WEBVTT

00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:03.259
Welcome to the deep dive. Have you ever noticed

00:00:03.259 --> 00:00:06.120
how some, well, brilliant ideas just seem to

00:00:06.120 --> 00:00:08.779
take off, while others, maybe just as good, sort

00:00:08.779 --> 00:00:11.539
of fade away? Yes, it's a common frustration,

00:00:11.599 --> 00:00:14.500
isn't it? Absolutely. Whether it's, say, a groundbreaking

00:00:14.500 --> 00:00:17.339
surgical technique, a fresh approach to patient

00:00:17.339 --> 00:00:20.320
care, or even just a new way to organize your

00:00:20.320 --> 00:00:23.190
operating theater list. getting innovative action

00:00:23.190 --> 00:00:26.129
to really stick and spread, well, it's much trickier

00:00:26.129 --> 00:00:28.890
than it looks, especially, I think, in today's

00:00:28.890 --> 00:00:31.429
fast -moving, very interconnected healthcare

00:00:31.429 --> 00:00:33.950
world. It's spot on. Today, we're embarking on

00:00:33.950 --> 00:00:36.289
a fascinating deep dive into the hidden dynamics

00:00:36.289 --> 00:00:38.750
of how innovative action actually gets done.

00:00:39.409 --> 00:00:41.929
We're going to explore the, well, the surprising

00:00:41.929 --> 00:00:44.270
interplay of networks, knowledge, and creative

00:00:44.270 --> 00:00:46.969
projects, uncovering the mechanisms that truly

00:00:46.969 --> 00:00:49.789
drive significant change, particularly perhaps

00:00:49.789 --> 00:00:52.109
within complex environments like hospitals and

00:00:52.109 --> 00:00:55.820
research institutions. Indeed. Our mission today,

00:00:55.820 --> 00:00:58.780
if you like, is to peel back those layers, to

00:00:58.780 --> 00:01:02.359
uncover the practical skills and the processes

00:01:02.359 --> 00:01:05.519
that transform these nascent ideas into impactful

00:01:05.519 --> 00:01:08.099
realities. It really is about understanding the

00:01:08.099 --> 00:01:09.939
invisible work, the stuff that goes on behind

00:01:09.939 --> 00:01:12.459
the scenes, that underpins significant change.

00:01:12.859 --> 00:01:15.079
Right. Whether that's developing a new surgical

00:01:15.079 --> 00:01:18.180
pathway, implementing a patient -centered approach,

00:01:18.400 --> 00:01:21.219
or maybe fostering interdisciplinary collaboration

00:01:21.219 --> 00:01:25.219
in, say, orthopedic research. That's exactly

00:01:25.219 --> 00:01:27.439
what we aim to do. By the end of our conversation,

00:01:27.659 --> 00:01:30.280
you should have, hopefully, a clearer lens to

00:01:30.280 --> 00:01:32.980
understand and maybe even orchestrate change

00:01:32.980 --> 00:01:35.760
in your own professional life. We'll be looking

00:01:35.760 --> 00:01:37.519
at how you might develop a new approach within

00:01:37.519 --> 00:01:40.099
your department, or perhaps mobilize a team for

00:01:40.099 --> 00:01:42.340
a critical project. So yeah, let's unpack this.

00:01:42.480 --> 00:01:45.340
Let's do it. OK, so thinking about the fundamentals.

00:01:45.980 --> 00:01:48.459
Every large organization, right? From a massive

00:01:48.459 --> 00:01:51.120
pharmaceutical company down to a national health

00:01:51.120 --> 00:01:54.879
service, it all started small. Inevitably. So

00:01:54.879 --> 00:01:58.099
the fundamental question we face is, how do these

00:01:58.099 --> 00:02:01.340
small entities actually expand? How do they evolve

00:02:01.340 --> 00:02:04.620
and achieve significant widespread impact? What

00:02:04.620 --> 00:02:07.439
allows maybe a brilliant idea born from a single

00:02:07.439 --> 00:02:10.300
surgeon's insight or a small research team's

00:02:10.300 --> 00:02:14.300
discovery to ripple outwards and redefine practice

00:02:14.300 --> 00:02:16.800
on a much larger scale? That's precisely it.

00:02:17.120 --> 00:02:19.300
And historically, the ability to effectively

00:02:19.300 --> 00:02:23.270
manage relationships and, crucially, the resources

00:02:23.270 --> 00:02:25.349
these relationships provide, that's always been

00:02:25.349 --> 00:02:27.569
central for strategic actors. Yeah. You know,

00:02:27.889 --> 00:02:29.729
careful cultivation of connections was needed

00:02:29.729 --> 00:02:32.289
to secure what was necessary for growth. You

00:02:32.289 --> 00:02:33.990
mentioned the surgeon. Perhaps they built relationships

00:02:33.990 --> 00:02:35.990
with philanthropists, hospital administrators

00:02:35.990 --> 00:02:37.990
to fund a new unit, that sort of thing. Right,

00:02:38.009 --> 00:02:40.909
the traditional patrons almost. Yes. But what's

00:02:40.909 --> 00:02:43.849
fascinating really is how profoundly this dynamic

00:02:43.849 --> 00:02:45.729
has changed in recent decades. And it really

00:02:45.729 --> 00:02:47.689
has changed dramatically, hasn't it? The way

00:02:47.689 --> 00:02:50.590
we engage with networks feels irrevocably altered,

00:02:50.969 --> 00:02:53.409
accelerated, I suppose. by digital tools, mobile

00:02:53.409 --> 00:02:56.789
phones, emails, social media platforms. How has

00:02:56.789 --> 00:02:59.830
that shift specifically impacted how people manage

00:02:59.830 --> 00:03:02.909
relationships and resources today? Does it just

00:03:02.909 --> 00:03:06.009
make communication faster or does it change the

00:03:06.009 --> 00:03:08.409
nature of coordination itself? That's a powerful

00:03:08.409 --> 00:03:11.409
point. It's more than just speed. Thomas Friedman's

00:03:11.409 --> 00:03:13.810
work on globalization, for instance, highlights

00:03:13.810 --> 00:03:16.949
this accelerated freedom, this velocity in combining

00:03:16.949 --> 00:03:19.909
people, ideas, and the means for production.

00:03:20.169 --> 00:03:22.530
It's created an environment where innovation

00:03:22.530 --> 00:03:24.889
can, well, it can spread at an unprecedented

00:03:24.889 --> 00:03:27.930
pace. And the very structure of work has evolved

00:03:27.930 --> 00:03:31.069
to reflect this. We're moving away from rigid

00:03:31.069 --> 00:03:33.610
sort of industrial hierarchies towards something

00:03:33.610 --> 00:03:35.930
much more fluid. And that brings us neatly to

00:03:35.930 --> 00:03:38.310
what the sociologists Luke Boltanski and Ithekia

00:03:38.310 --> 00:03:40.270
Pello call the new spirit of capitalism. They

00:03:40.270 --> 00:03:42.110
talked about a shift towards a project -oriented

00:03:42.110 --> 00:03:44.509
society. What does that actually mean for how

00:03:44.509 --> 00:03:47.030
work gets done in, say, a modern hospital department?

00:03:47.340 --> 00:03:50.099
Well, it suggests a profound move away from those

00:03:50.099 --> 00:03:53.000
rigid top -down structures. We're now seeing

00:03:53.000 --> 00:03:55.740
organizations that are highly flexible, predominantly

00:03:55.740 --> 00:03:58.439
organized around projects, and operating in quite

00:03:58.439 --> 00:04:01.060
intricate networks with far fewer hierarchical

00:04:01.060 --> 00:04:03.979
levels. That traditional sort of vertical flow

00:04:03.979 --> 00:04:06.879
of information is being replaced by transversal

00:04:06.879 --> 00:04:09.120
flows, communication and collaboration happening

00:04:09.120 --> 00:04:13.219
across, rather than just up and down, the organizational

00:04:13.219 --> 00:04:15.650
chart. OK, so across departments, across teams.

00:04:15.889 --> 00:04:18.589
Exactly. And for an individual, this means their

00:04:18.589 --> 00:04:20.769
professional life becomes, in essence, a series

00:04:20.769 --> 00:04:23.069
of projects. It requires them to continually

00:04:23.069 --> 00:04:26.269
assemble quite disparate groups of people, often

00:04:26.269 --> 00:04:29.649
for relatively short, focused periods. In a medical

00:04:29.649 --> 00:04:32.339
context, you see this all the time. multidisciplinary

00:04:32.339 --> 00:04:35.120
teams forming around complex patient cases, a

00:04:35.120 --> 00:04:37.379
knee replacement needing input from surgeons,

00:04:37.579 --> 00:04:40.720
anesthetists, physio, social workers, or research

00:04:40.720 --> 00:04:43.220
consortium formings for specific clinical trials,

00:04:43.519 --> 00:04:45.060
bringing together geneticists, statisticians,

00:04:45.199 --> 00:04:47.560
clinical specialists. It's project -based. So

00:04:47.560 --> 00:04:50.800
with work increasingly organized around these

00:04:50.800 --> 00:04:54.000
flexible project structures, who's actually making

00:04:54.000 --> 00:04:56.100
these networked organizations, these networked

00:04:56.100 --> 00:04:59.000
departments, hum? Who are the essential players

00:04:59.000 --> 00:05:02.040
in this fluid environment? Well, Boltanski and

00:05:02.040 --> 00:05:04.680
Chiappello identify them as mediators. These

00:05:04.680 --> 00:05:06.899
are individuals who possess a unique sort of

00:05:06.899 --> 00:05:10.560
art. The ability to reconcile opposites, to bring

00:05:10.560 --> 00:05:12.720
very different people together, and crucially

00:05:12.720 --> 00:05:15.879
to put them into contact. Their skills are paramount.

00:05:16.560 --> 00:05:19.100
coordinating, connecting, locating new sources

00:05:19.100 --> 00:05:21.600
of information vital for innovation, inspiring

00:05:21.600 --> 00:05:24.100
trust among those they coordinate, and demonstrating

00:05:24.100 --> 00:05:26.540
remarkable flexibility and adaptability. The

00:05:26.540 --> 00:05:29.420
social glue, almost. In essence, yes. They're

00:05:29.420 --> 00:05:31.800
the social glue that enables this dynamic, project

00:05:31.800 --> 00:05:34.259
-based work. Think of the senior registrar who

00:05:34.259 --> 00:05:35.980
seamlessly connects the surgical team with the

00:05:35.980 --> 00:05:38.800
nursing staff, ensuring smooth handovers. Or

00:05:38.800 --> 00:05:40.740
the research coordinator who links basic scientists

00:05:40.740 --> 00:05:43.459
with clinical trial specialists. They're mediating,

00:05:43.759 --> 00:05:45.899
connecting, and enabling new solutions to emerge

00:05:45.899 --> 00:05:47.939
from those connections. It sounds like so much

00:05:47.939 --> 00:05:50.100
of this hinges on connections between people.

00:05:50.420 --> 00:05:53.540
We often talk about networking as simply linking

00:05:53.540 --> 00:05:56.600
two individuals, a one -to -one. But how important

00:05:56.600 --> 00:05:59.639
is it to move beyond just two people for true

00:05:59.639 --> 00:06:02.360
coordination and impact? especially when you're

00:06:02.360 --> 00:06:04.860
trying to innovate. That's a critical distinction.

00:06:05.279 --> 00:06:07.759
Karl Weick, a key thinker here, introduced the

00:06:07.759 --> 00:06:10.920
concept of the double interact. That's a communicative

00:06:10.920 --> 00:06:13.959
exchange between two individuals. One sends a

00:06:13.959 --> 00:06:16.459
message, the second responds, the first adjusts.

00:06:16.459 --> 00:06:19.180
Simple feedback loop. OK, like a surgeon discussing

00:06:19.180 --> 00:06:22.160
a case with a colleague or explaining a procedure

00:06:22.160 --> 00:06:25.160
to a patient. Exactly. It forms the core coordinative

00:06:25.160 --> 00:06:27.800
unit in organizing. However, while it's foundational,

00:06:28.220 --> 00:06:30.579
the double interact is fundamentally inert in

00:06:30.579 --> 00:06:33.459
scale. It assumes a pre -existing pair and is

00:06:33.459 --> 00:06:35.939
limited to dyadic possibilities. It doesn't easily

00:06:35.939 --> 00:06:38.240
account for larger, more complex social phenomena

00:06:38.240 --> 00:06:40.980
or dynamic expansion. You simply can't scale

00:06:40.980 --> 00:06:43.519
a new medical protocol or launch a hospital -wide

00:06:43.519 --> 00:06:45.620
initiative just through a series of two -person

00:06:45.620 --> 00:06:48.439
conversations. It doesn't work. Right. So where

00:06:48.439 --> 00:06:51.259
does true coordination begin to scale up then?

00:06:51.639 --> 00:06:54.000
If two isn't enough, what's the magic number

00:06:54.000 --> 00:06:57.540
for an idea to really take flight? The crucial

00:06:57.540 --> 00:06:59.720
shift occurs when we move from two to three the

00:06:59.720 --> 00:07:03.480
triad. In a triad, the third party, the broker,

00:07:04.079 --> 00:07:06.519
no longer simply engages with one other person.

00:07:06.959 --> 00:07:09.759
Instead, the broker represents the position or

00:07:09.759 --> 00:07:12.379
viewpoint of one party to another individual

00:07:12.379 --> 00:07:15.319
or group. And this, in my view, is the fundamental

00:07:15.319 --> 00:07:17.399
template for the coordinated act in organizing.

00:07:17.699 --> 00:07:19.819
Okay. Can you give an example? Sure. Think of

00:07:19.819 --> 00:07:21.899
a clinical lead advocating for a new treatment

00:07:21.899 --> 00:07:24.339
protocol within a hospital. They represent the

00:07:24.339 --> 00:07:26.759
potential benefits, world one, to the hospital

00:07:26.759 --> 00:07:29.360
management or ethics committee, world two, or

00:07:29.360 --> 00:07:31.480
a pharmaceutical entrepreneur mobilizing support

00:07:31.480 --> 00:07:34.120
for a new drug development representing the science

00:07:34.120 --> 00:07:37.399
to investors, or an activist initiating collective

00:07:37.399 --> 00:07:39.740
action for public health awareness representing

00:07:39.740 --> 00:07:42.560
the community's needs to policymakers. All of

00:07:42.560 --> 00:07:44.920
these involve three or more actors, and the broker

00:07:44.920 --> 00:07:47.439
is absolutely central to linking those disparate

00:07:47.439 --> 00:07:49.220
interests and bringing them into some kind of

00:07:49.220 --> 00:07:51.019
alignment. That really clicks into place. And

00:07:51.019 --> 00:07:54.060
the broker's role in this triad sounds incredibly

00:07:54.060 --> 00:07:56.279
nuanced. It's not just about passing messages

00:07:56.279 --> 00:07:59.279
back and forth, is it? Not at all. The representational

00:07:59.279 --> 00:08:02.379
act, the very core of triadic coordination, is

00:08:02.379 --> 00:08:05.899
inherently complex. Now... Some have noted, like

00:08:05.899 --> 00:08:09.079
Ron Bird, that a strategic actor might intentionally

00:08:09.079 --> 00:08:11.980
misrepresent or adjust knowledge between parties

00:08:11.980 --> 00:08:14.540
for their own gain. The Tertius Gardens we might

00:08:14.540 --> 00:08:17.740
get to later. Precisely. But a more common and

00:08:17.740 --> 00:08:20.519
arguably more effective long -term approach involves

00:08:20.519 --> 00:08:22.939
the broker continually shaping representations.

