Elephant Metamorphosis

Mission->Vision Test

Critique of MENV Mission->Vision:

Test #1: Failed - both the mission and vision are wordy and not simple.

Test #2: Semi-Fail - the vision does not capture a complete picture of a binary state because the vision is not a simple, measurable goal such as: Building a more just, sustainable, and productive planet.

Test #3: Success - the overall goal is motivating (the wordiness gets in the way of this).

Test #4: Success - the mission does demonstrate  a pattern of rules that follow a formula for educating students.

Test #5: Failure - the mission does not state how any of the actions it describes leads to a more just planet.

Test #6: Semi-Success - the goal is too intangible to be measurable because knowledge and its impact on the world is immeasurable.

Test #7: Fail - the mission-vision mental model is not shared by everyone in the organization. It seems as though students have a different mental model of what the mission-vision should than what the faculty and staff think it should be.

Test #8: Fail - the mission-vision are long and very cookie-cutter - there is no passion behind these statements. The overall idea is motivating, but it does not capture the innovative mental model they wish to implement, teach, and see in the future.

Test #9: Fail - I understand this is the first year of the program and MENV is still developing its culture. However, there needs to be more and better collaboration and communication between the students, faculty, and staff before reaching consensus on any mental models to build culture.

Test #10: Success - Everyone is committed to MENV and the mission-vision because we are all here to learn and improve both ourselves and the program. It is best to learn from each other for this to be an even greater success.

Question - Is knowledge and success in creating meaningful change in the world measurable after students graduate?

MENV Mission > vision

 

Test #1: Mission > visions are short and simple

 

After first reading through the MENV mission statement, I had a similar thought to Cabrera & Cabrera. They stated how most mission statements "wax on poetically in flowery prose." Truthfully, it seemed like a stitched statement of feel-good words without much action. Also, the mission is written as goal for the specialization leads. A mission for what they want their students to become in reflection of their efforts--not what we seek as individuals. 

 

Test #2: Visions capture a picture of a binary future state

 

The vision describes a hopeful action plan with "build a more just, sustainable, and productive planet." Overall, I'd say it's too broad and vague to be binary.

 

Test #3: Visions are intrinsically motivating

The program brought together such a powerful cohort. Our vision statement should reflect the potential we hold and keep driving us toward our undefined goals of a better planet. The current vision statement is not unique and sounds like a tired explanation of what the program should be doing. 

 

Test #4: Missions are simple rules that follow a formula

The end bit of the mission statement came close to a formula, but again, is seems to broad and common.

Test #5: Repeatedly doing your mission should bring about the vision

Considering the mission and vision are disconnected, I don't believe they passed test #5. This would be fun to brainstorm in class.

 

Test #6: Mission > visions must be measurable

"Advance sustainability solutions" is positive, but not all that measurable.  Perhaps advancing our network and building on our relationships are more appropriate. Working with others and producing results implies we're advancing our sustainable values.

 

Test #7: Mission moments are rare and precious

The mission statement doesn't provide a picture or conjure a moment where I was making a difference or developing myself as a professional. This is my personal goal, at least, and I think it should be reflected in the overall program's mission.

 

Test #8: Mission > visions are mental models, not statements

This would also be fun to brainstorm together in class. I think we could come up with a simple statement summarizing how we want the world to be a better place unique to the program. 

 

Test #9: Culture is built on shared, core mental models

I appreciate the opportunity for us to be involved with this exercise. Bringing the specializations together and creating the next iteration of the mission and vision can help unify us with MENV pride--something I think we need after this semester. 

 

Test #10: Learning constantly improves vision, mission, and culture

Within our small cohort, there are three specializations. Within our specializations there are unique mental models on everything within every individual. This may seem like a lot, but I argue there aren't enough. We may come from different places, but I don't believe we cover a large enough spectrum. Hopefully in coming years the cohorts will continue increasing diversity. Our academic knowledge is sufficient--it's our relationships and their nature that the program really needs to work on. 

