A630.9.4.RB_HansardCarey

In the video, Mr. Schmidt asserts that you can build a culture based on the kind of people you hire. I think this is an accurate statement. If you surround yourself with capable, positive people, your organization runs smoothly. You are there to provide overall guidance and assist when necessary, but most of the time, your employees can handle things on their own. Patel (2013) says that hiring just one wrong person can send your entire culture and organization into a spin. To me, this is akin to having a classroom full of motivated, intelligent students and then, in walks the behavior problem and the entire mood and atmosphere of your classroom changes for the worse. Patel (2013) suggests that there are certain things you do and certain traits to look for when hiring employees. He says to hire people that are smarter than you. He is not necessarily referring to overall intelligence, but rather specific knowledge about the area that you are hiring for. Obviously, if I am looking for a trainer or web designer, I do not want someone who has little experience in these areas and is looking to me to help them grow and learn. (although the organization will help them grow and learn…but they need to be smart in this area from the beginning) Second, Patel (2013) says that you should hire people that are hungry. People who are already successful and are just bouncing from one big title to another are not as likely to get their hands dirty and do whatever it takes to make your organization successful. That is not always true, but it makes sense. Just by doing these two things, you set the foundation for a desirable  culture like that of Google.

I believe that the people working with me fall into the “right people” category with the exception of a scarce few. Those who do not fit in quickly find they are being escorted to the door. Everyone I work with knows his/her job well and has a positive, adaptive attitude. Because of that, it is always scary to hire a new person. I would be very interested to hear your thoughts on the hiring process because people can look great on paper and they can answer the questions you ask all day long, but how do you really know that a particular individual will fit into the culture of your organization?

It takes a great amount of courage as a leader to operate under the premise that if you hire the right people, they will not need you. Turning over control of your business to others definitely requires a high level of trust in those that work for you. Some leaders are micromanagers and are unable to fathom an environment like this; however, employees would love it. Nobody likes someone hovering over her all the time telling her how to do her job and then making sure she does it the way the manager wants.

This approach will not work for everyone. During the hiring process, it is essential that the leader be able to weed out those who will not fit into the desired environment. Yet it is equally important to hire competent and knowledgeable employees. Finally, in the end, it is leadership who sets the tone for a successful organization and an effective culture. Besson (n.d.) provides five strategies a leader can use that are likely to create a desirable culture: articulate a clear mission and walk the talk; build a strategic plan that everyone understands and stands behind; communicate with your employees; be flexible; and have fun. While these strategies cannot guarantee success, they have certainly been proven to lead to it more often than not.

As for takeaways, this chapter has made me think more critically about the hiring process in general as well as the empowerment of employees. I would like to learn more about hiring employees. I have been asked to sit on several hiring committees since I have been at WW and the questions seem random and it generally seems as though most prospective hires answer the questions suitably. So how can you be sure you are hiring the right person?

As an employee, I know that I have the knowledge to do my job well and appreciate the fact that management will let me do that for the most part. However, when she does look over my shoulder and micromanage, I feel resentful and have learned that that is not the type of manager I would like to be. If I surround myself with the right people, I do not have to be.

References:

Besson, T. (n.d.). Keys to a great corporate culture:improving . Retrieved from http://www.careercast.com/career-news/keys-great-corporate-culture-improving-employee-engagement

Patel, N. (2013, April 15). How to hire: 6 traits every employee must have. Retrieved from http://www.quicksprout.com/2013/04/15/how-to-hire-6-traits-every-employee-should-have/

Schmidt, E. (Performer). (2011, May ). Eric Schmidt on business culture technology and social issues [Web Video]. Retrieved from http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/strategy/eric_schmidt_on_business_culture_technology_and_social_issues

A630.8.4.RB_HansardCarey

In my opinion, yes, Tom Wujec has a point in his comparison of kindergarteners and business students. Kindergarteners go with the flow more so than adults. While kids may not have the emotional ability to deal with some of the conflict that comes with group work, they also do not have the preconceived idea about someone being higher on the totem pole than they are. In other words, they are all equal in ability in each other’s minds. Their skills may differ according to the task, but the overall group hierarchy remains flat.