00:08:23.660 --> 00:08:26.660
This is done carefully, to maximize understanding

00:08:26.660 --> 00:08:29.500
perhaps, or to ensure receptivity from the other

00:08:29.500 --> 00:08:31.819
party, or maybe to highlight the perceived value

00:08:31.819 --> 00:08:34.889
of connecting. Ultimately, the aim is often to

00:08:34.889 --> 00:08:37.529
engender trust in the representation itself,

00:08:38.090 --> 00:08:40.169
trust in the broker, or trust in the other actors

00:08:40.169 --> 00:08:42.629
involved as a necessary prelude to collaborative

00:08:42.629 --> 00:08:44.710
effort. Right, building that foundation. Think

00:08:44.710 --> 00:08:47.120
as an orthopedic department head. Trying to convince

00:08:47.120 --> 00:08:49.679
the hospital board, they need a new robotic surgery

00:08:49.679 --> 00:08:52.019
system. They need to understand the board's financial

00:08:52.019 --> 00:08:54.559
concerns. They need to understand the surgeon's

00:08:54.559 --> 00:08:57.139
clinical needs. And then they have to articulate

00:08:57.139 --> 00:09:00.320
the robotic system's value in a way that resonates

00:09:00.320 --> 00:09:02.779
with both, building trust that this investment

00:09:02.779 --> 00:09:05.299
is worthwhile. It's a delicate balancing act.

00:09:05.399 --> 00:09:07.840
So effective coordination, especially in these

00:09:07.840 --> 00:09:10.240
dynamic, often quite political environments,

00:09:10.480 --> 00:09:13.980
requires a certain social dexterity. What exactly

00:09:13.980 --> 00:09:16.039
does that entail? How would you recognize it

00:09:16.039 --> 00:09:18.659
in someone, say, a leading surgeon or a medical

00:09:18.659 --> 00:09:21.919
innovator? Social dexterity. It encompasses a

00:09:21.919 --> 00:09:24.639
range of attributes, really. It involves a command

00:09:24.639 --> 00:09:27.659
of the specific social hygiene of a given context,

00:09:28.259 --> 00:09:29.700
basically, understanding the unwritten rules,

00:09:29.820 --> 00:09:31.580
the etiquette of that particular group or industry.

00:09:31.820 --> 00:09:34.220
Like knowing when it's okay to phone a busy consultant

00:09:34.220 --> 00:09:38.139
versus sending an email. Exactly that. Or knowing

00:09:38.139 --> 00:09:40.500
how to subtly raise a sensitive issue in a team

00:09:40.500 --> 00:09:43.620
meeting without causing offense. It also requires

00:09:43.620 --> 00:09:46.840
the ability to forge trust across a broad spectrum

00:09:46.840 --> 00:09:50.059
of people, familiar and less familiar. A talent

00:09:50.059 --> 00:09:52.039
for accurately assessing the character and interests

00:09:52.039 --> 00:09:54.259
of those you don't know intimately, that's crucial.

00:09:54.840 --> 00:09:57.320
And a capacity to make effective appeals, to

00:09:57.320 --> 00:09:59.519
enlist and connect people to shared causes or

00:09:59.519 --> 00:10:01.840
projects. Can you think of historical examples?

00:10:02.190 --> 00:10:04.470
Well, historically, you see this dexterity in

00:10:04.470 --> 00:10:07.649
figures like Cosimo de' Medici, skillfully managing

00:10:07.649 --> 00:10:10.049
relationships to cultivate power in 15th century

00:10:10.049 --> 00:10:12.970
Florence, or Abraham Lincoln assembling support

00:10:12.970 --> 00:10:15.049
to abolish slavery by bringing together really

00:10:15.049 --> 00:10:18.029
diverse, often conflicting factions. Even in

00:10:18.029 --> 00:10:20.490
the arts, Paul Sacks building New York's Museum

00:10:20.490 --> 00:10:22.570
of Modern Art that required definitely connecting

00:10:22.570 --> 00:10:24.750
support from various institutions and patrons.

00:10:24.970 --> 00:10:26.809
And in modern health care. Think of the clinical

00:10:26.809 --> 00:10:29.429
director who navigates complex hospital politics

00:10:29.429 --> 00:10:32.190
to secure funding for a new research unit. or

00:10:32.190 --> 00:10:34.370
the researcher who builds a consortium across

00:10:34.370 --> 00:10:37.330
competing institutions for groundbreaking clinical

00:10:37.330 --> 00:10:41.690
trial. That is social dexterity in action, enabling

00:10:41.690 --> 00:10:44.090
collaboration across traditional silos, overcoming

00:10:44.090 --> 00:10:46.970
inertia, getting things done. Okay, so we understand

00:10:46.970 --> 00:10:50.200
the foundations. networks, coordination, the

00:10:50.200 --> 00:10:52.120
importance of the triad, and this idea of social

00:10:52.120 --> 00:10:54.740
dexterity. Let's now try and deconstruct brokerage

00:10:54.740 --> 00:10:56.779
itself. You highlighted earlier that it's crucial

00:10:56.779 --> 00:10:58.980
to distinguish between brokerage as a static

00:10:58.980 --> 00:11:01.639
structure, just the map of connections, and brokerage

00:11:01.639 --> 00:11:04.059
as a dynamic process. Why is that distinction

00:11:04.059 --> 00:11:06.139
so important when we talk about getting new things

00:11:06.139 --> 00:11:08.799
done? Precisely. Because when we talk about getting

00:11:08.799 --> 00:11:12.039
new things done, achieving innovation, we absolutely

00:11:12.039 --> 00:11:14.980
must consider both. The social network structure,

00:11:15.179 --> 00:11:17.860
provides the architecture, if you like, the accounting

00:11:17.860 --> 00:11:20.620
of activity. But the social process explains

00:11:20.620 --> 00:11:24.039
how ties form an aggregate, or indeed why they

00:11:24.039 --> 00:11:27.759
sometimes fail to form. The problem is, social

00:11:27.759 --> 00:11:30.460
network research often tends to subordinate process

00:11:30.460 --> 00:11:33.740
to structure. Why? Well, frankly, because structure

00:11:33.740 --> 00:11:36.039
is much easier to measure. You can map connections.

00:11:36.259 --> 00:11:37.679
Right. You can draw the network diagram. You

00:11:37.679 --> 00:11:40.080
can draw the diagram. But that can lead to process

00:11:40.080 --> 00:11:42.120
just being inferred from the structural data,

00:11:42.159 --> 00:11:44.210
which is a limitation. We need to focus on the

00:11:44.210 --> 00:11:47.289
dynamic, actionable aspects of brokerage, what

00:11:47.289 --> 00:11:49.429
the broker actually does within that structure.

00:11:49.809 --> 00:11:51.529
OK, so let's look at network structure first

00:11:51.529 --> 00:11:54.190
then. The literature often talks about open versus

00:11:54.190 --> 00:11:56.529
closed networks. Can you define those and what

00:11:56.529 --> 00:11:59.210
are their implications for, say, fostering innovation

00:11:59.210 --> 00:12:02.009
in medical research? Sure. Open networks are

00:12:02.009 --> 00:12:04.529
characterized by what Ronald Burtt famously called

00:12:04.529 --> 00:12:07.799
structural holes. These are essentially gaps

00:12:07.799 --> 00:12:10.460
or separations between non -redundant contacts.

00:12:11.399 --> 00:12:14.080
Someone who bridges such a hole connects otherwise

00:12:14.080 --> 00:12:17.220
disconnected groups or individuals. Such a structure

00:12:17.220 --> 00:12:19.679
offers that bridging actor an ideal opportunity

00:12:19.679 --> 00:12:22.159
for accessing new information. Because the groups

00:12:22.159 --> 00:12:24.379
they connect don't talk to each other, the information

00:12:24.379 --> 00:12:27.139
isn't redundant. It also provides potential control

00:12:27.139 --> 00:12:29.700
benefits by allowing the broker to leverage these

00:12:29.700 --> 00:12:32.220
disconnected actors. Okay, so good for fresh

00:12:32.220 --> 00:12:34.970
ideas, but what's the downside? The challenge

00:12:34.970 --> 00:12:38.370
in open networks lies in mobilizing these disparate

00:12:38.370 --> 00:12:40.649
actors. You often have very diverse interests,

00:12:40.950 --> 00:12:42.950
different ways of working, maybe even conflicting

00:12:42.950 --> 00:12:45.549
goals. This was often referred to as the action

00:12:45.549 --> 00:12:48.370
problem. Imagine a brilliant orthopedic researcher.

00:12:48.590 --> 00:12:50.490
They might know cutting edge bioengineers and

00:12:50.490 --> 00:12:52.309
have connections to patient advocacy groups.

00:12:52.750 --> 00:12:55.049
That's an open network structure, fantastic for

00:12:55.049 --> 00:12:57.769
generating novel ideas at the intersection. But

00:12:57.769 --> 00:12:59.450
getting the engineers and the patient groups

00:12:59.450 --> 00:13:01.769
to agree on a collaborative project, that can

00:13:01.769 --> 00:13:04.590
be tough. Right. And closed networks. Closed

00:13:04.590 --> 00:13:07.250
or dense networks are the opposite. They're more

00:13:07.250 --> 00:13:10.289
interconnected, more homogenous. People within

00:13:10.289 --> 00:13:13.309
them tend to know each other, share similar backgrounds,

00:13:13.789 --> 00:13:16.389
values, information. Think of a tight -knit surgical

00:13:16.389 --> 00:13:19.009
team that's worked together for years. These

00:13:19.009 --> 00:13:21.269
networks are much more conducive to mobilization

00:13:21.269 --> 00:13:23.610
and coordination because there's greater alignment

00:13:23.610 --> 00:13:26.389
of attributes and interests. Trust is often higher.

00:13:26.590 --> 00:13:29.730
communication easier. But the drawback. The drawback

00:13:29.730 --> 00:13:32.250
is they're less likely to import novel ideas

00:13:32.250 --> 00:13:35.129
from the outside. Information tends to be redundant.

00:13:35.710 --> 00:13:37.450
Everyone already knows what everyone else knows.

00:13:37.990 --> 00:13:40.529
This presents what we might call the idea problem.

00:13:40.750 --> 00:13:43.049
So it sounds like a bit of a dilemma for any

00:13:43.049 --> 00:13:45.149
leader trying to innovate. Open networks are

00:13:45.149 --> 00:13:47.370
great for new ideas, but hard to get things done.

00:13:47.850 --> 00:13:49.309
Closed networks are great for getting things

00:13:49.309 --> 00:13:52.250
done, but maybe less good for truly novel ideas.

00:13:52.669 --> 00:13:55.269
In simplistic terms, yes, that's the classic

00:13:55.269 --> 00:13:58.080
trade off. But the reality, of course, is far

00:13:58.080 --> 00:14:01.240
more hybrid. Most real -world networks combine

00:14:01.240 --> 00:14:04.539
open and closed characteristics. Overly simplistic

00:14:04.539 --> 00:14:07.080
distinctions can lead to oversimplified inferences

00:14:07.080 --> 00:14:09.899
about what works. For instance, my own research

00:14:09.899 --> 00:14:11.779
in an automotive design environment focusing

00:14:11.779 --> 00:14:14.259
on incremental innovation, mind you, found something

00:14:14.259 --> 00:14:16.860
interesting. It found that a combination of dense

00:14:16.860 --> 00:14:19.480
or closed networks, along with an action -based

00:14:19.480 --> 00:14:21.700
measure of actors' orientation to connect others,

00:14:21.960 --> 00:14:24.840
what we call Tushis iEngines brokerage, the uniting

00:14:24.840 --> 00:14:27.000
function, that combination, was actually predictive

00:14:27.000 --> 00:14:29.379
of innovation involvement. So it's not just the

00:14:29.379 --> 00:14:31.759
structure, but the activity within it. Exactly.

00:14:32.480 --> 00:14:35.240
It suggests that sophisticated analysis of network

00:14:35.240 --> 00:14:38.240
patterns demands a grasp of the social dynamics

00:14:38.240 --> 00:14:41.139
associated with those ties. It's about the process

00:14:41.139 --> 00:14:44.159
of brokering within that structure. For example,

00:14:44.379 --> 00:14:46.460
A senior surgeon might use their established

00:14:46.460 --> 00:14:49.139
dense network within the hospital to mobilize

00:14:49.139 --> 00:14:51.600
support for a new surgical approach that's the

00:14:51.600 --> 00:14:53.940
closed network advantage. But they also need

00:14:53.940 --> 00:14:56.179
to actively broker new connections to external

00:14:56.179 --> 00:14:59.360
experts or technologies to bring genuinely novel

00:14:59.360 --> 00:15:02.159
ideas into that network that's leveraging openness.

00:15:02.460 --> 00:15:05.019
This is where it really comes alive for me. Moving

00:15:05.019 --> 00:15:06.980
beyond just seeing connections as static lines

00:15:06.980 --> 00:15:10.720
on a map and into how brokerage is a truly dynamic

00:15:10.720 --> 00:15:13.000
action. It's not just about having connections,

00:15:13.139 --> 00:15:15.080
is it? It's about what you do with them. And

00:15:15.080 --> 00:15:17.059
you've identified three core ways people act

00:15:17.059 --> 00:15:19.100
as brokers, these orientations. Let's get into

00:15:19.100 --> 00:15:22.039
those. Absolutely. Because skillful leaders and

00:15:22.039 --> 00:15:24.039
innovators, they don't just sit in a network

00:15:24.039 --> 00:15:27.259
position. They strategically employ these three

00:15:27.259 --> 00:15:30.139
core brokerage orientations. The first is conduit

00:15:30.139 --> 00:15:32.570
brokerage. The information pipe. You can think

00:15:32.570 --> 00:15:35.070
of it like that, yes. But it's more active than

00:15:35.070 --> 00:15:37.710
just a pipe. This is where the broker curates

00:15:37.710 --> 00:15:40.230
from the flow of ideas and opportunities, determining

00:15:40.230 --> 00:15:42.909
what is relevant and how best to pass it on.

00:15:43.750 --> 00:15:46.490
It involves reformatting knowledge for successful

00:15:46.490 --> 00:15:48.940
transit and reception by the target audience.

00:15:49.620 --> 00:15:52.120
It's far more complex than simple knowledge transfer.

00:15:52.639 --> 00:15:55.000
It involves search, discovery, maybe embellishment,

00:15:55.120 --> 00:15:57.919
reconfiguration. It also requires sense -making,

00:15:58.539 --> 00:16:01.139
that crucial step of noticing, bracketing, and

00:16:01.139 --> 00:16:03.639
labeling new ideas so others can grasp their

00:16:03.639 --> 00:16:06.980
significance. So like a clinician attending a

00:16:06.980 --> 00:16:09.679
cutting edge conference. Precisely. They bring

00:16:09.679 --> 00:16:11.919
back a new insight, perhaps about prosthetic

00:16:11.919 --> 00:16:14.580
design. They're not just relaying raw information.

00:16:14.840 --> 00:16:16.759
They're interpreting it for their team, explaining

00:16:16.759 --> 00:16:19.200
its relevance, maybe even adapting it for their

00:16:19.200 --> 00:16:21.700
specific patient population or hospital context.

00:16:22.019 --> 00:16:24.820
That's conduit brokerage in action. And the classic

00:16:24.820 --> 00:16:27.259
non -medical example often cited is Steve Jobs

00:16:27.259 --> 00:16:30.220
and the Xerox PRC mouse, isn't it? That wasn't

00:16:30.220 --> 00:16:32.000
just seeing a mouse. It was about vision and

00:16:32.000 --> 00:16:35.009
transformation. Exactly. A perfect illustration.

00:16:35.649 --> 00:16:38.789
When Steve Jobs visited Xerox BR Xi and saw the

00:16:38.789 --> 00:16:41.850
graphical user interface and the mouse, he didn't

00:16:41.850 --> 00:16:44.649
just transfer the idea back to Apple. He recognized

00:16:44.649 --> 00:16:47.710
its revolutionary potential. He ferried these

00:16:47.710 --> 00:16:49.889
tokens, as the story goes, back to his own company.

00:16:50.690 --> 00:16:53.490
But crucially, this was a significant reconfiguration.

