On the need to be much more precise about the capabilities that we need to achieve the things we strive for – a designerly mentor’s view

By Dr Robert O’Toole

I’ve worked for over 20 years as a mentor in the overlapping fields of technology, education, research, and the creative industries. I work to help mentees to :

• be clear about their current and future goals (which may involve identifying new goals or modifying existing goals);
• appreciate their own repertoire of capabilities, what they make possible, and how they constrain their potential;
• and then to identify what they need to do to develop those capabilities, and apply them so as to achieve their goals, or to enable new previously unimagined goals.

This sounds like a linear process, but it rarely is. Focussing on capabilities often causes us to reframe goals, especially as we get more imaginative about future capabilities that might become possible with technological advances. We move back and forth between the different foci.

I do this using a designerly approach, that is to say, using the methods and concepts of professional designers. Our designing focusses on creating good capabilities for people. Mentoring is about facilitating the mentee’s own design process: describing their repertoire of capabilities; analysing and critically evaluating their capabilities; and creatively responding by developing their repertoire further (and sometimes inventing entirely new ways of doing things). It can also be about refining or changing their goals – it’s always important to keep this in mind, so that we don’t waste time trying to solve the wrong problems.

The first step is to clearly and consisely describe capabilities. The concept of “capability” is a little complex, and often used vaguely. So I try to be more precise and clear about it. Here’s my definition:

A capability is the ability to reliably undertake certain actions and to achieve goals using specific resources, tools and techniques, and meeting desired standards. We describe capabilities using statements of the form: doing X using Y with Z qualities.

Here’s a real example:

I can meet with people, discuss a topic, make decisions, and make a plan, in a Teams channel (synchronously in a video based meeting, and asynchronously in text posts), and feel comfortable that everyone is included in the discussion, that things are clearly stated, and that we are confident in the process.

This specifies a set of actions and goals (meeting, discussing, decision making, planning), the digital tools and techniques used (Teams and its features), and the qualities that we aim for in the design and implementation of the capability (comfortable, inclusive, clear, confident). Note that skills, knowledge, resources, and tools are all essential ingredients. We can go into more detail, describing the recipe for using these ingredients in a series of actions and interactions. That more granular level of detail is required when thinking about improving a capability. There are many useful design methods we can use for exploring the detail. But for the purposes of reflecting on our repertoire of capabilities, we want to stay at a fairly high level.

In this case it is also a shared capability – all of the participants need to be able to operate and cooperate in the right ways for it to work. This introduces a complexity – whose capability is it? Can I easilliy use the same capability with other people? Or am I dependent on specific people? Similarly, could I do this without access to my institution’s Teams account? Does the capabilty in part belong to the institution? Microsoft? It can be really important to think about these questions. For example, if a PhD student develops their capabilities using one university’s systems, moves to a different university, and has to use different systems, will that degrade their capabilities? Will that be a problem? This can, to some extent, be addressed through a capability to adapt capabilities to different contexts. I call this the “adaptability capability”.

There is also another implicit capability in operation, a kind of meta-capability: to select the right capabilities for our specific purposes. I call this meta-capability the “select-from-our-repertoire capability.” Problems often occur when people misapply a capability, for example using an email-based approach to document collaboration (use Teams, not email).

In designing (and the mentoring process), we evaluate the capability by considering: if the actions and goals are what we need to do; if the qualities we are aiming for are the right ones; and if the tools and techniques are suited to achieving our goals with those qualities. What if Teams is too confusing for some people, and we can’t then ensure that we are all clear about the decision making process? We might then refine the capability, or extend our capabilities to achieve our goals. This is another type of meta-capability, call it the “reflect, adapt, and innovate capability.”

Finally, through reflecting, adapting, and innovating our repertoire of capabilities, sometimes we discover/invent new previously unimagined goals. We could call this our “re-visionary capabilty.” For example, I often introduce people to the potential of VR and AR headsets and experiences. Sometimes they see in this a new way to achieve existing goals, sometimes they doscover entirely new goals for themselves.

Where to start?

1. Identify and appreciate capabilities that are good for what you are trying to achieve now, and then identify what might be improved and where there are gaps to be filled. It can be good to focus first on your favourite capabilities – things that work well for you, and why you like them (what “design virtues” do they demonstrate? e.g. are they productive, clear, simple, fast etc.). And then explore example capabilities from a list of ones that might be relevant to the kind of work you do. What do you struggle with? What do you not do but should do?
   
2. Then focus on capabilities that should be good for what you want to achieve in the near future, considering how you can make sure you have those capabilities in your repertoire.
   
3. And finally, capabilities that might be good for what you want to achieve in the more distant future, and how you can work towards having those capabilities.

My next task is to turn this into an online process that anyone can engage in any time without immediate feedback from me.