Propensity to Innovation Self-Assessment Tool

Self-Assessment Tool

Ideas are the source of improvements, innovations and inventions. However, some ideas may take more effort to generate, are difficult to come by, and more valuable than others.

Here is a simple self-assessment instrument which may help you uncover the innovation attitude you have towards a type of ideas and a step in the innovation process.

This article was 1st written on 6 Nov 2012.

Copyright 2012. Anthony Mok. All Rights Reserved.

Propensity to Innovation

Effects of Attitude on Innovation

Ideas are the source of improvements, innovations and inventions. However, some ideas may take more effort to generate, are difficult to come by, and more valuable than others.

Classes of Ideas

Ideas could be categorised in the four classes. These are:

·         Efficient Ideas

This class of ideas helps us do the right thing and do them the right way. These ideas do not call us to challenge or substantially change the organisation’s current processes. They usually lead to incremental changes and are unlikely to be noticed by people outside of the organisation.

·         Refining Ideas

This class of ideas helps us do things better. We want to know if ‘there is a better way of achieving the same output?’ It looks at the means and not the end itself. Since only the ways a service or product is delivered are changed, people external of the organisation may not be aware of the change.

·         Adopting Ideas

This class of ideas helps us do things in the ways others are doing. There is no shame in borrowing ideas from other organisations or industries, and adapting them in our organisations. Many of such ideas are known to us as best practices and they inform us of the proven ideas that usually work in the structures of a given context.

·         Different Ideas

This class of ideas helps us do things in ways that no one else has done before. These are truly radical ideas that have not been thought of before or have not been successfully implemented in the past. These ideas are usually the most difficult to execute since they are the first of their kind and they demand radical changes in the organisations. However, once they are successfully implemented, they are also the ones that deliver the most benefit and value to our organisations.

Innovation Process

Innovation does not exist out of the blue. It goes through phases of identifying and turning ideas into innovations that change our current circumstances.

A typical innovation process usually has four generic phases. These are:

·         Define Phase

Problem is defined as a state of difficulty, and  goal of innovation is to change this state. Therefore, if we can find the problem, we could find the opportunities where innovations could become handy. This kind of problems is called propportunities.

·   To do this, we must have a good appreciation our surrounding environment and clear understanding of the problems that exist in this space. In this phase, we generate the definitions and specifications of the problem, and reach a general consensus on them before making attempts to solve it.

·         Discover Phase

The source of Innovation is ideas.

There are two rules in the Discover Phase. These are suppressing our judging faculty temporarily and spending sufficient of time in generating alternative options. In this way, we give exploration a chance to populate the discourse with enough of ideas for the next phase of the innovation process.

·         Decide Phase

All ideas have the potential of creating a breakthrough, but some point, we will have to decide on the idea that is most likely to succeed at a cost that is most manageable. The flexibility and range for executing this phase depends a lot on the quality and quantity of ideas generated in the previous phase.

·         Deliver Phase

There is no breakthrough when there is no innovation.

The instrument for change is by making the innovation a reality; by creating and delivering the solution to users who need it. No all innovations will deliver immediate breakthroughs, and will need us to make refinements to them. To do this, we need to revisit the preceding phases to identify the sources of failure.

Choices and Personality

The choices we make when participating in innovation can be influenced by our personalities.

In brief, there are two basic kinds of cognitive ‘functions’ which guide the way we:

·         Take in information (Sensing (S) or iNtuiting (N)) to understand things around us, and

·         Make decisions (Thinking (T) or Feeling (F)) based on the information we have gathered.

There are also two different temperaments which we exhibit. We either show:

·       Extroversion (E), where we operate in the external world of behaviours, actions, people, and things, or

·         Introversion (I), where we operate in the internal world of ideas and reflection.

There is a ‘Lifestyle’ dimension in this model. We either have a preference for:

·         Judging (J), where we want things to be planned, stable and organised, or

·         Perceiving (P), where we like to ‘go with the flow’ and respond to situations as they appear.

Each of these preferences points to a character in the alphabet, which in combination forms a four-character code that informs us about our personality.

Personality and Innovation

Some people are more capable of generating a class of ideas and find it easier to navigate through a particular phase of the Innovation Process. We call this inclination our ‘Innovation Attitude’.

The 2nd and 4th character in our personality type indicator code inform us of our innovation attitude. This is the preference that influences why we are attracted a type of ideas, how we define a problem, and how we are likely to act during the innovation process. The code containing the:

·        'SJ' character suggests the innovation attitude of 'Efficiency'.

Precise information and timing is critical to SJians. For them, Sensing is introverted. They draw and use information from their own knowledge and experience bases to assess and judge their situations. They are likely to seek innovative ideas that create greater efficiencies and improve effectiveness.