00:16:53.679 --> 00:16:56.340
He famously instructed his engineers to transform

00:16:56.340 --> 00:16:59.580
the clunky, expensive $300 Xerox mouse, which

00:16:59.580 --> 00:17:01.299
apparently broke within two weeks into something

00:17:01.299 --> 00:17:04.519
manufacturable, for less than 15 bucks. And durable

00:17:04.519 --> 00:17:07.259
enough for, as he put it, for Micah and my blue

00:17:07.259 --> 00:17:09.660
jeans. That's definitely transformation. It absolutely

00:17:09.660 --> 00:17:12.420
is. Transformation for a completely new context

00:17:12.420 --> 00:17:16.619
in market. Paul Carlyle's 3T model helps us understand

00:17:16.619 --> 00:17:20.059
these nuances. Transfer is the simplest. Crossing

00:17:20.059 --> 00:17:22.420
a syntactic boundary where differences are known.

00:17:22.559 --> 00:17:25.559
Like describing a function you observed. Translation

00:17:25.559 --> 00:17:27.920
is needed when crossing semantic boundaries different

00:17:27.920 --> 00:17:31.519
interpretations due to context. Like jobs explaining

00:17:31.519 --> 00:17:34.059
how the mouse made sense for the lisa and macintosh,

00:17:34.440 --> 00:17:36.980
its strategic fit. And transformation involves

00:17:36.980 --> 00:17:39.299
that significant rearrangement or new synthesis

00:17:39.299 --> 00:17:42.119
of knowledge, often necessary when incompatible

00:17:42.119 --> 00:17:44.839
interests or contexts prevent shared meaning

00:17:44.839 --> 00:17:47.259
being easily established. So applying that to

00:17:47.259 --> 00:17:49.529
medicine. A surgeon might transfer information

00:17:49.529 --> 00:17:51.990
about a new implant they saw demonstrated, but

00:17:51.990 --> 00:17:54.170
they then have to translate it for their theater

00:17:54.170 --> 00:17:56.190
team. What does it mean for instruments, for

00:17:56.190 --> 00:17:58.769
workflow? And if it requires a whole new approach,

00:17:58.829 --> 00:18:00.970
they might need to transform the entire surgical

00:18:00.970 --> 00:18:03.750
protocol to integrate it effectively, which involves

00:18:03.750 --> 00:18:06.349
negotiation and change management. OK, that's

00:18:06.349 --> 00:18:08.450
conduit. The second orientation you mentioned

00:18:08.450 --> 00:18:10.769
is Tertius -Gaudens brokerage. This sounds a

00:18:10.769 --> 00:18:13.789
bit more strategic, perhaps even Machiavellian,

00:18:14.190 --> 00:18:16.829
the divide and conquer strategy. Indeed, it can

00:18:16.829 --> 00:18:20.289
be perceived that way. Tertius Godden's literally

00:18:20.289 --> 00:18:23.509
the third who enjoys involves the broker maintaining

00:18:23.509 --> 00:18:26.190
or even exploiting unfamiliarity, competition,

00:18:26.329 --> 00:18:28.829
or conflict between other parties. This can be

00:18:28.829 --> 00:18:31.509
done actively or sometimes through purposeful

00:18:31.509 --> 00:18:35.450
inaction. George Simmel, the classical sociologist,

00:18:35.730 --> 00:18:38.289
described this as the third who benefits from

00:18:38.289 --> 00:18:41.460
the disunion of the two others. Ron Bird elaborated,

00:18:41.759 --> 00:18:44.140
noting this often means playing conflicting demands

00:18:44.140 --> 00:18:46.400
or interests against one another. How might that

00:18:46.400 --> 00:18:49.039
look in practice? Well, it can take various forms.

00:18:49.259 --> 00:18:51.740
Playing actual or hypothetical alters against

00:18:51.740 --> 00:18:54.279
one another. A classic example is claiming other

00:18:54.279 --> 00:18:56.900
suppliers offer lower prices to gain a negotiating

00:18:56.900 --> 00:18:59.400
advantage. It could also involve subtly keeping

00:18:59.400 --> 00:19:01.880
alters apart, perhaps by declining invitations

00:19:01.880 --> 00:19:04.119
to critical joint meetings, citing competitiveness

00:19:04.119 --> 00:19:06.500
or timing issues when the real goal is to prevent

00:19:06.500 --> 00:19:09.789
them aligning. The most active form is devide

00:19:09.789 --> 00:19:12.829
et impera, divide and conquer intentionally producing

00:19:12.829 --> 00:19:15.569
or exacerbating conflict to gain a dominant position.

00:19:15.849 --> 00:19:18.730
And the goal here? The goal is typically to reinforce

00:19:18.730 --> 00:19:20.930
boundaries, or at least leave them in force,

00:19:21.250 --> 00:19:23.750
often by blocking or distorting information flow

00:19:23.750 --> 00:19:26.369
between the other parties, with the broker positioned

00:19:26.369 --> 00:19:29.490
as the disproportionate beneficiary. It often

00:19:29.490 --> 00:19:33.069
aims for immediate concrete profit or advantage.

00:19:33.289 --> 00:19:36.470
You could imagine, perhaps, a hospital administrator

00:19:36.470 --> 00:19:39.309
playing two competing orthopedic suppliers against

00:19:39.309 --> 00:19:41.809
each other to secure a better deal on implants.

00:19:42.410 --> 00:19:45.009
Or maybe subtly creating a slight tension between

00:19:45.009 --> 00:19:47.109
two departments to gain leverage for their own

00:19:47.109 --> 00:19:50.309
budget proposal. It happens. Right. And the third

00:19:50.309 --> 00:19:53.529
orientation, Tertius Ingen's brokerage, seems

00:19:53.529 --> 00:19:56.309
to be the polar opposite the uniter. This is

00:19:56.309 --> 00:19:58.009
about bringing people together. That's right.

00:19:58.289 --> 00:20:01.240
Tertius Ingen's the third who joins. Here, the

00:20:01.240 --> 00:20:04.160
broker actively introduces or facilitates a connection

00:20:04.160 --> 00:20:06.859
between two other parties, specifically pursuing

00:20:06.859 --> 00:20:10.019
coordination and collaboration. This can manifest

00:20:10.019 --> 00:20:12.599
as a brief engines, perhaps a single introduction

00:20:12.599 --> 00:20:14.960
where ongoing coordination isn't needed, or it

00:20:14.960 --> 00:20:17.619
can be a sustained engines where the broker maintains

00:20:17.619 --> 00:20:20.000
a continuous coordinated role over time. Can

00:20:20.000 --> 00:20:22.079
you give an example of that? Let's take our senior

00:20:22.079 --> 00:20:24.480
orthopedic surgeon again wanting to initiate

00:20:24.480 --> 00:20:26.869
a new clinical study. They might first pitch

00:20:26.869 --> 00:20:29.329
the idea separately to a promising junior researcher,

00:20:29.829 --> 00:20:32.109
and then to a potential funding body representative.

00:20:32.769 --> 00:20:35.069
Crucially, they tailor the story of the project

00:20:35.069 --> 00:20:38.029
to each party's specific interests. Let's call

00:20:38.029 --> 00:20:41.309
them PG for Gloria the researcher, PJ for Joanne

00:20:41.309 --> 00:20:44.210
the funder. Once trust is built individually,

00:20:44.910 --> 00:20:46.809
the surgeon then introduces the project to them

00:20:46.809 --> 00:20:49.400
together, perhaps with a third blended version

00:20:49.400 --> 00:20:51.960
of the proposal, PGJ, which reflects what was

00:20:51.960 --> 00:20:54.240
learned from the individual interactions. This

00:20:54.240 --> 00:20:56.480
involves both translation making the project

00:20:56.480 --> 00:20:59.019
make sense to both and potentially transformation

00:20:59.019 --> 00:21:01.099
of the initial idea to create something new that

00:21:01.099 --> 00:21:03.319
appeals jointly and enables collaboration. So

00:21:03.319 --> 00:21:06.220
is the motivation for Tertius I -Engines always

00:21:06.220 --> 00:21:08.299
altruistic? It sounds very collaborative, very

00:21:08.299 --> 00:21:11.099
win -win. Well, it certainly can be associated

00:21:11.099 --> 00:21:14.119
with altruism. Think of transformational leaders,

00:21:14.500 --> 00:21:16.359
facilitating their staff's advancement by making

00:21:16.359 --> 00:21:19.099
key introductions or efforts in international

00:21:19.099 --> 00:21:21.319
public health cooperation, bringing different

00:21:21.319 --> 00:21:24.079
agencies together. But it's also a powerful strategic

00:21:24.079 --> 00:21:27.319
means to get new things done. The broker might

00:21:27.319 --> 00:21:30.339
consciously forgo an immediate rent or benefit

00:21:30.339 --> 00:21:33.460
for their coordinated services. Why? because

00:21:33.460 --> 00:21:36.539
they anticipate unspecified future gains, things

00:21:36.539 --> 00:21:39.720
like long -term trust, reciprocity, or simply

00:21:39.720 --> 00:21:42.180
the successful completion of a high -impact project

00:21:42.180 --> 00:21:44.160
they care about. An investment in the network.

00:21:44.539 --> 00:21:46.740
Exactly. In a medical setting, this might be

00:21:46.740 --> 00:21:48.539
a senior consultant connecting a junior doctor

00:21:48.539 --> 00:21:50.700
with a leading researcher in another institution.

00:21:51.380 --> 00:21:53.240
There's no immediate personal gain, perhaps,

00:21:53.559 --> 00:21:56.400
but it fosters innovation within the field, builds

00:21:56.400 --> 00:21:58.660
the institution's reputation, and strengthens

00:21:58.660 --> 00:22:01.170
future collaborative potential. It's an investment,

00:22:01.430 --> 00:22:03.430
anticipating future dividends for the broader

00:22:03.430 --> 00:22:05.869
system or network. What's particularly fascinating

00:22:05.869 --> 00:22:08.109
here, I think, is that these orientations aren't

00:22:08.109 --> 00:22:10.849
mutually exclusive. You're suggesting people

00:22:10.849 --> 00:22:13.430
often blend them strategically. Can you give

00:22:13.430 --> 00:22:15.809
an example of that interplay, showing how these

00:22:15.809 --> 00:22:17.769
different roles might be combined to achieve

00:22:17.769 --> 00:22:20.710
a complex outcome? Absolutely. Skillful blending

00:22:20.710 --> 00:22:22.950
is not only common, but often highly effective.

00:22:23.210 --> 00:22:26.089
It can happen simultaneously, in parallel, or

00:22:26.089 --> 00:22:28.750
sequentially over the course of a project. Consider

00:22:28.750 --> 00:22:31.509
a music producer, for instance. They might act

00:22:31.509 --> 00:22:34.289
as a church's iEngines by getting a promising

00:22:34.289 --> 00:22:37.609
new band, a showcase at a larger club, and, importantly,

00:22:38.230 --> 00:22:40.150
inviting representatives from multiple record

00:22:40.150 --> 00:22:43.480
labels. That's the joining function. Then simply

00:22:43.480 --> 00:22:45.400
by having those multiple label heads present

00:22:45.400 --> 00:22:47.960
in the same room, aware of each other's interest,

00:22:48.319 --> 00:22:50.680
the producer naturally creates competition. They

00:22:50.680 --> 00:22:53.019
are now implicitly acting as Turch's Gaudens.

00:22:53.700 --> 00:22:56.000
This competitive market dynamic facilitated by

00:22:56.000 --> 00:22:58.339
the broker often leads to a better broker deal

00:22:58.339 --> 00:23:01.279
for the band. So the uniting sets the stage for

00:23:01.279 --> 00:23:04.279
the beneficial division in a way. Precisely.

00:23:04.480 --> 00:23:07.980
A convening act, Yamjins, sets the stage for

00:23:07.980 --> 00:23:11.680
a competitive situation. Gaudens. which ultimately

00:23:11.680 --> 00:23:14.099
leads to a positive outcome through brokered

00:23:14.099 --> 00:23:17.160
negotiation. We see this pattern in many real

00:23:17.160 --> 00:23:19.720
-world applications. Think about mergers and

00:23:19.720 --> 00:23:22.440
acquisitions brokers are involved before, during,

00:23:22.559 --> 00:23:25.420
and after, facilitating connections, managing

00:23:25.420 --> 00:23:28.079
competing interests. Supply chains often involve

00:23:28.079 --> 00:23:30.339
firms brokering between multiple suppliers and

00:23:30.339 --> 00:23:32.839
buyers. Even complex international diplomacy

00:23:32.839 --> 00:23:35.519
relies on these blended strategies. And in healthcare.

00:23:35.769 --> 00:23:37.930
You could easily imagine a hospital executive

00:23:37.930 --> 00:23:40.650
acting as Atertius Unions to bring together a

00:23:40.650 --> 00:23:42.730
medical device company and a university research

00:23:42.730 --> 00:23:44.990
institute to collaborate on developing a new

00:23:44.990 --> 00:23:47.910
diagnostic tool. Then, perhaps later in the negotiations,

00:23:47.970 --> 00:23:50.170
they might subtly use Atertius Godden's approach

00:23:50.170 --> 00:23:52.549
by hinting an interest from other potential commercial

00:23:52.549 --> 00:23:54.750
partners, just to accelerate the deal -making

00:23:54.750 --> 00:23:57.029
process. The ultimate goal is getting that cutting

00:23:57.029 --> 00:23:59.690
-edge technology to their patients. The key is

00:23:59.690 --> 00:24:02.190
the dynamic strategic orchestration of these

00:24:02.190 --> 00:24:04.769
different orientations to achieve a desired outcome.

00:24:04.920 --> 00:24:06.759
It's clear that brokerage is about connecting

00:24:06.759 --> 00:24:09.180
people, orchestrating relationships. But what

00:24:09.180 --> 00:24:11.440
about the ideas themselves? How do you make those

00:24:11.440 --> 00:24:13.160
ideas not just travel across the network, but

00:24:13.160 --> 00:24:15.579
actually stick and lead to action? Especially

00:24:15.579 --> 00:24:17.680
in complex fields like medicine, where precision,

00:24:17.940 --> 00:24:21.200
clarity, evidence, they're all paramount. This

00:24:21.200 --> 00:24:23.480
brings us, I think, to the indispensable role

00:24:23.480 --> 00:24:26.559
of knowledge articulation. Indeed. Brokerage

00:24:26.559 --> 00:24:29.940
gets the connections made, but it isn't enough

00:24:29.940 --> 00:24:32.940
on its own. Knowledge needs to be moved, yes,

00:24:33.160 --> 00:24:35.539
but also translated and crucially put to practical

00:24:35.539 --> 00:24:39.039
use. The very term articulate is quite instructive

00:24:39.039 --> 00:24:41.880
here. It has two relevant meanings, to join or

00:24:41.880 --> 00:24:44.720
unite, which links nicely back to Tertius Engels's

00:24:44.720 --> 00:24:47.920
brokerage. But also, and this is our focus now,

00:24:48.019 --> 00:24:51.440
to express distinctly, making things clear, understandable,

00:24:51.900 --> 00:24:54.279
compelling. Knowledge isn't just something static

00:24:54.279 --> 00:24:56.400
in the know, your education, your experience,

00:24:56.819 --> 00:24:58.599
nor is it just flowing through a passive pipe.

00:24:58.920 --> 00:25:01.779
It's profoundly relational. It's influenced by

00:25:01.779 --> 00:25:03.700
what you bring to an exchange, your perspective,

00:25:03.859 --> 00:25:06.039
your expertise, but also how that relates to

00:25:06.039 --> 00:25:07.920
your interlocutors, to their understanding, their

00:25:07.920 --> 00:25:10.740
context. So communicating a complex surgical

00:25:10.740 --> 00:25:14.019
technique to a new resident. Exactly. It's not

00:25:14.019 --> 00:25:16.339
just about listing the steps. It's about tailoring

00:25:16.339 --> 00:25:19.880
that explanation to their current level of understanding,

00:25:20.059 --> 00:25:23.180
their practical experience, maybe anticipating

00:25:23.180 --> 00:25:25.480
their questions or anxieties. It's making the

00:25:25.480 --> 00:25:27.849
knowledge accessible to them. So it's about making

00:25:27.849 --> 00:25:29.950
knowledge actionable. You've mentioned before

00:25:29.950 --> 00:25:33.369
a continuum from tacit to explicit knowledge.