 

 

My takeaway was from Stan Deetz and his quote, "it's not how much you know, it's how quickly you learn." I admit I am insecure about my inexperience as a professional. Often I feel clueless and unable to contribute in classes due to my age and ignorance. However, Stan's quote reminds me that I have potential and that I should remain humble, steadfast, and curious. What I lack in experience, I make up for in ambition. Besides, I will never stop learning so I should stop acting like there's an stopping point. I just hope I stop dumping thousands of dollars for learning opportunities sometime soon. ;)

VMCL Back to Reality

Section three of Systems Thinking Made Simple was the most useful section of the book. This section outlined how to take the theoretical and turn it into something more concrete, orienting these concepts into tangible organizational tools that can bring about real change. There is always the debate - does systemic change come from the top down or bottom up? I believe it is a combination of both - it must be a part of the entire system and implemented on every scale for any sort of change to be effective. I believe the VMCL model is most useful when trying to apply and teach systems thinking throughout an organization. By creating an environment where learning and challenging typical mental models are welcome, members of the organization feel important and want to participate, learn, and contribute more to the organization. I have found this to be quite true within the organization I am helping establish in Colorado. It is already a national organization that has been around for a few years, but my colleague and I have been working to establish a branch here in Colorado. This I have found to be a challenging yet rewarding task. We have the freedom to make the Colorado chapter anything we want it to be, but we also have an overarching mission->vision that we use as our orienting needle. The freedom we are given at the local level is the ability to learn and create new mental models of how we believe we should be organized in Colorado so that we adequately serve the people and the environments with which we'll be working - which looks different from a branch of the organization that is located in another part of the country.

We also recently began a Strategic Planning process so that everyone across the country is on the same page about the goals we would like to accomplish as an organization in the next ten years. This process has been extremely helpful because we have gotten the chance to see how other regions have differing approaches (Mission), but regardless of what part of the country we are in, we still all share a common vision of creating a network of resources to get more communities outside to explore and protect our natural spaces.

In conclusion, my biggest takeaway from this book was VMCL and I now feel like I have the tools to be able to share this knowledge with any organization I choose to partake in. I also feel it helps me organize my own personal vision and more concrete steps I need to take to get there.  

MENV Mission

I think the MENV mission statement is a good start, but could be improved. I’ve evaluated it according to a ten-part test below:

Test #1 – The mission is short and sweet. I appreciate the acknowledgement of the wide range of capacities that an MENV graduate could end up in. I’m certainly looking forward to some “real-world professional experience.”

Test #2— While the vision offers a vague picture of what a future might look like in MENV, it fails to offer specifics on how it might achieve those goals. In what ways will MENV provide these skills?

Test #3 – The vision statement is decently motivating. The ultimate goal for us students is indeed to create a more just, sustainable, and productive planet. Some mention of the dire situation we are in may be appropriate here. Urgency is lacking.

Test #4 – The mission is a simple rule that clearly follows a formula. What do we want to teach students and how will we do it? The statement addresses this question very well in my opinion.

Test #5 – Here, I think more real-world experience would be appreciated. I joined this program because of the “learning by doing” aspect. Now two semesters in, I still have yet to learn by doing. This summer’s capstone project will be an unquestionably awesome opportunity to do so, but I feel that experiential learning should be more integrated into the whole program rather than simply including a summerlong capstone project.

Test #6 – I’m really not sure how measurable this mission is. MENV should keep track of how many graduates are currently working in a position that they are passionate for. How could we measure MENV graduates’ impact on the world?

Test #7 – I’m truly confused by what this test means. If Mission Moments are moments in which the program adheres to its mission, the program should constantly be doing this. Mission moments should not be rare, but rather common. I think our program has had many mission moments within its first year.

Test #8 – This seems like more of a statement than a mental model. I find it difficult to conceptualize the mission statement into a mental model. I’m a visual learner, so this is highly recommended.

