thinking like a dolphin is different, or it wouldn’t be much use to you. So, buckle up!

Getting Started: If the language you read isn't seen here, then may be need to find us a translator and a publisher!

Click the image to enlarge it.
If the language you prefer to read isn't seen here, then please help us find a translator and a publisher!

There is much that takes getting used to when you start thinking like a dolphin.

You’ll quickly discover, if you haven’t already, that swimming in dolphin “brain waters” produces patterns of thinking that tend to become identifying, status-alert signatures for you. Suddenly, something within your awareness clues you to the reality that more is going on than merely thinking outside of the box. During these peculiarly dolphin-type moments, it is more accurate to suggest that you are outside the box and experiencing existence in a way that is radically different from others around you.

You learn, for example, to recognize that thinking like a dolphin can make you restless in ways that are unique and strange to your apprehension in other thinking modalities—and you come to realize that you are being privileged to tap into the telltale “tectonic shifts” of the mind. Deep down, something seismological is going on, like those little pre-tremors that sensitive earthquake-sensing equipment can pick up, not to mention the animal creatures of the field and air, prior to a genuinely felt temblor. In dolphin thinking, when sensations quicken, you rapidly learn to say to yourself: Pay attention. Something is coming up. You begin to monitor events more closely. You start assembling scenarios to see if any fit. You ask: What is morphing, disintegrating, metastasizing, mutating? What am I in touch with that could be nearing a point of no return—or a tipping point?

And then there is the connectedness factor. Whereas in carp, shark and Pseudo-Enlightened Carp waters, it is possible for you almost to totally shut yourself off from the rest of the world, this kind of compartmentalization isn’t really possible for you any longer. It’s a sure bet that the other thinking/valuing/deciding styles frequent “just slam the door in the rest of the world’s face” tendencies have deep roots in our oldest epigenetic rules for survival.

For most of our species’ history, it has been more necessity than luxury to live in the equivalent of today’s gated community: to be able to pull up the drawbridge and depend on the moat to keep predators and other ill-wishers at bay. Even when it is not a literal reality, “going gated” still tends to be a much too common emotional reality in pre-dolphin waters. Not, though, post-LEAP! waters. The realization that there is heart-stopping need, pain, danger, intrigue and potentiality for the irreversible confronting much of living creation at any given moment—for the dolphin thinker, this thought is a mental cloak that is never really removed. It is a constant governor on your hubris, your impatience or any desire you feel to censor or disdain others for their stupidity or inattentiveness. Dolphin thinking’s constant reminder: it isn’t always easy to stay alive, much less be alive.

Thinking like a dolphin is even going to affect how you react to react to the news, wherever you get yours in these news-around-the-clock times. We might call this The Consequentialness Factor. Personally, I find this to be one of the most consistently startling of dolphin thinking’s signature processes.

News tumbles in of an unexpected development—a slip of the tongue or a revealed moral turpitude by a politician, a dreadful natural disaster, something new in consumer technology, a scientific breakthrough, a counter-intuitive voter polling result, a counterfactual argument challenging the general consensus of how things are: you can never quite know what it will be. Your dolphin thinking mind sees most of most of every day’s news as routine. Then something happens that shifts it into analytical hyperspeed, and suddenly you just simply know.

✔ I can usually tell from the first news report about a politician’s missteps if their career is over.

✔I knew from the start that Bill Clinton would not be impeached.

✔I knew that Colorado was going to turn into another California.

✔I knew—almost immediately—that the 9/11/ tragedy would produce a psychological retreat for the American people from which it may never recover, appointing 9/11/2001 as the end date for America’s global dream of unending universal progress.

Or rather my dolphin mind knew. It is not always correct, of course. But when it pounces hyperspeed, it is very, very good, and even yet, when it pounces, because the experience is so pronounced, I still take pause to process—and marvel at—the process.

I think you will marvel, too, at your abilities as a dolphin thinker to just say no. One quick upfront “no” is usually worth a dozen or more “learning experiences.” This may involve a fast dismissal for telemarketers or squirrelly advertisers. Or not getting involved with a deal, a potential partner, a flaky customer or a too-good-to-be-true investment and thus, since there will never be anything to end, never having to face the pain of drawn-out personal recovery. Other times, you will understand immediately that you shouldn’t lend your influence or endorsement, intuiting that all is not as has been described.

On still other occasions, your dolphin mind will flash you a “go,” then soon turn around and renege. When using these thinking skills, your mind can be lightening-quick to size up whether promises are being kept, the truth is being told, anticipated gains are happening or whether you are being made privy to the total picture. Having you hang around to see if you can spot an insider’s advantage even if there is skullduggery afoot simply isn’t the dolphin-thinking brain’s typical style. Remember you read it first here: The dolphin thinker’s decision to disengage when it assays that something may be rotten in Denmark can be bone-rattlingly abrupt.

There are many of these kinds of signature thinking patterns for the dolphin thinker, and for the moment, I’ll mention but one more: The dolphin mind’s tendency to propel you into the thick of anything that effectively captures your interest.

This isn’t to say that you won’t ever be a foot soldier or a bystander, content to go with the flow. The dolphin mind’s overweening expectation of human enterprises, big or small, is that they be functional: is this working? If it is, you may stay close but not really be influential. Projects, opportunities or enterprises—especially complex ones—that genuinely challenge you are a much different story, however. In these instances, the dolphin mind nearly always wants the conn or at least a seat at the decision or planning table. It may or may not receive it. Much faster than most anyone else, you are going to find yourself asking significant questions or, even more jarringly to any pre-dolphin minds present, quickly pointing to solutions. This seldom sits well with the accomplished gamesmanship players of the organization—any organization. You may or may not be invited to stay. Accept that this is now part of your nature: your dolphin thinking nature. And you should, and most times will, enjoy the ride. You’ve earned it!