·        'SP' character suggests the innovation attitude of 'Refining'.

SPians are pre-disposed to experience the world with their senses. For them, Sensing is extroverted. In wanting to engage the people around them and to feel the variety of experiences their surroundings have to offer, they will operate in this external space to collect as much information as possible and respond to the situation accordingly. They are drawn to innovative ideas that can help them refine and adapt their current realities to continue enjoying these experiences. However, for them it also involves not doing something.

·       'NJ' character suggests the innovation attitude of 'Adopting'.

NJians understand that the time they need to convert their internal ideas to external realities is scarce, and will plan and organise ways to execute their insights to reduce loss. For them, Intuition is introverted, and they are likely to sort ideas internally, especially in terms of their importance and urgency to what is valued. Typically, NJians will borrow ideas from outside their sphere of influence, and adopt what can be applied, and innovate what cannot be accordingly.

·        'NP' character suggests the innovation attitude of 'Different'.

Connecting people to emerging potential concepts and ideas to generate possibilities is what keeps the NPians going. For them, Intuition is extroverted, and they see alternatives as life bloods in a world of interactions. In this space, NPians seek out ideas that are original – that are different from what are already out there are better informed about the potential we can tap on and the choices we can make while navigating through our innovative organisation and its processes.

Successful innovation teams have a healthy balance of these four innovation attitudes in its members. This way, each member, whose innovation attitude is need the most at a particular stage of developing an innovation, could be called to come forward to lead the teams and seek the breakthrough they need to move the project forward.

This article was 1st written on 8 Aug 2012.

Copyright 2012. Anthony Mok. All Rights Reserved.

Realities of Cause and Effect

Active Listening Series No. 6

In the Collins English Dictionary, ‘cause’ is defined as ‘something that produces a particular effect’ and ‘effect’ is described as ‘a change or a state of affairs caused by something or someone’. These definitions are interesting because the meaning of each word is found in the description of the other. This shows how tightly intertwined ‘cause’ and ‘effect’ is. They are like the front and the back of the same piece of block.

All effects and their resultant impact begin from a cause. In this sequence of events, the ‘cause creates an effect, which becomes the cause that generates its subsequent effects’. We can see this movement because we can see the back of one block and the front of the adjacent block.

However, with time and space, the line that separates cause and effect blurs, and they become embodied as a single entity. So, the sequence described in the last paragraph is no longer true. Now, it becomes the ‘cause leading to another cause, which creates even more causes’. It is as if we have become myopic and can see only the fronts of all adjacent blocks. Their backs are hidden from us. There are no more effects in this cycle.

Why is this so?

You see, in life, we do not see things as clearly as ‘causes’ and ‘effects’. Instead, we tend to see them as ‘becauses’ and ‘impacts’. We tend to do ‘becauses’ more than doing ‘effects’. The formal is other-focussed and requires less of our energies. In the world of ‘becauses’, we create justifications to explain away our current situations and find scapegoats to blame for our conditions without having to physically change anything.

Things become singular in the path of least resistance. We have no sense of the cost of the effect on us when it is invisible. So, we cannot calculate the payoff for getting out of it. Over time, this pattern becomes fully entrenched in our lives and we lose our abilities to take responsibility of ourselves.

The key is to refocus our attention to the back of each block and avoid agreeing with our becauses. Only then do we have access to everything that we have already had to create our breakthroughs.

This article was 1st written on 27 Jul 2010.
Copyright 2010. Anthony Mok. All Rights Reserved.

Keeping Your Promise and Honoring Your Words

Active Listening Series No. 5

Many of us cannot clearly distinguish the difference between keeping our promises and honouring our words, and this handicap has unnecessarily punished us for a very long time.

Let me share with you a story to expand on this idea.

Thomas is a loving husband and caring father who recently lost his wife to cancer. He has made a commitment to Wendy that he will be both the father and mother to two of their teenage daughters. The family is not well-to-do, and the illness has set them back by tens of thousand of dollars. Thomas is struggling to keep things going with the meager wage he receives each week but he is too proud to ask for help.

I had not met Thomas since we have completed full-time National Service. It is by a chanced meeting along Orchard Road during Christmas Day that we begin to meet regularly for tea.

‘Happy Chinese New Year!’ an exhausted looking Thomas called out to me when we met at The Central, the shopping centre, recently.

‘Same to you!’ I replied and follow with, ‘How have you been?’

After we had ordered our meals and beverages, he continued, ‘I am tired.’

‘I can see. Tell me more,’ I encouraged.

‘I have been avoiding Jenny, my younger daughter,’ was his short answer.

As we began having our meals and sipping tea, I had learnt that Thomas was feeling very guilty for not bringing Jenny, who had done well in her P.S.L.E examinations, to Malacca.