Test #9 – MENV culture, demonstrated through the values section, shows that MENV faculty and students do share the same underlying values. These values shape our mental models, so it’s important to be on the same page here. More of a focus on new and emergent fields, as stated in the values, would be appreciated.

Test #10 – Learning has already occurred in the MENV system. We have raised concerns and changes have been made as a result. That being said, there needs to be a better way of communicating student needs and suggestions for the program so that constant learning can occur, within and between cohorts.

Takeaway from the class – Systems concepts are wrapped into everything we do in life. I’m happy to say that I now have an introductory toolkit to start analyzing and assessing the systems around me in order to figure out leverage points, feedback loops, and emergent properties. I’d love to take another systems course in the future. I think the course would benefit from a bit more applied learning. The theory got a bit heavy at times, but I certainly enjoyed the content.

MENV mission vision statement analysis

Critiquing the MENV mission, vision and value statements using Cabrera and Cabrera’s 10 tests for mission vision statements shows that the MENV program is in some ways lacking systems thought… or at least according to Cabrera and Cabrera, though I would argue that the issue with the MENV mission/vision statements is more a problem of implementation.

Test #1 – Mission/Visions are short and simple. The MENV statements are certainly short and simple, and clearly depict what it is the program seeks to do: it is not a “complicated, over-engineered solution” which is one of the pitfalls mentioned in the book.

Test #2 – Visions capture a picture of a binary future state. The MENV statements fall short here, as the vision provides only vague language about a “more just, sustainable and productive planet.” This is not a measurable statement, but at the same time, the goals of this program are very wide reaching, and I’m not sure how effective or useful it would be to set a defined and measureable goal such as “reducing carbon footprint by 5%”. I think the program is seeking to set a direction, and I think the vision captures that intent.

Test #3 – Visions are intrinsically motivating. I think the MENV statements capture this, as I think we are all unified in the desire to create a “more just, sustainable and productive” world.

Test #4 – Mission are simple rules that follow a formula. I think the MENV statements work well here as well. They seek to “advance sustainability solutions” “across a wide range of environmental careers and sectors” “by promoting a community of learning though… engaged… interdisciplinary classes & real world professional experience”. Pretty clear formula there.

Test #5 – Repeatedly doing your mission should bring about your vision. This is lines up well also. We’re all here because we believe that the way to achieve a more sustainable (etc.) planet can be achieved through the mission statement.

Test #6 – Mission Visions must be measurable. Here, the MENV statement falls short, but similar to my discussion for test #2, I’m not sure that a measurable statement is appropriate here. Frankly, I’m more curious why the authors felt that this was a different type of test from #2. If it’s measurable, it’s binary. Right?

Test #7 – Mission moments are rare and precious. Well… when it comes to us paying for an education, they shouldn’t be. MENV “mission moments” should be slam dunks every time, or, like the book said, the program is “going to lose customers”. They should have a cohort full of mission moments every year.

Test #8 – Mission Visions are mental models, not statements. I think the MENV statements capture this, as the mental model is that wide-ranging, interdisciplinary education coupled with real world professional experience leads to sustainability solutions.

Test #9 – Culture is built on shared, core mental models. In a way, the program seeks to meet this test by providing shared “core” classes that we all take, such as leadership, systems and ethics. I think the goal here is to create a shared, core mental model.

Test #10 – Learning constantly improves vision, mission and culture. Only if the staff actually listens to us!

Takeaway from the class – I really like systems thinking! Would love to take another class on the topic if there is one. I think it’s a really powerful way to recognize unseen relationships and understand how huge, complex (dare I say it) systems operate, without the lens of your own bias.

Testing & Reflecting

Prior to this week, I had not ever seen or read the MENV program’s mission and vision, so I was very curious to view them. Upon reading through both, it took me some time to digest within the framework of the ten tests laid out by the Cabrera’s. In following each testing component, I certainly believe that there exists room for improvement in tweaking both the mission MENV mission and vision. Below, I detail my thoughts/critiques under each of the ten testing components.