Bookmark and Share

Youse pays your money and youse makes your choices when it comes to The Ghost In the Machine

It’s time, I think, for us to revisit the idea of The Ghost in the Machine. To get a firsthand sense of what this widespread dogma that colors so many of our assumptions about ourselves, our perceptions and our decision-making is about, you and I must visit the Great Swami, renowned reader of minds. First item of business: revealing what you, longsuffering reader, at this very moment are experiencing in your own head.

Before the Swami starts, I’ll let you in on a secret. This is going to be an inside job. The Great Swami is owner of the same kind of three-pound, grapefruit-sized, near-pudding-like, enzyme-controlled brain used by everyone else on his block, and he is actually about to describe how his brain seems to be experiencing the outside world. Unless you haven’t slept for the past 72 hours or have inhaled or imbibed something really squirrelly in the past few minutes, your brain is almost certain to be providing you with a similar experience.

And so The Great Swami begins:

“The first thing you are noticing is that it seems to you that you are gazing out the front of your face through a couple of holes in your head. Am I correct? … Ah, I thought so.

“And these vantage points permit you to see, continuously, except when you blink, just about anything you choose to see in roughly a 145-to-160-degree arc aligned center-on with your nose. Is this not right? … Yes! Yes, I thought so!

”And if you blink your eyes a couple of times and look for it, it even seems that you can actually detect the region where the dual images provided by your camera-like eyes merge their observations. That is to say, the view of the external world you get when you close one eye while keeping the other open and the view that you get when you do the reverse appear to be pasted together—when both eyes are open—in the vicinity of your nose. Now admit it? Is this not for you the truth? Yes? … Yes, it is as I had believed.

“Of course, your nose itself is a bit of a will-o’-the-wisp. Sometimes you actually seem to be seeing, if only in the faintest, gauze-like fashion, your nose in that shared viewing area between your eyes (and of course you can see your nose if you cross your eyes and look down) and sometimes it seems like you are also seeing right through your nose, with no discernable loss of vision. But one thing is very clear: everything you see is arriving in your head as a full-formed image, is it not? I mean, Holy Madagascar, just look out there! Images everywhere. It’s all images. All the time, seen from the inside of your head, isn’t it a certainty? … Yes! Absolumento!”

Along with the Great Swami, all of us all are but certain that our eyes are continuously recording—with indisputable fidelity—fully formed pictures of a rich, vivid world right there in front of our noses, and it may be difficult to convince us otherwise.

For example, after tracing what happens to a photon of light as it winds its way through the construction processes involved in producing what we think we see, one observer has summed up our abilities of vision as the “end product of chopping, coding, long-distance transmission, neural guesswork and editable cut and paste.” He adds, “What we see is not the product of direct perception, but of a reconstruction which borders on fragile artistry.”

At this juncture, and with apologies to the Great Swami, we can be absolutely sure that our vision isn’t television. Philosopher Daniel Dennett reminds us that much of our vision’s eventual “products” aren’t imagistic at all but are such things as guided hand and finger motions, involuntary ducking, exclamations of surprise, triggering of ancient memories and sexual arousal, to cite a few. Assuming that the results of our vision started out as pictures—images—“is rather like assuming that power from a hydroelectric plant is apt to be wetter and less radioactive than power from a nuclear plant. The raw retinal data are cooked in many ways betwixt eyeball and verbal report (for instance),” Dennett says.

As for that chief or central executive, that Ghost in the Machine that supposed is “up there” consciously watching the movie and providing us with a sense of self, well … youse pays your money and youse makes your choices when it comes to which theories, and which theorists, of consciousness you choose to follow.

Bookmark and Share


Perhaps when it comes to helping us understanding how our custard-like brain works, how mind and brain relate, what an odd phenomenon consciousness is and so forth, the brain is just being shrewd . . . crazy like a fox . . . intuitively sensing just how bizarre this whole subject actually is. To my knowledge, no one has made this “bizarreness business” more entertaining than science fiction writer Terry Bisson. One of his Omni Magazine stories contained this exchange between an alien explorer who has just returned from a visit to Earth and his commander. Apparently, several versions of this dialogue have shown up on the Internet, but this is the one I like best:

[Explorer] They’re made out of meat.

[Commander] Meat?

[Explorer] There’s no doubt about it. We picked several from different parts of the planet, took them aboard our recon vessels, probed them all the way through. They’re completely meat.

[Commander] That’s impossible. What about the radio signals? The messages to the stars.

[Explorer] They use radio waves to talk, but the signals can’t come from them. The signals come from machines.

[Commander] So who made the machines? That’s who we want to contact.

[Explorer] They made the machines. That’s what I’m trying to tell you. Meat made the machines.

[Commander] That’s ridiculous. How can meat make a machine? You’re asking me to believe in sentient meat.

[Explorer] I’m not asking you, I’m telling you. These creatures are the only sentient race in the sector and they’re made out of meat.

[Commander] Maybe they’re like the Orfolei. You know, a carbon-based intelligence that goes through a meat stage.

[Explorer] Nope. They’re born meat and they die meat. We studied them for several of their life spans, which didn’t take too long. Do you have any idea of the life span of meat?

[Commander] Spare me. Okay, maybe they’re only part meat. You know, like the Weddilei. A meat head with an electron plasma brain inside.

