Many people operate in what we might call “If Only Land.” Every time they are part of a conversation, they are quick to bring up what they wish they had – a better job, a nicer home, more well‐behaved children. Companies and organizations aren't much different. If you could listen in on their meetings, you'd hear statements like:
It's not that these desires aren't real – the people and organization truly would like to be in a different position. But at the end of the conversation, nothing's changed, and most likely, the next time you talk, you'll hear the same sentiments over again.1
If we're honest with ourselves, it's not just other people in “If Only Land.” Most of us are at least frequent visitors. We've convinced ourselves that we can't really do anything until someone else acts to fill a need that we see as critical. It's not necessarily that we are pessimistic by nature (although that may be the case for some of us). It's really a manifestation of hierarchy thinking. We've discussed the ways in which hierarchies limit thinking and control behavior; another of their important functions is to allocate resources. Most organizations have a number of processes around this: budgeting, for example, allows leaders to provide funding to various units. “Stage‐gating,” in which groups present new project ideas in a prescribed fashion for approval to go forward, is another. More generally, we are accustomed to looking to someone who has more authority than we do to provide the things we need.
Skill 3 asks us to give up that perspective. In network thinking, there is no top or bottom. We may still need resources, but there is no one whose job it is to give them to us. We need first to take stock of the resources we already have. What do we, and the members of our network that have agreed to work with us, have to offer to address the question we're asking? This isn't just (perhaps overly) optimistic thinking; as you'll see, in a network environment, it is exceptionally practical. We have resources all around us that can be used in new and different ways.
We use the word assets to describe these resources. An asset is any resource that could potentially be put to work to help us move toward a particular outcome. When we hear the word asset, those of us who have taken an accounting course immediately think in terms of money – the side of the balance sheet that offsets liabilities. However, assets come in many different varieties, and go far beyond cash. If you limit your perspective to funding, you will have a hard time getting out of “If Only Land.”
In identifying assets, it can be helpful to think in terms of different categories. Depending on the challenge you're trying to address, specific categories may be more or less valuable. Here's one way to organize assets, with some examples in each area:
Physical and natural assets: These assets include things like real estate (land or buildings), meeting spaces, water rights, classrooms, large or specialized equipment, or high‐speed fiber. There are also cyber‐equivalents for some of these: virtual meeting rooms, for example.
Skill and knowledge assets: Again, the specifics depend on the context, but these could include skills in writing, graphic design, public speaking, budgeting, website construction, research, or cooking, among many others. Although related but slightly different, knowledge assets could include subject matter expertise as well as assets from which new knowledge and insights can be gained. These could include data sets and algorithms.
Social assets: Social assets are individual people or groups of people with whom someone in your network is personally acquainted. Professional organizations, an entrepreneur with a technology that complements your company's, the mayor, or a well‐known author are all examples of social assets.
Capital assets: While we don't want to limit our thinking to money, we certainly can't forget about it either. Capital assets are financial resources or assets that otherwise would be bought, such as editorial space in a newspaper for an opinion column, or administrative support that someone could donate to the cause.
As you think about what assets you or your group have, you might not be sure what category they belong in. That's okay – the categories are primarily meant to help you expand your thinking about the assets you have at your disposal. With these categories, we are simply asking you to think broadly and more horizontally.
There is a common thread to both Skill 2 (asking the right question) and this one (identifying our assets): both rest on the principle that we move in the direction of our conversations. In “If Only Land” we focus on our problems and what we do not have – it is a one‐way trip to the cul‐de‐sac of inaction. It may momentarily feel good to vent to one another, but ultimately it saps our energy and potential for change. Focusing on what we do have – our assets – helps us change our focus to the opportunities that lie before us. It is an appreciative approach. In community development, this perspective has changed the way work is done in struggling neighborhoods and communities. Instead of defining the challenge as a lack (not enough money, not enough two‐parent families, bad infrastructure, etc.), “asset‐based community development” challenges civic leaders to ask a different question. What could we do with the assets to which we already have access? What does our neighborhood already have? Perhaps we have a network of churches willing to work together on new afterschool programs, or a group of young people interested in starting their own businesses. Those assets become the starting point for the work of transformation. The skill of identifying assets keeps us focused on talking about opportunities, not problems.
This same mind‐set is also important for companies. For a new business venture, financial resources and a large staff aren't available, so entrepreneurs need to seek other approaches. Who do we know with the skills or connections that might help us move forward? In larger companies, corporate assets tend to be locked away within departmental and business unit budgets. There is often little thought of sharing these assets across organizational boundaries. Because of this dynamic, strategy has become moribund in many companies. We see strategy discussions that have degenerated into more routine budgeting exercises, all designed to protect what managers already have and to get a little more.
In the nonprofit world and government, the ignorance of our assets shows up in a different way. We've been in more than one situation where multiple nonprofits are working in the same geographic region, a city or even a neighborhood, and they don't know each other. As a result, they have no idea of the range of assets that exist across nonprofit organizations to deal with shared social problems. In one midsized Midwestern city, for example, we convened all the nonprofits that received funding from the city government. Oddly, it was the first time that they had sat in the same room together.
