. The Advisory Committee cautioned that America should first launch a civilian satellite to establish a 'freedom of space' precedent - the right for satellites to overfly foreign countries. The coming International Geophysical Year planned for 1957 would provide perfect cover for this development program. A US satellite equipped with instruments to measure radition in the upper atmosphere would both contribute to scientific study and underline American prestige. Moreover, the Soviets were also known to be developing a satellite. Instead of working collaboratively, the US Army, Navy and Air Force would each pitch competing proposals.

The Air Force planned to use their SM-65 Atlas intercontinental missile. It was the most powerful US rocket yet built with a range of 5,000 miles, yet its advanced design suffered technical teething problems. The Navy's Vanguard  proposal also had problems. The Vanguard was a three-stage rocket which had yet to be built, based on the RTV-N-12a Viking rocket. Its Viking first stage had successfully taken the first photographs of the earth from space. However, the Vanguard  would have to be ready in 2 years. No one had previously achieved such an aggressive time to launch schedule. The Army's proposal used the 'old reliable' Redstone, a derivative of the SSM-A-14 rocket. Its booster and guidance system had already been successfully tested. However, the Atlas and Redstone ballistic missiles were top-priority military projects, which were not to be slowed in the pursuit of secondary space missions. Never-the-less, von Braun was convinced he had the most plausable bid.

In August 1955 the Committee on Special Capabilities was ready to vote on which of the competing Army, Navy or Air Force teams would win the opportunity to put the first US satellite into space. At stake for the winning team was not just tremendous prestige, but millions in funding over coming years. Factions in the US Navy and Air Force were concerned at the dominant role the US Army was seeking in space. Some committee members voiced concernes at the idea of launching the first American satellite using German engineers - and a modified vengence weapon. Consequently, the Navy's Vanguard rocket was selected and von Braun was specificially banned from further work on his proposed satellite launch vehicle. Unfortunately for the US, the Vanguard proved a disappointing failure, achieveing only three successful launches out of nine attempts.

Early  on 4 October 1957, a Soviet R-7 rocket lifted off from its launch pad in the Baikonur Cosmodrome complex. As the satellite passed overhead on its first orbit, an insistent 'beep, beep, beep' was heard around thw world, announcing the arrival of Sputnik. The Soviets had beaten the US into space. von Braun however would go on to international glory as the father of the Saturn 5 rocket which carried man to the moon.

So, did the Committee on Special Capabilities arrive at the right decision? What is the role of ethics and values in these decisions? What part did inter-service rivalry and self-interest play in the Committee's deliberations? Was it a case of military priorities over riding opportunities for advancing civilian science? Should pragmatism have overridden national pride?

Nelson On Leadership

The 200th Annivarsary of the Battle of Trafalgar brought a blizzard of books, articles and ephemera on all things Nelsonian. John Sugden's masterly 'Nelson: A Dream of Glory' stands out from the writhing mass as a thoughtful and insightful work. Appropriately I finished 'Nelson' on ANZAC Day. While I personally have never invested much credibility in analogies between our military and the commercials sector, Sugden's observations on Nelson's leadership qualities, provides an intriguing peek behind the curtains onto an 18th Century response to the increased complexity and asymetrical nature of navel engagements.

"...with the retreat from the tactics of line ahead, came greater confusion, and greater problems of command and control. Nelson knew the importance of detailed planning, but equally that no preconceived plan could entirely encompass the shifting circumstances of battle. Communications and flexibility were essential. By inducting his captains into the process of command, and by imparting his ideas and intentions to them, Nelson unlocked their initiative and reduced dependence upon the signal books...it did send his captains into battle fully aware of what was expected of them."

Strip out the social mores and technology and Nelson's challenge sounds like an all too familiar conumdrem - how to cope with an increasingly complex and volatile environment requiring agility and responsiveness at the point of connection, while bringing out the best of both your people and technology!