Summary of “IDEO’s Sandy Speicher on Constructivism: The uncomfortable secret to creative success is “disequilibrium””

In order to bring yourself back to a calm state of knowing, you have to generate a new “a-ha” inside your mind that reframes your old information with the new information.
A mental model that, through the force of your imagination and intelligence, connects those dissonant dots into new meaning.
Learning isn’t about the consumption of new information.
Synthesis is our natural creative process, and once you start to put those pieces back together into new frameworks of understanding, that’s when the new ideas start to flow.
It’s no longer just about understanding the word “Cow”: Now it’s about designing whole new offerings, experiences, and organizations that go against the convictions that have solidified in our minds.
While I constantly think about the time required to tick off my to-do list, I rarely evaluate how much emotional energy is required to take my work to new creative heights.
So how does this Constructivist learning theory help us support creative teams? What if, as creative leaders, we saw ourselves as great Constructivist teachers instead of orienting around our knowledge and expertise? How would Piaget’s theories change our behavior?
Just like classroom teachers, leaders face pressure to accomplish a set of outcomes within a particular timeframe and often, unintentionally, send signals to their teams that their time messing about in search of a new mental model isn’t valid.

The orginal article.

Summary of “When Faced with Conflict, Try an Introspective Approach”

How is it that rational, good, understanding, kind, collaborative people like you and me can get so triggered by certain colleagues’ work performance that our minds race with how we want them to get out of our lives and work – in any way possible? We come up with long diatribes of the million and one reasons why they need to get their act together – or, better yet, disappear.
In my research and experience as a time management coach, and in my work developing my new book, Divine Time Management, I’ve discovered that people often jump to blaming others in conflict.
Ask yourself: Was something else going on in my life that had an impact on how I saw this event? Had something happened previously in this work relationship that affected how I saw this person? Am I tired, stressed, hungry, hot, or in any other way mentally, emotionally, spiritually, or physically not at my best? Identify any external factors at play, particularly those that might have nothing to do with your counterpart or conflict.
If you are feeling confident about the projects you’re working on, your relationships with people at work, and your overall team performance, someone dropping the ball on a few things may slightly annoy you but won’t infuriate you.
When you’re feeling uncertain about your projects, believe that people think badly of you at work, and are insecure about your team’s performance, one little slipup could send you over the edge.
Instead of calmly working with a coworker on improvements, you could end up lashing out at her or going behind her back to try to get rid of the problem.
The why shouldn’t be “Because you made me so mad that I wanted to spit,” but something like “When you turned in this report late, I ended up working until 1 AM and missed my son’s soccer game to meet the client deadline. For us to work together effectively, I need to receive reports on time from you.” Then move on to find a solution: “We’re a team, and I want us to work well together. Can you explain what happened, so we can work together on preventing this situation from happening in the future?”.
I’ve had times when the people I work with do change their approach, and other times when it’s become clear that they’re not the right fit for the job and need to move on.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Why You Should Explain “Why” as a Manager”

There’s so much to learn and master when managing a team: how to give feedback effectively, how to run an effective 1:1, how to delegate, how to develop your team, and more.
Sharing a decision with your team? Tell them why you made it.
One of the most frequent things that’ll happen when you start explaining why you made decisions is that you’ll start sharing more context with your team.
Once your team has more context and understands your priorities and why you make decisions, you’ve created a feedback loop!
If you explained the decision as being tied to a number of people on the team being gluten-free, they’ll bring you options that fit that criteria and start thinking about the needs of the team as part of the decision.
You’re empowering your team to learn and do better next time, which is what management is all about.
When you share what’s happening, your team is informed.
I don’t know about you, but I’d love a team that’s constantly learning, making better decisions, and feeling more engaged.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Neuroscientist David Eagleman and composer Anthony Brandt explain how creativity works”

What makes humans special? Some credit should go to the opposable thumb and the larynx, says neuroscientist David Eagleman, but a lot of it has to do with our ability to be creative and constantly think up new ideas.
Eagleman, a professor at Stanford University and writer, collaborated with composer and Rice University professor Anthony Brandt to write The Runaway Species: How Human Creativity Remakes the World, published this month by Catapult.
Throughout the book, which is filled with photographs and illustrations, they narrow down and explain the three main components of creativity: bending elements, blending elements, and breaking.
The Verge spoke to Eagleman and Brandt about how these processes work, the relationship between creativity and quality, and their own favorite examples of creativity.
We had no interest in writing something about, you know, “Here’s advice on how to be creative,” in part because people are so different in what works for one person and what works for another.
What about taste, though? There are plenty of things, like performance art, that people will say is “Creative,” but they also say it’s bad. How should we evaluate? And how do we know how creative to be, or if it’s possible to be “Too” creative?
Brandt: We describe creativity as kind of a conversation between personal impulse and the community that sees it.
Eagleman: There is no way to know exactly how far out you need to be.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Jeff Bezos’ guide to life”

Jeff spent a summer repairing an old piece of Caterpillar construction equipment Pop had bought for $5000 – a huge discount because it was entirely broken.
Jeff distinctly remembers how from then on “His thumb grew butt hair”.
His boss told him it was a pretty good idea but that it was “a better idea for someone who didn’t have a good job.” Jeff took a few days, and decided “The best way to think about it was to project my life forward to age 80” and make the decision that “Minimized my regrets. You don’t want to be cataloguing your regrets.” And while you might feel remorse for things you did wrong, he said more often regrets stem from the “Path not taken” like loving someone but never telling them.
On his personal connection to the news and owning the Washington Post: Jeff says “Pop obsessively watched the Watergate hearings” in 1973.
On the need for space travel and his rocket company Blue Origin: “We have to go to space to save earth” Jeff says, noting “We kind of have to hurry.” Still, he believes Plan A and Plan B both need to be protecting the environment of Earth to keep it livable.
Jeff exhibited this resistance to multi-tasking early in life.
On how to establish work-life balance: “I like the phrase ‘work-life harmony'”, Jeff says.
On what defines you: “We all get to choose our life stories. It’s our choices that define us, not our gifts. You can only be proud of your choices” Jeff says.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Music is in your brain and your body and your life”

