NESC Forum 2009: Graeme Joy

Steve Lawrence introduced Graeme Joy. Graeme was the joint leader and navigator of the International North Pole Expedition where he became the first and only Australian to ski to the North Pole..

Joy_Graeme

Photo Source

In this presentation he discussed his North Pole adventure and explored how to be successful as a team of eight people making it to the North Pole.

The journey to the North Pole started at Cape Columbia. The straight line distance from there to the North Pole is 860kms. The team travelled over 1100kms to get to the Pole as a result of sea ice movement. Temperatures at the start of the expedition were -60 degrees.

Graeme presented some of Jim Collins‘ ideas about sustained performance. These included setting a BHAG (big hairy audacious goal) for the Pole expedition. Graeme cautioned about idea assassins. The more vocal of whom appear to know least and mobilise failure information.

Graeme discussed personality types and team membership. He identified: drivers, amiables, expressives, and analyticals. He pointed out that we are attracted to people with whom we get along but it is difficult to build a team around this attraction. He considered how directed responsiveness and directed assertiveness were components of the team environment. Graeme pointed out that teams needed variety of preferred styles to enable agility in decision making.

The three members of the leadership team were: a driver/driver; an analytical;  and an expressive/driver. Three leaders were chosen to avoid one leader’s burnout over a two month period.  in the team. It was decided also not to change leaders regularly in a democratic way to avoid constant change in the team’s atmosphere. A team of three provides a sustainable style.

Graeme noted that Level 5 leaders: were ambitious for the team; sustained results; committed to whatever it takes; and accept full responsibility. The team that went to the Pole was selected over a seven month period.  The three expedition founders people made the first team choices and thereafter the team was built with ongoing inclusion in decision making.

The remaining five members of the team were: expressive; analytical/driver; analytical; amiable/analytical; analytical/driver. Graeme believes that “we put the right people on our bus”. Team members had the same view of the same expedition.

Graeme provided details of how the team trained for two years to get ready for the expedition. He provided examples of training in rough ice (there were 2500 pressure ridges between the start and end points of the expedition which equated to climbing Everest from sea level) and the need to minimise all weight carried or dragged (including an eight-man tent weighing 1.5 kgs per person load). The team slept out of the tent in training to prepare for damage to the tent in the expedition. Graeme discussed deliberate practice (Anders Ericsson) in this context.

The aim of training was to address the brutal facts of the journey: recognise the real truth; acknowledge a step by step approach; and to confront real. The Ericsson-inspired approach to training meant that the team  spent a great deal of time on ridge ice. They used immediate feedback and continuous improvement. Graeme observed that “rough ice not pleasant but we got through it”. On the ice you can move backwards by going forwards. But can you move forwards too.

Graeme then turned his attention to making mistakes in training. He suggested these mistakes occurred either because the individual does not know enough or conversely you know it so well you do not pay attention to detail. An example of the latter is a frostbite blister one of the team members developed in training.

The whole aim of the preparation was to deliver the ability to work for set hours per day activity and measured rest intervals. During the expedition the team saw 36 sets of bear tracks. Given the polar bear is one of most effective hunting animals the team sought Inyuit advice about how to manage bear attacks. Interestingly, the analyticals in the team researched this part of the team’s needs.  (This was also the case in learning how to ‘read’ the ice.)

The expedition did receive regular deliveries of resources by plane. Ice splitting example. Each plane drop costs $45,000 and therefore required some skilled people at the home base to ensure all materials were packed for each drop. The provisions were resourced, packed and shipped by an analytical type.

Medical tests were conducted throughout the trip. Graeme shared some images of the frostbite dangers in the trip and the need when necessary to have whole body washes with medicated soap.

Graeme gave some examples of what if training that proved valuable particularly for wayfinding with a sextant when GPS systems froze.

Within the expedition there were opportunities to resolve conflict and Graeme gave an example of an Amiable and Driver interaction over nutrition. He noted that during conflict individuals revert to their strongest personal style. Other team members defused this conflict by addressing the team’s agreed goal and then discussed what (if anything) had changed. The problem was resolved by communication.

Graeme then discussed the role courage plays in forging a team. He noted that the team increased its workload to 12 hrs per day for 20 days. This involved moderate risk taking and a chess game with contours and fissures in the ice. The terrain bred a culture of discipline in thought and action. Fissures in the ice require teams to work together to advance on the ice.

The North Pole goal was achieved whilst supporting a team member who had badly frostbitten toes and a frostbitten heel. The a team removed responsibilities from injured team mate. “We reduced the weight he had to carry because we could not tow him!” The injured team mate still has to decide to make it happen. One foot in front of the other for 20 hours. He was not allocated new roles other than the role to get to the Pole. (There were only two moments of doubt on the expedition: these injuries, and the step up from 11 to 12 hours per day.)

Key characteristics of this experience included:

  • Accountability and responsibility
  • Assessment of  progress
  • Seeking the real truth
  • Solving disagreements and conflicts immediately
  • Understanding differences
  • Embrace and nurture winners
  • Commitment to making the team great

Spotting

218969025_ed7dbd5099_oSource

I am attending the National Elite Sports Council (NESC)’s Forum in Canberra next week. In addition to the Forum web site there is a Ning site for the Forum. A link to the conference program can be found here.

I have the opportunity to present on Day Two of the Forum and I have been thinking for a while about what to say. After my first draft I started again and late this week had my thoughts focused by Charles Leadbeater’s work. I have posted the draft and the presentation on SlideShare.

This is the presentation I hope to use as the framework for my talk.

I am using more Creative Commons images from Flickr in my presentations. Just searching for the images is transforming how I think. I have been thinking about presentation style too and am fascinated about how I might mash the Night Air, Garrison Keillor’s Radio Program and the Bush Telegraph for this Forum.

I hope to blog during the Forum. I am mindful of a recent post by Graham Attwell in sharing ideas live. Graham observed:

I am all for openness, open education, open discussions, open knowledge and a culture of sharing. Yet as digital identities become ever more important, it is critical that we have the rights and the tools to manage that identity and that social network providers appreciate and support those rights and make it easy for individuals to understand how they can mange both privacy and openness. This is an issue which will not go away.

This is a news item about the Forum.

The Joy of Finding Guerilla Knitting

Rose White has observed that Guerrilla knitting has “a couple of meanings in the knitting community – to some, it merely means knitting in public, while to others, it means creating public art by knitted means.”

Her talk at the 24th Chaos Communication Congress noted that:

Contemporary knitters feel very clever for coming up with edgy language to describe their knitting, but the truth is that for decades there have been knitters and other textile artists who are at least as punk rock as today’s needle-wielders. This talk will cover the vibrant history of contemporary knitting, with a focus on projects that will make you say, “Wow, that’s knitted?”

Today at the University of Canberra I had that wow feeling. I came across these examples of the art form.

DSCF4030

DSCF4032

DSCF4033

DSCF4035

The anonymity of guerilla knitting is such that I have no idea who installed these pieces. They may be devotees of Knitta. Or perhaps an acolyte of Bronwen Sandland. Perhaps someone from Parramatta. Whoever it was made it an unforgettable day for me … the first time since 2002 I have seen knitting in the wild!

This delight led me to concur with Kristin at Spinhandspun Design who observes that:

By covering construction sites, road signs, and technologies in handmade materials, each piece reminds us that our symbolic environments deserve a second skin: softer, warmer, imperfect, and tattooed with subtle reminders of our humanity. Ideas spread through human interactions…