‘You know, I really want to reward her with this trip but if we go, I have to bring the elder daughter as well. I just cannot afford it. Each day, I can see so much of anger in her eyes. I am so guilty that I left for work early and return home late to avoid seeing her. I am a failure. I am a bad father,’ he finished off.

I can feel Thomas’ sorrow and pain, and begin to share with him the difference between keeping a promise and honouring our words.

‘Isn’t they the same?’ Thomas asked after hearing the two phrases.

‘No, and this is the source of your current sorry and pain,’ and I distinguished their differences.

A promise is a declaration that something will or will not be done. Sometimes, we do fail to deliver the promise. However, we need not have to punish ourselves because of this with guilt and stay away from the people we had make the promise to.

‘But she is my daughter. How could I feel less guilty?’ Thomas asked.

‘You see, we feel guilty and want to avoid the very people we have make promises to not because we have failed to deliver the promises. We do all these because we are afraid that they think that we are dishonourable, and being dishonourable means a loss of face for us, which is painful. As they are close and important to us, the solution of staying away from them only brings us sorrow and more pain,’ I continued, ‘Honouring our word is about giving a warrant and assurance that the promise will be fulfilled even when it is not delivered at this moment. We are honourable as long as we stop running away from the very people we have given our word to and acknowledge with them about the lapse. We are honourable when we stay committed and being responsible in seeing that the promise is delivered at the next available opportunity.’

‘And this is the difference between keeping a promise and honouring our word,’ I concluded.

A few months later, we were again chatting over tea and I have learnt from Thomas that his relationship with Jenny has vastly improved.

‘What have you done?’ I asked.

Thomas has told me that he had a talk with her Jenny after our conversation to explain to her his difficulties. What has came as a surprise for Thomas was he had found out that the source of her anger was not about the broken promise but because Thomas had avoiding her. More surprisingly, Jenny wanted to contribute her savings to make the trip possible for the whole family.

‘So you went to Malacca?’ I asked.

‘Yes! We did,’ he said, ‘During the Easter holidays, and it is the best holiday we ever have as a family since Wendy had left us.’

This article was 1st written on 13 May 2010.
Copyright 2010. Anthony Mok. All Rights Reserved.

Decision is a Life Without Choices

Active Listening Series No. 4

There were disappointments when I announced in December of 2006 that I would leave the Ministry at the beginning of the following year. Several of my close colleagues had sat me down trying to discourage me and a few had made attempts to find management positions elsewhere in the organisation which I could rotate to. These, I had politely turned down but I am forever indebted to them for their kindness and for standing up for me. I am glad I know such friends after many years of championing change, excellence and transformation in the organisation.

I had struggled at length with the thought of leaving the organisation and this had begun as early as 2005 after a challenging year of working with stakeholders and constituents who were only keen in preserving their personal agendas and current ways at the expense of the organisation's. I would have left then if not for the promises I had made at the start of the transformation which I want to honour. These were only largely fulfilled towards the end of 2006. However, during this period, I was never happy, that's until I understood the distinction between choice and decision.

We cannot be making choices when we are instinctively driven to look at all the options and constantly analyse them for their considerations, justifications and consequences. The option that is finally selected, whether in our opinion is the best one available or the most satisfising, is created out of strict logic and reasoning by examining the differences between costs and payoffs. As rational men, we invest in those schemes with more payoffs. This means, the option that we finally select is seemingly sound and therefore, is pre-determined and predictable.

As humans, we want to be satisfied by the knowledge that nothing is forced upon us and we have the power to choose. So, we pretend that we have exercised free will in our selection. However, the reality is that we have allowed falsehood to creep in our minds and we become happy mixing up 'making decisions' with 'making choices'. However, they are never the same.

Thing are done differently in the world of choices. We look at what the world has to offer to us and we just choose. We do not have to account for all the considerations, surface all those justifications, and worry about the consequences. We just do it. In making choice, we do not let our innate need to fulfil our expectations and those of others get in the way.

The realm of making decision is very sinister. As we look at those considerations, justifications and consequences, we are using a substantial amount of our cognitive and emotive energy measuring, assessing, evaluating, and deciding on our options, and then we expect the decision to be good and things will happen as decided. We are conditioned and motivated to expect something good coming out of these efforts. However, while the options we finally narrow down to are predictable, the outcomes are not. Things do not unfold the way we hope they should and there bound to be unexpected events leading us to disappointments, bewilderments and dejections. In these, we face unhappiness but it is never the outcomes that disappoint. Always, it is the expectations that are, and so the misalignment between real and expected outcome becomes the source of our sorrows.

In making a choice, there is no expenditure of energy. Choices are made randomly and we develop the capacity to receive what comes our way. There is no disappointment because we made no effort to calculate and to expect something. Since there are no expectations, there will be no disappointments. Without these, there is no unhappiness because everything is always within the scheme of things.

