Creative Solutions for Business & Education

If you read my last blog entry (below) you’ll remember that I discovered what is perhaps my key skill, making complex things easy to understand, following a long period of working with people whose background was very different to my own and thought very differently to myself.
This discovery didn’t come overnight and it was only after working in often difficult and frustrating circumstances that I was able to find my talent, even if it did have to be confirmed by people around me before the ‘light went on’ and I realised what it was!

In reality, the little phrase I now use to crystallise my skill, Making the Complex Easy was only finally formulated a couple of months ago whilst talking to my business mentor about it. Thankfully, Sandra is very persistent and also very perceptive and the phrase eventually fell out as I tried to capture what I did in less than a paragraph!

We were discussing my experiences whilst studying for my PhD; whilst working in the pharmaceutical industry; whilst working in schools; with friends; in church. Time and time again the examples we discussed had the same repeating theme:

How can I make it easy for others to understand what I’m saying?

This was important to me becasue I have always been someone who has had to work hard to understand things. Combine this with a severe lack of contentment if I couldn’t really ‘get inside’ and understand what I was trying to learn. Knowledge for me has more to do with its application than knowledge for knowledge’s sake.

By understanding something I can use my knowledge in how I decide to move forward and use it in my own life and situations.

So, I suppose it was a natural progression that I should want others to enjoy the same opportunities. Here are a few of the instances we discussed of how and when I’d made complex things easy:

• My PhD was focussed on pain relief and what was involved in helping us control painful stimuli, so important in conditions like malignant diseases. More than once I was asked to explain what I was investigating by friends who had no science background. So, I was often trying to explain complex pharmacological and biochemical processes in simple terms like opening and closing gates, keys in locks, motorways and side roads.
• One of my tasks whilst working in the pharmaceutical industry was training sales representative, many of whom were from a marketing and selling background and without any science input, on the decidedly unsimple process of our body’s immunological response to infection by viruses. Here terms like cavalry, snipers, secret messengers and chewing and spitting were used to demystify the process.
• My last role in the pharmaceutical industry before I accepted redundancy was to provide technical and information support to physicians and researchers on the data available to support the use of a specific drug in difficult-to-treat and potentially life-threatening conditions. The problem I was faced with was that I had over 600 slides in my presentation with a usual time slot of a lunch break (i.e., between 10 minutes and 1 hour). My solution was to reverse the process and devise an interactive presentation where my audience told me what they wanted to talk about and we ‘dipped-in’ and ‘dipped-out’ of the presentation and information available. This seemed a revolution to many of my audience and I spent hours discussing how they could put together a similar format for their own work, thereby enabling the passing-on of important information in a more targetted way: reducing a complex array of slides to easy-to-digest, smaller segments.
• Whilst working I often took time out to visit schools and help children to understand what they were learning in the science of sound arena. As a drummer and percussionist I was used to making sounds (noise some would call it) and as a scientist I understood some of the principles behind the sounds I was making. So I took samples of my drums and percussion into schools and we experimented together and began to understand what made some sounds high, some low; some loud and some soft. What amazed me after these lessons was that I received a lot of feedback on how the children had used some of the more socially orientated skills (listening, talking, thinking together) and the reasoning and experimental approaches in their other subjects and in generally working together in other lessons. Making it easy in one subject had been transferrable to other areas of school life (and hopefully in their wider life).
• My daughter, who is no scientist, was revising for her GCSEs and needed to understand the basics of the electrophoresis of DNA for DNA profiling. Saying the word is difficult, let alone understanding it. So I explained that the long strand of DNA is cut into lots of smaller pieces by enzymes (chemical saws). The result is a bit like a shoal of fish: some very small; some larger; some longer; some big and some huge. The plate onto which the sample of ‘chewed DNA’ is placed is like lines of fishing nets and when the electric current was switched on, it was a bit like a river or the tide flowing, taking the fish with it. Little fish was pass easily through the nets and the longer and larger fish would get stuck more quickly or have to work harder to swim through the nets. The huge fish wouldn’t be able to get through at all and would stay where they were. At the end of the experiment when the electric current is switched off, it is like taking a snap shot or photograph of where all the fish are. The ‘bands of fish’ are like the bands of DNA on the plate: smaller fish/pieces of DNA have travelled furthest, largest fish/pieces of DNA haven’t been able to move at all. My daughter understood this more pictorial, less scientific approach and manged to answer questions on her GCSE paper, getting a Grade B which was a true miracle.

… and I guess that’s why I’m so passionate about making difficult things easy to understand … once we understand them we have chance to use the knowledge and achieve more than we thought possible.

