I’ve been learning the radical product development methodology of Agile and Scrum, quite a learning curve of undoing decades of project management practices that now seem Neanderthal (no offense to our forebearers and thanks to all of their innovations).

It’s based on levels of transparency, intellectual honesty and respect for unpredictability and complexity unfamiliar in most corporations where 80% of projects typically fail, 30% of requirements change even with ironclad plans, and at least half the functionality never gets used. These new approaches are transformative and don’t work well in organizations where values are otherwise.

Best of all, it eschews superstitious dependence on management and leadership, replacing them with simple iterative rules that outperform any led team of warily defensive and unempowered folk. A breath of fresh air.

I’ve been facilitating an online conversation on leadership this weekend with my Executive MBA students at Kent State. We’re using a wiki (pbwiki.com) which is new to many. And many are fast realizing the power of the collaborative world where perspectives emerge from the co-creation of meaning.

The wiki transcends discussion boards and emails, and even to some degree in-person conversations where some people don’t get easy access to conversational traffic. It’s the synergy of small and large group conversation dynamics, in the sense of the best of both worlds. Plus, giving the conversation an asynchronous nature over the period of a few days, people voice more from reflection than refraction. It all points to how the simplest technologies offer the richest media for thinking together.

Good design is not fashionable, it neither leads nor imitates fashion. Fashion isn’t even a relevant motivator or measure. So much fashion is clearly strategies for social deceit and so eludes design’s commitment to beauty and truth. Those who cannot distinguish between good design and fashion may not have a clear sense of good design. Those of us who spend any amount of time in the design community have a social responsibility to make the distinction common sense.

Tibet has become a major metaphor for the crossroads our civilization finds itself in defining governance. It marks the movement of people’s tolerance of hierarchy as a political given and their growing passion for autonomy and engagement. It’s the archetypal protection-freedom dynamic played out on a very large and well-lit stage. The Dalai Lama’s call for dialogue is an understatement.

Trust always implies unknowns, uncertainties, ambiguities, and surprises because these are the nature of an intrinsically impermanent universe. The promise to never change is the ultimate existential lie. The expectation that we can trust that promises will change is the ultimate existential truth.

Does this mean we are off the hook for promises we make? What does a promise mean in a world where change is a constant? Do we need to qualify every promise with this reference to the essential impermanent nature of the universe? Certainly we cannot expect many people to understand impermanence as the nature of things rather than moral failure. Certainly we cannot assume that people understand the profound scope of their own impermanence.

If authentic trust is possible, it is trust in the goodness of one’s best and the best in the world around us.

There is a part of us that suffers from chronic strengths amnesia. This is forgetting how capable we are. It’s the part of us responsible for worry, anxiety, angst, fear, and self-doubt. It’s the part of us that hates (projectively) those who question our ability, doubt our sincerity, and criticize our ambivalence.

The good news is that there is no cure, no hope, no antidote. The only thing we can do is listen to these stories as possible stories and remember how capable we are. At that moment, we see the lie, and the truth, and enjoy the freedom in truth.

One of the reasons why self-organizing communities like social insect communities thrive is because they operate on two simple rules: communicate what you know and completely trust what you hear. These two rules are responsible for a level of speed and complexity that no human organization has ever come close to.

My friend Cathy called tonight reporting that our mutual friend Pat died about a half-hour ago. We visited with her recently in hospice and it was a moving testimonial to the power of the spirit to live a life that others refer to as dying.

It’s a stark reminder that birth marks the first moment of dying. Life is dying; dying is life. When the distinction collapses, an infinite space calls us to play.

Will we see a world of mixed gender team sports anytime in the near future? What will happen to the dynamics of gender politics for players and fans? Count on it being far more interesting than it is today.

This was a week of working with dozens of health care professionals, all of whose trust I earned in part thanks to a sense of humor. Many of us don’t trust a lack of humor. Humor connotes perspective and understanding, largely at the intersections of irony, paradox, and surprise. These are qualities that inspire, connect, and heal, so yes they are to be trusted along with those smart enough to manifest them.

Life is richer with humor; we cannot bring ourselves to be inspired by a sullen intensity that belies a healthy and energizing sense of humor.