These insights into making decisions and making choices caused me to seriously rethink about how I struggle with the option of staying and the option of leaving. I finally chose and I officially tendered my resignation at the end of December 2006. I feel free and happy, and everything is always within my expectation because I have none before I left.

This article was 1st written on 5 Jan 2010.

Copyright 2010. Anthony Mok. All Rights Reserved.

Managing Innovation at the Organisational Level

Strategic Importance of Innovation in Organisations

I have written much about the limitations of continuous improvement and the role of creativity in injecting new avenues of improvement into an organisation and in thinking outside the natural laws that govern the technologies that define a current produce, service or process.

Each time a new source of improvement or breakthrough is found, the propensity for innovations come into existence. The capability to identify this source and the capacity turn it into innovations is an advantage that organisations must afford to have in order to stay competitive.

From Managing Innovations to Managing the Engine that Creates Them

However, organisations cannot depend on a single improvement or innovation to stay competitive. In a dynamic market, competition is nearly perfect and organisations do not have long periods to enjoy the gains from their own innovation. The lifecycles of products, services and processes are getting shorter as more organisations have learnt to innovate and are capable of taking their own innovations to the market.

This means organisations need to move away from managing an innovation or a number of innovations; seeing them from conceptualisation to commercialisation, to managing the pipeline that creates these innovations. This is the engine that is capable of producing new innovation to replace the ones that are currently decaying in their lifecycles.

However, to manage innovation at this level, Organisational Development (OD) practitioners need to recognise the kinks in the pipeline. These kinks are the outputs of an overactive organisational immunity system working against all things that may create instability ln the organisation's current social order and topple its existing structures. This means, innovations do not flow through the organisation very well and regular interventions are needed to nudge the ideas and the innovations that come from them forward.

Seven Kinks of the Innovation Pipeline

Before we talk about the types of intervention, let's examine these seven kinks in the pipeline:

The Challenges of Imperfect Market

There are many individuals in organisations with ideas and solutions. Equally many are individuals looking for them. The challenge is that there is little knowledge in the market who and where these suppliers and buyers are and this create exchange inefficiencies in the organisational market of ideas and solutions.

Projectisation Challenges

Many ideas with breakthrough potentials are often given up because very few individuals are willing to stick their heads out to turn these into projects in order to draw value out of them. This does not mean that the motivation for enterprise is found lacking amongst the employees in the organisation. It suggests that people are turned off by the organisation's aversion towards uncertainty, its unforgiving nature towards failures, and an overly myopic focus on short-termism.

Challenges of Time and Space

Project teams face much inertia when they try to get their projects started. Some of these include finding the right members, right problem definition, and right range and scope. When things become tough, there is always a tendency for these teams to fall back on routine work methods and proven solutioning approaches, and symptomatic rather then underlying fundamentals issues get solved.

Challenges of Social Constraints

Research has revealed that leaders have the tendency to unknowingly introduce organisational and social constraints that prevent creativity and innovation to flourish in their own organisation.

Organisations may formulate and implement seemingly well meaning policies that have unexpected consequences that constraints the flow of ideas or innovations within the organisation. Organisations have both formal and informal structures that govern the distribution of power, influence and control between stakeholders. The flow of ideas and innovations in the organisation could be channelled or halted by these elements and the leaders needs to be sensitive to their use and the impact they create.

Challenges of Participation

Social interactions are always at the centre of creative ideas and innovations generation. The willingness of various players in innovation - the fund managers, entrepreneurs, protectors, advocators and promoter, to believe and participate in these interactions will determine the projects’ success.

Therefore, the quality and frequency of these interactions cannot be taken lightly and has to be cultivated over time. This requires the skills and acumen of the pipeline architects and the recognition that these players have to play two roles - the role of managing today and the responsibilities of managing for tomorrow now.

Challenges of Scarcity

The availability and accessibility to resources can make or break the project. Money is not the only resource teams need. They also need management approval, support and protection as these are capable of influencing the motivation, make-up and dynamics of the project team. Often, teams are frustrated and jaded because of the lack of such resources. Jaded individuals could create long term impact for the organisation as their existence always challenges the credibility and authenticity of management towards being an innovative organisation.

Challenges of Withholding Value

In a knowledge-based society, creativity and innovation is not constraint by the boundaries that separate spaces. Individuals and teams could choose not to contribute and they are equally capable of withholding the value of the innovation from the organisation and passing it someone they find worthy of receiving it. Individuals could start translating an idea created at one organisation in another. There is very little the organisation could do in terms of the policies that could be used to prevent the leakage of value from the organisation.