To pick apart how music affects us would be a matter of analysing the notes and our responses to them: in come notes, out tumbles our perception of music.
Thinking about music in this way – as sound, notes and responses to notes, kept separate from the rest of human experience – relegates music to a special, inscrutable sphere accessible only to the initiated.
The vision of an isolated note-calculator in the brain, taking sound as input and producing musical perceptions as output, consigns music to a kind of mental silo.
The past few decades of work in the cognitive sciences of music have demonstrated with increasing persuasiveness that the human capacity for music is not cordoned off from the rest of the mind.
On the contrary, music perception is deeply interwoven with other perceptual systems, making music less a matter of notes, the province of theorists and professional musicians, and more a matter of fundamental human experience.
Far from revealing an isolated, music-specific area, the most sophisticated technology we have available to peer inside the brain suggests that listening to music calls on a broad range of faculties, testifying to how deeply its perception is interwoven with other aspects of human experience.
Beyond just what we hear, what we see, what we expect, how we move, and the sum of our life experiences all contribute to how we experience music.
People show better recognition memory and different emotional responses to new music composed in a culturally familiar style, as compared with new music from an unfamiliar culture.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Los Angeles Lakers legend Kobe Bryant has a new, post-basketball obsession”

That’s all you need to look at on Kobe Bryant’s phone to see how much he cares about being a businessman.
At all hours of the night, Bryant is texting and listening to the latest returns from one of the companies he’s invested in.
“Text at 3 in the morning, and he responds a minute later,” said Mike Repole, founder and chairman at BodyArmor, a sports drink brand that Bryant invested in in 2014.
Bryant says there’s nothing to talk about or celebrate until they cash out of some of the companies they’ve invested in, which include a real estate data and analytics company and a restaurant reservation brand.
How hands-on Bryant is can be seen with BodyArmor.
Bryant will take a picture, but only after he’s briefed on who he’s being introduced to.
Bryant hasn’t just been along for the ride of BodyArmor’s growth from $3 million in sales in 2012, when he first started talking about a deal, to the nearly $200 million today.
Bryant pushed Nike as much as any athlete had. “I’m a pain in the butt to work with sometimes,” he said.

The orginal article.

Summary of “How to Apply for a Job You’re Overqualified For”

“No job applicants should call themselves overqualified. If someone else says it about you, it’s flattering. When you say it, it’s off-putting.” If the hiring manager brings it up, be humble.
Erdogan suggests saying something along the lines of, “I’d like to be in a job with more predictability and reduced travel.” Or perhaps you’re interested in the job because you’ve been searching for months and are getting desperate.
If there are still doubts about your fit for the job, Fernández-Aráoz’s advice is to take “a problem-solving point of view,” and “Be strategic” about showing how the organization could benefit from having you in the job.
You can nudge the hiring manager to think more broadly about the role by “Enthusiastically sharing your ideas for how big the job can be,” he adds.
“You will have the opportunity to shape the job and expand your role once you’re in the organization and have an understanding of how things work,” she says.
“Sometimes when overqualified people don’t get the job they applied for, they get angry and upset,” Erdogan says.
Later in the interview, Lauren shared her ideas for how big the job could be.
Case Study #2: Express enthusiasm for the job, and demonstrate how you will add value.

The orginal article.

Summary of “How science transformed the world in 100 years”

In an essay for the BBC, Nobel Prize-winner and Royal Society President Sir Venki Ramakrishnan contemplates the nature of scientific discovery – how it has transformed our worldview in a short space of time, and why we need to be just as watchful today about the uses of research as we’ve ever been.
If we could miraculously transport even the smartest people from around 1900 to today’s world, they would be simply astonished at how we now understand things that had puzzled humans for centuries.
Just over a hundred years ago, people had no idea how we inherit and pass on traits or how a single cell could grow into an organism.
That in turn has given us the ability to figure out how things go wrong in genetic diseases and potentially how to fix them.
We are no longer a complete black box, although our complexity is such that we are only just beginning to understand how our genes regulate the body and how they interact with our environment.
A hundred years ago mysteries such as how the Universe came to exist were, for many, firmly in the realms of faith.
Today, much of how we see the world is through an electronic screen.
Computers in all their many guises are sources of knowledge, but they are also increasingly how we present ourselves to the rest of the world, and how we interact with others.

The orginal article.

Summary of “It’s Your Fault People Always Misunderstand You”

If you’re not getting the results you want or if you’re having meeting after meeting and you’re not getting the response you want from your team, it’s time to look at how and what you’re communicating, says Matt Eventoff, owner of Princeton Public Speaking, an executive communication training firm, and the founder of The Oratory Project, which teaches executive communication skills to at-risk young adults.
Avoidance: People only approach you with questions or feedback when they absolutely need to do so, Eventoff says.
First, you need to take an honest look at how you communicate, Grenny says.
Are you thorough, clear, and factual in how you convey yourself? How consistent are you in how you communicate? And, do you involve all of the stakeholders so you can get different perspectives?
Look at how clear you make your expectations-and how open you are to understanding what others expect of you.
Asking curious, open-ended questions encourages dialogue instead of dictating what other people should do or think, Magosky says.
People need to know the outcome that you’re seeking or the result you want, Eventoff says.
Magosky says it’s important to remember that all people have good days and bad days.

The orginal article.