Week Nine - Video Debrief of Team MA

When power leads man toward arrogance, poetry reminds him of his limitations. When power narrows the area of man's concern, poetry reminds him of the richness and diversity of existence. When power corrupts, poetry cleanses.

-       John F. Kennedy

This week we had the opportunity to reflect upon our results provided by Tom and Rachel from NextSteps Research; it was a very powerful and moving exploration, and I learned a great deal about my inward drive towards success and how much of it stems around perfectionism and my need for recognition.

In the case of who my characteristics would have fit in with the culture and makeup of the NeXT startup team, I feel like it would be a mixed bag.

For example, although I enjoy setting and accomplishing ambitious goals that “…thrive on the use of metrics…” to show myself and others what I am working towards achieving (NextSteps Research, 2015), this particular aspect would have fit in well with NeXT. Their goal to build and produce an exemplary affordable computer was the definition of ambition back in the late 1970’s. Additionally, because I also scored high on the innovation scale, it would be an excellent complement to the team at NeXT, as my key performance attributes identified by Tom and Rachel were related to “…problems solving, process creativity, and inventiveness…” which are essential elements when leading a team on a large scale (NextSteps Research, 2015). These inclinations would work hand-in-hand with Jobs and the rest of the team.

Where I begin to doubt a good fit would be during the company retreats and brainstorming sessions take a turn to the limitations Jobs essentially failed to acknowledge, such as time and resource constraints. I believe that the “cumulative efforts” that made Jobs and the team great is just from that, “built from the heart” but lacked the reality that there are factors no matter how hard we work, that are just beyond our control. Jobs’s arrogance seemed to give the impression that we could overcome everything, and became “overbearing” with his ideologies and requirements of his team. This would be an area of concern for me working in these conditions; I have a propensity to want to be heard and validated, and my ideas and efforts given consideration. Job’s doesn’t appear to be concerned with personal aspects of management and leadership; he is focused on the product, and not the people creating the product.

I would enjoy how Job’s constantly pushes each of his team challenging beyond the “norm” – he does a great job keeping the team focused on the goal, and I enjoy that drive and someone that can constantly “reiterate” that vision. However, he constantly interrupts the team overriding their concerns and challenges by only reiterating his priorities, and crates “reality distortion” – this could serve to be problematic for my personality and propensities to have freedom to explore and set my own goals. As my profile indicates, in the areas associated with independence, my scoring showed exactly what I enjoy; freedom to do, act, and think, while seeking consultation and given parameters and without explicit structure and rules. Job’s didn’t function this way; he wanted to be involved and heard on everything that touched the product and his thought process took priority over everyone else’s limiting the amount of freedom each departmental team had access to explore.

Additionally, although I tend to have conservative goal ambitions towards the future, I love the interaction and uncertainty that my dynamically changing environment offers. Because of the dynamics I work under, I appreciate reflection and interaction, but once I have collected the vital information to make a decision, I make it and move on. Job’s and the culture of NeXT by the time they reached six months of existence, his speech delivery during the second retreat reminded me of my own worst enemy – hearing how hard the team has worked and killed themselves to produce the end result that is good, “just not good enough” would be such a blow to my esteem. He gives the impression that he is incredibly judgmental and that the efforts and sacrifices made before are now entirely irrelevant. There is a great deal of frustration experienced from the team; they are unable to clearly articulate their needs. Every department appears to be on an island of one – there doesn’t appear cohesion, collaboration, or compassion between one another. This doesn’t fit my results, my personality, or my hierarchy of needs.

Where I see a good match is how they itemize their spending habits; I know how to nickel and dime and find ways to remove extraneous spending! That is one area that I would consider my forte, and therefore, I could have offered review and analysis to assist the team in cost reduction suggestions. However, they were more concerned looking for the low-hanging fruit spending which didn’t appear to be the underlying problem. This would have been a great match for me; this ties back to my ability to take what I am given, and make it better each time I evaluate or encounter it. As Tom put it, I am an “…excellent tweaker…” and this justifies my inclination to be independent and be a problem solver, not a problem identifier (NextSteps Research, 2015).

Although I actually have a great deal of respect for Jobs and his contributions to our generations, I don’t find that NeXT happens to be the perfect fit of challenge, freedom, personal balance, and appropriate mix of need related to the group dynamics in which I crave. I love that they are trying to do the impossible, that part is certainly right up my alley. But that only satisfies one part of the myriad of sides to my personality! I need diversity, I crave change in challenges, and I most likely do better when faced with several projects, instead of being compartmentalized into one area. NeXT’s adventure, while seemingly interesting, just wouldn’t be the best fit for the “me” that I am today!

