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.
No comments:
Post a Comment