Our First Year

Eugene Eric Kimby Eugene Eric Kim

Laughing together, a frequent occurrence on our team. Photo taken by our friend, Eugene Chan.

Tomorrow, on September 15, 2012, Groupaya celebrates its one year anniversary.

It completely snuck up on all of us. We’ve had our noses to the grindstone this whole year, focusing on doing great, meaningful work, on learning as much as we can, on exploring innovative ways to make a greater impact on the world, and on living our values. It’s been incredibly intense and an absolute joy. We all feel very lucky to have had this experience together this first year.

We’re doing this work, because we want to help create a world that is more alive. That journey has to start with each of us, individually. For me personally, doing this challenging, meaningful work in collaboration with amazing people has brought me alive every day.

Here’s a sampling of what we accomplished in our first year:

  • We’ve been spending the bulk of our time and energy facilitating a multi-stakeholder dialogue in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta around water issues for the Delta Conservancy. We’re calling it the Delta Dialogues. This is one of the most critical issues California is currently grappling with, and it’s without question the hardest problem I’ve ever tackled (which also makes it one of the most enjoyable).
  • We designed and facilitated a participatory visioning process for the Alliance for Arts Learning Leadership. Over 120 people representing over 50 organizations participated in self-organized conversations over a four month period to develop a 10-year roadmap for the Bay Area arts education community.
  • We facilitated leadership team meetings for IntraHealth, Hawaii Community Foundation, and Amyris, and strategy workshops for Code for America and The Hub.
  • We provided leadership coaching for Amyris, LinkedIn, and eSilicon.
  • We shared what we’ve been learning and thinking about, both informally through this blog and through brown bags, and formally at conferences. This past spring, I gave a talk at the GEO National Conference on leading change. This past week, my friend, business partner, and Groupaya co-founder, Kristin Cobble, returned to her hometown of Tulsa to speak to local grantmakers about learning organizations.
  • We applied our own frameworks for becoming a high-performance, learning organization to ourselves. For me, this has been the most gratifying and humbling part of this past year. It’s much easier to help others with this than to do it yourself!

We had the pleasure of doing all this work with many of our friends, including Jeff Conklin (CogNexus), Joe Mathews, Heather McLeod Grant (Monitor Institute), Vanda Marlow, Thomas Souza-Buckup, Mariposa Leadership, Pete Forsyth (Wiki Strategies), Shiree Teng, CompassPoint, Stanley Jones (Diligent Creative), and Matt Sengbusch.

We also added two new members to our team: Natalie DeJarlais and Dana Reynolds. Along with our original core of Kristin, Rebecca Petzel, Amy Wu Wong, and Betty Marcon, these wonderful people make up the Groupaya family. I am humble and grateful to get to do such meaningful work with such a caring, passionate, brilliant group.

This past week, our friend, Mariah Howard, sent us this delightful one-year anniversary gift.

Amy (our Director of Delight) suggested that we share Mariah’s wonderful gift more broadly, and so she decided to make it our official logo for the next week.

Thanks to Mariah, to all the friends we got to work with this past year, and to all of you for being a part of our first year! Can’t wait to kick-off Year 2!

The Secret to High-Performance: Constant Striving

Eugene Eric Kimby Eugene Eric Kim

Our name, Groupaya, is a combination of “group” and “upaya.” Upaya is a Sanskrit term from Mahāyāna Buddhism that roughly translates to “skillful means.” It’s a concept that captures the journey and practice that leads to a higher goal. It’s a name that resonates strongly with what we’re about: working intentionally and skillfully in groups to create a world that is more alive.

As is evident from our name, all of us have been influenced by Buddhist principles to varying degrees. I am particularly fascinated by an apparent contradiction in principles that seems to manifest itself often. On the one hand, much of the popular literature on Buddhism emphasizes the importance of being content with how things are. As Stuart Smalley likes to say, “You’re good enough, you’re smart enough, and gosh darn it, people like you!”

On the other hand, the central figure in Buddhism is Siddhārtha Gautama Buddha, the founder of this spiritual movement who apparently achieved total enlightenment. By embodying perfection, he showed that perfection was possible and an ideal worth striving for.

How do you reconcile self-contentment with the strive for perfection?

I think what matters is the “striving” part, not the “perfection.” You can’t be perfect, and so you shouldn’t be unhappy with yourself when you’re not. However, the act of seeking perfection reveals character and manifests itself in the results. When you try, you get better, and you do better.

There’s a practical issue around striving for perfection, however. You can always spend more time striving, but there’s a diminishing return. Jiro Ono, the legendary sushi chef, requires his cooks to practice for 10 years before they’re allowed to prepare the eggs. 10 years! I’ve never had the pleasure of eating his eggs, but are they really that much better than what someone who spends, say, one year training, is capable of preparing?

It depends on how you define “much better.” With eggs, maybe the improvement doesn’t manifest itself in a way that most people can detect. But in other situations, that marginal return could literally be the difference between life and death.

In his book, Better, Atul Gawande described the remarkable performance of the Minnesota Cystic Fibrosis Center, where patients were living an average of 15 years longer than those at other centers. Why were they doing so much better? Warren Warwick, the director of the center, explained:

A person’s daily risk of getting a bad lung illness with CF [cystic fibrosis] is 0.5 percent. The daily risk of getting a bad lung illness with CF plus treatment is 0.05 percent. So when you experiment you’re looking at the difference between 99.5 percent chance of staying well and a 99.95 percent chance of staying well. Seems hardly any difference, right? On any given day, you have basically a one-hundred-percent chance of being well.

But it is a big difference. Sum it up over a year, and it is the difference between an 83 percent chance of making it through [the year] without getting sick and only a 16 percent chance.

As Gawande explains throughout his book, the doctors in his field who achieve high-performance are those who relentlessly strive it for it. Seemingly insignificant differences add up to big differences over time.

So when is enough enough?

Last week, our designer, Amy Wu Wong, was graphic recording a client meeting that I was facilitating. When we were setting up, I asked her to write down the five big ideas we’d be discussing, and I told her not to fuss over them too much, as they would probably change during our discussion. Amy proceeded to write them down, then stopped and gazed at one of them.

“What’s wrong?” I asked.

“It doesn’t look right. I’m going to do it over,” she responded.

I looked at what she had done. I couldn’t find anything wrong with her work. Frankly, I thought she had overdelivered (as she often does). So I looked at her and shrugged. “We have time,” I said. “If you want to do it over, do it over, but I think it’s fine.”

That was the key: We had time. I didn’t want to repress the instinct to strive for perfection. She saw something that I didn’t see, something that mattered to her. If we had other priorities, I would have told her to move on. But, we didn’t.

Frankly, I was proud of her, proud to have her on my team, proud of the collective attitude that it reflects from all of us. We have high standards, and we’re constantly striving to raise the bar. Our challenge is finding balance, understanding that every choice we make is usually at the expense of something else. Through constant practice, we need to learn to do our best within reason, to take pride in what we achieve while continuing to strive to do even better.

Understanding what “within reason” means is the ultimate challenge. I am constantly coaching both clients and colleagues on how to work openly and transparently, which often amounts to being comfortable with revealing work-in-progress. By definition, “work-in-progress” is work that you’re not satisfied with. However, what we need to understand is that all work is ultimately work-in-progress, and that ultimately, it’s about doing the best you can within reason and letting go.