Managing Innovation in the Organisation is about Managing the Pipeline

It is therefore not surprising organisation has no problem recognised as being innovation when they managed these kinks well and those trying to be innovative find it to be a challenge to be one because they are doing the wrong things by copying them without understanding the underlying principles.

This article was 1st written on 29 April 2009 and updated on 15 May 2009.

Copyright 2009. Anthony Mok. All Rights Reserved.

How Our Reasons Stop Us From Getting What We Are Capable Of Having

Active Listening Series No. 3

Steven and I meet regularly for meals and we will talk about things.

This was a conversation that we had one afternoon when we talked about aspirations.

'I like to have more training. Could you help?' Steven asked while we were walking towards a nearby foodcourt for our lunch.

'I want to but you have some limitations.' I replied as we walked into the foodcourt.

He asked, 'what are these?'

'What are some of the programmes you have wanted to do but we have never assigned them to you?' I asked as I was thinking about the meal I wanted to order.

'Like leadership programmes. Maybe helming engagements that have participants holding more senior appointments. I would like to do workshops as well,' he came back to my questions and suggested that we should have fried rice for lunch.

I followed with 'what is missing here?'

'What do you mean by missing?' he queried.

'What do you not have now that is stopping you from getting what you want?' I complete my line of questioning as I looked over my shoulder for a place to sit down.

'I need to be certified in the use of some profiling instruments, like MBTI and DiSC,' he replied.

I looked at him and asked, 'have you done anything yet?'

He said, 'No,' and I followed quickly by asking for the reasons.

'Well, you know I don't earn much. These certifications are expensive. MBTI costs S$3,500 and DiSC is at S$2,000. I don't have the money,' said Steven as he led me to an emptied table nearby.

I replied, 'but you could save or obtain a sponsorship from your employer'. However, before I could continue, he interjected by revealing his two key objections to these suggestions - saving had a long gestation period and the notion of serving a bond with his sponsor was unacceptable.

'Could you hear yourself?' I asked and started chewing my rice.

He asked, 'what do you mean?'

'Could you repeat what you have just told me?' was my reply.

He looked at me quizzingly, and said 'Are you referring to the difficulties of saving and getting bonded with my company?' He reproduced what he had articulated earlier and said 'Alright, I have said it. What now?'

I smiled and highlighted to him that he has taken his life lightly, and questioned, 'Could you tell me what these sound like to you?'

'They are the difficulties or obstacles', he replied.

I encouraged him to tell me more and he continued, 'Yes. These are my reasons why I couldn't do these certifications, and without these I couldn't conduct more programmes for reasonableyour company'.

'But are they real?' I questioned. He looked at me and provided a strong affirmation to my query. I asked again 'Are they real?'

'What do you mean by real? Of couse they are! If not, I would have completed the certifications some time ago,' he reiterated. 'They are the reasons why I am in my current predicament'.

'You mean these are your excuses for in-action!' I insisted.

'They are not!' He shot back.

'Let me try it this way. You said you cannot save. How do you know? Have you started on a saving scheme already? You said you cannot entertain the idea of being bonded? How do you know the sponsorship can only be secured through serving a bond? Have you personally spoken to the CEO of the company about alternative approaches in getting the sponsorshlp? Have you done these?

'No. I have not', as he leaned back after the hearty meal.

'Then, your claims are not real. The difficulties or challenges you had mentioned are just your excuses for not moving on with your life,' I continued to coach.

I could see that he was struggling with the idea and I began to give him the key insights into the concept of being reasonable.

I continued, 'What you have actually done is that you had labelled all your excuses as reasons. There is a distinct difference between an excuse and a reason. A reason is based on facts and an excuse is not.To ensure that your claims sound reasonable to yourself and real to others, you imbuned them with justifications, which are the 'becauses' that further insulate you from seeing the truth. Anything that does not fit into this reality is rejected. All these excuses and 'becauses' become your repertoire of stories and dramas used, instrumented and manipulated by you to explain the mechanisms that had deprived you of your breakthroughs. These forever protect you against having to take personal responsibility for your own life.

Your actlons and behaviours become the script of your life. It is through this script that you demonstrate the stories and seek affirmation from others. The social process for carrying these out over time helps with the editing, change and refinement of your script. All in all, this pretence that the problem is out there and not within you prevents you from getting what you are potentially capable of having. You have become accomodative towards everything that is found in your life script. You have become reasonable and your constant explanations ol what stops you becomes your racket'.

After much thought, Steven asked, 'You mean I should not be reasonable with people and things around me?'

'No. You cannot be unreasonable with others. You can come across to others as aggressive when you turn to the extremes. Besides, you could never change others. The only control you have to achieve breakthroughs and success is in yourself and for yourself. You could introduce the concept to them so that they acquire the space for greater things. This means you can only be unreasonable with yourself', I said.

'Unreasonable with myself?' Steven asked, 'How could I do this?'