There will always be those who like to keep things complicated because it gives them a sense of power and importance; they are the only ones who know. But in a world where increasing co-operation is becoming a key factor (especially in business) and clarity of understanding paramount, the sharing of knowledge in an easy to understand way is, I believe becoming ever more crucial, not only for success, but for survival.

Labels: explaining science to children, making complex easy, schools, science for non-scientists, survival in business, teams, teamwork, transparent communication

I don’t know about you, but one of the biggest hurdles I’ve had to overcome (and still fight daily) is the idea that others know more than me, especially in areas where I am dubbed an expert.

I think a lot of it goes back to when I was younger, especially in my teen years where, although I was in the top set at school there were those around me who were like a cerebrum on legs: they oozed ability, knowledge and were more concerned with where they’d lost two or three marks in their exams than with where they’d gained them!

The problem with hanging out with these guys wasn’t anything to do with their personalities: most of them were really great people to be around. It was the toll that it all took on my self-confidence and self-esteem. My mind had a field day, reinforcing all those doubts that had ever dared to enter my thinking, or had been placed there by others.

It wasn’t until I was in my 40’s that I was forced to go back and revisit these difficult and confusing times when recovering from serious illness. During the long, slow, often painful process that was called recovery I was forced (in the nicest way possible) to see these things in their true perspective and identify the lies that I had taken on-board and made an integral part of my life and psyche.

One of the biggest mistakes I had made was when I started looking at my abilities in comparison to others. We live in a competitive world where we are continually compared to others BUT there is no need for us to do it to ourselves. When we go for a new job, invariably our skill sets, talents and background will be compared to those of others competing for the same job. That is the interviewer’s job.

HOWEVER, we want to be at our best in those situations, showing others our true self and abilities.

If we focus on what we don’t have and what we can’t do as well as others, then we will never see our own unique talents; our own unique skills and the things that we CAN bring to the table that others can’t.

Here’s a couple of examples from my own life that may help:

• When I left school, I went straight to university but was so clueless and dispirited about what I wanted to/could do that I gave up after a term (though I did return with my first drum kit … but that is another story!). I worked for 3 years and then decided that I would go back to studying as I had a much clearer idea of where I wanted to go (and where I couldn’t go at that time without a degree). I entered the first year of my degree expecting to be worse than the fresh young things entering straight after their A-levels. I looked to the brightest of them for encouragement and help but I was always aware in my own mind that I wasn’t as good as them. That was confirmed in my exams at the end of the year. For some reason and I still don’t know why, I decided over the Summer holidays that I would really work for myself and make sure that I understood what I was doing. This meant re-learning a lot of what I’d not learnt very well during my first year. The second year was different. Nothing changed in my ability to work with others, but my internal focus was now on what I could do rather than what I couldn’t. I really WANTED to learn and understand to the best of MY abilities. I came top of the year in my second year exams, something I could never have dreamed of. I wasn’t the brightest on paper (my A-level results wer mediocre at best) but my focus had changed and I’d achieved my potential (albeit with a lot of hard work). I passed my degree with a higher grade than I would ever have expected and then went on to higher study. The point I’m trying to encourage you with is that if we look at ourselves it’s very easy to see what we lack. But we have so much to offer that others don’t, and others rarely see the failings in ourselves that we do! I’m definitely not trying to propose some self-help mantra but I am suggesting that a change of focus can bring a change of attitude and facilitate us reaching our fuller potential.
• Another example was when I was working as a member of a Medical Department’s clinical research team in the pharmaceutical industry. I knew some of my strengths: people skills, patience, generally up-beat and good to be around etc. But, it took several years of working with the Dark Side, i.e., members of the Marketing Department, to really bring my core skills to the fore. Medical Departments generally work to a dinosaur type time-scale; it takes a long time to design, set-up, run, and report clinical trials. Marketing work very much in the here and now and want results today (or yesterday if possible). Initially I worked to set-up a Medical-Marketing Interface, a group of people from both departments who could get together on a regular basis to discuss what their priorities were at that time, what they were for the next year and the reality of what information was likely to become available or be wanted in that time. These were not easy meetings but they gradually evolved into a broader set of discussion forums that really helped the two departments work together more effectively. They opened the way for more constructive interaction rather than shooting at each other from the parapets. Through them there was also much closer collaboration in the construction of sales and marketing literature and this is where I discovered something that had probably been obvious but I’d never seen it! My personal ‘gem’ was an ability to make complex and highly technical scientific and medical ideas easy to understand by all, including those from a non-technical and non-scientific background. This did two things: a) It boosted my confidence; I did have something special to offer and b) it paved the way for my last role in corporate business, that of communicating and building professional relationships with members of the medical and research communities and providing fora in which we could openly discuss data supporting the use of specific drugs in difficult-to-treat-conditions. It was also interesting that when I left my job, many of the most moving ‘good-bye’ messages came from these same people.

