Hello all,
Observing this dilbert discussion, facing some of our corporate challenges
and re-evaluating my own role in this merry mess has me concluding that my
corporate cartoonist role comes in two parts: Role #1). Visualizer. This
seems to be what Don Kerr was talking about in his Wed, 23 Oct 1996,post:
> Scott Adams has done a remarkable job making the implicit "current reality
> of organizational life" more explicit. There is so much power in using
> cartoons, humor, metaphors, parables and stories to convert the implicit
> to the explicit.
>
> It would be very interesting to hire Scott Adams to "capture the story" of
> the learning organization and to help us communicate the complexity,
> without using unecessary, over-intellectual words.
The visualizer role, is part "technical modeler" using concept
illustrations, process models, metaphor and analogy, multiple viewpoints
to get the story, and part humorist, who ties it all to the individual
human. If I can get my viewer to see his or her place in my picture, they
respond and begin to understand what we are talking about at a gut level.
Role #2). Guerilla educator... So often the "corporate immune system"
kicks in and blocks communication. Those (typically leads, and some
middle management) who feel the need to protect their turf, have a
personal agenda, or just simply "don't get it" often ignore, overlook,
side track or simply balk at passing new ideas or information down the
management chain. The guerilla educator steps around the traditional
chain by developing compelling imagery that invites people to "steal a
copy" and post it on a wall somewhere. Cartoons that "preach" don't make
it into that category of work. Neither do the "happy, happy, Joy, Joy"
type either.
I recently had someone say, "this current pile of changes is-ONE BIG
HAIRBALL TO CHOKE DOWN". So I drew a really scruffy alley cat hucking up
a hairball, and the common reaction was "Yech! Thats gross-can I have a
copy?" While the hairball cartoon doesn't really teach anyone anything,
it does validate the feelings of the production folk who are feeling
crushed under a mind boggling series of changes. It gives them the
understanding that YES, someone does understand, and it's providing a
vehicle for dialogue rather than strengthens the walls put up by the
various camps within the company. (they all want to preach).
I'm no Scott Adams, but I do enjoy a certain flow of people who come with
great ideas and need someone draw them up. It seems to make a difference.
I have also found that the more I draw, the more others are encouraged to
draw, and I make a point to help them all I can. I tell people that
EVERYONE can communicate visually, just like everyone can write. The
schools seem to have perpetuated a myth, that while writing is a simple
matter of learning the alphabet, spelling and grammer rules, drawing is
ART and art is a form of magic posessed by the special few. I teach
everyone that will take the risk, the visual alphabet, grammer and
spelling rules and they are amazed that they CAN do it. Sure, some people
are able to take both writing and drawing into that magical realm of ART,
but the majority of us aren't writers or artist, we communicate. It's
OK-no it's important- to communicate with drawings too.
Whether it's the program director asking me to draw bungee jumpers or
Dinasaurs, or line crew asking for a cartoon of a buggy system, the visual
description seems to talk the loudest.
I once sent up a couple of pictures to the LO list. You can see them at URL:
http://world.std.com/~lo/96.07/0370.html
Since I work on stuff that my company considers it's private business, I
don't have anything else up on the web for public viewing, but I'm hoping
to change that, or get permission to send up a collection...
later...
Michael Erickson
sysengr@atc.boeing.com
--Michael Erickson <sysengr@atc.boeing.com>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>