[Explorer] Nope, we thought of that, since they do have meat heads like the Weddelei. But I told you, we probed them. They’re meat all the way through.

[Commander] No brain?

[Explorer] Oh, there’s a brain all right. It’s just that the brain is made out of meat!

[Commander] So … what does the thinking?

[Explorer] You’re not understanding, are you? The brain does the thinking. The meat.

[Commander] Thinking meat? You’re asking me to believe in thinking meat?

[Explorer] Yes, thinking meat! Conscious meat! Loving meat. Dreaming meat. The meat is the whole deal! Are you getting the picture?

[Commander] Omigod. You’re serious then. They’re made out of meat.

[Explorer] Finally. Yes. They are indeed made out meat. And they’ve been trying to get in touch with us for almost a hundred of their years.

So Archie Bunker turns out to have been a sharp-eyed neuroscientist, after all!

What is the bottom line, the moral, if you please, for this clever piece of sci-fi dramaturgy? How about this one: whether you are on the outside looking in (Sisson’s alien) or on the inside looking out (us Sisson meatheads), the brain is always central to understanding what’s happening, no matter discombobulatingly circuitous the route between what’s out there and what we actually conclude is happening. It may be meat but as Dr. Steven Hyman, director of the National Institute of Mental Health, observes, it’s a choice cut. “The human brain,” he says, “is probably the most complex structure in the known universe.” Its one hundred billion neurons are, or would be were they to be struck end to end in a continuous thread, more than two million miles long.

Neuroscientists suspect that each neuron is directly connected to an average of about ten thousand other neurons. Dr. Daniel J. Siegel, associate clinical professor of psychiatry at the UCLA School of Medicine, notes that this makes the brain home to about one million billion of these links. “The number of possible ‘one-off’ patterns of neuronal firing is immense, estimated as a staggering ten times ten one million times (ten to the millionth power),” he marvels.

More than that, we’re stuck with the brain’s “my way or the highway” centrality to what’s going on. Edward O. Wilson, the renowned pioneer of sociobiology and biodiversity, reminds us, “Everything that we know and can ever know about existence is created there.”

Wilson continues, “The human brain bears the stamp of 400 million years of trial and error, traceable by fossils and molecular homology in nearly unbroken sequence from fish to amphibian to reptile to primitive mammal to our immediate primate. In the final step the brain was catapulted to a radically new level, equipped for language and culture. . . . The result was human nature: genius animated with animal craftiness and emotion, combining the passion of politics and art with rationality, to create a new instrument of survival.”

Thinking about how best to help you perform in dolphin-thinking waters, we need to do a reality check on our views about human nature. Older theories about human nature are proving tenacious in the pre-dolphin-thinking mind, but in the minds of people paying serious attention to what we are rapidly learning about the way the world really works already know better. One of our key assignments as dolphin-styled thinkers is to utilize the full powers of our new ways of thinking about human nature becomes second nature.

Bookmark and Share


As readers of this blog, readers of my books, participants in any workshop longer than 30 minutes that I’ve designed and anyone who has ever asked me who the most seminal influencers of my career have been know, I have an outsized regard for the intellectual skills of a most remarkable, if often underappreciated, researcher and theorist named Clare W. Graves. He was a psychologist, and a very unique one.

Like another iconoclastic psychologist of his generation, the late George A. Kelly, in the 1950s, Clare Graves was coming to suspect that the differing psychological systems of the era were multiplying rapidly because “the people who developed them were focusing their attention upon somewhat different events.” (Kelly often referred to the theories of psychoanalysis and behaviorism as the Conventional Wisdom of the Dominant Group, a designation that one of his followers later shortened to COWDUNG!)

I’ve also been a fervent admirer of the work of two of the most competent academicians using Dr. Graves’ theory in their personal research and writing: Christopher C. Cowan and Dr. Natasha Todorovic, of Santa Barbara, Calif.

DR. CLARE W. GRAVES<BR>(Photo courtesy of Christopher Cowan; used by permission)

(Photo courtesy of Christopher Cowan; used by permission)

Cowan was the primary creative wellspring behind the writing of a tour de force for academicians and other serious scholars attracted to the Graves theory: Spiral Dynamics: Mastering Values, Leadership and Change/Exploring the New Science of Memetics (co-authored with Dr. Don Edward Beck), published in the mid-90’s. Cowan was a confidant and close colleague of Clare Graves in the final decade of his life and for nearly forty years has done extensive applied research into uses for the Graves model.

If not the first, Dr. Graves was one of the first visionary actually to see and to cite hard evidence of a revolutionary new way to describe human nature. In doing so, he was one of the very first challengers of the late Abraham Maslow’s idea that there was a ceiling to we humans’ psychological development, one that Maslow called “self-actualization.” Once fully self-actualized, we supposedly had nothing new to add to our mental, emotional and spiritual toolkit of personal developmental possibilities. Graves torpedoed that idea by doing research that turned up people who, as he phrased it, had made “a monumental leap.”

I once asked Cowan and Todorovic what we should expect to see in the way of personal characteristics in individuals who are approaching the point where they might be candidates to make that Gravesian leap, and they provided this list:

• Relativistic: situationalistic and context-dependent behaviors.
• Attracted to religion (again).
• Many alternatives and each to his own.
• Many alternatives—choice made on the basis of feeling, not knowledge or rules—service to others.
• Considers intellectually, but conclusion does not follow logic.
• Negative sensitivity to control by authority; sensitive to peer group and situation.
• Tendency to criticize but not cynically or snidely in a way to lead to change.
• “Each to his own, others have their way, we have ours, not mine to judge.”
• Chameleon-like character: when I FEEL this way I do this.”
• Centrality of life is people and friends.
• Superficial approach to solving problems of the world (they go away).
• Shows negativity around only one thing—hurting other people.
• “Things should be different, but I’m not the one to change them.”