Test #1: It is apparent that the current MENV mission and vision are not “short and simple” as the authors assert are necessary. While I disagree with the authors that the shorthand for their mission and vision (E37BST) is “a powerful organizational alignment tool,” I do believe it is important to have a short and effective mission and vision statement. In glancing at the mission statements of environmental graduate programs at peer institutions, however, I found that there are mission statements of varying length and simplicity. Ultimately, while I certainly have suggestions for improving each, I do not think length or simplicity is a significant issue with the current MENV mission or vision statements.

Test #2: Of each testing component, this is one I have particular difficulty grappling with, mainly because the term sustainability is so ambiguous. As others have pointed out, what does sustainability mean and how do we determine or measure what makes for a more sustainable future?

Test #3: I do not find the vision of the MENV program to be particularly motivating, though people each have their own intrinsic motivators. I would venture to guess that many of my fellow classmates within the cohort all desire to help build a more “just” and “sustainable” planet as a baseline. I agree with the authors and perhaps it may be helpful to re-craft the vision by polling our cohort on “what pisses us off?” in the context of the environment and how that has played a role in joining an environmental graduate program.

Test #4: The MENV mission passes this test, grounded through its interdisciplinary learning program both in class and real-world professional experience.

Test #5: In completing this assessment, I do not have as many problems with the mission as I do with the vision, which I believe is too wordy. To me, pairing in-class instruction with real world, hands-on exposure should hopefully help us become more effective at solving environmental problems.

Test #6: Quite simply, the MENV missions-vision is not measurable. For example, how will we know when we have built a more just, sustainable and productive planet? How are we measuring each of these conditions?

Test #7: A mission moment is difficult to assess in the context of the MENV program. Perhaps one is forthcoming, as the MENV faculty and staff meet with the inaugural cohort to receive feedback on the program to date and how it can be improved moving forward. As the authors asserted, it is critical to take advantage of mission moments and ensure that they are productive, as their success often correlates directly to the success of the organization.

Test #8: The mental models within both the mission and vision of the MENV program are well established – in-class instruction paired with real world experience will provide the necessary education to be impactful leaders within the environmental field.

Tests #9 & #10: I do not believe that tests 9 and 10 are yet applicable to the MENV program, as the program is still evolving. I believe this summer will be key, as the program accepts feedback from current students and reflects upon our experience as the first cohort in preparing for the arrival of the new cohort of students this fall. I believe the learning that takes place then will be critical to improving the mission, vision and help foster the implementation of a strong culture within the MENV program.

Systems Class Reflection: Overall, while I found some of the course content to be overly abstract and have yet to become a converted systems thinker, I do believe systems thinking can be a valuable tool. In particular, I believe this course has shown me that systems thinking can be utilized as an effective problem-solving tool for organizations and individuals alike, both inside and outside of the environmental field. The key for me, as Stan Deetz urged our blog group, is to avoid overthinking systems. I have a tendency to overthink often in my daily life and just as that causes me unnecessary complications in the form of increased work and stress, I have found that if I assess systems more intuitively, the more productive my thinking around them is.

Discussion question: I know that I had a few personal thoughts on how the MENV mission and vision may be tweaked outside of the Cabrera’s ten testing component lens. What edits would you suggest to the mission, vision and/or values, if any?

MENV Vision: Shorter & Sweeter

Based on the 10 mission → vision tests in Systems Thinking Made Simple (critiqued below), I propose revising the MENV statements to:

 

Mission - Advance sustainability through engaging classes and real-world experience

Vision - A more just, sustainable, and productive planet

 

Critique:

 

Test #1: Mission → visions are short and simple

• MENV’s mission and vision could definitely be abbreviated (the book recommends just a few words!)

