X : We need to adapt to our new reality.
Me : A question?
X : Should we start with organisation or operating model first?
Me : Neither. Start with doctrine i.e. basic principles of your company. This will lead you to landcape which will lead you to structure + operating model.

X : Thoughts on private companies being on the boards of ICS (integrated care systems).
Me : Conflict of interest question? Supplier determining needs?
X : Yes
Me : It's ok, as long as
a) you have effective spend control
b) those private companies are JVs which Gov owns 51% of.

X : What if they are not 51% owned JVs?
Me : Ah, that's a bad idea. You really want your boards to have your interests at heart.
X : What about experience, partnership?
Me : Those are advisors and you take it with a pinch of salt and as much as possible use critical friends.

Suppliers will always tell you that they want to be your partners, to build a relationship, to be your friends, to find the win/win in much the same way a second hand car salesperson wants to be your buddy ... but their interests are not yours and never can be.

X : Critical friends?
Me : Occassionaly you can find critical friends. People that we willing to tell you the truth as they see it regardless of the consequences. They are not very common and it normally requires a deep sense of duty that exceeds any loyalty to others.

X : Can the relationship be symbiotic?
Me : Rarely but that depends. If the organisation has a core overiding principle of focusing on the customer need and I don't mean lip service to this but absolutely embedded into its very core then yes i.e. places like Amazon, Alibaba etc.

X : Do you think cloud will decentralise?
Me : Already has - started with regions and AZs and is now rapidly expanding into outpost, greengrass, EKS anwhere.
X : No, I mean many providers.
Me : There are two forms of decentralisation - provision and control (i.e. authorities) ...

... what is happening is decentralisation of provision (i.e. cloud everywhere, at the edge) but under centralised authorities (Amazon, Alibaba, MSFT, Google etc).
X : What about decentralisation of control?
Me : Many companies working to a common standard ...

... that was the dream of OpenStack but they blew that on day one creating a collective prisoner dilemma. They are trying to recorrect this with K8s but the cloud has moved on, higher up the stack ...

... so, the idea of a marketplace of many different companies each having authority is ... wishful thinking by past vendors and clients they've hoodwinked. Maybe in 15-20 years we will get another go ... open source is a long game ...

... more likely is many points of provision i.e. companies offering EKS anywhere on a utility basis but under centralised authority e.g. AWS.

So, yes, the cloud is going to edge, has been for sometime but it'll be AWS / Alibaba / MSFT cloud that is everywhere.

X : Can you apply pace layers to maps?
Me : You can but what is where evolves. However, same rules apply to things, practices, data, knowledge and ethical values. All are forms of evolving capital. In the mapping world, we refer to this with pioneers, settlers and town planners.

X : What's the robot for?
Me : Image from an older presentation slide, don't worry it has no relevance.
X : Is this linked to diffusion?
Me : Not simply. Evolution of a single component can consist of many hundreds of diffusion curves i.e. a virus diffuses but it also evolves.

X : Why have you got DevOps in legacy? We haven't even started yet.
Me : That's not my problem. I would take a look at serverless.
X : DevOps is serverless.
Me : Some of the practices maybe co-opted (see ITIL vs DevOps) but the new faction will decide what it is or isn't.

X : I also disagree with your methods graphic.
Me : Do you mean this? As applied to the following map?
X : Yes. Lean is suitable for innovation.
Me : Ah, that depends upon what you mean by innovation. If you mean Genesis then lightweight XP has it beat.

X : I disagree.
Me : Well, I've had 15 years of people telling me that Agile works everywhere or Lean works everywhere or Six Sigma works everywhere and why all the competing methods don't. I have no interest in the conversation. Use appropriate methods based upon context.

X : When is #mapcamp happening this year?
Me : Wed, Oct 13th.
X : What's the plan?
Me : Right now? Find some funding.

X : How much do you need?
Me : For a 1500 - 3000 person online event? Back of envelope calculation ... about £50k to make it happen. LEF has kindly sponsored it for the last few years but we now need to stand it up on its own two feet.