And here’s what the Santa Barbara researchers say they would expect to see in someone who has made the leap:

• Relativistic: situationalistic and context-dependent.
• Conclusions follow logic.
• Do not stop from doing something even if it may hurt someone’s feelings or people are hesitant.
• Matter of fact responses which describe reality of what “is” in a detached though interested and concerned manner.
• Allow other person his/her point of view and still have his/her own point of view.
• Impulsivity and compulsivity are absent.
• Absence of fear.
• Ability to be critical without rancor.

Few things are more inspiring than listening to the great man himself as he described what he believed he was seeing in folks who have made the transition to this new level of maturity. Here is a snippet of his observations on how ethics change for us when, as we like to say around Brain Technologies. one of us succeeds in entering dolphin-thinking waters:

“Ethics that are good for man in his life, not after life; that are good for him, not his superior; that are good for him, not his group; that are good for him, not his ego … no bowing to suffering, no vassalage, no peonage. There will be no shame in behavior, for man will know it is human to behave. There will be no pointing of the finger at other men, no segregation, depredation or degradation in behavior… a foundation for his self-respect, which will have a firm base in reality [in an] ethical system rooted in human knowledge and cosmic reality.”

From Chris Cowan,

Wow . . . And thanks! You continue to impress with your generous tone and writing, Mr. Lynch.

Looking at the word Wow—probably a mind worm wriggling—likely came up because we returned last week from the WOW5 conference at the U. of Indiana: “Workshop on the Ostrom Workshop #5″. It was a gathering of political scientists, many social game theorists, who assemble every five years to compare notes. Most were trained by Elinor (Nobel prize in economics) and Vincent Ostrom at the Bloomington school. We . . . found that all these global scholars tend to miss the human factors in analysis. They look at ethnography and demographics, but do not delve deeper into why participants in social games make the strategic moves they do. An exceptionally collegial and welcoming bunch.

We were invited to attend by [a Brasilian consultant] who did a couple of our courses and whom we let use assessments to see if there was a relationship between game performance (most of theirs are build around CRP—common resource pool—decisions such as managing a fishery, distributing water rights, dealing with forests, now atmospheric carbon, etc.) and levels of existence. Surprise! The more F-S [Level 5, or shark] the more collaborative and willing to compromise for win:win solutions. The more D-Q [Level 4, or carp], the less willing to bend. They’ve been largely discounting the personality dynamics of the players and are now scrambling to fill in the gap in their analyses.

Thanks again,

Bookmark and Share


If you missed out on our initial roll-out and are wondering what the hubbub is about, you can find a quick fly-over introduction to our new soft-skills-building training format here and here.

What has really been rewarding about our unveiling of a new “play book approach” to using dolphin thinking insights and methodologies in times of declining corporate training budgets has been the spontaneous upwelling of approval and enthusiasm the idea and our approach have generated. It turns out some of the friends of “59 Minute TeamBuilding” are new to the scene; others go way back. Some we’d lost touch with. And with a good many, we were never in touch to begin with personally, at least not until now.

To those below and the others who have volunteered their thoughts, please know that you have our profound gratitude for getting in touch for the first time and/or staying in touch:

Giuseppe Platania photo

DR. GIUSEPPE PLATANIA, creator of the Ideodinamica brief-therapy method and professional life coach, Turin, Italy,

Today I finished reading your awesome book. I want to express my sincere admiration for the importance, completeness and usefulness of this work. The learning process is designed with extreme care and attention in order to protect the investment of money and time spent by the participants. It has absolutely practical applicability, distinguished from too many theoretical courses that plague the world!

GARRY ADLER, Owner, TEBU TeamBuilding, Sydney, Australia,

I think Strategy of the Dolphin was one of the first books I bought and it sits on my bookshelf. I still pick it up the book and read it from time to time and enjoy the read. It has stood the test of time!

ShawnBrophy lecturingDR. SEAN BROPHY, Organizational Behavior Consultant and Life Coach, Dublin, Ireland,

Congratulations on your scholarship and the enterprise revealed in your innovative approach to team building. I’m enthused to find so many useful slants on the various instruments, especially on PathPrimer. Aside from team building, your guide is excellent as an adjunct to a coaching engagement. I wish you continued success with all your endeavours, you mighty man!

David Patient photoDAVID PATIENT, Owner, Empowerment Concepts, Nelspruit, Mpumalanga, South Africa,

We have used Strategy of the Dolphin for years. It is a brilliant tool. In a South African context, it is even more relevant today than it was 20 years ago.

RUTH LOGIE, Enterprise Architect at Standard Bank of South Africa, Johannesburg

I’d first like to tell you that Strategy of the Dolphin was a mind-opening book for me, and I thank you for that. There is an enormous amount of work that has gone into this [new] concept.

Adam Lindemann photoADAM LINDEMANN, Managing Partner, Mind Fund Ltd. Entrepreneur and Venture Capitalist, Hong Kong

I first read Strategy of the Dolphin as a young man of around 20 years old. It was funny the other day, an entrepreneur said to me that he was initially not sure whether I was “New Age” and then he realized I was too practical to be so, but that he realized that I was not a selfish or a predatory shark. I explained confidently that I was a Dolphin and showed him the toy Dolphin in my office. For now, I would just like to say thank you from both sides of my Dolphin mind and heart for helping me to demonstrate that a Dolphin can not only succeed in the world, but that indeed the future of civilisation depends on us succeeding.

