MindHive Pty Ltd is pleased to announce the appointment of Bruce Muirhead as its Founding CEO. Announcing Bruce's appointment, MindHive Chairman Lindley Edwards said: "Bruce comes to the role after a long career as the CEO of Eidos Institute which, under Bruce's leadership successfully incubated Mindhive. We are excited to have Bruce decide to be part of the next growth horizons of Mindhive".
On Sunday 18th June MindHive's Founder and CEO, Bruce Muirhead, appeared on Radio National's Future Tense program as they discussed the problem of problem solving and some possible solutions. Within is a transcript of the interview.
It’s one thing for a CEO to urge their employees to be brave and bold in their pursuit of new practices – it’s another for a CEO to lead from the front and demonstrate their own willingness to embrace these opportunities. For this reason, organisational approaches and understanding of innovation are largely connected to the interpretation of what it means to be innovative by leadership within the organisation.
We have some very exciting news to share with you as we approach the Holiday Season. We’ve been funded by NAB Impact Investment Readiness Fund and The English Family Foundation to prepare MindHive for a $2.5M capital raising. Minter Ellison and BDO have joined forces by taking the lead on legals and financial modelling. We’re in final discussions with Australia’s top marketing and advertising agency. We’re very fortunate.
I’ve spent a good amount of time in this blog talking about how important culture is in creating an innovative public service. It’s not an easy thing to achieve, and people aren’t even entirely sure what the best approach is. Is it a top-down approach or grass roots initiative? Does it need hands on leadership or unit autonomy? External or internal coaching? It’s a big challenge, we know this and readers of this blog will know that its something we’re trying to help solve here at MindHive. I’m pleased to say there have been some positive shifts inside of government. Indications that these questions are slowly being resolved and that calls for celebration.
There are dozens of old sayings out there that question the wisdom of involving too many people in the decision-making process: “too many chefs in the kitchen”, “too many queens, not enough bees”. They’re sayings directed towards the idea that top-heavy management structures breed indecision, inefficiency and poorer quality decisions. This remains true in a number of circumstances, as I have highlighted before in this blog – but when it comes to customer/client based feedback we’re starting to see the limits of this logic.
Colombia has been in a state of civil war for more than 50 years. And this week they rejected peace. Why did this happen? Why would Colombians reject a deal that would see guerrillas hand in guns and give up drug trafficking? There aren’t any simple answers, but one of the issues appears to be complacency on the part of the Colombian government.
I’ve spent a fair amount of time over the last two years meeting with representatives from industry, government and the NFP and academic sectors to discuss problems. Problems that they face, that they fear they’ll face as well as those that we can’t imagine yet. A favourite question of mine to ask is “what keeps you up at night?” – an attempt to cut through the day-to-day minutiae of politics, academia or the 9 to 5 of business.
Should we trust the crowd with delicate national issues? Crowds may be wise when it comes to making tough, close calls, but there’s growing research showing they are actually worse than individuals at choosing between two options. When the choice is easy, in other words, the crowd can actually be pretty dumb.
The leather jacket as a symbol of individuality and belief got me thinking this week. It was Malcolm Turnbull’s first birthday as Prime Minister of Australia. And it just felt like it was a long time since he has worn his leather jacket. That may be because he auctioned it off after dropping a few kilos… Regardless of the cause – it got me thinking about leadership – and the lived experience of leadership.
Open and accountable government is more than just an ideal to aspire to, it’s the optimal working condition of our political system – and it’s achievable. Not only should all politicians and public bodies be actively working towards the advent of this reality, it’s in their interest to do so.
One of the areas I raised in last week's blog was around driverless cars and the perennial disruption that is Uber. I’d like to explore this example a little more in-depth and look at once such conversation that was undertaken regarding Uber in Queensland.
From next week we will be incentivising richer and more active discussion and problem solving. We will be introducing one of the most important advances in scholarly communication in the past ten years into MindHive. How will this integration benefit you?
So many industries have felt the pinch of digital transformation in the last few years. Freelance, mobile workforces have disrupted dozens of industries from the IT sector, to insurance, to taxis. So what does this mean for our public sector?
I’ve been long arguing that governments need to take more risk, fail fast and learn with regards to new technologies. We often forget something that should be central to our consideration – risk can be both good and bad and must be balanced.
What is the role of government? It’s a question to which the answer for many defines their political views. It is a question that embeds a tension in the heart of our political system. Are governments to act as custodial guarantors of certain rights and freedoms, or do we expect more?
Technology has the potential to create better policy processes and better policy better outcomes. But to realise this potential we need to see a shift in how we view technology. It is important that we stop seeing technology as the answer but as a facilitator of problem solving.
Crowdsourcing is developing into a mega-trend. It has begun an inexorable shift from the periphery to the mainstream of policy and problem solving methodology. We’ve heard countless times the virtue of crowds and the inherent advantages regarding access to knowledge, transparency, accountability and efficiency – yet all of these advantages rest on the simple assumption that the crowd is wise.
Crowd-funding has come on in remarkable strides since the advent of the internet. In some form or another this pooling of resources to invest, develop and create things for the advantage of the group has been part of human nature for thousands of years – its no new phenomenon. What is new however is the ease with which people can connect and the scale at which they can do so.
I recently travelled to the UK for the 2016 Horasis Global Meeting – this was an opportunity to engage in earnest discussion with people from all around the world in some of the challenges that democracy faces in the 21st century. By some chance it just so happened the event straddled the British referendum on the EU and I was fortunate to witness first hand the reaction to “Brexit”. The question gaining a lot of traction in present debate is “why?”. Why did a majority of Britons vote to leave the economic bloc that secures access to a single European market, freedom of labour and freedom of movement?
In the contemporary world, smart solutions like crowdsourcing have become a common method for solving some of the most pressing issues in a cariety of areas. One area that has felt the incredible impact of this phenomeon is health and environment policy.
Advanced manufacturing has been extolled as one of areas of potential growth with huge benefits for Australia in near to medium term – having been identified as one of the government’s five targeted sectors for growth in the economy. But what does advanced manufacturing mean for small to medium businesses?
One of the biggest challenges to democracy is around determining the shape of democracy and our political system in the future. Technology has always had an impact and the potential for to disrupt democracy and its institutions over the next period is massive. Therefore, how do we conceive democracy in the future being shaped? Are the “liberal pillars” of democracy still relevant and integral to the survival of democracy or are we seeing the emergence of a more polarised and radical democracy with an increased role for nationalism and religion?
As the Information Age continues to transform itself into the age of networked intelligence, crowdsourcing continues to bloom as one of the mega-trends of the future, uniting crowd with power and thereby, strengthening democracy. Crowdsourcing brings a new era in democracy with societies exploring open government and business approaches, and empowering the public to develop and improve innovative applications that aid in the betterment of civic life.