00:25:33.730 --> 00:25:36.210
Could you elaborate on that and where articulation

00:25:36.210 --> 00:25:39.589
really fits in for, say, a medical professional

00:25:39.589 --> 00:25:42.150
trying to share an innovation? Certainly. At

00:25:42.150 --> 00:25:44.390
one end, we have tacit knowledge. This is our

00:25:44.390 --> 00:25:46.990
unconscious, automatic, often taken for granted

00:25:46.990 --> 00:25:48.769
understanding, things we just know how to do.

00:25:48.890 --> 00:25:52.029
Like riding a bike or maybe performing a complex

00:25:52.029 --> 00:25:54.569
orthopedic maneuver during surgery. Precisely.

00:25:54.670 --> 00:25:57.400
It's difficult to surface fully. difficult to

00:25:57.400 --> 00:26:00.240
communicate directly in words. At the other end

00:26:00.240 --> 00:26:02.900
is explicit knowledge, which is highly codified,

00:26:03.319 --> 00:26:06.119
easily expressed. Think of a published medical

00:26:06.119 --> 00:26:09.339
protocol, a textbook diagram, a drug dosage chart.

00:26:10.180 --> 00:26:12.519
What's crucial for innovation, though, is often

00:26:12.519 --> 00:26:15.039
the middle ground. This is where knowledge is

00:26:15.039 --> 00:26:17.859
emerging from its tacit state, but isn't yet

00:26:17.859 --> 00:26:21.009
fully codified or formalized. I call this emergent

00:26:21.009 --> 00:26:22.890
explicit knowledge. Can you give an example?

00:26:23.130 --> 00:26:24.690
It's that moment when you've just figured out

00:26:24.690 --> 00:26:26.950
a clever workaround for a recurring surgical

00:26:26.950 --> 00:26:30.269
challenge during a procedure. Or you see a new

00:26:30.269 --> 00:26:32.450
way to optimize patient flow on the wart. You

00:26:32.450 --> 00:26:33.890
haven't written it down yet, it's not in any

00:26:33.890 --> 00:26:36.170
manual. But you need to explain it to a colleague

00:26:36.170 --> 00:26:38.529
right now, or convince your team it's the new

00:26:38.529 --> 00:26:40.970
best practice. This is precisely where new knowledge

00:26:40.970 --> 00:26:43.430
and potential action emerge. It's driven by the

00:26:43.430 --> 00:26:45.789
practical need to share, to move understanding

00:26:45.789 --> 00:26:48.230
across different communities, like from surgeons

00:26:48.230 --> 00:26:50.329
to nurses, to persuade others, or eventually

00:26:50.329 --> 00:26:53.009
to codify a practice for wider, more consistent

00:26:53.009 --> 00:26:56.150
use. Articulation is the engine here. This reminds

00:26:56.150 --> 00:26:59.450
me of Carlisle's 3T model again, transfer, translation,

00:26:59.690 --> 00:27:03.259
transformation. How do those nuances of knowledge

00:27:03.259 --> 00:27:08.039
movement apply specifically to articulation in,

00:27:08.079 --> 00:27:10.500
say, a clinical setting where you're trying to

00:27:10.500 --> 00:27:12.279
introduce something new? They are absolutely

00:27:12.279 --> 00:27:15.000
central. Transfer is the simplest form of articulation.

00:27:15.299 --> 00:27:17.900
It occurs across what Carlyle calls a syntactic

00:27:17.900 --> 00:27:20.579
boundary, where differences are known and a common

00:27:20.579 --> 00:27:23.420
lexicon usually suffices. Like noting a specific

00:27:23.420 --> 00:27:25.819
characteristic on an X -ray image. Exactly. Or

00:27:25.819 --> 00:27:28.180
describing a straightforward functionality observed.

00:27:28.960 --> 00:27:31.140
Translation, however, becomes necessary when

00:27:31.140 --> 00:27:33.740
you cross semantic boundaries where different

00:27:33.740 --> 00:27:36.660
interpretations exist due to varied contexts

00:27:36.660 --> 00:27:39.099
or professional backgrounds. For example, explaining

00:27:39.099 --> 00:27:41.720
how a new medical technology applies to a specific

00:27:41.720 --> 00:27:43.920
patient group or how it fits into the existing

00:27:43.920 --> 00:27:46.980
workflow in this particular hospital. This requires

00:27:46.980 --> 00:27:49.779
active reformatting of knowledge and a real pursuit

00:27:49.779 --> 00:27:51.740
of shared understanding. You can't just state

00:27:51.740 --> 00:27:53.839
the facts. You have to explain the meaning in

00:27:53.839 --> 00:27:56.299
their context. And transformation. Transformation

00:27:56.299 --> 00:27:59.039
involves a significant rearrangement or even

00:27:59.039 --> 00:28:03.059
a new synthesis of knowledge. This is often required

00:28:03.059 --> 00:28:06.059
when fundamentally incompatible interests or

00:28:06.059 --> 00:28:09.380
deeply ingrained assumptions prevent shared meaning

00:28:09.380 --> 00:28:12.380
being reached through simple translation. It's

00:28:12.380 --> 00:28:14.880
often an inherently political process, needing

00:28:14.880 --> 00:28:17.079
common interests to be established or negotiated

00:28:17.079 --> 00:28:20.460
to move forward. So applying that 3T model again.

00:28:20.799 --> 00:28:23.019
A radiologist might transfer the findings of

00:28:23.019 --> 00:28:26.099
an MRI scan. There's a tear in the meniscus.

00:28:26.960 --> 00:28:28.779
The orthopedic surgeon then has to translate

00:28:28.779 --> 00:28:31.079
those findings into the context of surgical planning.

00:28:32.119 --> 00:28:34.240
Okay, given this type of tear and the patient's

00:28:34.240 --> 00:28:36.240
activity level, here's how it impacts our approach.

00:28:36.990 --> 00:28:39.250
Finally, if the findings are truly unprecedented,

00:28:39.529 --> 00:28:41.450
perhaps revealing a condition not previously

00:28:41.450 --> 00:28:43.670
understood, it might require a transformation

00:28:43.670 --> 00:28:45.930
of the entire diagnostic or treatment pathway,

00:28:46.529 --> 00:28:48.609
which involves convincing multiple specialties,

00:28:48.849 --> 00:28:51.549
changing protocols, a much bigger shift. So when

00:28:51.549 --> 00:28:53.529
we're articulating knowledge, especially in these

00:28:53.529 --> 00:28:56.049
more complex translation or transformation scenarios,

00:28:56.670 --> 00:28:58.730
what are the key processes we're aiming for in

00:28:58.730 --> 00:29:01.750
a practical sense? What outcomes make articulation

00:29:01.750 --> 00:29:04.890
successful? Primarily, I'd say there are three

00:29:04.890 --> 00:29:07.490
key outcomes we're striving for through articulation.

00:29:08.509 --> 00:29:11.660
First, mutual intelligibility. Simply establishing

00:29:11.660 --> 00:29:13.819
a shared understanding. This is the absolute

00:29:13.819 --> 00:29:16.000
precondition for any kind of influence or enlistment.

00:29:16.359 --> 00:29:18.180
Do they actually get what I'm saying? Second,

00:29:18.400 --> 00:29:21.400
persuasion. Going beyond understanding to actually

00:29:21.400 --> 00:29:23.940
convincing others to adopt an idea or a proposed

00:29:23.940 --> 00:29:26.619
course of action. This often builds on mutual

00:29:26.619 --> 00:29:29.099
intelligibility, but you can sometimes persuade

00:29:29.099 --> 00:29:31.839
even without perfect shared understanding, perhaps

00:29:31.839 --> 00:29:35.140
through trust or authority. And third, perhaps

00:29:35.140 --> 00:29:37.880
most critically for innovation, is enlistment.

00:29:38.000 --> 00:29:40.819
This means mobilizing active support and commitment

00:29:40.819 --> 00:29:42.880
from others, getting them on board to the point

00:29:42.880 --> 00:29:45.079
where they engage in joint, coordinated action.

00:29:45.220 --> 00:29:46.839
Getting them to actually do something together.

00:29:47.079 --> 00:29:50.759
Exactly. This last one, enlistment, is arguably

00:29:50.759 --> 00:29:53.259
the single most important articulation outcome

00:29:53.259 --> 00:29:56.079
for actually getting new things done. And these

00:29:56.079 --> 00:29:58.559
processes, especially in fast -moving innovation

00:29:58.559 --> 00:30:01.339
contexts like medicine, often involve what we

00:30:01.339 --> 00:30:04.460
might call provisional knowledge dialogue, PKD.

00:30:04.619 --> 00:30:07.400
Quick exchanges, iterative understanding rather

00:30:07.400 --> 00:30:10.910
than deep knowledge dialogue, DKD, simply due

00:30:10.910 --> 00:30:13.650
to the speed and uncertainty involved. You often

00:30:13.650 --> 00:30:16.049
don't have time for exhaustive discussion. That

00:30:16.049 --> 00:30:18.029
makes a lot of sense, the need for speed and

00:30:18.029 --> 00:30:20.240
agility. Let's try and bring this to life with

00:30:20.240 --> 00:30:22.960
some practical examples. You've used the new

00:30:22.960 --> 00:30:25.779
car automotive cases, which offer a really rich

00:30:25.779 --> 00:30:28.420
lens into these organizational dynamics. You

00:30:28.420 --> 00:30:30.799
identified five key communicative dimensions

00:30:30.799 --> 00:30:33.160
of how knowledge articulation happens in practice.

00:30:33.339 --> 00:30:36.200
Yes. These are active, often quite fleeting,

00:30:36.380 --> 00:30:38.380
representational activities that are crucial

00:30:38.380 --> 00:30:40.779
for generating collaborative action. They really

00:30:40.779 --> 00:30:42.880
mirror how new ideas get traction or fail to

00:30:42.880 --> 00:30:45.809
in any complex field. Okay, first. Moving between

00:30:45.809 --> 00:30:47.769
backstage and front stage. How does this play

00:30:47.769 --> 00:30:49.569
out in everyday organizational life? What does

00:30:49.569 --> 00:30:52.769
that mean? This involves the constant often subconscious

00:30:52.769 --> 00:30:55.869
choices we make about what information to share

00:30:55.869 --> 00:30:59.269
publicly, front stage, versus what to keep private

00:30:59.269 --> 00:31:01.920
or share only with trusted confidants. backstage.

00:31:02.599 --> 00:31:05.319
It's about deciding how and when to surface privately

00:31:05.319 --> 00:31:08.700
held ideas, doubts, or opinions versus what to

00:31:08.700 --> 00:31:11.039
withhold. You could think of it as the social

00:31:11.039 --> 00:31:13.539
correlate of moving knowledge from tacit, often

00:31:13.539 --> 00:31:16.440
private, unarticulated, to explicit, publicly

00:31:16.440 --> 00:31:18.460
stated. Okay, and the new core example. There

00:31:18.460 --> 00:31:21.079
was a situation involving Dan from program management

00:31:21.079 --> 00:31:24.269
and Brad from the body division. Brad, because

00:31:24.269 --> 00:31:27.069
he trusted Dan, revealed his backstage skepticism

00:31:27.069 --> 00:31:29.910
about a new central database, the paper car,

00:31:30.250 --> 00:31:32.769
during an informal hallway chat. This was a critical

00:31:32.769 --> 00:31:34.410
view he likely wouldn't have voiced in a formal

00:31:34.410 --> 00:31:37.349
meeting. Dan, understanding this private concern,

00:31:37.549 --> 00:31:39.750
then responded strategically in the front stage

00:31:39.750 --> 00:31:42.509
by reframing Newcar's mission not just as a car

00:31:42.509 --> 00:31:44.869
company, but as an information company, thereby

00:31:44.869 --> 00:31:47.349
justifying the database's value in a way that

00:31:47.349 --> 00:31:49.990
addressed Brad's underlying worry without exposing

00:31:49.990 --> 00:31:52.859
his skepticism. Both selectively move private

00:31:52.859 --> 00:31:54.960
understanding into the public domain to reach

00:31:54.960 --> 00:31:57.380
a shared path forward. So it's about strategic

00:31:57.380 --> 00:32:00.359
disclosure, often built on trust. Precisely.

00:32:00.720 --> 00:32:02.640
In a hospital, this might be a nurse sharing

00:32:02.640 --> 00:32:06.039
backstage concerns about usability issues with

00:32:06.039 --> 00:32:08.619
the new electronic patient record system with

00:32:08.619 --> 00:32:11.630
a trusted IT lead. That allows the IT lead to

00:32:11.630 --> 00:32:14.190
then address those potential issues constructively

00:32:14.190 --> 00:32:16.970
in a front -stage planning meeting, perhaps by

00:32:16.970 --> 00:32:19.069
reframing the training plan or highlighting specific

00:32:19.069 --> 00:32:21.490
benefits that counter the concerns. Okay. Second

00:32:21.490 --> 00:32:24.789
dimension. Moving between complex and simple.

00:32:24.990 --> 00:32:27.309
This seems particularly relevant in medicine

00:32:27.309 --> 00:32:30.170
where concepts can be incredibly intricate, technical.

00:32:30.730 --> 00:32:33.410
Absolutely vital. Articulation frequently involves

00:32:33.410 --> 00:32:36.210
reducing complexity, stripping away what might

00:32:36.210 --> 00:32:38.769
be seen as irrelevancies for a particular audience

00:32:38.769 --> 00:32:41.210
or situation to convey only what's most essential.

00:32:41.690 --> 00:32:43.869
As the philosopher Michael Polanyi famously said,

00:32:44.349 --> 00:32:46.410
we know much more than we can tell. Effective

00:32:46.410 --> 00:32:48.329
articulation is often about selecting the right

00:32:48.329 --> 00:32:50.309
subset of what we know. How do people do that

00:32:50.309 --> 00:32:52.750
effectively? often through using articulation

00:32:52.750 --> 00:32:56.190
devices. Tools like analogies, metaphors, stories,

00:32:56.710 --> 00:32:59.329
even informal sketches or physical objects. Things

00:32:59.329 --> 00:33:02.470
that clarify and simplify. For instance, at Newcar,

00:33:02.970 --> 00:33:05.569
an engineer named Rick was trying to convey specific

00:33:05.569 --> 00:33:09.269
design goals for a car armrest. Instead of complex

00:33:09.269 --> 00:33:12.990
engineering specs, he used vivid metaphors. Avoiding

00:33:12.990 --> 00:33:15.450
a certain texture was Barbie Doll's stipple.

00:33:15.970 --> 00:33:18.420
Achieving a desired close fit was tight like

00:33:18.420 --> 00:33:20.960
a scuba outfit. Instantly understandable. Exactly.

00:33:21.019 --> 00:33:23.400
They simplified complex aesthetic objectives,

00:33:23.720 --> 00:33:25.960
making them immediately understandable and actionable

00:33:25.960 --> 00:33:29.519
for other engineers. In orthopedics, a consultant

00:33:29.519 --> 00:33:31.720
might explain a complex joint replacement to

00:33:31.720 --> 00:33:34.019
a patient using a simple analogy comparing the

00:33:34.019 --> 00:33:36.779
joint to hinges and levers. Or to a junior surgeon,

00:33:36.819 --> 00:33:39.299
they might explain a new fixation method by comparing

00:33:39.299 --> 00:33:41.740
it to a familiar, simpler technique providing

00:33:41.740 --> 00:33:44.380
an accessible entry point. Third, moving among

00:33:44.380 --> 00:33:47.140
past, present, and future. How does weaving in

00:33:47.140 --> 00:33:49.579
history or experience play into getting new things

00:33:49.579 --> 00:33:52.619
done? This is about strategically bringing knowledge

00:33:52.619 --> 00:33:54.980
gleaned from past experience to bear on present

00:33:54.980 --> 00:33:57.700
situations, usually with the aim of eliciting

00:33:57.700 --> 00:34:01.559
support for future joint action. Knowledge, especially

00:34:01.559 --> 00:34:04.220
tacit knowledge gained through experience, often

00:34:04.220 --> 00:34:06.559
resides in our memories associated with its original

00:34:06.559 --> 00:34:09.010
context. At Newcar, there was a great example

00:34:09.010 --> 00:34:12.010
where a senior VP named Frank told a story. He

00:34:12.010 --> 00:34:14.329
recounted how, as a young engineer nearly two

00:34:14.329 --> 00:34:17.130
decades earlier, he and his team solved a really

00:34:17.130 --> 00:34:19.630
difficult technical problem called Terminal Powerhop.