X : What does that mean?
Me : Like all events, it's a risk profile. So, today the chance of #mapcamp happening is 0%, as we raise some funds, identify costs and find ways of reducing costs etc then that chance increases to a point that we can say ... yep, we can do this.

X : What about ticket sales?
Me : Nothing can ever be guaranteed, so you have to position it to the point that if everything goes wrong the liability is acceptable. Ask me in a month then I'll have a better idea.

X : If it's all about cost, reducing liability etc ... why does anyone run an event?
Me : For the same reason we speak at events. We love the subject. If you didn't then you'd be mad.

Ok, as promised, here's a thread of my top 15 non-verbal gestures for effective behaviour management:

1. A much neglected oldie, best used when only one or two pupils are still talking:

2. Wiggle that earlobe when you see a rogue off-tasker:

3. A gentle side to side headshake, which says "don't even think about doing what you're thinking of doing":

4. This is more forceful and vigorous than no. 3. It says immediately desist:

https://t.co/Uejb3Ng30u

THE TRUTH BEHIND WHY ONLY 2% OF PEOPLE SUCCEED AND 98% OF PEOPLE FAIL

(Plus a 30 minute exercise to get you into the top 2%)

//Thread//

Quick PSA: If you get value from this thread, please share some Knowledge Karma and retweet the first tweet 👆

Thank you.

Now let's upgrade your life..

I'll start by addressing the elephant in the room.

This is not another thread about "positive thinking" and us ing affirmations to get what you want.

You will need to take action for this to work.

If you are willing to do that

Read on 👇

Psychological Fact #1 : Reality = What you experience in your mind.

Reality is not objective.

This is why a man with a million dollars can say he's "depressed"

While a man with nothing in his pocket can say he's "happy"

and they can both be right at the same time.

A plastic surgeon noticed a pattern in his patients.

Even though a patient underwent transformative surgery and OBJECTIVELY looked more beautiful

Many came out of surgery and still saw an ugly person in the mirror.

How is this possible?

It all boils down to self belief.

Women sleep with Men who are Emotionally Stable.

Here are 7 Ways to Master your Emotions:-

// Thread //

1) Your Environment

Emotions are nothing but Energy in MOTION.

Surround yourself with Beauty, Positive Energy, and High Value people.

The environmental effect is Incredible.

2) Understand that Emotions are just feedback.

If you find yourself wanting to escape, or avoid going deep into a particular emotion, ask yourself this:

Can the emotion actually do any harm, or is it just a bad feeling?

Exactly. It's all just a story in your head.

3) State Control:

This one is so underrated.

Practice Physical and Mental anchors that put you into a badass state

-Meditate
-Music that amps you the fuck up.
-Power Poses; take up space
-Mental Pictures of you dominating.
-Hand Movements that let you know its game time.

4) Stop trying to get rid of them.

You're feeling good? Experience it fully.

You're feeling terrible? Feel it all over your body.

You will realize that they go away when you don't try to stop them.

I am a resident of Louisiana.
Tomorrow, I will drop hard copies of this letter in the mail, but I've emailed it to the GOP office and also to Senator Cassidy's office today.
*sorry for the run-ons and so forth.

Dear LAGOP:
Your tone deaf condemnation and censure of Senator Cassidy is misguided and alienating.
As it turns out, remarking that he is without a party places him in a privileged arena if our state’s Republicans are choosing to categorically deny the Senator his

elected responsibility to listen to evidence at a trial and cast a vote appropriate to his conscience.
Senator Cassidy has the ability to muster the courage it takes to be truly honorable, and extend the thought and reasoning it takes to make tough choices regardless of

subversive pressure being applied.
Unlike yourselves, Senator Cassidy has the capacity to read a room. The room he had to read most likely felt cold and lonely. The room he had to read most likely felt suffocating, and fraught with dubious outcomes for himself personally.

But he persisted with honor, and he persisted with valor. He deserves respect for that.
Perhaps reading that room is something for which you should take a look at doing a bit more closely. The Republican Party will no doubt see some changes in the next years.