Executive assistants perform better than the CEOs because the CEOs are usually the overseers of the project, but the administrative assistants are often the ones who are coordinating the project and making everything come together when it is supposed to. Duncan (2011) claims that administrative assistants have the ability to see what is going to happen before it happens, create a smooth environment for their bosses, and are able to manage temperaments and culture very well. So the CEOs are able to zoom out and see the big picture but when it comes to zooming in on the details of the project, they are not as well equipped to deal with the details as their assistants.  An example of this is right in front of me in my own organization. The CTO is great at delegating and assigning responsibilities to others. She knows what she wants to happen (the vision) and can articulate it to those around her; however, when it comes down to actually doing the work, someone else is usually responsible for that. This is not to say that she could not do it if she had to, but I certainly think that she surrounds herself with knowledgeable, skillful people and trusts that they will handle the process. The coupling of her visions and her employees’ attention to detail makes for a successful department.

Recently, at the Worldwide Conference, we were tasked with something like what is depicted in the video. It was interesting to me to watch the team dynamic at our table. None of us knew each other (which was supposed to be the point of the exercise…getting to know people better) and nobody really stood out as a leader. Eventually, after we sat there all thinking for several minutes, one of the Campus Directors and I stepped up and began to work on the project. There were 2 faculty members who did not do anything to help us build our towers and we never did get to the point where we were all working together as a team or assigning roles to one another. I wondered afterward if we had had more time, would we have been a more cohesive and well-rounded team. We did get our M&Ms to stay put on the top of our tower, but we did not have the highest tower.

If I were leading a similar exercise, I would definitely direct the group to assign tasks to members of the group. Some of the process intervention skills that I think would work well in this situation would be: clarifying, synthesizing, observing, and proving feedback (Blessing, n.d.). The first thing that should be done for the group is clarify the task ensuring that each group member understands what need to be done and the steps to take to accomplish the goal. Synthesizing happens once the group has had a chance to add their own ideas on the process of building the tower. The list can be complied and members assigned a part in the building process. The observer for the group can provide feedback about what is working and what is not so that the team can adapt and adjust along the way. Had we taken the time to do this at the conference, I believe that the entire group would have been involved and the task would have been accomplished faster and more accurately.

As for a takeaway, I have never considered actually assigning roles to people on a team. I have never been on a team where that happens. However, I definitely see the benefit of it since most of the work I do involves some kind of teamwork. In the future, should I find myself as the leader of the team, I would like to try to assign tasks and roles to my teammates to see if it helps achieve  goals in a more effectively.

References:

Blessing, M. (n.d.). Types of process intervention skills. Retrieved from http://www.ehow.com/info_8007762_types-process-intervention-skills.html

Duncan, M. (2011, May). The case for executive assistants. Harvard Business Review, Retrieved from http://hbr.org/2011/05/the-case-for-executive-assistants

Wujec, T. (Performer). (2010, February ). Build a tower, build a team [Web Video]. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/tom_wujec_build_a_tower.html

A630.7.4.RB_HansardCarey

The thought of rewarding people for striving for excellence and making a difference in their companies is appealing to most. However, the idea of punishing those who come to work every day, do their jobs well, and help the company stay afloat does not seem to make sense. Mr. Bethune implemented a reward system when his company, Continental Airlines, met or exceeded a predetermined goal for on-time flights. This strategy promotes teamwork by encouraging everyone to come together to make the company better. This is a more effective strategy than the one Mr. Bonsignore alludes to. It would be one thing if by punishment Mr. Bonsignore means that those who do not “shine” will not be rewarded. People may decide that they like coming to work and doing what they do well every day without making any extra effort. This is a conscious decision not to go for a bonus. These employees do not need to stand out but they are doing what they need to do every day and are otherwise great employees. If they will keep their jobs and just not get whatever bonus or reward is being offered, this could work. People in this situation get to decide their own fate by either going the extra mile or simply continuing to do their daily jobs.