Test #2: Visions capture a picture of a binary future state

• MENV’s vision is close to binary, but could be pushed further

Test #3: Visions are intrinsically motivating

• The vision sounds like it be more aimed toward faculty and staff (i.e., “provide environmental leaders…”) - I think it could better reflect a mission the students’ perspective as well

Test #4: Missions are simple rules that follow a formula

• The mission more or less follows the formula; again, it is faculty focused and not a mission that speaks to students

Test #5: Repeatedly doing your mission should bring about the vision

• MENV’s mission → vision passes this test!

Test #6: Mission → visions must be measurable

• The vision is pretty hard to measure, but perhaps could be measured by surveying students after graduating to see if they are working on justice and sustainability issues

Test #7: Mission moments are rare and precious

• I think this is the most precarious part of MENV’s mission; although it’s written in a way most students can agree with, we’re just not experiencing mission moments in the program - we need more mission moments if the program is to thrive

Test #8: Mission → visions are mental models, not statements

• I do believe the vision is a mental model and not a statement

Test #9: Culture is built on shared, core mental models

• I think the mental models need to be better shared among the cohort - it seems strange we are just hearing about the mission and vision now, two-thirds of the way through program; I recommend sharing these with the next cohort during orientation week

Test #10: Learning constantly improves mission, vision, and culture

• I do think MENV passes one part test - the program is aligned in a way to make the mission and vision faster (two years condensed into 17 months) but not cheaper (at least for students)

 

One thing I’ve taken away from the class:

The overarching message that has resonated with me, from interpretivist theory and Systems Thinking Made Simple, is that we must actively work to acknowledge the “mismatch between the way the real world works and the way we think it works.” Engaging with and working to understand various perspectives and power structures is something I’ll aim to do in all my work.

Systems Thinking Ramble on Perspectives & Listening

Last week, as exhibited in my previous blog post, I was feeling turned off by systems thinking. The second section of the Cabrera’s book did not resonate with me, however this week’s final section of the book provided a pleasant rebound as much of the content struck a chord with me. Throughout this course, but more often over the last couple of weeks as we approach the final two classes in this course, I have been asking myself - how have I emerged as a systems thinker, if at all? Grappling with systems thinking has been a bit of challenge for me at times, as the intuitiveness of the material has varied. By no means am I contemplating myself as a systems thinker, because I believe I have a long way to go before I can consider myself one, but I have reflected upon the elements of systems thinking I have begun to practice more or am at least more cognizant of in my everyday life.

In addition, I have also mulled over what aspects of systems thinking may be most applicable to my eventual career in the environmental field (wherever that may) upon graduating in December. Within this last section of the Cabrera’s book, the section on metacognition and increasing one’s awareness really made sense for use as an environmental professional - particularly how the four simple rules of DSRP can be used to develop emotional intelligence, prosocial skills, compassion, empathy, introspection, perseverance and grit (p. 175). All of those skills I believe are necessities for an environmental professional. It will be especially critical to be self-reflective. What is working that we are doing and in which areas could we improve upon to bring about positive environmental change in the increasingly complex global world in which we all live. 

The following passage from this week’s reading brings me to my final point – the importance of understanding differing perspectives, which is key to listening effectively.

“Without the ability to take on others’ perspectives there would be little empathy and compassion. The ability to listen, which is so essential for human communication and social interaction, would be, and unfortunately is, a meaningless exercise without perspective-taking.” (p. 183)

I know that I likely have already blogged about this and it seems elementary, but I believe that the importance of listening cannot be understated. It is a necessity to avoid the pitfalls of “lock-in,” which the authors warned against. Listening was a common theme that I have heard in nearly all of my classes this semester from visiting environmental practitioners to former President Obama, who alluded to the importance of listening during his first public appearance since leaving office earlier this week. Obama discussed his time as a community organizer in Chicago:

“One of the things that I learned when I was organizing and this is true for I think of a lot of would be do-gooders. You know you show up in a neighborhood and your initial instinct is to tell people what they should be interested in, instead of spending the first six months listening and finding out what they actually are interested in… and then connecting their immediate needs to the policies that are having influence on those areas of concern…” (Link here to discussion, which was interesting, focused on civic engagement: https://www.c-span.org/video/?427383-1/former-president-obama-makes-first-public-remarks-since-leaving-office - this excerpt begins at 27:55)

Ultimately, in order to overcome many of the wicked problems we face, environmental and otherwise, we cannot solve them alone. We need to encourage people to view problems from perspectives other than their own and work to bring them together, which is certainly a daunting task. While I am not yet a full-fledged systems thinker or a convert to the belief that systems thinking will solve all of our problems, having more systems thinkers would likely be beneficial.