00:34:20.449 --> 00:34:22.670
This informal narrative, told retrospectively,

00:34:22.889 --> 00:34:25.889
wasn't just a war story. It illustrated and burnished

00:34:25.889 --> 00:34:28.610
Newcar's cherished cowboy culture, its history

00:34:28.610 --> 00:34:30.969
of risk -taking, of figuring things out on the

00:34:30.969 --> 00:34:33.530
fly. The implied message to the present -day

00:34:33.530 --> 00:34:36.599
engineers was, embrace that spirit. tackle today's

00:34:36.599 --> 00:34:39.079
challenges, achieve future innovative outcomes,

00:34:39.460 --> 00:34:42.139
using the past to inspire the future. Precisely.

00:34:42.400 --> 00:34:44.880
Similarly, a seasoned surgeon might share an

00:34:44.880 --> 00:34:46.920
anecdote from an early challenging case in their

00:34:46.920 --> 00:34:49.480
career, not just to reminisce, but perhaps to

00:34:49.480 --> 00:34:51.500
illustrate resilience, problem solving under

00:34:51.500 --> 00:34:54.139
pressure, and encourage a junior team facing

00:34:54.139 --> 00:34:57.239
a new, difficult procedure. It grounds future

00:34:57.239 --> 00:34:59.780
ambition in past successes and shared cultural

00:34:59.780 --> 00:35:04.420
values. Fourth, balancing familiarizing and defamiliarizing.

00:35:04.860 --> 00:35:07.079
These sound like opposing forces. How do they

00:35:07.079 --> 00:35:09.539
work together? They are indeed opposing forces,

00:35:09.940 --> 00:35:12.199
and using them strategically, often in sequence,

00:35:12.639 --> 00:35:15.239
is key to shifting perspectives. Familiarizing

00:35:15.239 --> 00:35:17.239
aims to make new ideas comfortable, relatable.

00:35:17.860 --> 00:35:20.079
It deepens understanding and encourages buy -in

00:35:20.079 --> 00:35:23.099
by connecting the new to the known. Rick's scuba

00:35:23.099 --> 00:35:25.639
outfit analogy did this. It used a familiar image

00:35:25.639 --> 00:35:28.440
to explain a new design goal. Defamiliarizing,

00:35:28.679 --> 00:35:31.019
conversely, aims to disrupt taken for granted

00:35:31.019 --> 00:35:33.500
meanings, to challenge assumptions, and ultimately

00:35:33.500 --> 00:35:36.280
change attitudes. It naturally lends itself to

00:35:36.280 --> 00:35:38.599
driving transformation. And the new car example

00:35:38.599 --> 00:35:42.340
for this. Henry, the NVH noise vibration harshest

00:35:42.340 --> 00:35:45.239
expert we mentioned earlier. He initially tried

00:35:45.239 --> 00:35:47.940
to familiarize engineers with proposed NVH design

00:35:47.940 --> 00:35:51.019
changes using data and technical explanations,

00:35:51.619 --> 00:35:53.900
linking them to existing principles. But this

00:35:53.900 --> 00:35:56.199
yielded minimal support. They were resistant.

00:35:56.780 --> 00:35:59.900
So he shifted tactics. He adopted a more contentious

00:35:59.900 --> 00:36:02.679
stance, forcibly asserting the absolute necessity

00:36:02.679 --> 00:36:05.989
of a specific design, the double boot. This acted

00:36:05.989 --> 00:36:08.449
to defamiliarize their resistance, shocking them

00:36:08.449 --> 00:36:10.789
out of their complacency, and forcing a re -evaluation

00:36:10.789 --> 00:36:13.110
of their assumptions about NVH's importance.

00:36:13.510 --> 00:36:15.389
So you might start by making it comfortable,

00:36:15.449 --> 00:36:17.369
but if that doesn't work, you shake things up.

00:36:17.630 --> 00:36:19.889
Sometimes that's exactly what's needed. In healthcare,

00:36:20.050 --> 00:36:21.769
you might familiarize staff with a new patient

00:36:21.769 --> 00:36:23.929
safety checklist by showing how seamlessly it

00:36:23.929 --> 00:36:26.570
integrates with their existing workflow. But

00:36:26.570 --> 00:36:30.739
if compliance remains low, You might then defamiliarize

00:36:30.739 --> 00:36:33.400
their complacency by presenting stark data on

00:36:33.400 --> 00:36:35.420
a critical incident that the old system failed

00:36:35.420 --> 00:36:37.880
to prevent, creating urgency and prompting a

00:36:37.880 --> 00:36:40.500
real shift in mindset and behavior. And finally,

00:36:40.760 --> 00:36:43.280
the fifth dimension, establishing credibility

00:36:43.280 --> 00:36:46.559
by laying down markers. This sounds like using

00:36:46.559 --> 00:36:49.980
your expertise strategically to lead or influence.

00:36:50.599 --> 00:36:53.420
Precisely. This involves deliberately using specific

00:36:53.420 --> 00:36:56.179
details, telling anecdotes that showcase deep

00:36:56.179 --> 00:36:59.420
experience, or employing specific jargon to validate

00:36:59.420 --> 00:37:01.980
your assertions and establish your expertise.

00:37:02.219 --> 00:37:04.840
It's particularly potent in cross -functional

00:37:04.840 --> 00:37:07.360
or inter -departmental discussions where different

00:37:07.360 --> 00:37:09.940
professional languages and knowledge bases exist.

00:37:10.460 --> 00:37:12.519
Dan, the program manager at Newcar, was very

00:37:12.519 --> 00:37:14.920
effective at this. He's successfully pushed for

00:37:14.920 --> 00:37:17.519
crucial design changes, partly by leveraging

00:37:17.519 --> 00:37:20.219
his own engineering background and using precise

00:37:20.219 --> 00:37:22.039
engineering jargon, what he explicitly called

00:37:22.039 --> 00:37:24.679
engineer talk, to counter resistance, even from

00:37:24.679 --> 00:37:27.099
senior executives. He'd assert things like, damn

00:37:27.099 --> 00:37:29.139
it, guys, I'm a product engineer. Been there,

00:37:29.179 --> 00:37:31.639
done that, managed product, managed people. And

00:37:31.639 --> 00:37:33.219
tell me what you want me to do because I know

00:37:33.219 --> 00:37:36.300
this will work. This created undeniable credibility

00:37:36.300 --> 00:37:38.840
based on demonstrated expertise and influenced

00:37:38.840 --> 00:37:41.219
the outcome. Asserting your credentials, but

00:37:41.219 --> 00:37:44.659
through specific knowledge. Exactly. For an orthopedic

00:37:44.659 --> 00:37:47.699
surgeon, it might involve citing specific anatomical

00:37:47.699 --> 00:37:50.340
details, referencing outcomes from a particular

00:37:50.340 --> 00:37:53.360
surgical theories they performed, or using precise

00:37:53.360 --> 00:37:56.260
biomechanical terminology in a discussion with

00:37:56.260 --> 00:37:58.980
hospital management about the clinical necessity

00:37:58.980 --> 00:38:01.090
of a new piece of equipment. It's using their

00:38:01.090 --> 00:38:03.829
deep professional knowledge not just to explain,

00:38:04.210 --> 00:38:06.190
but as a marker of authority and credibility

00:38:06.190 --> 00:38:09.030
to support their case. Okay, these five dimensions

00:38:09.030 --> 00:38:11.289
provide a great framework. Let's now put these

00:38:11.289 --> 00:38:13.730
concepts into action by exploring how Newcar,

00:38:14.010 --> 00:38:16.449
our automotive manufacturer, actually mobilized

00:38:16.449 --> 00:38:18.750
innovation, looking both at innovation within

00:38:18.750 --> 00:38:21.269
existing routines and the launch of entirely

00:38:21.269 --> 00:38:23.889
new creative projects. First, tell us a bit more

00:38:23.889 --> 00:38:26.289
about Newcar's unique cowboy culture. What defined

00:38:26.289 --> 00:38:28.460
it? Well, Newcar had this really distinctive

00:38:28.460 --> 00:38:31.699
cowboy culture that genuinely permeated his approach

00:38:31.699 --> 00:38:34.320
to innovation. The physical environment played

00:38:34.320 --> 00:38:37.280
a part, and the Mayflower Road office building,

00:38:37.340 --> 00:38:40.840
MROB, wasn't some sleek, modern corporate HQ.

00:38:41.320 --> 00:38:43.219
It had a history of housing under capitalized

00:38:43.219 --> 00:38:46.210
companies, which bred a necessity to do more

00:38:46.210 --> 00:38:50.010
with less. This fostered a really scrappy, inventive,

00:38:50.110 --> 00:38:52.730
risk -taking culture. And it yielded significant

00:38:52.730 --> 00:38:55.670
results, things like entirely new vehicle categories

00:38:55.670 --> 00:38:58.889
and the early, quite pioneering adoption of 3D

00:38:58.889 --> 00:39:01.289
digital design tools. And the train metaphor.

00:39:01.590 --> 00:39:04.190
Ah, yes. The iconic image they often used internally

00:39:04.190 --> 00:39:07.110
was the steam train laying down tracks just ahead

00:39:07.110 --> 00:39:10.050
of itself as it sped along. It perfectly symbolized

00:39:10.050 --> 00:39:12.809
their ethos of figuring things out as they unfolded.

00:39:12.829 --> 00:39:15.289
improvising, adapting. Of course, this culture

00:39:15.289 --> 00:39:17.789
often created tension with the larger, more bureaucratic

00:39:17.789 --> 00:39:20.349
parent company, Alcar, which generally preferred

00:39:20.349 --> 00:39:22.730
established processes and predictability. It

00:39:22.730 --> 00:39:25.010
sounds like a familiar dynamic, the innovative

00:39:25.010 --> 00:39:27.849
unit versus the larger organization. Very much

00:39:27.849 --> 00:39:30.650
so. You could easily see parallels with an innovative

00:39:30.650 --> 00:39:33.389
clinical department within a larger, more traditional

00:39:33.389 --> 00:39:35.809
hospital structure, constantly pushing boundaries

00:39:35.809 --> 00:39:37.730
while needing to navigate those bureaucratic

00:39:37.730 --> 00:39:40.449
constraints and expectations. So within that

00:39:40.449 --> 00:39:43.400
culture, How did innovation happen within their

00:39:43.400 --> 00:39:45.719
established routines, especially when things

00:39:45.719 --> 00:39:48.099
went, well, off track? Let's look at the manual

00:39:48.099 --> 00:39:50.420
shifter redesign initiative you studied. Right.

00:39:50.800 --> 00:39:53.039
The context here was complex automotive design

00:39:53.039 --> 00:39:55.219
work relying heavily on cross -functional teams,

00:39:55.780 --> 00:39:58.280
not unlike, say, how an orthopedic team might

00:39:58.280 --> 00:40:00.699
collaborate on designing custom implants or planning

00:40:00.699 --> 00:40:03.659
complex reconstructive surgery. A critical problem

00:40:03.659 --> 00:40:05.599
emerged with the design of the manual shifter

00:40:05.599 --> 00:40:09.630
console for a specific vehicle, the G5. It stalled

00:40:09.630 --> 00:40:11.949
due to issues with a highly complicated digital

00:40:11.949 --> 00:40:15.349
simulation, the move macro simulation, and the

00:40:15.349 --> 00:40:17.230
initial attempt to resolve this through knowledge

00:40:17.230 --> 00:40:20.250
articulation actually failed spectacularly. Two

00:40:20.250 --> 00:40:22.829
engineers, Clay and Seth, put together this incredibly

00:40:22.829 --> 00:40:25.510
long, overly detailed presentation showing all

00:40:25.510 --> 00:40:28.949
152 possible shifter moves. Oh dear, too much

00:40:28.949 --> 00:40:32.360
information. Way too much. It completely violated

00:40:32.360 --> 00:40:35.739
the complex to simple rule of effective articulation.

00:40:36.179 --> 00:40:38.619
It led to executive impatience, total confusion.

00:40:39.260 --> 00:40:43.139
The emergency crunch team formed to fix it felt

00:40:43.400 --> 00:40:46.039
In their words, like, wrestling with a huge ball

00:40:46.039 --> 00:40:48.480
of yarn. They couldn't interpret the simulation

00:40:48.480 --> 00:40:50.219
findings, and there was a real lack of clear

00:40:50.219 --> 00:40:52.900
leadership. It's a classic example of information

00:40:52.900 --> 00:40:55.320
overload completely hindering progress, something

00:40:55.320 --> 00:40:57.599
we often see when raw data is dumped without

00:40:57.599 --> 00:41:00.380
proper synthesis or focus. That sounds like a

00:41:00.380 --> 00:41:02.760
moment absolutely ripe for a skilled broker or

00:41:02.760 --> 00:41:04.780
articulator to step in and sort things out. What

00:41:04.780 --> 00:41:06.679
happened next in that rather chaotic environment?

00:41:06.980 --> 00:41:09.869
It was indeed. And Henry, the NVH expert we talked

00:41:09.869 --> 00:41:12.489
about earlier, saw this disrupted routine as

00:41:12.489 --> 00:41:17.010
his opportunity. NVH noise, vibration, harshness

00:41:17.010 --> 00:41:19.909
was often dismissed by other engineers, sometimes

00:41:19.909 --> 00:41:23.099
crudely referred to as a crock of shit. Henry

00:41:23.099 --> 00:41:25.460
aimed to reposition it as a genuinely worthy

00:41:25.460 --> 00:41:27.920
design objective. He didn't just complain about

00:41:27.920 --> 00:41:30.219
the problem, though. He developed an informal

00:41:30.219 --> 00:41:32.980
NVH presentation, drawing on his two decades

00:41:32.980 --> 00:41:35.539
of experience. He then met individually with

00:41:35.539 --> 00:41:38.219
key stakeholders across different teams to establish

00:41:38.219 --> 00:41:40.659
mutual intelligibility, making sure they understood

00:41:40.659 --> 00:41:43.159
the basics and why it mattered. He marshaled

00:41:43.159 --> 00:41:45.260
data commissioning specific lab studies on boot

00:41:45.260 --> 00:41:47.380
designs, importing best practices from other

00:41:47.380 --> 00:41:49.840
manufacturers, effectively acting as a conduit

00:41:49.840 --> 00:41:52.460
broker to bring in external validation and legitimate

00:41:52.460 --> 00:41:55.019
his proposed solution, a double boot design.

00:41:55.679 --> 00:41:58.639
So building the case methodically? Methodically,

00:41:58.860 --> 00:42:01.739
yes. He initially used familiarization tactics,

00:42:02.219 --> 00:42:04.320
explaining the benefits in terms engineers could

00:42:04.320 --> 00:42:06.679
relate to their own work. But when he still met

00:42:06.679 --> 00:42:09.739
resistance, rooted in old assumptions, he shifted

00:42:09.739 --> 00:42:13.320
gears. He moved to defamiliarization, forcefully

00:42:13.320 --> 00:42:15.539
asserting the double boots absolute necessity,

00:42:16.000 --> 00:42:17.800
challenging their ingrained ways of thinking.

00:42:18.380 --> 00:42:21.159
And he succeeded. He mobilized enough support,

00:42:21.500 --> 00:42:23.659
persuaded the team, and they adopted the double

00:42:23.659 --> 00:42:27.150
boot. It's a fantastic example of how continuous

00:42:27.150 --> 00:42:29.969
knowledge articulation combined with periodic

00:42:29.969 --> 00:42:32.869
bursts of brokerage can achieve significant innovation

00:42:32.869 --> 00:42:35.550
even within a routine, especially when that routine

00:42:35.550 --> 00:42:37.590
is disrupted and creates a window for change.