Bookmark and Share


Cartoon courtesy of Thomas Karlsson, <br>Agile Coach at Softhouse

Cartoon courtesy of Thomas Karlsson,
Agile Coach at Softhouse

If you yourself aren’t involved in big-time software development or don’t, say, have a serious client or close friend who is, you may not be aware of some of the latest organizing concepts in this highly influential technology sub-specialty.

I’m referring particularly to the kind of ideas that often travel under one (or all) of these identifiers: lean, agile or scrum.

You’ll get a far more nuanced introduction to these buzz words and the sacrosanct workplace practices they represent from people who closely track them. Sinan Si Alhir, who blogs here, is a worthy example. Consider this enthusiastic sentence he uses to introduce the agility model to his blog readers:

We live in a VUCA (volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity) world where we are challenged to be thriving on chaos in an age of discontinuity — where the past is plagued with incoherence & inconsistency, the present is plagued with chaos & ambiguity, and the future is plagued with unpredictability & uncertainty!

Alhir also has an excellent PowerPoint presentation I’d recommend to any newbie to the lean, agile, scrum scene. In it, he provides us such tidbits of context and history as these:

Lean has its roots in the Toyota “just in time” production system of the late 20th Century. The idea is to identify value and strive for perfection in producing it. Si Alhir recommends James Womack’s and Daniel Jones’ book, Lean Thinking, as good background reading.

Agile practices stem got their start in the design of high-performance fighter jets. Chet Richard’s book, Certain to Win, is a go-to source for details on agile approaches. Since these ideas are from the military’s neighborhood, it’s no surprise that they are usually described in slam-bang fashion: Observe, orient, decide, act.

Scrum refers to a way of designing the work. In Si Alhir’s words, it refers to “a simple team-based ‘inspect and adapt’ framework to organize work around ‘complex’ systems and products.” Its insider’s vocabulary is well stocked (and stoked!) with terms like ScrumMaster, Burndown Charts, Daily Scrum Meeting and Information Radiator.

I like the sound, the vitality and the no-nonsense character of all this because much of it closely tracks with the dolphin thinking qualities I’ve been advocating now for about a quarter-century.

For example, I’ve been telling folks that there is a kind of automatic problem-solving quality residing in our heads that, if we can activate it, will leave us reluctant to go to conventional workplace meetings any longer. Why? Arrogant as it sounds, in 95 meetings out of a 100, once you activate these thinking qualities, you will know a lot of that what needs to be done next not long after you walk in the door, if not before.

You might want to ask, “Why not go anyway and share your insights?”

Because the dolphin thinker quickly comes to realize that business meetings are mostly attended by three kinds of people: those who don’t want the problem solved, those who don’t want the problem solved on any terms but their terms and those who don’t want to hear any possible solution until they have had a chance to explain—and often argue strenuously—why they don’t think there can be one.

Dolphin thinkers would much prefer to invent new circumstances where old problems simply can’t find their way back in. Rather than attending meetings, they would much prefer to be busy instituting change.

This explains why dolphin thinkers have so often kept themselves in the background unnoticed, knowing that “Whereof we cannot speak, thereof we should remain silent”?

“You have read Wittgenstein, I see,” I can hear you saying, dryly.

Not really that much. I often find the enigmatic Viennese philosopher virtually unreadable. I think many individuals who have picked up a copy of his Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus will agree with me.

But I like his whereof/thereof quote. And I like his comment that his philosophy is intended to “show the fly the way out of the fly-bottle.”

I don’t yet know enough about the progress of the lean-agile-scrum movement in software development to know whether this is actually turning out to be a dolphin-thinking-like idea or not.

My suspicion is that the “push for speed” ambitions of this movement without concomitant attention to some of the so-called soft-skill needs of the workforces involved in the end often leads to the same old, same old.

If that is the case, then there is a set of ideas that travels under another four-letter buzzword that I heartily recommend be added to the mix.

Nevertheless, I get excited when I come across folks who are saying things like this: “Simplicity‒the art of maximizing the amount of work not done‒is essential.”

That’s from The Agility Manifesto. You can read all 12 of its principles here, and if you are involved in training, coaching, leading or seeking to influence teams responsible for producing complex outcomes in fast-changing environments, I’d really recommend it.

From Brian Branagan,
Thanks, Dudley, for opening the conversation about the need for bringing “soft-skills” to those working with Agile/Lean/Scrum methods for delivering value to customers. I enjoyed reading about “The Agility Manifesto” since I’ve been introducing these practices to teams for over 10 years.

In addition to the books Sinan Si Alhir recommends on his site, I highly recommend that “emissaries” bring along the “Language of Business” skills you describe in your book, Evergreen: Playing a Continuous Comeback Business Game, and a knowledge of Clare W. Graves work you describe in LEAP! I also recommend Dr. Fred Kofman’s Conscious Business and Denning and Dunham’s The Innovator’s Way.

I’ve relied on these books as a resource to deal with the breakdowns I’ve encountered after introducing Scrum methods to teams.

The first breakdown was with the Daily Standup ritual where a team stands around a board with three columns: Work to be Done, Work in Process and Work Completed. On the board, there are Post-its describing tasks that take anywhere from one day to three days to complete that are moved from the first column to the third column over the course of a focused two-week period of work called a Sprint.

In a Daily Standup, each team member declares their progress. They commit to doing something by a certain date, they assess their progress for work they are doing or they say they have done something. If anyone needs help, this is the place to ask for it.

Sounds simple enough, right?