 It is a completely different situation if by punishment he means that employees not going above and beyond will be fired, demoted, or whatever else the company decides will be appropriate. Negative motivation like this is not really motivating. If there are employees who are not adapting to change, then yes, they need to be dealt with accordingly, but in this scenario, it is difficult to determine what the punishment would be and what exactly they would have to do to be punished. Punishment of these individuals would have a detrimental effect to the company.

One of the barriers that stands out to me is that there has been a lot of change at Honeywell and employees are already in a state of uncertainty. The threat of punishment may do more harm than good in a situation like this. As Mackay (2013) points out, “Downsizings, reorganizations, new products and revamped org charts can take their toll. Employees may feel they don’t have it in them to go through another major overhaul”.  Employees can grow tired of the thought of more change and because of that, management needs to ensure that the need for any changes is clearly communicated to them and that they are included in the future change efforts.

I think that management needs to create a positive spin on changes to unite the processes of both organizations. Communication to employees is essential explaining the changes, why they are necessary, and how they will affect the employees. Asking the employees for their input in the changes will also be key in the success of creating a new, common culture. Cultural change does not happen overnight but a strong consistent message will certainly go a long way toward making the change smoother and easier to accept.

An immediate takeaway from this article is that employees matter more than anything else. As a CEO you can have all the great ideas in the world but if you don’t have the people to make it happen for you, they remain just great ideas. Changing a company’s culture is a monumental task, but as Reh (n.d.) points out, “Companies with an adaptive culture that is aligned to their business goals routinely outperform their competitors”. With this in mind, it will be vital for me as a leader to stay in touch with the culture of my organization and ensure that I listen to employees and watch their behaviors for signs that it is time to adapt.

References:

Mackay, H. (2013). Why your employees fear change and how you can fix it. Portland Business Journal, Retrieved from http://www.bizjournals.com/portland/print-edition/2013/07/26/why-your-employees-fear-change-and-how.html?page=all

Reh, F. J. (n.d.). Company culture: What is it and how to change it. Retrieved from http://management.about.com/cs/generalmanagement/a/companyculture.htm

http://digital.films.com/play/GWEU7L

A630.6.4.RB_HansardCarey

Change is hard to swallow even if you are the instigator of such change. I personally do not know anyone who likes to change constantly. However, leaders recognize the need for periodic change and understand that it is their responsibility to motivate those working for them to embrace the change. Part of this process includes explaining the need to do something different. Brown (2011) mentions that many managers have issues implementing change because, although they may be well versed in the organizational side of change, the human factor can be much more challenging. Explaining the challenges the current systems or processes are causing and how changes will positively affect workers is the first step in getting them on board. If those working for you do not understand why a change is being made, many of them are likely to rebel.

When I hear coworkers that are rebelling against change, I have a different reaction depending on my own reaction to the change. In many cases, I am one of the skeptics who needs convincing at first although I try to remain positive. For example, recently, an upgrade to our Blackboard service pack was announced. This upgrade will happen after the start of October term. This upgrade means that there are several changes to the system that need to be announced and explained to faculty. Internally, there was conversation related to creating new knowledgebase articles for the upgrade and it was decided that there should be a change to the way the articles were created. One of my coworkers does not agree with the proposed change, which includes linking a PDF to the KB article rather than having the answer appear in line. He has been talking to my supervisor, trying to convince him that the change is not needed and why. However, the way we are creating the articles now requires many workarounds and is not very efficient time wise for staff writing up the articles. Although it means a lot of work for me and my team, I understand why it is happening and agree with the change, making it easier for me. He does not, though, and has spent a lot of time and energy fighting a losing battle. In this situation, I have done what I can to share my thoughts with him about why the new proposal would be a good change for our team. I have to work with people who agree and do not agree with the change and, since it will happen no mater what, I would rather be working with those who support the change to some degree. Therefore, I make an effort to explain the positives to my colleagues.

