In a change of format today we broke into small groups and discussed a case study, looking at a specific corporate failure to consider the reasons for the failure. We are mid-course. At a basic level, one could say that the sustained pace, along with the unrelenting heat has frayed a few tempers, however the underlying reason for the tension is a little deeper. We have quite differing cultural norms for group behaviour, and at the risk of generalising or stereotyping, I’m going to try and explain this further. Our Nigerian cohort members hold the floor for quite a long time when they communicate. There is a context setting part, then an opinion, then justification for the opinion. It’s very interesting, but it takes a long time, and they engage on almost every topic, so dominate the room. Our Eastern European cohort members communicate more shortly and sharply, interrupting, a lot, to clarify or focus the discussion on the main point. You can see where this is going….there was a fairly heated fight in my small group today… This small group tiff is representative of a broader tension in the wider group, and I’m finding it harder to learn in that environment.
Tension aside, some of the topics today were really interesting. We had a behavioural economist talking about risk, starting with a discussion about why lottery tickets are so popular and then delving deeper and deeper into what makes people take risks. We had a fantastic lady who was the deputy governor of the bank of Ghana and a senior leader in the IMF (International Monetary Fund). Her talk was about emerging markets and she had an amazing ability to marry the perspective of the regulator with the perspective of the organisation. I know that sounds dull, but it was really really good. Also, she was an absolute master in managing the room and ensuring that quieter cohort members had input, and the more dominant ones were muted.
They had organised a weird “international festival” for lunch today. The unfortunate catering staff were in little booths outside in the courtyard in 35 degree heat, with sad, dodgy signs saying “Mexican” or “Lebanese” . We lined up in the sun to collect our international lunch/s of choice and then stood awkwardly balancing plate and cutlery and drink. It was purportedly a World Cup inspired idea, but the food options were not necessarily countries in the comp (looking at you Italy). It was one of those ideas that was probably better in concept than in reality and I couldn’t help looking longingly at the beautiful, air conditioned, comfortable space we could have sat down in just fifty metres away through a locked door.
Our evening activity was a walking tour of Oxford. Unfortunately, we ended up with the most boring tour guide on the planet. I had told a few of my group that the walking tour would be great, and felt very badly that I had talked it up. Dinner at the Crown afterwards was fun though. We had a diverse group from Poland, Hong Kong, Croatia, and Czech Republic and we ended up talking about social policy. This dinner included my favourite conversation of the course with our Hong Kong friend coaxed into talking us through the cultural differences between Hong Kong and Mainland China and his take on global politics. There are no Americans in the cohort, but obviously the US leadership behaviour impacts everyone, so the conversation often strays to that impact. He told us that “the US leader is consuming his own fortune and the fortune of his descendants”. I don’t want political comments on my social media (take the hint blog commenters!), but it was such an interesting idea and way of describing the behaviour. I’ve been thinking about it ever since.
What stayed with my most today was the difficulty inherent in listening to a variety of separate voices. Individually they are coherent, but each voice feels a little out of step with the others. It was real work to understand the larger picture made by the friction and the differences. I would like it to be easier and simpler but… learning happens in discomfort so I’m trying to learn. The title is a nod to my thinking that simple harmony doesn’t require you to listen so carefully or for such a sustained period to derive meaning. I’m trying to listen to many things at once to understand patterns and fully appreciate the beauty of the complexity.

