Until we blog again!

Reference

NextSteps Research. (2015). Management Assessment Profile. Alexandria: NextSteps Research.

Week Eight - Reflective Analysis

Personality is an unbroken series of successful gestures.

-       F. Scott Fitzgerald

This is one of those bitter-sweet times…we are almost at the end of our journey for 632, which I am glad to be down to one class soon, but I am so sad that the learning on the subject will formally end. This week, we had the opportunity to complete some reflective analysis. One of my favorite things is the MBTI personality indicator testing. I jumped at the chance to take the one made available on the HumanMetrics website this afternoon.

My results really haven’t changed much over the coursework of MSLD experiences; I am still seen as an “ENJF” which demonstrated that 47% of my personality is based upon extroversion interactions, 9% was based upon intuition, 28% based on my feelings of a person or situation, and 3% based on judgment (Humanmetrics, Inc., 2015). Overall, I have a preference for extroversion, versus introversion, which anyone who knows me, knows this was not a surprise. It also indicated that I have a “…slight preference of Intuition over Sensing” (Humanmetrics, Inc., 2015) and that I have a moderate inclination of feeling over thinking. This was the one area that surprised me more than the others; I do a great deal of decision based analytical thinking, or so I thought, over doing so based on feeling. That is one small example of what I love about taking this kind of time for reflection, which is something I rarely have the opportunity to do.

I think on an annual basis, one thing that I can do is actually make the time to reflect upon not only my leadership style and preferences, but also seek out what areas my team would like me to develop more inclinations towards; that way I am not only actively seeking out 360-degree feedback, but also letting others know that I care about their views and how I impact them on a daily basis. Leadership requires that we are constantly rebalancing our viewpoints, as well as refocusing our frames.

For example, I consider my natural style of leadership to be somewhat a more participative style. I do my best to ask for the input of others to help myself and the team generate a thorough decision making process. In my 632 class, I recently discovered that I like the idea of the portfolio perspective when making decisions. This is because I am analytical in nature, and this method allows for the exploration of “…sets of options…and evaluate the net result of…combinations…” (Hoch et al., 2001, p. 150) rather than only reviewing one option at a time.

By learning to take the best from both worlds, it allows leaders to find the right combination, not the right answer from a group of choices. The challenges I see with this option is that this methodology can be time consuming and never ending; not all decisions have ample time for review, nor can all information be reviewed to find the optimal answer, and the choices may then become an endless wish list. This also reminds me of the need to speak the frame language of others. By learning to strike a chord with the other members needs, I can “align” my message with the frame necessary to gain critical buy-in (Hoch et al., 2001, p. 153).

All in all, I couldn’t be happier to be at the end of the course work for purely selfish reasons, but reflection is one of the most valuable tools I have learned to apply in my personal and professional life going forward. The trick is really going to be to make the conscious effort to carve out dedicated time in which to do so.

Until we blog again!

Reference

Hoch, S. J., Kunreuther, H. C., & Gunther, R. E. (2001). Wharton on Making Decisions. Danvers: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Humanmetrics, Inc. (2015). Humanmetrics Jung Typology Test™. Retrieved December 08, 2015, from Humanmetrics.com: http://www.humanmetrics.com/hr/jtypesresult.aspx?EI=47&SN=-9&TF=-28&JP=3

Week Seven - The Future of OD

Life is divided into three terms - that which was, which is, and which will be. Let us learn from the past to profit by the present, and from the present, to live better in the future.

-       William Wordsworth

This week I think I have finally realized that I am ready to start living my life, not just merely surviving. It’s too short and I overcomplicate too much, but that is typical due to the frame in which I see others in juxtaposition to where I see myself.

This week we reviewed various ways in which OD is often scrutinized; some see it as an effective way to managing change, while others deem it as an irrelevant group of impractical ideas supported by a mere fad.  The future of OD lies in our ability to successfully send the consistent message that change is going to happen regardless of what we do, or do not do; those whom are armed with a variety of tools and processes stand a greater chance in success of becoming a reconfigurable organization that takes change in stride and provides the tools, guidance, leadership and resources our organizations need to remain relevant in the future (Brown, 2011, p. 420). Those who deem it just mushy psychobabble most likely will attempt to remain authoritarian, bureaucratic, and rigid reactive organizations that ignore the stability that OD has to offer our leaders and our teams, subsequently leading them to miss out on the ability to retain a workforce of innovative thinkers and an empowered stabilized teams working in unison and harmony.