What I saw occur in the first few iterations were people who had difficulty in declaring commitments, making assessments or making requests as described in Evergreen. I realized that this is a core human skill that is probably not taught in computer science classes. I was able to provide some one-on-one coaching to team members so that they could move from needing to be seen as an Expert to becoming recognized for their ability to be a Learner.

The second breakdown I saw was between the Scrum team and the stakeholders of their work. It was not uncommon for a “Shark” stakeholder to demand the team take on an additional work item in mid-Sprint. Sometimes this could be handled by simply substituting it for a task of comparable size that had not yet been started. There were other times, however, when the stakeholder said that that was simply not possible.

This is where the “Language of Business” skills described in Evergreen and Dr. Kofman’s book can be useful so one can stay engaged with a frustrated person without being overwhelmed by their negativism. I’ve found Denning and Dunham’s book and their Eight Essential Practices for Innovation to be very helpful here, too.

Again, thank you for opening up new possibilities for bringing your ideas into new worlds of work and life.

Bookmark and Share


Swiss psychotherapist Carl Jung would have called it synchronicity. I call it downright irritating.

Less than 24 hours after our talented graphic designer delivered Brain Technologies’ new “59 Minute TeamBuilding” logo (below), an American tire company began promoting a national TV advertising campaign called “59 Minute Quick Tire Install™.” 59 Minute TeamBuildingAnd If that wasn’t already one synchronous step too far, there was also the tagline I had created for the logo: “Where tomorrow meets the road.” I will cheerfully admit that I based this idea on a tagline that has long been associated with—yes—tires (“where the rubber meets the road”). You can forgive me for thinking that no good idea goes unpunished.

Nevertheless, I’ve thoroughly enjoyed the several months I’ve spent producing the facilitation guide for “59 Minute TeamBuilding.”

As is explained elsewhere on this website, the idea behind the concept is about as simple as making biscuits with Bisquick®.



It doesn’t have to break the bank or crowd the schedule for you to “grow” your people and your teams. It doesn’t even require your to be a seasoned training, coaching or HRD/OD professional to pull it off.

And this isn’t merely another simplistic do-si-do around the training room dance floor. It’s an exhaustively tested, carefully syncopated, professionally coordinated week-to-week “game plan” for getting everyone on a work team deeply involved in the task of getting better and delivering more with the natural thinking skills they possess. And doing it collaboratively and with a reasonable amount of ongoing enthusiasm.

Putting the sinews of “59 Minute TeamBuilding” together sent me searching my files and my memory for “the best and the rightest” from more than three decades of facilitating team-building sessions.

Money-wise, benefitting from what materialized from my quest requires the investment of a ridiculously small amount of corporate or organizational pocket change. All that is needed to get started is to place an order for enough of our BrainMap® self-discovery assessments to supply everyone on your team with their own copy. That order also qualifies you for an e-mail copy of our 125-page “59 Minute TeamBuilding” facilitation guide and script free of charge.

After that, you simply need to find “an hour, less a minute” each week for as long as people are saying “Why didn’t we think of this sooner?” and let the valuable learning times roll!



My favorite exercise is probably the one I suggest for Week 6, which is the second session (if you follow my suggested schedule) using BTC’s mCircle Instrument®. The activity is called “Win As Much As You Can.” I certainly didn’t invent the game and by no means was I even an early user. But I’ve been using it for nearly a quarter-century and have always found it an effective approach for providing my participants with new insights about the value of cooperation.

Well, nearly always.

Not long after the government broke up AT&T, I was asked to spend a few hours in Miami Beach with a group of managers and employees at one of the company’s surviving fragments. The HR people who invited me wanted the conference attendees to explore new ways to cooperate. I thought this might be a good opportunity to use “Win As Much As You Can.”

It wasn’t.

The changes and upheaval within AT&T at that point were too much to permit this group to generate any serious interest in cooperating even if they were merely play-acting.

Quickly, the room dissolved in riotous pandemonium that refused to be calmed. Not even the bosses on hand could restore order to the room.

As I remember, we simply abandoned the exercise and broke early for dinner.

Moral of the story: Be sure you get people to commit to making good things happen together before you ratchet the drama too high.

“59 Minute TeamBuilding” shows you how to quickly get a team focused on the things that matter, and the effect just builds and builds and builds.

Bookmark and Share


I have a set of bowl-like items—some plastic, some metal, some actually food bowls from the kitchen—that I’ve taken with me all over the world.

Customs officials have looked at me strangely but have never asked why I carry around the basins or what they are used for. I think they may assume that I’m another oddity collector, one with lamentably poor eyesight or strange tastes.

If they ever want a demonstration, I’d have to line up my basins on the customs counter and then find my marbles, which can be anywhere in the jumbled contents of my materials trunk. I can just picture the snickering as the word spreads in the customs house: “Guy’s lost his marbles, too!”

Not so.

By the time we earthlings reach the thinking level that, more than a quarter century ago, Dr. Paul Kordis and I named the dolphin level (as opposed to various earlier varieties of mind that we called carp and shark thinking levels), we generally know where our marbles are—and those of the people we deal with—to an unprecedented and amazing degree.

Demonstrating this is the purpose behind my basins and marbles. I use them to help people visualize how the mind matures.

The marbles are reds and blues. And the basins come in ascending sizes. The first is quite small, no larger across than a silver dollar. The next one is more the diameter of your average citrus orange. Then comes one that is the width across of, say, a Frisbee. And so forth, each one larger than the one before. Seven in all, all of which I keep under wraps—under a cloth, actually, like a magician does his or her props—until I’m ready to bring each one into view.