When I am on the other side and do not necessarily agree with what is coming, education becomes my goal. Again, since the new policies or procedures will be implemented anyway, I try to inform myself by asking questions about what I do not understand. Many times, a little information and a better understanding of the issues sways my opinion on the matter enough to remain positive. I have found myself coming up with excuses about why we should not do something. In my personal life, we have wanted to purchase a larger home but continue to come up with excuses about why we shouldn’t put our house on the market, seek a new loan, or look at homes that are for sale. The bottom line is that fear is one of the biggest obstacles to change and one of the hardest to overcome because the unknown makes people want to revert back to what they know. In an organizational environment, most of the time change is not optional and we have to change fear into excitement about the new possibilities the change can bring about.

According to Corelli (2009), some of the most important things leaders can do to help ease the fears of employees are: create a culture of communication, form a team to champion the cause, institute change in stages if possible, and take the time to train employees. Obviously, when there is already open communication in the organization, employees are more trusting and the idea of change may be easier for some. Another way to lessen the blow of change is to implement it in stages. After all, we all have to crawl before we can walk. Finally, as I mentioned above, being educated about change and being able to ask questions about what is not understood makes change seem les overwhelming. While these suggestions may not completely eliminate resistance to change they can’t hurt.

I do agree that change is driven by groups of people. At the Worldwide conference this year, I shared a video with some colleagues that I found while doing research for a previous MSLD course. This is the same video you shared in your announcement a few weeks ago, How to Start a Movement. Every idea starts with one person. Once that one person brings forth the idea and is able to convince another to join him, a tribe has formed. As Sivers (2010) points out in the video, once several people have joined the movement, it makes it easier for people to make the decision to join in and the same is true for change. When an individual sees the masses agreeing with the changes, it is easier for him/her to see the change as less threatening and have a better attitude about joining the rest.

As for takeaways, I see the benefit of having clear and open communication with my employees and coworkers. This starts well before change happens and is something that I strive to include in my leadership style whenever I can. Being empathetic about people’s feeling about change is helpful and I plan to continue that when I find myself in a leadership role.   

References:

Corelli, C. (2009, November 01). Ten ways to help employees adapt to change. Construction Equipment Distribution, Retrieved from http://www.cedmag.com/article-detail.cfm?id=10925388

Sivers, D. (Performer) (2010). How to start a movement[Web]. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/derek_sivers_how_to_start_a_movement.html

A630.5.4.RB_HansardCarey

In my opinion, Mr. O’Keefe met with employees in an effort to show outside entities that he was attempting to promote cultural changes in NASA. Due to the shuttle tragedy, my supposition is that he felt pressure from inside and outside the organization to find a cause and outline a plan for change to ensure that this does not happen again. As the leader of the organization, he is putting himself in front of the employees as a poster child for this change. His goal, it would seem, is to convince employees that the problems have been identified and unite them in efforts to fix those problems.

As for the believability factor of Mr. O’Keefe, as I was watching the video, I went back and forth between buying into what he was saying and thinking he was a used car salesman attempting to make us believe what he was telling us, but not really believing it himself. It is essential that organizational stakeholders believe him to form a trusting relationship that will be the springboard for change. Norman, Aviolo, and Luthans (2010) argue that in order to be trustworthy, leaders must be transparent and a true sharing of ideas and information must be present. If Mr. O’Keefe truly means what he is saying, he will (and, in fact, should have already) dialogue with his people in a frank and open manner at all levels on a daily basis. At the moment, the fact that the survey results identify an issue with communication indicates that is not happening. Until there is a genuine effort by management to do what he is saying, there will be little change. Employees have to believe him. In my research about believable leaders, I read an interesting analogy. Tom Skinner (1974) illustrates how to determine if someone trusts you by using a story about a husband and wife:

            To illustrate this, let’s consider the story of the top businessman who is at a big meeting out west. He calls his wife to tell her he’ll be home by six thirty that evening. However, at the airport he gets a call telling him to return that evening for an important executive committee meeting. He has no time to call his wife. The meeting lasts all night and he comes walking into the house at two a.m. His wife meets him at the door and says, “Where have you been?” He explains why he is late. “Do you mean you’ve been at a meeting until two o’clock in the morning? Now who’s going to believe that?” This woman is closed-minded. Let’s take the same situation only this time his wife, who has fallen asleep on the couch waiting for him, gets up and says, “Where have you been?” After he explains she asks, “Who were you with?” “Bob, Ray and John were there,” he replies. “Well, we’re going over to Ray’s house for dinner next week and I’m going to ask him about that meeting.” She doesn’t quite say, “I don’t believe you,” but she’s at least open-minded and will check out his story. Another time the wife comes to the top of the stairs as the businessman comes in and calls down, “Where have you been?” He explains where he was and who was there. She says, “You know the next time we see them I’m going to ask them why they always keep you up at night solving their problems in the business. Like the business can’t run without you.” She never questions his story. She’s at the level of having confidence in him.

I do not think that the employees of NASA are at the point of trusting leadership. At this point, his speech is all lip service and employees are at the “now who’s going to believe that?” stage.  Leaders will have to walk the walk in order to move toward the trusting stage. They have done a lot of analysis of the problem and statistical breakdown of the survey results but the trick for them with be implementing the changes across the board and earning the trust of their employees.

O’Keefe attempts to unite the organization by discussing values and prompting employees to compare their behavior to the values that they think they subscribe to and determine if they match. The issue I see here is that the values that employees espouse may not align with those of the organization as a whole. It would be helpful to employees to have him clarify expectations and values that are relevant to the organization. The make these even more meaningful to employees, they should be included in the identification process to ensure that there is agreement across the organization.

On the other hand, Mr. O’Keefe has points in his speech that entice me to believe in him and get on board with his plan. One of the statements that Mr. O’Keefe makes that adds to his credibility for change is that he wants to promote a “yes….if” rather than a “no….because” attitude. In other words, he wants leaders within the organization to evaluate and determine the obstacles to an idea or thought presented by an employee instead of immediately saying that it cannot be done. There are also several instances where he mentions that employees need to start treating others as they would want to be treated themselves. The Golden Rule is always one that should be considered, in my opinion, but if you have to tell people to do this, there may be bigger issues that need to be addressed. He might need to consider team building activities or informal social gatherings for the employees so that they begin to get to know and respect one another on a different level than they currently do.

This presentation is a reminder to me that, as a leader, culture should never be taken for granted. Just because outward appearances lead one to believe that the organization is doing well, there may be underlying issues that need to be handled before there is a major catastrophe in the organization. Although you do not want to go to great expense nor over survey people to death, it might be helpful to survey employees annually to assess the general feeling of the organization and be able to adapt as needed rather than having to react in the face of necessity.

Norman, S. M., Avolio, B. J., & Lufthans, F. (2010). The impact of positivity and transparency on trust in leaders and their perceived effectiveness. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(3), doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.03.002.

O'Keefe, S., & Jennings, J. (2004). Nasa cultural changes[Web]. Retrieved from http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/SACu

http://skinnerleadership.org/2012/08/31/what-kind-of-leader/

                

A630.4.4.RB_HansardCarey

                  In my personal experience, when management within my organization makes an effective, timely, and well-thought out decision, employees are much happier and certainly more engaged than they are when decisions are made in a different manner. Knee jerk reaction decision-making can lead to poor decisions and promote a lack of confidence and enthusiasm by employees.