As with any field, there is going to be varied opinions. I can see how people tend to gravitate towards sciences that are provable and concrete; whereas OD tends to constantly be an emerging science, where developments and new approaches are constantly being added and subtracted as new information becomes available, and therefore is in constant renewal and evolution (Brown, 2011, p. 425). OD is subject to the change in organizational climates, and therefore requires more latitude than say a clinical trial of a cancer drug. With the drug, it either stops the cancer from spreading, or it doesn’t; with OD we are constantly being thrust towards a “…world that is rapidly changing and that our…” organizations “…must follow suit” (Brown, 2011, p. 425). It is the equivalent of thinking one type of cancer drug can cure all types of cancer…it is just not realistic.

Where I see the largest challenge for the future of OD is embedded in our westernized ways; our culture values speed. Mostly, OD, in order for it to be effective, takes place over a period of time using multiple phases, integrations, and interventions. Today’s leaders don’t tend to have a great deal of spare time to react, implement, and reflect. We lack the ability and the luxury of having a balanced vision, leading to myopia and thinking on the fly. We tend to forget that leaders do make mistakes, and often times unknowingly make decisions that do in fact get the job done, but ultimately conditions us to do so in waves of adrenaline, emotions, and fear of missed opportunities (Hoch, Kunreuther, & Gunther, 2001, p. 93).

I see the future of OD in people like myself; it is not so much about the future of the discipline, but in more so in the ways like people who study it will keep the fire alive by applying the practical applications in everyday life situations. What students of OD have the joy in knowing is that we remember we don’t know everything! Therefore, over the past two semesters, I have been building a lifelong toolkit to pull from that can be applied not only in my professional life, but my personal one as well. The fact that there is a formal education accessible in OD tells me this isn’t something that is a fly-by-night science. Just because our objectives may seem like “moving targets” doesn’t make that a reality to those embedded in the foundation of our work (Brown, 2011, p. 426). I would bet money that most leaders use some form of OD application in everyday life and never would realize it; I can’t prove that I love my husband, or my dogs, or even my job. Love isn’t seen as a tangible item to some people. That doesn’t mean we cannot find pragmatic ways in which to prove that OD works; when is the last time being innovative like Steve Jobs didn’t work? How many companies have you known that said areas such as employee empowerment, trust, reengineering what doesn’t work, and understanding what change and conflict can do to the morale of the organization, your employees, and your future was for the birds and lead to catastrophic consequences?

Although we never know what the future holds for any of us, “Organization development has been…a process…to increase organization effectiveness by integrating the needs of the individual members for growth and development with the organization’s goals” (Brown, 2011, p. 429); if you ask me, OD is something that we simply don’t have enough visibility in, and programs such as this will likely gain it momentum in the future.

Until we blog again!

References

Brown, D. R. (2011). An Experiential Approach to Organizational Development, Eighth Edition. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

Hoch, S. J., Kunreuther, H. C., & Gunther, R. E. (2001). Wharton on Making Decisions. Danvers: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Week Three - Reflections on Decision Making

Permanence, perseverance and persistence in spite of all obstacles, discouragements, and impossibilities: It is this, that in all things distinguishes the strong soul from the weak.

-          Thomas Carlyle

Oh, how I do love weeks like this; the pain of ripping off Band-Aids is so insignificant in comparison to what you get to see about ourselves in the end reflection before us. Out of the frying pan and into the fire was an understatement, but I will survive…and I realize now how much I still have to learn about relationships with other professionals and how I can learn to rationally think about multiple perspectives within a limited time frame. I actually think I was overcomplicating the entire process, when I could just simply ask myself or someone else what they would do or consider in my shoes.  

Our discussions this week focused on how we frame things; are we framing them in the right light, in a myopic nature, are we framing the material presented as a risk or opportunity purely for our own gain, or forgetting to look through the frames of others? As our reading pointed out this week, "Being unaware of our frames poses an enormous risk" (Hoch, Kunreuther, & Gunther, 2001, p. 125). Some of the dangers encountered include the oversimplification of information, reinforcement of ego and overconfidence, as well as the limited ability for self-correction (Hoch et al, 2001, p. 125). Upon reflection of this week, I was definitely guilty of oversimplifying information and in my discussions with others. Although the results were not catastrophic, I do feel the weight of the world on my shoulders. I need need need to learn that times of crisis do not excuse lack of consistent rational thinking and learning to trust the thought process of others. The chapter for the week regarding frame blindness couldn’t have come at a better time.