It is the final moments of my hour-long demonstration that usually bring a “you can hear a pin drop” quietness to the room. My first six basins are now out in full view. The three on the left contain a red marble. Those on the right, blue marbles. Each of these basins represents a stage, a stopover, for the mind, I’ve explained.

Red-marble stages are strongly individualistic. I put the bowls for those on the left side of the table. Blue ones are strongly oriented to the family, community or other groups. The bowls for those go on the right side of the table. And the bowl pattern is a zig-zag one because, as the creator of this model, the late Dr. Clare W. Graves, the gifted American psychologist, suggested, the dominant geometry of the mind’s development has been a spiral. The larger the basin, the more complexity and mobility, the more realness, the more knowledge, the more cosmic reality . . . the more functionality and flexibility our mind is capable of mobilizing and utilizing.

Until a few decades ago, every human alive and every human of history had assembled a mind for themselves from this grouping. There didn’t seem to be any other choice. Some individuals stayed at early stages and built worlds for themselves where technologies were simple and the emphasis by necessity was on simply surviving. Others moved on, diminishing some of the dangers and expanding others, making more sophisticated tools, adopting more and more sophisticated ideas and systems and ways to interact.

For the longest time, this was it. There were no other options for fashioning a mind.

Then, bro, nitro!

Suddenly, not long ago at all, just a few decades, we humans appear to have experienced our own Big Bang. Of the mind.

At this point in my demonstration, I reach beneath my prop cover-up and bring out another basin. Instantly, it is obvious that we are in another dimension. This basin is huge, dwarfing all the others. I set the new entry down some distance away from the original six.

“Dolphin waters,” I announce.

I do not know who the first dolphin thinker was. But I believe I’ve talked to more than a few. In my books, I’ve sought to augment their insights with personal experiences of my own.

I’m very fortunate in that, as an itinerant philosopher and instructor of thinking skills, I get to commingle regularly with ambitious souls who want to “be the best they can be,” always searching, probing, inquiring . . . always thinking about how most effectively to discard the old and move on to the new.

I have no scientific survey of the world’s seven-plus billions to offer (and know of no way to structure or finance one anytime soon). And I freely acknowledge that my personal universe is a long way from reflecting the whole. But I offer this educated guess: that 5 to 8 percent of the adult population of the world’s economically advanced countries are capable of making the momentous leap to dolphin waters.

Those who succeed don’t regularly make the headlines or the talk shows or otherwise stand out in the media because their serious thoughts about issues and solutions typically find few hospitable receptors in the brains of interviewers or reporters—being too broad, early, radical, difficult, complex or indecipherable, or some mix of all this. But, if nothing else, the explosive rate of change in the new millennium is one indication that a growing number of these kinds of minds is around.

At the end of my demonstration with the bowls and marbles, I give all my participants a marble of their own and invite them to place it in my out-sized bowl.

“Something new is here,” I observe. “And given what’s happening and what’s needed in our world, the arrival of dolphin thinking skills is very timely.”

Bookmark and Share


Our first Brain Technologies associate in Denmark (and in Scandinavia, for that matter) is traveling a fast track. Claudia Lindby is already generating media coverage in Copenhagen while she rushes to complete the website for her new consultancy, Claudia Lindby: engage for transformation.



In the past couple of days, two items about her new business and her affiliation with Brain Technologies have appeared in the Danish media. One mention was in the “names” section of Denmark’s most important business paper, Børsen. I can’t give you a link to it because you need to be a subscriber to access it. But here, Claudia says, is how it read in English:

Claudia Lindby is the first Associate in Scandinavia for Brain Technologies Corporation (BTC), headquartered in Florida and founded by Dudley Lynch, author of three bestselling books. For more than 30 years, BTC’s mission has been to create brain change models, tools and techniques that help people “make the leap.” Claudia Lindby has worked with business and people development for 20 years in Danish and international companies, hereof 17 years in executive and leadership positions. She has built her expertise within change leadership in international and complex matrix organizations as well as in small organizations, and as an independent consultant and advisor.

And then a day later, a similar mention appeared in an online magazine, Kommunications Forum, Here’s the item in Danish:

Claudia Lindby bliver den første partner i Norden for Brain Technologies Corporation (BTC), der har hjemsted i Florida og er stiftet af Dudley Lynch, der har skrevet 3 bestseller-bøger. I mere end 30 år har BTCs mission været at skabe “brain change” modeller, værktøjer og teknikker, som hjælper mennesker til at tage det “næste spring”. Claudia Lindby har i 20 år arbejdet med forretnings- og medarbejderudvikling i danske, udenlandske og internationale virksomheder, de seneste 17 år på direktør- og lederposter. Hun har bygget sin ekspertise indenfor forandringsledelse i internationale og komplekse matrixorganisationer såvel som i små organisationer, og som selvstændig konsulent og rådgiver.

Claudia tells us that she’s already received about a dozen phone inquiries about the BTC assessment tools and her consultancy services as a result of the publicity.

You can get a sense of what a veteran of the Danish corporate business scene she is by taking a look at her C.V. You can email her at

But you don’t have to wait another moment for a better understanding of why Claudia feels that it is useful to have the BTC tools and models available for her Danish clients and be in partnership with the Dolphin thinking skills and brain-change brands that we have been developing and promoting for nearly the past four decades. We asked her to share her thinking about how and why she brought her new consulting company to our doorstep. Here are some of her replies:

What attracted you to the Brain Technologies’ concepts, approach and tools?