00:42:37.789 --> 00:42:40.150
And there was another example of successful routine

00:42:40.150 --> 00:42:42.050
-based innovation from that same crunch team,

00:42:42.250 --> 00:42:44.429
wasn't there? Alex and Joe's master cross -section

00:42:44.429 --> 00:42:47.150
approach. How did these two designers intervene

00:42:47.150 --> 00:42:49.909
when the larger team was floundering? Yes, Alex

00:42:49.909 --> 00:42:52.610
and Joe. They were designers, and they stepped

00:42:52.610 --> 00:42:54.929
significantly outside their typical, often more

00:42:54.929 --> 00:42:57.909
passive roles when the crunch team really got

00:42:57.909 --> 00:43:00.670
bogged down. There was confusion over supplier

00:43:00.670 --> 00:43:03.550
responsibilities, fundamental misunderstandings

00:43:03.550 --> 00:43:06.610
about the design itself. They responded by aggressively

00:43:06.610 --> 00:43:09.750
pursuing mutual intelligibility. They went straight

00:43:09.750 --> 00:43:11.989
to the suppliers, questioning them directly,

00:43:12.190 --> 00:43:14.510
literally asking, are there two different proposals

00:43:14.510 --> 00:43:16.989
here? What are we actually working from? They

00:43:16.989 --> 00:43:19.110
even intercepted people after meetings to force

00:43:19.110 --> 00:43:21.730
clarification and establish consistent design

00:43:21.730 --> 00:43:25.110
criteria. Taking charge. Very much so. It was

00:43:25.110 --> 00:43:27.489
a short -lived, but highly effective, tertius

00:43:27.489 --> 00:43:30.090
-iongian strategy, quickly uniting disparate

00:43:30.090 --> 00:43:32.789
perspectives that weren't connecting. Then, crucially,

00:43:32.929 --> 00:43:35.530
they introduced a novel technical approach, a

00:43:35.530 --> 00:43:37.989
2D cross -sectional approach, which they called

00:43:37.989 --> 00:43:40.889
the master cross -section. This provided a simplified

00:43:40.889 --> 00:43:43.610
shared visual frame for problem -solving. Now,

00:43:43.610 --> 00:43:45.969
this was dramatic departure from the team's usual

00:43:45.969 --> 00:43:48.849
complex 3D modeling routine, and it initially

00:43:48.849 --> 00:43:51.050
met considerable resistance, particularly from

00:43:51.050 --> 00:43:52.789
the engineers. So how did they overcome that?

00:43:52.920 --> 00:43:56.199
They really had to twist arms to maintain cooperation,

00:43:56.360 --> 00:43:59.239
as they put it. They even strategically threatened

00:43:59.239 --> 00:44:01.980
to act as Tertius Gaudens, using the potential

00:44:01.980 --> 00:44:04.400
for conflict to their advantage. They hinted

00:44:04.400 --> 00:44:07.739
they might foment alter -alter conflict by suggesting

00:44:07.739 --> 00:44:09.719
they'd have the powertrain division explain the

00:44:09.719 --> 00:44:11.860
necessary design changes directly to the styling

00:44:11.860 --> 00:44:15.260
team and even more worryingly for the engineers,

00:44:15.860 --> 00:44:18.639
to hire management. Ah, the threat of escalation.

00:44:18.860 --> 00:44:21.719
Exactly. A very unwelcome prospect for the engineers

00:44:21.719 --> 00:44:24.300
and managers involved, which influenced them

00:44:24.300 --> 00:44:27.519
to cooperate with the new 2D approach. Alex and

00:44:27.519 --> 00:44:29.940
Joe's success stemmed from their intimate understanding

00:44:29.940 --> 00:44:32.179
of the interests and pressures on multiple parties,

00:44:32.659 --> 00:44:34.320
their command of the digital design languages

00:44:34.320 --> 00:44:37.280
involved, and deploying this novel network and

00:44:37.280 --> 00:44:40.849
brokered strategy. And importantly, they operated

00:44:40.849 --> 00:44:43.389
largely through provisional knowledge dialogue,

00:44:43.710 --> 00:44:46.250
quick iterative conversations, because the situation

00:44:46.250 --> 00:44:48.769
was constantly changing. It's a great lesson

00:44:48.769 --> 00:44:51.269
in how knowing the political landscape and your

00:44:51.269 --> 00:44:53.610
audience's specific pain points can be leveraged

00:44:53.610 --> 00:44:56.530
to drive a solution forward. So that covers innovation

00:44:56.530 --> 00:44:59.190
within a routine, often sparked by a crisis or

00:44:59.190 --> 00:45:02.369
disruption. But how did entirely new creative

00:45:02.369 --> 00:45:05.409
projects get mobilized at Newcar, those initiatives

00:45:05.409 --> 00:45:08.570
outside the established framework? Let's turn

00:45:08.570 --> 00:45:11.909
to the Prototype Parts Purchasing, or PPP, redesign

00:45:11.909 --> 00:45:15.150
initiatives. First, what was the existing PPP

00:45:15.150 --> 00:45:18.750
routine like? The PPP routine was a core, essential

00:45:18.750 --> 00:45:21.570
process for Nucar, much like managing surgical

00:45:21.570 --> 00:45:24.190
equipment procurement or ordering bespoke implants

00:45:24.190 --> 00:45:26.849
in a hospital. It involved a standard sequence,

00:45:27.570 --> 00:45:29.670
engineering requests for prototype parts, getting

00:45:29.670 --> 00:45:31.949
quotes from suppliers, issuing purchase orders,

00:45:32.289 --> 00:45:34.530
and finally, the part delivery to the vehicle

00:45:34.530 --> 00:45:37.210
build units. This process spanned four distinct

00:45:37.210 --> 00:45:39.530
communities of practice. The design engineers

00:45:39.530 --> 00:45:42.110
making the requests, the external suppliers providing

00:45:42.110 --> 00:45:44.309
the parts, the internal purchasing department

00:45:44.309 --> 00:45:46.969
managing the finances, and the build units actually

00:45:46.969 --> 00:45:49.989
assembling the prototypes. Craig, the manager

00:45:49.989 --> 00:45:52.630
overseeing PPP, maintained notoriously tight

00:45:52.630 --> 00:45:55.550
controls. He felt he had to in order to corral

00:45:55.550 --> 00:45:57.610
engineers who had a reputation for making last

00:45:57.610 --> 00:46:00.369
-minute, often unauthorized design changes that

00:46:00.369 --> 00:46:02.070
threw the whole process off. Sounds like a source

00:46:02.070 --> 00:46:05.190
of tension. Huge tension. The process was predictable

00:46:05.190 --> 00:46:08.389
enough, ironically, for Craig to anticipate problems

00:46:08.389 --> 00:46:11.269
and even budget for the inevitable cost overruns

00:46:11.269 --> 00:46:14.409
caused by these changes. But this constant waywardness,

00:46:14.409 --> 00:46:16.989
as he saw it, from the engineers led to significant

00:46:16.989 --> 00:46:19.670
friction and inefficiency. Everyone knew this

00:46:19.670 --> 00:46:21.829
system wasn't ideal. And how did the Alcarpe

00:46:21.829 --> 00:46:24.309
PPP redesign project, the first creative project,

00:46:24.349 --> 00:46:26.349
emerge from this background of predictable tension?

00:46:26.730 --> 00:46:29.110
This was a clear example of a creative project

00:46:29.110 --> 00:46:32.110
driven by a high -level vision, originating from

00:46:32.110 --> 00:46:34.090
senior management's awareness of the systemic

00:46:34.090 --> 00:46:37.070
PPP issues, the budget overruns, the delays,

00:46:37.170 --> 00:46:39.789
the frustration. They projected a trajectory

00:46:39.789 --> 00:46:42.809
towards a solution. The core group tasked with

00:46:42.809 --> 00:46:45.030
this engaged in what we call trajectory management.

00:46:45.590 --> 00:46:48.130
This involved several key activities. First,

00:46:48.320 --> 00:46:50.960
Fixing, which meant collectively articulating

00:46:50.960 --> 00:46:53.719
the group's often tacit knowledge about the routine's

00:46:53.719 --> 00:46:55.940
specific flaws. They did this through intensive

00:46:55.940 --> 00:46:58.599
whiteboard sessions, detailed process mapping,

00:46:59.019 --> 00:47:01.079
making the invisible problems and bottlenecks

00:47:01.079 --> 00:47:04.860
explicit and shared. Then came pitching, persuading

00:47:04.860 --> 00:47:07.380
key stakeholders of the need for change and the

00:47:07.380 --> 00:47:09.480
proposed solution. They developed a powerful,

00:47:09.739 --> 00:47:12.460
relatable metaphor arguing for a new centralized

00:47:12.460 --> 00:47:15.099
PPP unit that would operate like Craig, meaning

00:47:15.099 --> 00:47:17.639
with consistent controls, but system -wide. Using

00:47:17.639 --> 00:47:19.820
the existing figurehead as a model. Exactly.

00:47:20.340 --> 00:47:22.579
And finally, scheming, which sounds negative,

00:47:22.900 --> 00:47:25.320
but here means strategically enlisting support.

00:47:26.039 --> 00:47:28.900
They carefully identified potentially receptive

00:47:28.900 --> 00:47:31.239
influential individuals from multiple functions

00:47:31.239 --> 00:47:33.739
and invited them to a crucial off -site retreat.

00:47:34.300 --> 00:47:36.679
They even practiced anticipatory contingency

00:47:36.679 --> 00:47:39.199
management. They suddenly engineered, you might

00:47:39.199 --> 00:47:41.679
say, the appearance of a spontaneous consensus

00:47:41.679 --> 00:47:44.500
emerging at the retreat. They recruited a purchasing

00:47:44.500 --> 00:47:47.739
manager, Alan, who independently introduced the

00:47:47.739 --> 00:47:49.960
idea of the centralized purchasing unit, the

00:47:49.960 --> 00:47:52.340
very idea the core group had already meticulously

00:47:52.340 --> 00:47:54.820
developed beforehand. Very carefully orchestrated.

00:47:54.960 --> 00:47:57.440
Extremely. a carefully sequenced set of brokerage

00:47:57.440 --> 00:47:59.840
and articulation actions designed to launch a

00:47:59.840 --> 00:48:02.599
major new initiative and overcome expected resistance.

00:48:02.780 --> 00:48:05.980
And the G5 PPP creative project that was another

00:48:05.980 --> 00:48:09.199
distinct creative project focused on PPP. How

00:48:09.199 --> 00:48:11.880
was its mobilization different? Yes, this one

00:48:11.880 --> 00:48:14.480
was different. It was driven more bottom up,

00:48:14.599 --> 00:48:17.460
specifically by Dan's urgency and sheer frustration

00:48:17.460 --> 00:48:19.559
after that difficult executive meeting where

00:48:19.559 --> 00:48:22.000
his program was criticized for delays. His pitch

00:48:22.000 --> 00:48:24.599
was incredibly sharp, born of that pressure.

00:48:25.150 --> 00:48:26.989
getting the right parts and the right cars at

00:48:26.989 --> 00:48:30.269
the right time. Simple, direct, action oriented,

00:48:30.670 --> 00:48:32.869
because it had a much shorter, more urgent time

00:48:32.869 --> 00:48:35.510
frame. The trajectory projection, the vision

00:48:35.510 --> 00:48:38.190
and the scheme, the plan to get there, were much

00:48:38.190 --> 00:48:40.309
more closely intertwined from the very beginning.

00:48:40.889 --> 00:48:43.070
Knowledge articulation here was explicitly used

00:48:43.070 --> 00:48:45.369
not just to make tacit problems explicit, but

00:48:45.369 --> 00:48:47.809
to make the case for change persuasive. Unlike

00:48:47.809 --> 00:48:50.369
in the analysis of the original routine, the

00:48:50.369 --> 00:48:52.309
pitching activity constantly circled back to

00:48:52.309 --> 00:48:54.800
and reinforced those specific taglines like the

00:48:54.800 --> 00:48:56.599
right parts and the right cars at the right time

00:48:56.599 --> 00:48:58.920
to build the creative case and maintain momentum.

00:48:59.280 --> 00:49:01.460
And contingency management. How did Dan handle

00:49:01.460 --> 00:49:04.840
obstacles? Dan was constantly dealing with contingencies,

00:49:05.280 --> 00:49:07.300
particularly resource constraints. There was

00:49:07.300 --> 00:49:09.920
a company -wide hiring freeze, so he had to continually

00:49:09.920 --> 00:49:13.360
negotiate to borrow staff from other areas. He

00:49:13.360 --> 00:49:15.219
described this challenge very vividly, saying,

00:49:15.360 --> 00:49:17.860
and I'm quoting him here, I have identified a

00:49:17.860 --> 00:49:20.510
hand. It's called Kurt. the person he wanted

00:49:20.510 --> 00:49:23.130
to lead the team, but I don't have a glove to

00:49:23.130 --> 00:49:25.650
slip him in an official job slot, so I'm running

00:49:25.650 --> 00:49:28.690
around trying to find a glove. He successfully

00:49:28.690 --> 00:49:31.309
navigated these kinds of obstacles by orchestrating

00:49:31.309 --> 00:49:34.130
both anticipatory responses, planning ahead for

00:49:34.130 --> 00:49:36.949
likely problems, and incredibly deft reactive

00:49:36.949 --> 00:49:39.730
responses when unexpected issues cropped up.

00:49:40.070 --> 00:49:42.289
It really illustrated profound contingency management

00:49:42.289 --> 00:49:44.820
in action. These cases really demonstrate just

00:49:44.820 --> 00:49:47.519
how complex and multifaceted social skill truly

00:49:47.519 --> 00:49:49.579
is when it comes to orchestrating innovation

00:49:49.579 --> 00:49:53.179
and change. You've identified three deeply intertwined

00:49:53.179 --> 00:49:55.440
competencies that seem to define this mastery,

00:49:55.880 --> 00:49:57.840
bringing all these threads together. Yes, I think

00:49:57.840 --> 00:50:00.340
they capture the essence of it. First, there's

00:50:00.340 --> 00:50:03.159
brokerage competency. This isn't just about occupying

00:50:03.159 --> 00:50:05.860
a structural position, but the strategic deployment

00:50:05.860 --> 00:50:08.869
of those different orientations, conduit, tertius

00:50:08.869 --> 00:50:12.150
gaudens, tertius aeongens dynamically over time.

00:50:12.590 --> 00:50:15.409
It also includes the broader ability to identify,

00:50:15.829 --> 00:50:18.289
recruit, and orchestrate participation from the

00:50:18.289 --> 00:50:22.110
right people as a project unfolds. Second, knowledge

00:50:22.110 --> 00:50:24.989
articulation competency. This is that crucial

00:50:24.989 --> 00:50:27.670
ability to read your audience and tailor your

00:50:27.670 --> 00:50:30.030
communications effectively to the specific context.

00:50:30.650 --> 00:50:32.510
It's fundamentally about perspective taking,

00:50:32.650 --> 00:50:34.909
or if you prefer, empathy, understanding where

00:50:34.909 --> 00:50:37.920
the other person is coming from. And third, Projective

00:50:37.920 --> 00:50:40.559
competence. This is the more strategic, forward

00:50:40.559 --> 00:50:42.340
-looking ability to consider which actors need

00:50:42.340 --> 00:50:44.360
to be assembled, when they need to be brought

00:50:44.360 --> 00:50:46.719
in, and how best to engage them to advance a

00:50:46.719 --> 00:50:48.719
project towards its goal. And these aren't separate

00:50:48.719 --> 00:50:51.480
skills, are they? Not at all. They are deeply

00:50:51.480 --> 00:50:54.039
intertwined. Effective brokerage, for example,

00:50:54.420 --> 00:50:56.880
almost always implicates knowledge articulation

00:50:56.880 --> 00:50:59.360
you need to articulate effectively to build rapport,

00:50:59.739 --> 00:51:01.980
establish common interests, and persuade people

00:51:01.980 --> 00:51:04.820
to connect or collaborate. You need projective

00:51:04.820 --> 00:51:06.880
competence to even know who to broker between.

