A slogan on a T-shirt worn by someone coming into Paces early this morning gave me the title for this post.
The prompt for the post, however, comes from this morning's Independent newspaper, (previously published in Newsweek, it seems), "Universal Adapter", about Mike Lazaridis, of Blackberry fame. It's an interesting article about innovation, about invention and reinvention, about keeping ahead of the game.
"Innovation is not born of one moment, or one story or even the result of taking risks." Lazaridis says.
Then, what caught my eye, the prompt for this post, he says: "Really good entrepreneurs only appear to take risks because you don't understand how they made the decision to go from point A to point B." That resonated with my own experience, not that I am a "really good entrepreneur", but in providing leadership and direction to Paces.
I have on my desk a card by Edward Monkton (check it out in his Gallery), "Where are we going?". I have mentioned it here before. A brief conversation, it ends "Maybe no-one knows" and then, after a pause, "Oh well, I hope it's nice when we get there."
"Understanding" is a two-way communication, of course, with the onus just as much on the speaker or writer to be clear, as on the listener or reader to pay thoughtful attention. The corollary of Lazaridis view, is that often, in my experience, the "entrepreneur" is often not quite sure himself or herself how the "decision to get from point A to point B" was made. The "entrepreneur" may be clear (unlike the happy souls on Monkton's card) "where we are going", but being clear about the reasoning is not always so easy. There is a risk element, and an intuition, which do not easily lend themselves to hard evidence. And for others to demand that evidence before a decision is taken to set off for Point B, may well destroy the innovative strategy altogether, and, all together, we just wander along with Monkton's happy people.
Take Free Schools, for instance .... and their value to the groups of parents and charities who have come and gone, and some remain, struggling to bring conductive education into the mainstream, so that parents may have some choice in the education of their children with cerebral palsy. I was recently asked the very reasonable question why Paces was preparing to submit a Proposal to DfE to become a Free School: a question, you might well think, for which a clear, reasoned answer would be straightforward, the case well-made, the benefits and risks assessed and evidenced - before any action is taken. One would think so.
The Proposal form invites those considering an application to "Briefly outline your reasons for wanting to set up a Free School". That is one sort of answer, one sort of set of reasons: more choice, increased sustainability, greater flexibility and so on, each statement evidenced or able to be evidenced.
But there are other answers and other factors, maybe more important in the process of decision-making, to reaching the conclusion that we should move from Point A to Point B, and some of these reasons may be difficult to explain and evidence and consequently difficult for others easily to understand.
One 'other answer": Mike Chitty has stimulated a discussion "Putting Power in the Hands of Individuals and Communities" about the "Big Society" which for me (I have added a Comment) points to such 'other' answers, less easily set out and grasped perhaps, but to do with the national policy environment in which we in conductive education are trying to bring it into the mainstream, which, as John Popham says in a further Comment, recognising the downside nevertheless "it may also offer the opportunity for people who want to do progressive stuff in education to get things off the ground". And doing "progressive stuff" is what conductive education and Paces (and others) are about.
A second "other answer": Tom Legge, New Schools Director at Place Group, who emailed me following my recent posting about Paces' Free School Proposal being submitted, writes of the Free Schools Policy on his LinkedIn Profile, that he is: "Inspired, frustrated and terrified in equal measure with the biggest change in education policy in my lifetime. Convinced that Free Schools are part of the solution to improve life chances for children and young people". My italics, my opinion exactly. We are compelled to respond, to seize the opportunity, to create the opportunity if possible by influencing public policy by being part of it. We could, as many are, step back and wait and see. And miss the boat.
There are more "other answers", equally intangible, to do with our foundation and founding purpose and ambition and searching out our 'place', which are important too. But to return to Mike Lazaridis:
Lazaridis goes on to say that "really good entrepreneurs" make the decisions they do, which seem so full of risk to others, because "they do a tremendous amount of homework". That resonates with me, too. The decision to put forward a Proposal to create a Free School, comes from "a tremendous amount of homework" over literally years; it is not a step "born of one moment, or one story or even the result of taking risks". It is a decision, perhaps, less to do with reason than with judgement. And above all, doing everything possible to "Keep It Real".
Been there. Seen the T-shirt!
