“Dissatisfaction, Vision, and Capacity”

The ability to “connect the dots” is more complex than simply telling others about the dots and how they connect.  It requires a lot more than showing others the dots.  

Akin to most if not all change efforts is a set of requisite readiness knowledge and understanding that must be present before any lines or dots are actually connected.  These requisites include but are not limited to knowledge and understanding of dissatisfaction, vision, and capacity. 

Within each of these requisites are conditions that will determine whether or not the “dots” will connect.

The three (3) conditions of dissatisfaction are level, depth, and ownership.  Without these, dissatisfaction will never exist in the way it must to be helpful in connecting the dots.

First and foremost, dissatisfaction must be based on data.  Data can take many forms albeit quantitative and qualitative.  The level of data is based on access and availability as well as the form in which data is presented.  For example, aggregate data is the most common and easily accessed information about groups of students and schools and for the most part has the least value. 

Nevertheless, data must be at a level that is specific, relevant, timely, and actionable.  This requires data at a personal level.  For data to be personal it must be within the control or responsibility of the person or persons accountable for the results.

The level of dissatisfaction drives the depth of dissatisfaction.  Simply, if someone is not dissatisfied with the level of data, you won’t get to the depth of data. 

There is always data behind the data being analyzed.   The metaphor of “peeling the onion” is fitting.  In that, as one peels the levels more data appears that eventually reveals “causes” of results.

This “peeling” creates a deeper sense of curiosity as well as inquiry or it should.  This results in the depth of questions begetting further data points and data analysis.

Yet, without the third requisite of dissatisfaction, ownership, the layer and depth of data will seldom if ever result in seeking, finding, and implementing strategies to improve.

The madness of the adage “how are we going to get different results if we continue to do what we have always done” is a reality when ownership of data doesn’t exist.

If the data is not ownership there is no dissatisfaction.  Without dissatisfaction, connecting the dots is impossible – not to mention futile. 

If dissatisfaction based on the level, depth, and ownership of data or results is present the second requisite, vision becomes extremely important.  A powerful articulated vision of what the organization will look like, feel like, and sound like in terms of relationships, relevance, and results will matter little if there is not dissatisfaction.  Conversely, if there is dissatisfaction but not a powerful, articulated vision, the organization will experience serious morale and motivation challenges.

Our vision, “All means all” is very powerful.  The acknowledgement that each of our students, staff, parents, and community members are of inherent worth and value and therefore are deserving of our very best, day in and day out, is or should be compelling in every way – if – dissatisfaction for current performance is authentic.  Our vision, “All means all” is inclusive, unwavering, and relentless or should be to constantly, continuously, and consistently seek ways to rise about our circumstances to achieve the results we desire.  Our vision, “All means all” is intended to be proactive, personal, and purposeful in all ways and at all times.  It is both a process and mindset.

Our vision, “All means all” coupled with dissatisfaction leads to the third requisite, capacity.  A key to capacity is assessing the present skill, knowledge and experience of our staff compared to the necessary skill, knowledge and experience to achieve not only the mission but make our vision a reality.  It is capacity or lack of that undermines dissatisfaction and vision and that ultimately prevents both the dots and connecting lines from forming the desired picture or coherence of initiatives, programs, practices, and etc.

Capacity building is time consuming and costly.  It requires an investment in our staff, of our staff, and by our staff.

Next week I will develop, in much greater detail, the Human Capital Development initiative as part of our capacity building strategy.