'This is very easy. Just stop letting your excuses and becauses get in your way. They are not the reasons why you are where you are. Your excuses and becauses are. Only when you try, and in trying you encounter an obstacle, than that excuse becomes a reason but as human, we are capable of overcoming it. It is this simple!' I suggested.

'I understand now. Thank you for helping me attaining this knowledge'. said Steven in an appreciative manner.

'I feel most honored that you have gotten what you are capable of having. Let's celebrate with lunch next week', I ended the coaching with the invitation.

'Sure! I will let you know what comes out from this awareness next week.' Steven replied as he walked by to his office.

'It's all about practice and you should begin now', I called out to his direction.

'Cool!' he called out as the doors of lift closes between us and I proceed to walk back to my routine work.

This article was written on 22 Dec 2008.
Copyright 2008. Anthony Mok. All Rights Reserved.

Thinking Outside the Box and Living the Future From the Past

Active Listening Series No. 2

'Think outside the box' is one of those management jargons that has been wildly circulated and widely used in many learning communities in the world.

But what does it really mean? What is the 'box' mentioned in the phrase? We have included an 'outside' in the maxim, how does the inside looks like? Since we know we need to 'think' to get out, then what kind of thinking should we use to do that?

There are many answers that need to be found in these questions. Let's revisit active listening and the second conversation to see what these concepts could inform us.

We will have different encounters that give us a variety of experiences throughout our lives. Some are of our choosing. Others are entrusted upon us out of circumstances. There are the ones that had given us happiness and left us with many enduring memories. There are others so nasty that we just wanted to forget, even to walk out of life to end them all.

In Pursuit of Happiness

Humans are such calculative creatures. We will do anything and everything to stay in a space that enables us to keep doing, having and being with things that delight. In the face of frustration, anger, sadness, hardship and pain, we employ the same or with even greater amount of energy do the opposite. We are just creatures into self-preservation.

So, we create, develop and use strategies that help us keep receiving those experiences that we want and strategies of un-having, undoing and un-being with those that we want to avoid. We identify triggers that cue us to these strategies and they become heuristics that are hardwired into our sub-consciousness, like lines of instructional codes, defining who we are and how we should behave.

The process of creating these strategies could be over in a moment and it occurs only in our second conversation and no where else. With time, we forget the very reasons for these decisions and the exact time they were made. When we progress further into time, the strategies themselves become silent, leaving us with nothing but cues that instinctively trigger us into action, and clues for those perceptive few, whom we intimately know, of the many decisions we had made long ago.

Living the Future From the Past

In making each decision, we created a psychological pact with time that commits us to a future that is bounded by the singularities of our past. It is in these decisions that we had made, committed to and eventually forgotten that form the lines of the box in which we now live; the invisible barriers that allow or prevent us from really doing and having something, or being who we can be. These are the boundaries that shape the box, and inside its space, we are always restricted from accessing the source of our own breakthroughs and restrained in many ways on how we could authentically live our lives.

These decisions are not made from a singular time but throughout life; yesterday, today and tomorrow. We will continue strategising, determining cues and making commitments into the future to enrich the nature of the boundaries that enclose us. We add, shape and change the decisions we had made in the past, now and future. We do these to ensure that we are better at surviving the harsh realities of a world of having, doing and being; all in the pursuance of happiness.

The Silence in the 3rd Conversation

We know the nature of our second conversation. It is selective, evaluative and judgmental. We know because we could hear it as it happens and, therefore, are capable of stopping it or letting it run. We have a choice there.

The third conversation is different. It is totally silent. The third conversation was a second conversation that had taken place and ended ages ago. Metaphorically, we could envisage the third conversation as an all powerful recording of an old second conversation that was written into our psyche, now speaking and controlling from within without its frequency and vibration ever being felt. This means that while we may not be able to explain why we do what we had done, these behaviours are never random. We cannot stop these behaviours at the conversational level like the second conversation since it cannot be heard. Choice cannot be exercise here.

The intervention has to be executed at the source.

In Love With Myself

Let me tell you a story.

We have been attached for more than a decade now but I had never really loved my partner until in the recent few years.

Of course, you are shocked by both the revelation and my honesty. Most, who had heard of this, were, but hold that thought for a moment. Do not judge me yet. Let me finish my story. You will get something out of this. I promise.

Why was I not in love?

You see. Some years ago, before I met my current partner, I was attached to someone whom I loved but we broke up. Being my first relationship, the aftermath was bad. It was a disaster, with school, work and sports in tow. I had depression and it lasted for about eight months. I did not recognise it after many years later.

Those were eight months of self-blame, sadness, hatred, and pain, and I had made a decision then. I must protect myself, at all cost, against feeling the pain again. The strategy was simple. I was to never break up again. I reasoned that when there was no break-up, there will be no pain.