Three pertinent ways in which we can avoid frame blindness include understanding the frames of others, retraining my focus to incorporate multiple frames, identify inadequate frames, and the use of the multiple frame technique.

By learning to refocus our frames towards the frames of various stakeholders, we are able to identify the potential for conflict and myopia. Recently to stifle a patient complaint, I asked what I could do to assist one of our directors. I was then asked us to write-off their balance and "just make them go away". However, because they were only focused on making the patient happy, they failed to realize that action would be a compliance violation butting us as risk not only for an audit, but to lose future revenues by voiding our contract with the insurance company. How the frame could change in the future is by asking additional questions prior to just getting down to the requested action. That way I have enough information and time to formulate a mutually beneficial and compliance appropriate response that will still appease all aspects of the business and patient satisfaction needs. The risk to my initial question only caused additional frustration, but taught me that reframing my question or presentation of solutions can be critical to others thought process and expectations of my actions.

Another instance where I can avoid a frame trap would be making the time to identify inadequate frames. Often due to time and labor constraints, I do not have the time to reflect upon the decisions that I make; I only get feedback if the same issue with a patient, physician, or claim reemerges. Therefore, by teaching myself to think beyond "does your current frame get the job done" is going to save time in the long run and expand my knowledge base so that it becomes fluent and not regurgitation (Hoch et al, 2001, p. 132). I need to pause and ask myself if I have tested my frame ideas with an outside objective party, or have I considered key stakeholders during my information gathering and filtering? In doing this reflection, I would be able to identify if my current frame is relevant and also evaluate and challenge some of the "...deeper assumptions that underlie..." my frame (Hoch et al, 2001, p. 133). This technique would have been helpful during the recent departure of a key executive this week. Although I like learning by being thrown into the fire, by finding the first solution that worked and seemed to have stuck while trying to identify areas of missed revenues, I may have overlooked a $356,000 account. One person that was helping during the month end process, a very knowledgeable peer, pitched in and hit the ground running with reports. We were desperate to prepare the reports to see where our P&L stood. This sounded great in theory because the person assisting is a genius and I wouldn't have to go over their work; I had my own fires to put out and new work assignments to be completed. More importantly on my list was to be able to learn from their valuable presence while here helping our team. However, once I changed my frame after the hustle was low enough for me to think, I went back to review the accounts, just as I would every other month. What I found was they overlooked and made false assumptions about the account. The next challenge was finding a way to question about their methodology and logic to pass over the revenue impact I could clearly see was available to us. If I had stuck with only the frame of do whatever to get the job done, I would have ignored the frame that is most important to me, which is to get it right and never overlook the chance to learn something new from someone. In this case, I should remember that what I always do which has worked over time may just get me by...but not make the impact and consistent splash I would like to be known for and relied upon with my peers. Shifting frames in the slightest manner helped us save negative month end impacts.

Lastly, by using multiple frames, it welcomes the views and participation of others. Our business, and the success of leaders, is highly dependent on the relationships we build with one another. By getting the views of others, it not only builds rapport, but also sheds light on areas that we only dream to know about and understand. By using multiple frames, it can encourage and empower others to share their expertise, prior experience, as well as challenge my limited thought on the subject matter. For example, during this week, because of our executive upheaval, I naturally felt that my area of the month end process would be most dramatically impacted, as we worked in tandem to accomplish the entire process. However, in thinking this, I also neglected to acknowledge the decisions and guidance that needed to be given to peripheral departments in need of support. When I started having a myriad of front-line people asking questions I had no idea about, it then would have dawned on me how selfish I was to think I would be the only one sinking or swimming without our leader. Using multiple frames sheds light on additional processes, people, and areas that are greatly interdependent on one another and how asking for expert advice is not a sign of weakness. I felt like it was expected I had all the answers; I know enough to get by, but I don't know everything! Now that I realize how much I do not know, I am excited about the opportunity I am going to have to learn from others about their areas and roles within our organization. This will help me, and my relationships flourish...but more importantly, continue to build my larger network of formal and informal support staff experts.

Another great week in the books can't wait to see what is around the next corner!

 Until we blog again!

Reference

Hoch, S. J., Kunreuther, H. C., & Gunther, R. E. (2001). Wharton On Making Decisions. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.