I am noticing more and more as I surf the web how my apps keep managing my feeds – identifying what I click, like, find, etc, and tailoring the results so I get more stuff that will probably appeal to me.
At a deep level I suspect it is quite satisfying and gratifying – making me feel good as I read more stories that I like.
But part of me feels that this isn’t really OK, that I might be at risk of being somewhat manipulated – even just that I’m at risk of missing the bigger picture and perhaps missing out.
So quite a dilemma – because if I opt out I might feel worse off!
It strikes me that I see the very same curating happening with our clients, as they work to collaborate on complex issues across boundaries.
This most often manifests in a discussion about stakeholders – it seems that they often unconsciously select those they like (are easy to get on with, probably agree with, or at least they think might be constructive), rather than those who might disagree, and hold diverse views that might take the activity in new and potentially challenging (but perhaps more useful) directions
So how might we force ourselves out of our “like” bubble? Here are some simple suggestions:
- Invite those who the organisation is most likely to be nervous about
- Sit with the person you like the least in the room
- Pair up with the person you know is most likely to disagree with you
- Find the wisdom in the view you are most opposed too
- Share information with those who you think are most likely to misuse it/or use it against you
While such actions may go against the grain, they might just reduce the risk that we compromise the power of our collaboration by relying too much on our curated feed, and not opening our minds to the diversity that we know is a requisite for improved outcomes.
What is your experience? Is your collaboration in a ‘Like’ bubble?