I was attached again and in those years I was stressed. Stressed by what? Stressed by the fear that my partner not wanting me. Stress by my effort of reading cues that may signal an impending break up, which was exhausting me. Stressed by the readiness to respond immediately in the event of a mishap. Stressed by the need to respond at each sign of trouble. Each time she seemed to be unhappy, I appeased. Each time she seemed to be angry, I apologised. Whatever I did was about signalling her how important she was to me and that I was the right one for her. I was focusing on the 'what if .....' .

This was a long relationship. With time, I had forgotten the reason for the stress. With time, I had forgotten why I was doing all these. I was like a machine; just responding to the triggers of doing, having, and being safe but this was never a relationship I wanted because it was a sorrowful one. I was never happy. I did not know that being safe was this painful as well. I was not in love with my partner. I was surviving the relationship. I was in love with myself.

Getting Our Breakthroughs From the Past

I was not aware of my predicament. Why? Because I had forgotten that second conversation that had happened ages ago. It had become totally silent. It has morphed into a third conversation, talking to me and controlling every direction I took. It was too silent to warn me of the perils I was in. I was totally disempowered. That was until one night four years ago.

How did I stop the third conversation? I went back in time.

To go the source of my breakthrough, I have to accept that nothing in my actions is co-incidental. There is always a cause and the resultant effect. My actions, the effects, point to the source of the cause.

So, I went back to a time where I first encountered this uneasiness of being incomplete and I uncovered the driver of the third conversation. By cognitively going backwards in time, I dig up the second conversation, which had gone silent, and I recognised how absurd it was. To trace the cause at source requires me to courageously accept that I will go no further if I am to stay where I was. Doing and having more, and being wiser merely sink me deep into that position. What I need is a breakthrough so that I could leave the box that enclosed me for this long.

Dumping the Past for the Future

I made a choice, on that night four years ago, to dump the boundaries from my psyche altogether and walk out of the box. This single thought set me free. This put me in a space that is cleared of my old baggage; like a clearing of some sort in a forest where the sunlight can at last reach its floor. It is as if my programming codes have been reinitialised and restarted again, and now I could begin life on a clean slate.

I love my partner.

Suddenly I saw all the things she had done for me. For my own selfish reason of living for myself I cannot see the generosity, forgiving and loving nature of my partner. I was too blinded by my own third conversation to see all these to appreciate them and love her back. I have started to do see my partner in a new light. I have seen the 'what it could be .....' in our relationship.

I told my partner about the whole thing. Of course, it was dramatic as it was done in between sobs and tears, as it was difficult to admit I was wrong about my whole life but this piece of conversation releases me from my bondage. I felt liberated; one more conversation gone.

What was the future has come to the past. The decisions of the past no longer need to influence how we live in our new future. The strangle hold of the third conversation has been broken.

These are the language of the third conversation and the way it works in our minds.

Think Outside the Box

What does it really mean? What is the 'box' mentioned in the phrase? We have included an 'outside' in the maxim, how does the inside looks like? Since we know we need to 'think' to get out, then what kind of thinking should we use to do that?

I have three instruments that help individuals like me answer these questions. They have been successfully been used in several organisations.

These tools are:

Innovation Performance Derailment ProfileTM


Do your personal transformative efforts met with much resistence? Are your efforts to create lasting change and transformation endangered by derailment? Here is a self-assessment that helps you identify your obstacles for breakthrough and determine your margin of safety.

Opportunity-Obstacle Quotient (QO2)

The Opportunity-Obstacle Quotient is a personality profile that provides answers to all the questions you may raise after knowing your derailment profile. It informs you of your way of perceiving opportunities and obstacles. It shows your level of propensity to breakthrough self-imposed limits and provides a window to look at your personal barriers in developing and growing your live. The information from the profile helps you improve the way you contribute to your own capacity and capability for fruitful outcomes.

Journey to KinderlandTM

Journey to KinderlandTM is a mechanism designed to help you deepen what you have discovered of your own personal limitations. The game creates opportunities for debriefs after the QO2 is revealed to you.

This article was 1st written in Sept 2008 and update in Feb & May 2009.

Copyright 2008 and 2009. Anthony Mok. All Rights Reserved.

Zero Chance Life

Active Listening Series No. 1

In the course of my work I always will share with people about this thing called active listening and the Zero Chance Life.

A few months ago, I have a new staff joining my organisation and in the course of our ‘getting-to-know-you’ interactions I share these concepts with him.

‘Have you heard of the phrase ‘active listening’ before?’ I asked one day, during one of our interactions.

‘No’, he replied.

‘You want to venture a guess what ‘Active Listening’ may be?’ I encouraged him.