As you try to identify the assets that might be useful for whatever challenge it is you're addressing, you need to keep a few things in mind. First, direct influence is critical. If it's not your asset, it's (to be blunt) not an asset. While it may be wonderful that your Uncle Mortimer's ex‐wife's cousin is an expert in social media, that skill is probably not readily available to your group. Assets have to be either resources you personally own, or that you at least exert significant control over. For example, while you may not own a 3‐D printer yourself, if you're easily able to reserve time on one where you work, then that is an asset that you can legitimately contribute.
Second, each person makes autonomous decisions about sharing assets. Sometimes a member just doesn't want to make an asset available for whatever reason. A prominent member of the community, for example, may be tired of being asked to be introduced to a city official. A professional photographer has decided “no more” to any requests for pro bono services. Those decisions may be temporary ones or more permanent, but either way, they are decisions that need to be respected.
Finally, true assets are actionable – that is, we can describe them in a way that makes it clear how we might use them. In working on developing a new technology, someone may tell us, “I know lots of people who have experience with testing new products.” Is this a useful “social” asset? We can't tell – asking more questions will help us figure it out: What kinds of products? In which markets? Who are the specific people that the person knows well that might be approached?
Beyond these guidelines, keep an open mind about whether something is really an asset – you don't need to know exactly how it could be used to address a challenge. As long as there's a plausible case to be made that it might be relevant, keep it in mind as a potential resource to take advantage of.
Some people think they have no assets. Perhaps they aren't in a position of authority in the organization, or they're a high school student or retired person. If you simply ask them “What are your assets?” they may reply “Nothing,” or, “I'm not even sure why I'm here.” We can confidently say from years of experience that everyone has assets, and often the most valuable assets are the ones that no one thought of at first. Many assets are hidden – sometimes there is no one else in the group with any idea that the person has that asset. Some of our assets are hidden even from ourselves – it takes another person to draw them out and identify the value they can have to the group.
Common hidden assets are hobbies, skills, or interests someone has pursued independently over the years. One of our favorite examples is from a project Ed worked on. A group was thinking about ways to address a common problem: how to develop a workforce with the skills for twenty‐first‐century manufacturing. They discussed what assets they had to develop some kind of initiative. One member of the group somewhat reluctantly shared that she was interested in both manufacturing and sustainability. A little gentle prodding revealed that she also had experience in curriculum design. That conversation led to the first national “green collar” certification of manufacturing workers. The group was so engaged by her hidden assets that they rallied around to get this new program started.
If you've ever been part of an improvisation class or workshop, you may be familiar with the phrase, “Bring a brick, not a cathedral.” In improv, the phrase means that each person adds only a few actions or lines to move the plot forward – they don't have to finish the whole “story.” For our purposes, the phrase reminds us that no one has to have a fully formed concept for a new opportunity, initiative, or project – in fact, it's usually better when we don't have a complete idea in mind. We start from an open‐minded posture, in which each person can say, “This is what I have – a few bricks.” What can be built from them will emerge as we work together.
You may feel as the assets you and your colleagues can contribute to an adaptive challenge are just not sufficient – it seems like quite a meager set of resources in the face of a big issue. This is in some ways true – you don't have everything you need (remember, that's the very nature of an adaptive challenge, as opposed to a technical one). However, the flip side of this disadvantage is a powerful truth: because you are only working with what you have, you can start work right now. You don't need permission. You don't have to wait for more funding or people or legislation. You are free to move ahead. As you'll see, something almost magical happens when you seize the opportunities available to you. Agile leaders understand this paradox of scarcity and opportunity, and they move forward with confidence.
Using this skill can be as simple as taking out a sheet of paper or a set of sticky notes and asking yourself and the other people with whom you are working to list assets. Use the four categories to spur your thinking – in which categories are you “asset‐rich”? Where might you be missing some assets? Ask questions that might unearth those hidden assets that you did not even know were there.
Each of the people in your group will bring their own set of assets. Sometimes they are assets that are really truly their own (for example, someone is a graphic designer), and sometimes they are assets that they can exert control over (there's video equipment at their school that they could check out to use). If you know each other well, you can prod a bit to remind one another of assets they might have left out – as in the example of the team member interested in sustainability. However, remember that members of your group have autonomy – they can decide whether to make the asset available to others. Maybe they are tired of always being asked to design the website – or they don't yet trust the group enough to invest their time in this way. As you think about what assets your network has, keep your focus on what you can reasonably expect to control that has been made available.
This isn't to say that you should list any and every asset. Sometimes an asset truly has no value to a network: a collection of stuffed animals for a group designing a new business process, say. If it seems like people's contributions aren't quite hitting the mark, revisit your framing question, if you have one (if you don't, you might consider taking a time‐out to develop one). Assets should have some possible connection to the challenge you're working on – to your framing question – even if you can't quite see what the connection would be. When in doubt, err on the side of inclusion.
Even so, after you've finished making your inventory, you may feel like your list is pretty short. Don't panic – part of the genius of networks is that the set of available assets is not static. Every new person that comes into the network brings new assets with them. Every boundary spanner in your network can help you identify other networks that can make needed assets available. Every cautious pragmatist that comes on board may decide that they do, in fact, trust the group enough to cash in on that favor someone owes them. Keep asking yourself (and others) what new assets you have that you might be willing to share. The assets you have to work with will grow as you work.
Agile leaders help surface potential that the group didn't know existed by focusing on assets. They focus a network on what can be done, rather than wallowing in its problems or waiting for someone else to act. Even when the resources seem inadequate, knowing what they are means that the group can start building with those bricks, thinking creatively about using them to create new opportunities.