Seeing our company from the outside: A moment to cherish

We at GlobalDenmark are currently involved in an internal development programme that aims at generating new business scenarios for the next 5-10 years. The process facilitator is Claus Bjørnelund, who is a skilled coach and also a member of our Board. In this project, Claus uses Appreciative Inquiry (AI) as the basis for liberating us from operational constraints and unproductive scepticism. This has been a great challenge, even if – or because – it builds on what really works now rather than what doesn’t.

At one stage, we were invited to “dream”: how do we ideally see the company in five years’ time? There wasn’t much dreaming there: We were all so realistic and terribly sensible. Our dreams were inhibited by our current reality, expressed in a sense of profound loyalty and commitment. Whereas that in itself was gratifying, the dreaming was no “giant leap” forward.

Claus Bjørnelund then invited members of the network with the wonderful name “Passende Forstyrrelser” (“Appropriate Disturbances”) to join us for a “fish bowl” exercise. After a short introduction to our history, activities, self-perception etc., our guests sat in a circle and “dreamed” on our behalf. We were only to listen to a 40-minute conversation. We heard what kind of company GlobalDenmark might be in five years. Ideas, projects and possibilities were brought up in ways that were new to us, and yet possible for us to identify with.

Our guests, obviously trained in the tough discipline of uninhibited, yet tangible and productive conversation, were a marvellous experience. “Wow, is that really our company? I would love to work there,” one of our colleagues blurted out. Our guests’ generous, sharp-witted and insightful contribution to our internal development project was a moment for us to cherish.

Den nordiske model

En nordisk identitet – findes den?

Det ellers konservative magasin, the Economist, bragte i deres seneste januarnummer en række artikler om de nordiske lande og deres påfaldende succes med at tackle finanskrisen.

Analysen finder en kombination af en stærk tillid i befolkningen til ”systemet” som så kvitterer med at yde tryghed på arbejdsmarkedet. Ord som innovation, disciplin, etik, pragmatik, lav befolkningstæthed og fraværet af lokale konflikter beskriver væsentlige årsager til at ”vi” synes at klare krisen bedre end vores sydlige brødre og søstre.

Svenskere betragtes som mere formelle og konsensusøgende end danskerne, der til gengæld har en mening om alting og mangler sans for vekselvirkningen mellem det formelle og det uformelle; finnerne siger ikke så meget, men har alligevel et stærkt beundret skolesystem, et uforståeligt sprog og et stærkt innovationsbrand; nordmændene holder sig uden for EU, men følger alligevel med i det europæiske uden at have synderlig indflydelse på hvad der foregår – de har så mange olie- og gasfelter at de har råd til at gøre hvad de vil. Og islændingene, der med ukuelig stædighed er ved at kæmpe sig ud af en fuldstændig fallit som de godt nok selv havde skabt. Stereotyper om vores forskelligheder er der mange af.

Men hvem er ”vi” egentlig? I samtalen mellem to redaktører på the Economist omtales vi som ”the Nordics” – og en enkelt gang utilsigtet som ét land. Har vi en fælles-nordisk bevidsthed? En nordisk model? Lighed, retfærdighed og sund fornuft? Tror verden udenfor mon at vi i Norden inderst inde er socialdemokrater? Se interviewet her.