Scaling Systems

In Cabrera & Cabrera's Systems Thinking Made Simple, Chapter nine highlights systems thinking across different scales. The authors explain that to achieve big results, you must first focus DSRP rules on the individual and then the organization. Beginning at the micro-level allows systemic change for the individual and organization to emerge as systemic operators and operations.

As I was reading this section, I began thinking of the system our blog group examined for class: Ralphie's Green Stampede. Beginning with individuals, the program has emerged as a complex adaptive system. Ralphie's Green Stampede changed market behaviors, student and local practices, and even campus and administrative actions. Sustainability and responsible, earth-conscious decisions are part of CU Boulder and it's legacy. Students were seeking zero-waste opportunities that would be visible in a big way--so why not utilize the popular, attention-grabbing stadium and football games? Systems Thinking Made Simple illustrates how CU students and the Environmental Center's actions were different than others who tried to create change, but failed. Ralphie's Green Stampede's original initiatives were proactive and were focused on its "circle of influence" rather than reactive and worried about its "circle of concern". Getting sponsors and devoted student volunteers on-board early on created almost a butterfly effect. When the community eagerly accepted zero waste and adapted their behaviors in support, it was clear the system was filling a gap. Now CU proudly holds their zero-waste title and seeks similar opportunities elsewhere. Today, the Environmental Center on CU's campus monitors and oversees Ralphie's Green Stampede's operations. However, students remain very much involved with the processes that continue to further its growth. 

 

 

Clear, Hold, Build . . .

Section 3 of Cabrera’s book truly helped me realize the purpose behind studying the simple rules that guide a system rather than studying the system from a complex, large-scale view. The section gave the example of a general trying to oversee the whole battlefield all at once. This requires one to focus all of their energy on understanding the whole system. Yet, as Cabrera argues, this energy is misplaced. It is much more effective to perform a DSRP analysis and understanding the simple rules that guide the interactions within the system.   

Cabrera talks about the importance of scaling with regards to the US general’s strategy in Afghanistan: clear, hold, build. These simple instructions, when followed by all members of the coalition, can be scaled up and down. For instance, once a town is taken, soldiers may move into surrounding areas while keeping others held at their initial position. Eventually, soldiers can claim whole regions of territory just by following those three simple rules.

I’ve felt this concept while flipping through the Cabrera book. Section 2’s emphasis on mapping seemed to detract from the overall message of the book. When looking at a “God’s Eye View” systems map, I remember thinking “this is not the key to systems understanding.” There’s simply no way I could study that massive systems map enough to understand how it truly functions. DSRP seemed simpler, but how could DSRP truly encapsulate everything? Well, as Cabrera points out, when all actors in a system follow DSRP rules, the system becomes complex, dynamic, and adaptive.

So, if you want to truly understand a system, you need to distill the simple rules that are guiding action within the system. I aim to try to implement these systems concepts in my career, with whatever organization I end up working for. It seems like a simple process: 1. Employ a VMCL framework, 2. Rather than employing a command and control scheme, teach your VMCL framework to co-workers, and 3. Pay attention and be adaptive. Every situation will be different—the key is to identify core principles that guide your action while always remaining adaptive to new changes.

Question: Do you see any roadblocks to VMCL, that is, using simple rules (a mission) to bring about a goal (a vision)? To me, culture is the key here. Without shared mental models between all group members, one’s conception of the problem and the solution may be entirely different.