Back in 2006, I left the “classic corporate world” primarily because of a feeling there had to be more to it than working with business development in that rational, rather mechanical way. Even as we decided to include behavior in our KPI’s—leadership behavior—I felt we were missing out on something of critical importance: the human being “at work.”

As an independent advisor, I have since then explored the concepts of behavior and culture in organizations, looking at how we can become better at finding solutions to change that will actually work. Lasting, meaningful change is virtually impossible without the full picture. [NOTE: Speaking of pictures, that's Claudia's new website logo below.]

This is where your work at Brain Technologies comes in. One of the most significant contributions to my own work and development has been the understanding that behavior is just the tip of the iceberg, the visible part of what it means to be human: what ultimately manifests as behavior in the organization is a result of thoughts, feelings, ideas, values, beliefs. . . . Gaining insight into this inner ecology (or, collectively, culture) and becoming able to work constructively with it as a natural part of our change and development efforts is key to create lasting, meaningful change; and BTC’s tools and methods help us do precisely that.

What else do you expect the BTC methods for helping people develop powerful new living, thinking and business skills to bring to Denmark?

Neither our leaders nor we are fully aware of what we are really capable of—a price we pay for fitting in in this very collective culture of ours. They are looking for more freedom to do the right things, things that will actually work—to achieve better outcomes.



Well-known and rooted systems obviously no longer work well enough, and new solutions are increasingly being asked for at all levels of society. Public and private institutions have become too complex, too heavy, too impersonal, and increasingly no longer offer the solutions we need. Everywhere we are looking for better ways to integrate people, technology and organizations, for better alignment, for greater functionality enabling us to do more with less.

Certainly, Scandinavian organizations are not inhumane, but we still do not embrace a full understanding of human beings “at work.” But I believe we are indeed ready to integrate a broader understanding of what works, what it takes to move forward. BTC’s approach and tools can help us become more comfortable with and better at dealing with change, even thriving with it, taking advantage of the formidable energy related to change to create better futures—on a collective organizational level and an individual level.

How do you plan to differentiate “Claudia Lindby: engage for transformation” using the BTC tools and methods? And what will your primary selling points be?

Understanding that we cannot separate business and people but have to include both in change initiatives is a differentiating factor in my work. I will help my client/leaders develop new and better strategies for achieving change goals—for both themselves and their organizations. In a way, I can help them design problems out of existence, always working from the desired future back to the present.

My position in the Danish market is based on my ability to see and work with the full picture when working to get to desired outcomes: including business processes, technology, task flows, etc. as well as the human element—behavior, culture and the forces shaping them.

The BTC tools and methods will be central as I work to inspire and stimulate the full change process with leaders, from research & analysis, brainstorming, discovery, design, implementation and follow-up, and integration in daily work habits.
Well thought out and convincingly said, Claudia! Welcome aboard! And, again, congratulations on the quick startup successes!

And if any of our readers would like more information about becoming an authorized associate with Brain Technologies, we invite you to go here now and then get in touch with us if you have questions. It’s a big, big world, one getting more complicated and chaotic by the hour. We are convinced that in the hands of capable, forward-thinking “intervenionists” like Claudia Lindby, the BTC concepts and tools can provide critical guidance to people and organizations ready and willing to make a difference.

Bookmark and Share


Nietzsche, it was, who observed, “Almost 2,000 years and no new God!”

Philosopher Karl Jaspers allowed that this is true. The most recent great religions all emerged from an extraordinarily fecund “cultural Petri dish” between 800 B.C. and 200 B.C—Jaspers called it the “axial age”—that saw monotheism swept into the mainstream.

In an article in The Economist not long ago, Paul Saffo, the futurist, wondered if it is finally getting close to time once again for a powerful new religion to appear: a new God. Similar forces are again in ferment, Saffo noted: new technologies, new mobility, new insecurities, new unhappinesses spread far and wide by new means of communication.

At the far fringes of today’s contemporary cultural Petri dish, you can already hear the rumbles. What else would you call science writer Joel Garreau’s call for new rituals to welcome scientific breakthroughs into our personal lives, such as those that might postpone aging? One of his suggestions in his book, Radical Evolution: The Promise and Peril of Enhancing Our Minds, Our Bodies—and What It Means to Be Human (New York: Broadway, 2006): “A liturgy of life everlasting as a person receives her first cellular age-reversal workup.”

Getting out of the cradle

Getting out of the cradle

The question has seldom been more vividly framed than in the writings of Frederick Jackson Turner, who died in 1932. Turner’s book, The Significance of the Frontier in American History, helped put men on the moon. That’s because President John F. Kennedy was exposed to it as a Harvard student—that and Catholic paleontologist Teilhard de Chardin’s progressive theories about the wellsprings of the human spirit. Turner’s oft-debated “frontier thesis” was this: having a new frontier to explore does wonders for the spirit of human cooperation. The eloquent Edward O. Wilson picked up the inquiry with Sociobiology: The New Synthesis, especially his inquiry into altruism, one example of which is human civilization itself.

The late Soviet rocket scientist Konstantin Tsiolkovsky was another “new frontiers”-man, urging humans to think of colonizing the Milky Way galaxy. “Earth is the cradle of mankind—but we can’t stay in the cradle forever,” he said famously.

Dolphinthinkers worry about Earth’s occupants falling into a “zero-sum” game à la Toynbee (A Study of History) and Spengler (The Decline of the West), not to mention Turner, if we run out of genuine new frontiers to explore. For this reason, you should not be surprised to find most dolphinthinkers insistent that humans not retreat from the idea of moving out into space big time. It’s the final frontier and as such, they believe, is vital to keeping our altruism (and perhaps our very biologies) alive.

Bookmark and Share