It took me a long time to realise that it’s not always simply how much we know, it’s a lot more to do with recognising our own skills and talents, developing and using these to the best of our abilities, whilst never missing the opportunity to hear what others are saying about us. As we refine our path, we will be amazed at what we have to offer and as with my university exams, we may just move from being one of the crowd to being a leader.

Even if we don’t, I can guarantee that you’ll feel so much better about yourself and be more confident with what you can offer.

Labels: making complex easy, medical marketing interface, personal skills talents, pharmaceutical industry, reaching full potential, self-confidence, self-esteem, teams

One principle that seemed to underpin many of my university lecturers and some work colleagues was, 'Why make it easy when you can keep it complex?'

This might seem a bit cynical but I think many of us have a real fear when it comes to being the 'Knowledge Broker' ... we want to be the person to whom the others will come when they want help to understand something or learn about a particular process or even start a new relationship.

The gaining of knowledge has always been important but for me the key is not so much what you know: it has a lot more to do with how you use it.

Unapplied knowledge is largely useless, apart from a warm inner feeling of knowing it! And the key to applying knowledge is often understanding it in the first place. If we don't understand we can't act or apply. The danger is of course, that we don't step out unless we know absolutely everything which is equally paralysing and ineffective.

Many hold onto their knowledge from a position of power: they know; we don't; so they hold the power and potentially the key to our forward movement. Some hold onto their knowledge because they may not know how to pass it on ... for whatever reason. The end result is the same: unapplied knowledge and no ability to expand and develop except through the restricted lines of access to single knowledge brokers.

But how do we make it easy for others to understand?

I would argue that in the first instance, we have to want to make it easy for them to understand. If we have this attitude we will be prepared to take the time to think about how best to pass it on to our target audience, whether that is at work, our family, friends or even strangers. There's a lot of psychology that we can bring in here relating to our audience wanting to learn, their background, their ability to learn etc, but I think if we are prepared to look at our audience and also want to pass the information on we will find a way.

Let me give you a practical example that may help ...

My daughter recently took her GCSEs and when it comes to science, she is definitely no Einstein!

PROBLEM:

As part of her forensics course, she was learning about the process of DNA profiling (NOT a simple concept for GCSEstudents). She was struggling to understand what was happening during the process of breaking down the DNA and coming up with a result from electrophoresis of the sample i.e., multiple bands visible on the gel plate.

SOLUTION:

Firstly my daughter has a very pictorial way of thinking. Secondly, she has encountered the principle of fishing using nets. Fishing using nets??

Yes. I described the process to her in simple fishing terms as follows:

Imagine that when the DNA has been cut up into smaller pieces by enzymes it resembles a shoal of fish of all types, lengths and sizes. Some pieces are small, like minnows. Some pieces may be a bit longer, like small eels. Some pieces will be larger, like large fish and some will be really big like dolphins, sharks and whales. Imagine that the gel plate onto which the DNA is spotted is like a line of fishing nets. When the electricity is applied to the gel plate it will be like a river or tidal flow and the fish will try to swim with the current, through the nets. The little fish will pass easily through all of the nets so they will swim through each net as they get to it and they will travel furthest in the time allowed. Slightly larger fish may get through one or two nets but they will be slower than the little fish. As the fish get bigger they will be less able to get through the nets and some will be too large to get through any of the nets so will stay where they started.

The result is that at the end of the experiment, the smallest pieces of DNA will have moved furthest and the largest pieces will have moved the least distance, or even stay where they started, showing up as lines or spots along the gel plate.

My daughter understood the principle of fish swimming through the nets and so she also understood the basics of the physical principle of the pieces of DNA migrating along a gel plate under the influence of an electric current (electrophoresis).

The great ending to this story was that she had a question in her science exam on explaining the electrophoresis of DNA ... and she answered the question without referring to fish or nets once!

Sometime explaining things so others can understand is the gateway to future success. As Richard Gerver quotes from a teacher he met in China, who bucked the trend and instead of expecting his class to bow to him on entry to the classroom and thank him for the knowledge he was about to impart, actually bowed to the class and thanked them for allowing him to teach them. When asked why he did this he said something like, "Teaching is my privilege and I never know who I am teaching: I may be teaching the person who will discover a cure for cancer."

The advantages of making anything easy to understand are many and we hold the map to that road. It's not about trivialising; it's about helping others take the next step along a road where they may achieve what we cannot.

And if we can make the complex easy to understand, we open more doors for others to pass through.

Labels: electrophoresis DNA made easy, gcse forensic science, helping others understand, knowing our audience, knowledge brokers, making complex easy, passing on our knowledge, simplifying ideas, teaching science