00:51:07.070 --> 00:51:09.809
Think of a chief of surgery trying to introduce

00:51:09.809 --> 00:51:12.489
a significant new orthopedic technique into the

00:51:12.489 --> 00:51:15.130
hospital. They need brokerage skills to connect

00:51:15.130 --> 00:51:17.650
with the right surgeons, nurses, administrators,

00:51:18.090 --> 00:51:20.909
maybe even external experts. They need articulation

00:51:20.909 --> 00:51:23.250
skills to clearly explain the technique, its

00:51:23.250 --> 00:51:25.530
benefits, the evidence behind it, addressing

00:51:25.530 --> 00:51:28.010
concerns. And they need projective competence

00:51:28.010 --> 00:51:30.789
to plan the entire rollout training, equipment,

00:51:31.269 --> 00:51:33.650
scheduling, managing the change process. It all

00:51:33.650 --> 00:51:36.079
works together. Let's delve a bit deeper into

00:51:36.079 --> 00:51:39.280
one aspect of articulation you highlighted, perspective

00:51:39.280 --> 00:51:41.800
articulation, that ability to understand and

00:51:41.800 --> 00:51:44.780
express others' worlds. How did you see this

00:51:44.780 --> 00:51:46.579
manifest in practice in your research? It seems

00:51:46.579 --> 00:51:49.260
incredibly powerful. It was genuinely one of

00:51:49.260 --> 00:51:52.260
the most effective articulation behaviors I observed.

00:51:53.420 --> 00:51:57.110
This capacity to truly understand and then accurately

00:51:57.110 --> 00:52:00.510
express the perspective of others, whether it's

00:52:00.510 --> 00:52:02.269
articulating your own knowledge in a way they

00:52:02.269 --> 00:52:04.469
understand or articulating their perspective

00:52:04.469 --> 00:52:07.030
back to them or to a third party. There was a

00:52:07.030 --> 00:52:09.190
great example with Carl, that non -engineer at

00:52:09.190 --> 00:52:11.449
Newcar, who had decades of experience working

00:52:11.449 --> 00:52:14.150
closely with engineers. He was explaining to

00:52:14.150 --> 00:52:16.690
Aaron, an engineer from a newly merged, more

00:52:16.690 --> 00:52:19.010
bureaucratic company, how the original Newcar

00:52:19.010 --> 00:52:22.179
design engineers typically worked. Carl articulated

00:52:22.179 --> 00:52:24.679
their tacit experience, their mindset, saying

00:52:24.679 --> 00:52:27.059
something like, Look, I want to show it my design

00:52:27.059 --> 00:52:29.619
to you until it's done. Because half of engineering

00:52:29.619 --> 00:52:32.119
should be trying new dumb things. But that's

00:52:32.119 --> 00:52:34.539
not socially acceptable in a formal review. Capturing

00:52:34.539 --> 00:52:37.500
the culture. Exactly. He successfully conveyed

00:52:37.500 --> 00:52:41.539
a complex, nuanced cultural understanding, validating

00:52:41.539 --> 00:52:44.119
the engineer's perhaps unexpressed feelings and

00:52:44.119 --> 00:52:46.239
potentially enlisting Aaron's support, or at

00:52:46.239 --> 00:52:48.800
least understanding, for a new design initiative

00:52:48.800 --> 00:52:52.559
by bridging that cultural gap. In a medical context,

00:52:52.880 --> 00:52:54.880
this might be a senior nurse explaining to a

00:52:54.880 --> 00:52:57.800
newly qualified doctor the unwritten rules of

00:52:57.800 --> 00:53:00.340
patient flow or communication norms on a busy

00:53:00.340 --> 00:53:03.420
ward, articulating the nurse's operational perspective

00:53:03.420 --> 00:53:05.900
to help the doctor navigate the system more effectively

00:53:05.900 --> 00:53:08.480
and build collaborative relationships. That's

00:53:08.480 --> 00:53:10.380
fascinating. And then there's this related concept

00:53:10.380 --> 00:53:13.699
you mentioned, ventril equation or riffing, essentially

00:53:13.699 --> 00:53:15.639
speaking through another's voice or perspective.

00:53:15.780 --> 00:53:18.619
What does that sound like in practice? Yes. This

00:53:18.619 --> 00:53:21.000
is a particularly powerful variant of perspective

00:53:21.000 --> 00:53:23.750
articulation. It's where one person effectively

00:53:23.750 --> 00:53:27.730
speaks as or through another voice or voices,

00:53:28.210 --> 00:53:31.210
often relying on shared understandings of social

00:53:31.210 --> 00:53:34.449
speech types or social languages, like professional

00:53:34.449 --> 00:53:36.949
jargons or typical ways of framing arguments

00:53:36.949 --> 00:53:39.429
within a certain group. Karl, again, was a master

00:53:39.429 --> 00:53:42.230
of this. During intense process innovation efforts,

00:53:42.570 --> 00:53:45.010
he would often use riffing to advocate points

00:53:45.010 --> 00:53:47.929
or frame conversations. He'd hypothetically speak

00:53:47.929 --> 00:53:50.730
as an engineer, saying things like, OK, if I'm

00:53:50.730 --> 00:53:52.820
a product you're looking at this, I'm thinking

00:53:52.820 --> 00:53:56.559
about XYZ coordinates. Carl wasn't an engineer,

00:53:57.019 --> 00:53:58.980
but doing this showcased his deep understanding,

00:53:59.400 --> 00:54:01.139
his mastery of their privileged knowledge and

00:54:01.139 --> 00:54:03.980
way of thinking. It created credibility, made

00:54:03.980 --> 00:54:06.420
complex technical ideas accessible to the non

00:54:06.420 --> 00:54:08.659
-engineers in the room, and allowed the conversation

00:54:08.659 --> 00:54:10.539
to move forward without getting bogged down in

00:54:10.539 --> 00:54:13.000
misunderstandings or defensiveness. It's quite

00:54:13.000 --> 00:54:15.329
a performative skill. bridging knowledge divide

00:54:15.329 --> 00:54:17.969
dynamically. So like a medical director ventriloquating

00:54:17.969 --> 00:54:20.250
the perspective of a busy ward manager when talking

00:54:20.250 --> 00:54:22.230
to hospital executives about staffing needs.

00:54:23.010 --> 00:54:25.849
Precisely. Framing the issue using the language

00:54:25.849 --> 00:54:28.409
and priorities that resonate with both the operational

00:54:28.409 --> 00:54:30.510
front line and the strategic decision makers.

00:54:31.030 --> 00:54:32.769
It's a sophisticated articulation technique.

00:54:32.989 --> 00:54:35.969
And Dan, the G5 program manager you studied closely

00:54:35.969 --> 00:54:38.989
seems to embody this apex of social skill. What

00:54:38.989 --> 00:54:41.309
specifically made his approach so virtuous and

00:54:41.309 --> 00:54:43.389
effective? You paint a picture of real mastery.

00:54:44.050 --> 00:54:46.619
Dan's virtuosity was truly remarkable. operating

00:54:46.619 --> 00:54:50.000
on multiple levels. Firstly, his ability to navigate

00:54:50.000 --> 00:54:53.340
divides was exceptional. As one of Alcar's relatively

00:54:53.340 --> 00:54:56.659
few black senior executives at the time, he consistently

00:54:56.659 --> 00:54:59.440
and skillfully brokered across both racial and

00:54:59.440 --> 00:55:02.420
organizational divides. He deftly handled incredibly

00:55:02.420 --> 00:55:04.820
sensitive situations, like one where a white

00:55:04.820 --> 00:55:07.400
finance manager was publicly, quite harshly,

00:55:07.659 --> 00:55:10.760
rebuked by a very senior VP. But Dan managed

00:55:10.760 --> 00:55:12.639
to smooth things over afterwards by explaining

00:55:12.639 --> 00:55:15.320
the nuanced perspectives of each party, fostering

00:55:15.320 --> 00:55:17.159
understanding where there could easily have been

00:55:17.159 --> 00:55:19.380
lasting resentment and damaged relationships.

00:55:20.139 --> 00:55:22.619
Secondly, his multifaceted communication style

00:55:22.619 --> 00:55:25.780
was key. He masterfully used humor, often quite

00:55:25.780 --> 00:55:28.639
direct, earthy humor, using phrases like, beavering

00:55:28.639 --> 00:55:31.099
away, or calling engineers cheating, lying sons

00:55:31.099 --> 00:55:33.400
of bitches, affectionately, or even playfully

00:55:33.400 --> 00:55:35.400
threatening to pull a gun to assert authority

00:55:35.400 --> 00:55:38.099
lightly. But this was always coupled with incredibly

00:55:38.099 --> 00:55:40.760
insightful perspective articulation. He could

00:55:40.760 --> 00:55:43.159
grasp the complexities of a situation instantly

00:55:43.159 --> 00:55:45.760
and articulate the different viewpoints sympathetically,

00:55:46.119 --> 00:55:48.820
while always offering pragmatic solutions. This

00:55:48.820 --> 00:55:51.739
built an incredibly broad base of trust and rapport

00:55:51.739 --> 00:55:54.849
across very diverse groups. And how did he manage

00:55:54.849 --> 00:55:57.449
those really complex, high -stake situations

00:55:57.449 --> 00:55:59.849
when tensions were running high between teams,

00:55:59.949 --> 00:56:02.869
like the PPP example? Ah yes, the example of

00:56:02.869 --> 00:56:05.690
rising tensions between his new PPP team, led

00:56:05.690 --> 00:56:08.849
by Kurt, and the established manufacturing personnel,

00:56:09.210 --> 00:56:12.829
represented by Tim. This was a critical potential

00:56:12.829 --> 00:56:15.920
roadblock for his project. Dan didn't just send

00:56:15.920 --> 00:56:18.820
emails or hold meetings in his office. He literally

00:56:18.820 --> 00:56:21.360
stepped onto manufacturing's turf, went down

00:56:21.360 --> 00:56:23.980
to the plant floor, got a first -hand look at

00:56:23.980 --> 00:56:26.480
the issues from their perspective. He used his

00:56:26.480 --> 00:56:28.619
acute social insight to capture the operational

00:56:28.619 --> 00:56:31.099
details, but also the underlying frustrations.

00:56:31.480 --> 00:56:33.559
He could then translate the issues effectively,

00:56:34.139 --> 00:56:35.840
speaking engineering language in one meeting

00:56:35.840 --> 00:56:39.000
and manufacturing language in the next. He orchestrated

00:56:39.000 --> 00:56:41.119
the network, bringing the right people together

00:56:41.119 --> 00:56:43.760
at the right time to talk directly, but facilitated

00:56:43.760 --> 00:56:46.309
by his understanding. Ultimately, he resolved

00:56:46.309 --> 00:56:48.929
the conflict, keeping the project on track by

00:56:48.929 --> 00:56:50.909
demonstrating that profound understanding of

00:56:50.909 --> 00:56:53.170
each party's pressures, interests, and ways of

00:56:53.170 --> 00:56:55.750
working. So it's a blend of empathy and strategic

00:56:55.750 --> 00:56:59.510
action. Exactly. Dan's mastery involved a complex

00:56:59.510 --> 00:57:02.429
blend of cognitive perspective -taking, understanding

00:57:02.429 --> 00:57:04.829
their rational arguments and emotional perspective

00:57:04.829 --> 00:57:07.389
-taking, grasping their feelings and motivations.

00:57:07.949 --> 00:57:10.010
This allowed him to constantly adapt his approach

00:57:10.010 --> 00:57:12.449
and language precisely to his audience, which

00:57:12.449 --> 00:57:15.329
is absolutely crucial for achieving high -impact

00:57:15.329 --> 00:57:17.750
innovation in any field, certainly including

00:57:17.750 --> 00:57:20.070
the complex, high -pressure environment of healthcare.

00:57:20.349 --> 00:57:22.429
It really highlights that the most effective

00:57:22.429 --> 00:57:25.110
leaders aren't just technically brilliant, but

00:57:25.110 --> 00:57:28.469
also deeply empathetic and socially adept orchestrators.

00:57:28.969 --> 00:57:31.389
It's very clear how these principles – brokerage,

00:57:31.469 --> 00:57:33.329
knowledge, articulation, project management,

00:57:33.469 --> 00:57:35.590
social skill – apply within a large corporation

00:57:35.590 --> 00:57:39.389
like Newcar. But you argue that this DKE model,

00:57:39.389 --> 00:57:41.829
as you call it, has universal application, extending

00:57:41.829 --> 00:57:44.309
far beyond the corporate boardroom. Where else

00:57:44.309 --> 00:57:46.289
do we see these dynamics powerfully at play?

00:57:46.480 --> 00:57:49.340
Absolutely. The underlying mechanisms are remarkably

00:57:49.340 --> 00:57:51.960
consistent. One compelling historical example,

00:57:52.320 --> 00:57:54.860
far removed from corporate life, is Serge Diaghilev

00:57:54.860 --> 00:57:57.179
and his Ballet Roses in the early 20th century.

00:57:57.500 --> 00:58:00.610
A cultural earthquake. Diaghilev acted as a master

00:58:00.610 --> 00:58:03.349
conduit broker. He was perpetually seeking out

00:58:03.349 --> 00:58:06.409
new and important artistic elements. Revolutionary

00:58:06.409 --> 00:58:09.210
music from Stravinsky, avant -garde design from

00:58:09.210 --> 00:58:12.150
Picasso, groundbreaking choreography from Nijinsky,

00:58:12.730 --> 00:58:15.309
sourcing them from exhibitions, concerts, studios

00:58:15.309 --> 00:58:17.889
across Europe, and adapting them, reconfiguring

00:58:17.889 --> 00:58:20.570
them. for his ballet productions. He was also

00:58:20.570 --> 00:58:23.269
a superb Tertius Eugens. He had an incredible

00:58:23.269 --> 00:58:26.469
knack for uniting often fragmented, argumentative

00:58:26.469 --> 00:58:28.630
avant -garde artists, bringing them together

00:58:28.630 --> 00:58:31.289
in novel collaborations. And crucially, linking

00:58:31.289 --> 00:58:33.409
this potentially shocking artistic world with

00:58:33.409 --> 00:58:35.489
the conservative moneyed elites, the patrons

00:58:35.489 --> 00:58:37.409
who actually funded the performances, bridging

00:58:37.409 --> 00:58:40.090
worlds. And did he use Tertius Gaudens too? Oh,

00:58:40.090 --> 00:58:42.690
certainly. He simultaneously employed Tertius

00:58:42.690 --> 00:58:45.690
Gaudens tactics, explaining differences or creating

00:58:45.690 --> 00:58:48.750
competition to his advantage. For instance, he

00:58:48.750 --> 00:58:51.070
might commission music from rival composers for

00:58:51.070 --> 00:58:53.750
consecutive seasons, generating creative tension

00:58:53.750 --> 00:58:55.909
and leverage that constantly pushed artistic

00:58:55.909 --> 00:58:59.210
boundaries. His knowledge articulation was phenomenal,

00:58:59.750 --> 00:59:02.429
synthesizing these vast, disparate artistic contents,

00:59:02.969 --> 00:59:05.929
skillfully blending radical classicism with startling

00:59:05.929 --> 00:59:08.869
experimentation. He created, as one critic put

00:59:08.869 --> 00:59:11.610
it, radical novelty translated into a language

00:59:11.610 --> 00:59:13.989
rich in classical references, making the new

00:59:13.989 --> 00:59:17.659
palatable yet still revolutionary. A true impresario

00:59:17.659 --> 00:59:20.440
of innovation. Precisely. It showcases how local

00:59:20.440 --> 00:59:22.619
micro -level brokerage and articulation actions

00:59:22.619 --> 00:59:25.340
can aggregate to have broader systemic impact.

00:59:25.940 --> 00:59:28.719
The IONGEN's broker, like Diagelev, often trades

00:59:28.719 --> 00:59:30.960
immediate control or profit for wider network

00:59:30.960 --> 00:59:33.239
growth and influence, acting as an impresario

00:59:33.239 --> 00:59:35.579
who enables the whole ecosystem. And what about

00:59:35.579 --> 00:59:37.980
entrepreneurial action? How does the assembly

00:59:37.980 --> 00:59:40.199
view of entrepreneurship connect to this model?