                        To go one step further, Insightlink.com points out that involving employees in the decision-making process when an issue directly involves them is critical and, “will increase their commitment and improve the success of implementing new ideas or change”. Therefore, I think that in order to make more effective decisions and engage employees, managers should make an effort to include the opinions of those who are directly affected by that decision. What better way to make employees feel engaged than actually engaging them? When people making decisions are well informed about the issues, better decisions are made and the entire organization benefits. Why would I want someone who is well versed in Blackboard making decisions about EagleVision? Or better yet, why would I want someone who only has limited knowledge making critical decisions? From an organizational perspective, that is not a prudent idea. So the bottom line is: involve employees in decisions relevant to them and everyone reaps the rewards of higher engagement and better performance.

                        According to Dan Gilbert, our previous experiences can hinder our decision-making abilities. This is true not only for individuals but also for managers and organizations. Using last week’s case study as an example, if Spinks’s project were funded and failed, the organization and management would be leery of funding another project, especially one that is so expensive and grand in nature even if there is minimal risk. We tend to avoid situations similar to those where we have been burned in the past and gravitate towards the familiar or what has typically been successful for us.

                        Another important obstacle to mention according to Blenko is that of complex org charts which bog down the decision-making process, making it slower and harder to make decisions because of varying values and opinions. I know that in my current organization, it takes a long time to make decisions because we have several layers of management. Unfortunately, senior management likes to have the final say when there are important decisions being made which can cause delays.

                        In large organizations or where there is high turnover, it can also be difficult to determine who is supposed to be making the decision, according to Blenko. This recently happened on my team when my direct supervisor left in March. He had only been on the job about 6 months himself and people were just getting used to him and understanding his responsibilities. So when he left, customers (and employees alike) were confused by who to go to. Even after my new supervisor was hired, there was a period of adjustment for customers, not to mention the fact that he needed time to bring himself up to speed. This confusion led to increased decision-making time in addition to some poorly made decisions.

                                    Decisions should also be authentic or, in other words, consider whether the decisions has been made after evaluating alternative ideas. This authenticity may come into question and have to be defended. In the effort Blenko describes, alternatives should be examined in order to ensure that a quality decision has been made.

            In my position, I have to make many decisions that relate to training on various technologies. When I am making decisions that affect a wide range of stakeholders, I make an effort to involve many of them in the process. This is a practice that I intend to continue as I think that the quality of my decisions is better when other points-of-view are considered.  I appreciate when co-workers reciprocate as well. Working together leads to higher caliber, well thought out decisions and increased value for employees in the final product.  

References:

http://www.insightlink.com/state_of_employee_satisfaction.html

http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_gilbert_researches_happiness.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbxpg6D4Hk8&feature=player_embedded

A630.3.3.RB_HansardCarey

After watching the Southwest Airlines culture committee video, I am not entirely convinced that they have established a norm. According to Brown (2011), norms are, “ organized and shared ideas regarding what members should do and feel, and how this behavior should be regulated” (p. 10). In the video, the surprise cleanings did seem to be organized; however, the piece that left me doubtful that this was a norm was the fact that one of the flight attendants and member of the committee that they interviewed said that most of the flight attendants didn’t even know that Southwest did something like this. If it is in fact a norm, then shouldn’t the employees at least know about it? They may not have ever been the recipient of the committee’s kindness but they should at least know that there are groups of people in the organization trying to make someone else’s day better. Rather than establishing norms, the culture committee seems more to me like they are the deliverers of random rewards (which can be nice, too).

When I finished watching the video, other Southwest videos appeared in the margins of the You Tube page and I decided to watch another, A Day in the Life of a New Hire at Southwest. I thought that this was a better depiction of the way Southwest goes about establishing norms. The new hires are led through several processes, as they would be at many companies. The difference was that the new hires are grouped together and led through what Travis Peterson, Senior Manager of People, describes the enculturation process. He attributes this enculturation (or socialization according to Brown, 2011) to Southwest’s low turnover rate of about 5%. New employees listen to members of Southwest’s upper management talk about the airline and its culture. They are also treated to a fun day of karaoke and games. I think that this sets the stage for a fun culture in the organization. Please watch this video as an example of the fun atmosphere at Southwest.

