[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEitrZU-nCw]
Now here IS an enterprise ambassador!
Just another WordPress site
by admin
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEitrZU-nCw]
Now here IS an enterprise ambassador!
by admin
Richard Sennett’s ‘The Craftsman‘ is well worth the considerable effort it has taken me to read it. Although very well written many of the ideas it tackles are not easy!
He makes the point that we have used tests of intelligence and education to smear citizens along a bell-shaped curve of distribution that is in fact very flat and very wide. As a result we have come to believe that ‘ability’ is not anywhere near uniformly spread through society. And this belief has been used to justify the increased public investment in the education of the most able and the relative paucity of opportunity offered to those who, in the tests, appear to be ‘less able than average’.
Sennett then argues that this is a social construction with little basis in facts, outside of educational IQ tests such as the Stanford Binet. These tests rely on questions to which there is an answer – either right or wrong. They cannot deal with questions where the answer is a matter of opinion or insight. Where the answer is contestable. This especially, argues Sennett, serves to discriminate against those whose talents might lie in developing real craft skills. Sennet is at great pains to point out that these are not just about traditional crafts but anything where learning happens over a long period of application through experience, reflection and adjustment. This includes many roles that are incredibly relevant in modern society. People who are capable of this craft type learning may do poorly on the Stanford Binet and its equivalents (SATS) and from that point on they are socialised as ‘low ability’. Or those that thrive on the assessment regime they are socialised as ‘Gifted and Talented’. It is hard to know which is more damaging!
This socialisation has little to do with true potential or inherent capability and more to do with what we choose as a society to recognise, label and invest in.
Sennett’s argument (again assuming that yours truly has understood it) is that capability is MUCH more evenly distributed – we just might need to search for it with a much more open and creative mind. Many more of us are capable of doing ‘good work’. This insight would have enormous implications for how we organise education. Sennett says;
“Motivation is a more important issue than talent in consummating craftsmanship”
Socialisation serves to disconnect many of us from our talents as they are neither recognised not valued. The capabilities remain, but our motivation is eroded. Re-establishing motivation then becomes more important than extant talent. Indeed the key motivation required to renew the search for potential and to enter into a period of ‘craft type’ learning action, reflection and adjustment, often over a period of years until the capability becomes a craft.
Another leading academic Nobel prize wining Amartya Sen also talks about capability, its recognition and development as a central tool in poverty reduction. He also recognises the structural processes that serve to justify the enormous gaps between the haves and the have nots on a global scale.
Perhaps one of the vital roles of the enterprise coach is to help people to challenge the way that society has shaped them and to renew the search for ‘capability’ – the potential of those who use our services that has often been suppressed by societies warped, distorted and narrow perceptions of ability.
This is the Craft of the Enterprise Coach. And it may have nothing to do with starting a business.
by admin
Yorkshire Forward have recently unveiled plans (again) for the regeneration of the tiny, but very well positioned Tower Works site in Leeds. A quick search of the YF site shows that this has been rumbling on since the land was acquired in 2006.
The usual PR froth is being spewed out – ‘mixed use development’, ‘Italianate Towers’, ‘Giotto’, ‘supporting creative and digital industries’, ‘Leeds as a major business centre’….’vibrant community’ etc. But haven’t we been fed this line somewhere before?
Original plans for some 145 000 square feet of office space have been reduced to 18000 square feet in the ‘first phase’. But this will put still more pressure on Holbeck Urban Village where, at a casual glance, occupancy (outside of The Round Foundry) is poor.
The re-development of Tower Works will be financed by a mix of public and private finance. The public element coming from Yorkshire Forward seems to be just shy of £20 million. The private investment will mean that only those aspects of the development that are most likely to provide a good return are likely to happen quickly. With Holbeck Estates going into administration it is not yet at all clear how any developer will make their returns.
Perhaps it is a time for a change of tack?
Currently we invest enormous sums of public cash in developers to sweeten deals sufficiently to enable them to provide an infrastructure that will attract the creative classes to Leeds. Tower Works, the new southern entrance to the station, Neville St refurbishment, Latitude, Wellington St, I could go on. Once we have got things just right, and our 15 year plans have come to fruition, then surely things will come good? Well, if it all works out well, perhaps, yes. Those with the skills and the finance to use the infrastructure might be able to accrue more wealth. And, if you still believe in ‘trickle down’ (probably Father Christmas and the Tooth Fairy as well), then the economic benefits will also flow out to the poorer communities enabling the ‘gap’ to be maintained rather than widened. Perhaps the enterprise fairytale will have a happy ending this time. Perhaps…if we combine best case scenario with that holy grail of trickle down. Now I am all for optimism, confidence and positive thinking – but the realist in me says ‘Perhaps not’.
Worst case scenario? Developers, architects, public servants and planners get paid their fees and salaries and we get left with yet more low occupancy real estate. And I am not talking schools and GP practices. I am talking office space. Leeds is already awash with infrastructure – yet we intend to create more.
What would happen if we used that £20m to provide a serious programme of enterprise outreach education? (And before anyone says isn’t that what LEGI did, no they did not. They too put the money primarily into infrastructure at Shine and Hillside offering expensive premium office space).
What would happen if we provided high quality, sustained, long term and person centred community development work?
What if we taught local people the importance of bootstrapping, skill development and building social networks that pursued sustainable communities?
What if we helped them to create their own futures rather than enveloping them in the vision of the anointed?
Would our faith in the creativity, hard work and application of the people of Leeds be rewarded?
Of course.
by admin
Last night Nobel prize winning Economist and philosopher Amartya Sen gave an address with Demos and the Indian High Commission. Sen has spent a lifetime studying poverty, its causes and how it may be alleviated. His writing is dense, often supported with mathematical arguments. He is not an easy read. By his own admission he is a theorist and a researcher. It is up to others to put his research into practice.
So what does Sen have to say? How is it relevant to enterprise? Well here is my interpretation and, no doubt, gross simplification – tentatively offered….
Clearly Sen is not arguing that everyone should start their own business. Entrepreneurship is on the agenda but not at the top of it.
He is arguing for enterprising individuals and challenging us to develop our society in a way that encourages and supports them.
Anyone for enterprise?
by admin
Last night Nobel prize winning Economist and philosopher Amartya Sen gave an address with Demos and the Indian High Commission. Sen has spent a lifetime studying poverty, its causes and how it may be alleviated. His writing is dense, often supported with mathematical arguments. He is not an easy read. By his own admission he is a theorist and a researcher. It is up to others to put his research into practice.
So what does Sen have to say? How is it relevant to enterprise? Well here is my interpretation and, no doubt, gross simplification – tentatively offered….
Clearly Sen is not arguing that everyone should start their own business. Entrepreneurship is on the agenda but not at the top of it.
He is arguing for enterprising individuals and challenging us to develop our society in a way that encourages and supports them.
Anyone for enterprise?