00:59:40.639 --> 00:59:42.340
Starting a new venture or maybe a medical tech

00:59:42.340 --> 00:59:44.780
startup? Entrepreneurial efforts fundamentally

00:59:44.780 --> 00:59:47.260
involve continually joining people and resources

00:59:47.260 --> 00:59:49.800
together in new combinations. That's almost the

00:59:49.800 --> 00:59:52.579
definition. This assembly view suggests that

00:59:52.579 --> 00:59:54.380
an entrepreneurial startup doesn't just spring

00:59:54.380 --> 00:59:57.659
fully formed from a single brilliant idea. It

00:59:57.659 --> 00:59:59.900
usually begins with a trajectory projection,

01:00:00.360 --> 01:00:03.000
a vision for the goal, however hazy or evolving

01:00:03.000 --> 01:00:05.980
it might be initially. But then it unfolds to

01:00:05.980 --> 01:00:09.260
what you could call cascades of tertius engines

01:00:09.260 --> 01:00:12.179
connecting work. Each connection enables the

01:00:12.179 --> 01:00:15.349
next. This assembly action can evolve serially,

01:00:15.710 --> 01:00:17.550
one connection leading logically to the next,

01:00:17.869 --> 01:00:20.130
sometimes in parallel, multiple connections being

01:00:20.130 --> 01:00:22.969
forged simultaneously, and usually expansively,

01:00:23.190 --> 01:00:25.429
adding more people, more resources, more capabilities

01:00:25.429 --> 01:00:28.230
over time. Brokerage, particularly the iEngines

01:00:28.230 --> 01:00:30.809
form, is effectively the primary engine by which

01:00:30.809 --> 01:00:32.650
venture growth is accomplished. How does that

01:00:32.650 --> 01:00:34.809
compare to other theories like effectuation?

01:00:35.170 --> 01:00:38.110
It offers a slightly different emphasis. Effectuation

01:00:38.110 --> 01:00:39.989
theory highlights starting with the means you

01:00:39.989 --> 01:00:43.059
have available and letting goals emerge. The

01:00:43.059 --> 01:00:45.239
assembly view, while acknowledging adaptability,

01:00:45.639 --> 01:00:47.739
argues that the trajectory projection, that initial

01:00:47.739 --> 01:00:50.500
guiding vision or stake in the ground, is still

01:00:50.500 --> 01:00:52.820
a critical orienting element, even if it gets

01:00:52.820 --> 01:00:55.340
refined along the way. For a medical startup

01:00:55.340 --> 01:00:57.860
developing a new orthopedic device, it's that

01:00:57.860 --> 01:01:00.440
constant process of assembling the right engineers,

01:01:00.760 --> 01:01:03.820
clinicians, investors, regulatory experts, each

01:01:03.820 --> 01:01:06.320
iEngines connection, building the venture piece

01:01:06.320 --> 01:01:08.719
by piece towards that initial guiding projection.

01:01:08.989 --> 01:01:11.769
And collective actions, social movements, they

01:01:11.769 --> 01:01:14.269
also underpin by these same fundamental dynamics

01:01:14.269 --> 01:01:16.170
of brokerage and articulation. It feels like

01:01:16.170 --> 01:01:18.269
a different world from corporate innovation or

01:01:18.269 --> 01:01:20.989
entrepreneurship. Fundamentally, yes, the underlying

01:01:20.989 --> 01:01:24.070
mechanisms are remarkably similar. As I sometimes

01:01:24.070 --> 01:01:26.730
say, innovation is not as far removed from the

01:01:26.730 --> 01:01:29.530
street as might be imagined. Getting new things

01:01:29.530 --> 01:01:31.789
done, whether it's launching a product or sparking

01:01:31.789 --> 01:01:34.670
a movement, relies on connecting people, shaping

01:01:34.670 --> 01:01:37.920
understanding, and mobilizing action. Think about

01:01:37.920 --> 01:01:40.699
historical examples like the 1936 General Motors

01:01:40.699 --> 01:01:43.739
sit -down strike in Flint, Michigan Blue -collar

01:01:43.739 --> 01:01:46.260
workers through incredibly sophisticated internal

01:01:46.260 --> 01:01:49.000
brokerage and articulation Mobilized collective

01:01:49.000 --> 01:01:51.119
action that fundamentally disrupted and ultimately

01:01:51.119 --> 01:01:54.039
restructured an entire social and economic system

01:01:54.039 --> 01:01:56.619
That involved countless acts of connecting workers

01:01:56.619 --> 01:01:59.619
sharing information conduit uniting factions

01:01:59.619 --> 01:02:02.940
young juns and strategically managing conflict

01:02:02.940 --> 01:02:05.900
gardens with management and authorities And in

01:02:05.900 --> 01:02:08.500
our increasingly digital world, how have these

01:02:08.500 --> 01:02:11.199
mechanisms adapted? Has technology made human

01:02:11.199 --> 01:02:13.699
brokers less relevant? Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn

01:02:13.699 --> 01:02:16.300
connect people automatically. That's a key question.

01:02:16.880 --> 01:02:20.019
Digital tools have undoubtedly dramatically increased

01:02:20.019 --> 01:02:22.840
information availability and the speed of coordination.

01:02:23.119 --> 01:02:25.980
Algorithms can sometimes shift some of the connection

01:02:25.980 --> 01:02:28.440
work from human brokers to digital platforms

01:02:28.440 --> 01:02:31.039
matching users with shared interests, facilitating

01:02:31.039 --> 01:02:33.280
introductions. However, this certainly doesn't

01:02:33.280 --> 01:02:35.719
eliminate the advantages of skilled, hands -on

01:02:35.719 --> 01:02:38.659
human brokering, or the complex task of orchestrating

01:02:38.659 --> 01:02:41.159
projects across multiple venues, both online

01:02:41.159 --> 01:02:44.460
and offline. If anything, future strategic actors

01:02:44.460 --> 01:02:47.500
need to be adept at navigating both worlds, possessing

01:02:47.500 --> 01:02:50.639
the traditional in -person analog skills of relationship

01:02:50.639 --> 01:02:53.059
building and nuance, and the digital skills to

01:02:53.059 --> 01:02:55.340
leverage online platforms effectively. Can you

01:02:55.340 --> 01:02:57.639
give an example of that blend? Wael Ghonim's

01:02:57.639 --> 01:02:59.980
pivotal role in the Egyptian -Arab Spring is

01:02:59.980 --> 01:03:02.380
a powerful illustration of this analog -digital

01:03:02.380 --> 01:03:04.920
straddling. He was a Google executive, comfortable

01:03:04.920 --> 01:03:07.260
in the digital world. He created high -impact

01:03:07.260 --> 01:03:11.869
Facebook pages, like Kalina Khalid said, in an

01:03:11.869 --> 01:03:14.449
extremely politically charged environment. But

01:03:14.449 --> 01:03:16.630
crucially, his knowledge articulation was exceptional.

01:03:17.170 --> 01:03:19.650
He used colloquial Egyptian dialect in his posts,

01:03:20.170 --> 01:03:22.610
consciously avoiding formal Arabic or dense activist

01:03:22.610 --> 01:03:25.769
jargon, allowing him to connect deeply and authentically

01:03:25.769 --> 01:03:29.210
with young Egyptians online. His activism displayed

01:03:29.210 --> 01:03:32.269
a potent composite of brokerage skill. Conduit,

01:03:32.630 --> 01:03:34.510
moving critical information and narratives rapidly

01:03:34.510 --> 01:03:37.920
online. Tertius Unions. mobilizing collective

01:03:37.920 --> 01:03:40.079
action both digitally through calls to protest

01:03:40.079 --> 01:03:42.099
and then coordinating in person on the ground,

01:03:42.679 --> 01:03:45.340
and crucially, Tertia's gaudens, strategically

01:03:45.340 --> 01:03:47.400
keeping the authorities separate and in the dark

01:03:47.400 --> 01:03:49.599
about their plans for as long as possible, a

01:03:49.599 --> 01:03:52.199
vital protective function. This collective action

01:03:52.199 --> 01:03:54.679
truly was a creative project, developed rapidly

01:03:54.679 --> 01:03:57.000
in the absence of established routines, with

01:03:57.000 --> 01:03:59.260
constantly evolving goals and activist identities,

01:03:59.699 --> 01:04:01.920
all driven by a powerful blend of digital reach

01:04:01.920 --> 01:04:04.230
and human brokerage skill. Finally, you suggest

01:04:04.230 --> 01:04:07.309
this whole BKAP model brokerage knowledge articulation

01:04:07.309 --> 01:04:10.289
projects even has implications for broader societal

01:04:10.289 --> 01:04:12.550
issues like social inequality and education.

01:04:12.829 --> 01:04:15.190
How so? That seems quite a leap from automotive

01:04:15.190 --> 01:04:17.989
design or the Arab Spring. Well, the model's

01:04:17.989 --> 01:04:20.670
emphasis on social skill as a key enabler of

01:04:20.670 --> 01:04:24.340
effective action can indeed be extended. If social

01:04:24.340 --> 01:04:27.159
skill helps people navigate complex systems and

01:04:27.159 --> 01:04:30.300
mobilize resources to achieve goals, then fostering

01:04:30.300 --> 01:04:32.739
it could potentially help address barriers related

01:04:32.739 --> 01:04:35.860
to income inequality. Higher education for all

01:04:35.860 --> 01:04:38.300
its challenges remains a primary institution

01:04:38.300 --> 01:04:41.599
for facilitating upward mobility. The model seems

01:04:41.599 --> 01:04:43.719
particularly relevant when thinking about students,

01:04:44.300 --> 01:04:46.300
perhaps, at what are sometimes called comprehensive

01:04:46.300 --> 01:04:49.119
universities, often regional public institutions.

01:04:49.820 --> 01:04:52.039
Many students there demonstrate remarkable resilience

01:04:52.039 --> 01:04:54.940
and motivation. often achieving dramatic upward

01:04:54.940 --> 01:04:57.360
mobility despite significant financial or social

01:04:57.360 --> 01:05:01.079
disadvantages. Developing social skill, the ability

01:05:01.079 --> 01:05:03.760
to network effectively, articulate ideas persuasively,

01:05:04.079 --> 01:05:06.340
manage projects, navigate different social contexts

01:05:06.340 --> 01:05:08.719
to their education, offers these students a crucial

01:05:08.719 --> 01:05:11.679
pathway to success. It equips individuals not

01:05:11.679 --> 01:05:13.559
just with subject matter knowledge, but with

01:05:13.559 --> 01:05:15.579
the practical ability to orchestrate that knowledge

01:05:15.579 --> 01:05:17.639
and their networks for impactful change in their

01:05:17.639 --> 01:05:19.940
own lives and careers. It's about empowering

01:05:19.940 --> 01:05:23.170
them. to become effective brokers and articulators,

01:05:23.730 --> 01:05:25.789
regardless of their starting point. So let's

01:05:25.789 --> 01:05:27.769
try and bring this all together. What does this

01:05:27.769 --> 01:05:29.789
deep dive mean for you, our listeners, whether

01:05:29.789 --> 01:05:32.050
you're a surgeon leading a team, a researcher

01:05:32.050 --> 01:05:34.590
trying to get funding, an administrator managing

01:05:34.590 --> 01:05:37.130
change, or anyone working in orthopedics or health

01:05:37.130 --> 01:05:40.690
care generally? We seem to live in an era increasingly

01:05:40.690 --> 01:05:44.340
defined by this project -based work where Organizing

01:05:44.340 --> 01:05:46.780
maybe even life itself revolves more and more

01:05:46.780 --> 01:05:49.300
around dynamic networks, less rigid hierarchy

01:05:49.300 --> 01:05:52.199
and a real premium being placed on this ability

01:05:52.199 --> 01:05:55.599
to function effectively as a broker, as an articulator.

01:05:55.960 --> 01:05:58.420
Precisely. While having the right network structure

01:05:58.420 --> 01:06:00.639
and possessing individual knowledge or expertise

01:06:00.639 --> 01:06:02.920
have always been fundamental They aren't sufficient

01:06:02.920 --> 01:06:05.840
on their own anymore the social skill involved

01:06:05.840 --> 01:06:07.820
in actively orchestrating those networks and

01:06:07.820 --> 01:06:09.820
articulating knowledge effectively for different

01:06:09.820 --> 01:06:12.960
audiences and Critically the capacity to formulate

01:06:12.960 --> 01:06:15.619
launch and navigate novel projects. These are

01:06:15.619 --> 01:06:18.519
increasing perhaps paramount Importance in our

01:06:18.519 --> 01:06:20.940
rapidly evolving world. It's really about more

01:06:20.940 --> 01:06:22.699
than just what you know individually It's about

01:06:22.699 --> 01:06:25.440
the art the skill of putting that knowledge into

01:06:25.440 --> 01:06:27.670
action through and with others. It reminds me

01:06:27.670 --> 01:06:29.929
of that quote about the knowledge of how to combine.

01:06:30.409 --> 01:06:32.409
I think it was Alexis de Tocqueville who observed

01:06:32.409 --> 01:06:35.269
way back in the 19th century in democratic countries

01:06:35.269 --> 01:06:37.530
the science of association is the fundamental

01:06:37.530 --> 01:06:40.090
science. Progress and all the other sciences

01:06:40.090 --> 01:06:42.750
depends on progress in this one. That's a profoundly

01:06:42.750 --> 01:06:45.050
relevant thought isn't it. And it transcends

01:06:45.050 --> 01:06:47.110
specific political systems or organizational

01:06:47.110 --> 01:06:50.570
contexts. Understanding this science of association

01:06:50.570 --> 01:06:53.860
as he put it the dynamics of brokerage. articulation,

01:06:54.079 --> 01:06:56.820
and collaboration helps us grasp not just how

01:06:56.820 --> 01:06:59.480
routine things get done, but how genuinely new

01:06:59.480 --> 01:07:02.320
things get done, how larger processes like collective

01:07:02.320 --> 01:07:04.780
action, entrepreneurial innovation, and indeed

01:07:04.780 --> 01:07:06.980
scientific and medical breakthroughs truly unfold.

01:07:07.239 --> 01:07:09.960
In healthcare specifically, it means getting

01:07:09.960 --> 01:07:12.440
better at understanding how we combine deep clinical

01:07:12.440 --> 01:07:15.159
expertise, rapid technological advancements,

01:07:15.519 --> 01:07:18.059
diverse human resources, patient perspectives,

01:07:18.400 --> 01:07:20.179
how we bring all those elements together effectively

01:07:20.179 --> 01:07:23.519
through skilled association to achieve real breakthroughs

01:07:23.519 --> 01:07:25.780
in patient care, research, and public health.

01:07:26.079 --> 01:07:28.400
That's how we transform the landscape. Absolutely.

01:07:28.800 --> 01:07:31.000
Well, we hope this deep dive has given you some

01:07:31.000 --> 01:07:33.420
powerful new insights, maybe a new language,

01:07:33.639 --> 01:07:35.780
to consider for your own professional journey,

01:07:36.139 --> 01:07:38.219
whether that's leading your team more effectively,

01:07:38.719 --> 01:07:41.159
launching that new quality improvement initiative,

01:07:41.199 --> 01:07:44.059
or simply navigating the complex collaborations

01:07:44.059 --> 01:07:46.960
that are part of everyday life in medicine. If

01:07:46.960 --> 01:07:49.219
you found this deep dive valuable, please do

01:07:49.219 --> 01:07:51.400
take just a moment to rate the show or perhaps

01:07:51.400 --> 01:07:52.960
share it with a colleague who you think might

01:07:52.960 --> 01:07:55.639
also find it insightful. We're always keen to

01:07:55.639 --> 01:07:58.039
hear what stands out to you. Until next time,

01:07:58.460 --> 01:08:00.800
keep exploring, keep connecting and keep getting

01:08:00.800 --> 01:08:01.539
new things done.