‘Could it be listening attentively? Or being present?’, was his answer as he looked at me waiting for a positive acknowledgement.

‘Hmm….. let me share with you what is not active listening so that you can appreciate what active listening really is.’ I said as I began to draw the following stick men on a piece of paper.

‘You know, when we are in a conversation, this is this piece of the conversation that you can hear and I can also hear. I call this the first conversation.’ I continued as I drew both the red and blue lines between the two stick men.

‘But, there is this other conversation that only you can hear and I cannot, and it takes place during the first conversation.’ And I finished off the diagram by inserting a bubble next to one of the stick man. ‘This is the second conversation.’ I looked at him and wait for a reaction.

I added that ‘The second conversation is a scary conversation.’

He asked ‘Why?’

The second conversation is scary for four simple reasons. Firstly, when one is engaged in the second conversation, he has very limited resources to attend to what is going on in the first conversation. Also, the characteristics of second conversation are evaluative, selective and judgemental. It acts like a screen that sieves out things that are not in congruent with the identity of the individual. Thirdly, this is the source that drives immediate reactions, which manifest as behaviours that are observable. Because the second conversation is so silent, it is very scary. The only relief is when the conversationist unconsciously verbalises and articulates this piece of the conversation to give the other person an insight to what he is thinking. Otherwise, it is totally silent.

‘So, this is what non-active listening is. In active listening, there is no second conversation.’ I concluded.

‘Okay. I hear you. So, what has this got to do with ‘Zero Chance Life’?’ he quipped.

‘Well. Let me tell you a story so that you can understand ‘Zero Chance Life and the Law of 66.66.’ I replied.


Jaime has been working on an idea that could save his company a million dollars. All he needs is just an investment of S$5,000, and he is very confident that he can get that million for the company.

However, Jaime works in an organisation that has an owner who looks and sounds like Donald Trump. In fact people fear Mr Chin, the owner, who tends to scoff at new ideas. Those working in the company prefer to keep their relationship with him formal and distanced. If given a chance, many will leave.

After much consideration, Jaime has mastered enough of courage to take his proposal to Mr Chin. Now he is outside his door.

‘So, do you think Jaime will knock, go in and present the new idea to the owner of the company?’ I asked him after finishing the story.

‘No!’ and that was what I heard.

I shot back with a ‘why?’

And he said ‘It is so simple. He will definitely say no. I have seen people like that. Everything also cannot.’

Here, I began to share with him the ‘Law of 66.66’.

‘May I ask if this is his ‘No’ or your ‘No’?’ I threw this question at him.

‘Mine. But since he is known to turn new ideas down, there will be no difference for this one with Jaime’ he informed.

I told him ‘You mean to say that your ‘No’ is his ‘No’? This cannot be and you know it. Your ‘No’ is a bluff ‘No’. Only when Mr Chin tells Jaime that his new idea has no place in his company, that it is his ‘No’; the real ‘No’. Can you see the difference between the two ‘No’s?’

’Okay. I can see it. I have gotten tricked by my ‘No’. I have replaced this with reality’. He replied.

‘Yes. You have. And may I ask where does this piece of the conversation resides in? Is it in the first or the second conversation?’ I looked at him expectantly waiting for his reply.

He said ‘It is inside the second one. Now I can see the connection between non active listening and the bluff ‘No’. I used my second conversation to conjure up false images that replace the reality.’

‘Yes. You have. And this is the fourth and scariest part of the second conversation. We make meanings out of nothing through our second conversation and causes use to lead a ‘Zero Chance Life’.’ I added.

‘I do not understand this. Could you tell me more?’ He queried.

‘If Jaime went in and presented his new idea, what you think are his chances of getting a negative outcome?’ I continued to ask him.

‘50% chance of a ‘No’ and 50% chance of receiving a ‘Yes’.’ He said.

I added ‘If you add ‘Maybe’, there is a 33.33% chance of a ‘Yes’, 33.33% of a ‘No’, and a 33.33% chance of a ‘Maybe’.’

‘This means from a positive side, Jaime will have a 66.66 chance of getting something positive if he goes into the room and talks about his idea.’ He reached his conclusion.

‘Correct, and it is Zero Chance if he decides not to knock and go in.’ I reinforced.

‘So, by replacing reality with my own story from my second conversation, effectively nothing will happen. So this is Active Listening and the Zero Chance Life!’ I got it.’ He looked at me with a face of enlightenment. ‘But why 66.66? Shouldn’t it be 50% since ‘Maybe’ comes with a ‘Maybe-Yes’ and a ‘Maybe-No’.’

I laughed. ‘True but that is your second conversation in action again.’

'Yes! You are right!' He said and we both laughed.

This article was 1st written on 19 Jul 2008.

Copyright 2008. Anthony Mok. All Rights Reserved.