The culture committee is an attempt to let the employees know that they are appreciated. In order to do this, other employees do something nice for their counterparts. Although I believe that the recipients appreciate these random acts of kindness, I would also be interested to know what the organization does for its employees to let them know they are appreciated. An organization’s culture is a combination of many factors including the attitudes and sentiments of management, the technology used by the organization, job descriptions, and the hierarchy of an organization all make up the culture (Brown, 2011). I did not get the sense that members of management were included in what we saw on the video nor did I hear any evidence to indicate that any of the other factors that establish a culture were included. I certainly think that what the culture committee is doing should be continued. People like to be appreciated whether it is by their customers, peers, or supervisors.

In my organization, the human resources department has organized the WEQC, a committee that organizes events for employees throughout the year in order to show appreciation for employees’ hard work. Events such as a health and wellness fair, Bring Your Child to Work day, and the school supply drive for employees’ children are examples of affairs hat the committee plans. The events are organized for large groups of employees and many only apply to certain groups; for instance, the “meet Santa” event is for those employees who have smaller children. Coming from a public school system where there is almost no recognition of employees, this has been a refreshing change and has turned into a peripheral norm for the organization. It would be nice if the committee could do more. Recognizing employees of the quarter might be nice and it would also be nice if a member of each department could be on the committee to provide a variety of ideas to recognize and appreciate employees in each area of the organization.

According to Williams (2013), in organizations with cultures that promote mentorship of new employees the new hires, “produce higher quality work than corporate cultures that encourage competition and duplicity among employees”. What this tells me is that corporations that have employees who feel a sense of belonging and being included in the culture from the very beginning of their employment will get the most out of their people. I do not currently have responsibility for this process; however, in November, a new person was hired for the training team and it was my responsibility to show her the ropes, so to speak. It was important to me to introduce her to as many people as I could and explain to her the reasoning behind many of our processes. She felt included in the organization and was impressed by how friendly and helpful everyone had been. Conversely, when I started several years ago, the trainer at the time was a teleworker. Although HR has a process for supervisors to follow with respect to new hires, my former supervisor left the majority of my acclimation into the environment and culture up to the other trainer. However, since she was not physically present, there were many gaps in this process including the fact that she had little to do with the team culture because she was not there and therefore, could not help me understand what that culture was like. She was not helpful to me and I felt ignored and isolated, not how I wanted to feel after leaving my previous job of 18 years. My goal for the future is to make people feel important, informed, and a part of what we do at our organization. The processes that we use to make that happen can vary but I think that having a team like Southwest does that is in charge of determining what that process looks like is important. Once they establish the process, the entire organization should be trained on what to do so that people have similar experiences and start their careers with us on a positive note.

References:

Brown, D. R. (2011). An experiential approach to organization development. (8th ed. ed.). Boston: Prentice Hall.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7P0T9IbYKU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-rz1A1w3hQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3eNFdwn07g

Williams, R. B. (2013, May 14). How "giving" can create a positive organizational culture. Psychology today, Retrieved from http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wired-success/201305/how-giving-can-create-positive-organizational-culture

A630.2.4.RB_HansardCarey

In history, the period called the Enlightenment happened between the 17^th and 18^th centuries. It was a period that was characterized by dramatic changes in thought in many areas including politics and science (Bristow, 2011). These changes were brought about by a different mindset that pushed freedom and allowed people to begin considering other points of view and schools of thought. According to Matthew Taylor, 21^st century enlightenment has to do with the idea that in order to live differently, we must have a different mindset. This makes a lot of sense because, as long as we keep handling situations the same way, associating with the same people, and closing our minds to new ideas, nothing will change in our lives. In effect, we are the masters of our own destinies. If we are willing to see issues from other points of view, we can exact change in our lives and our communities.

Taylor (2010) goes on to talk about the fact that people naturally want to change what is unfamiliar to them. This has been seen throughout the years as evidenced by historical events like Europeans trying to convert the native peoples to Christianity. This idea is also a major reason for racism and other forms of hate. We tend to be afraid of that which we do not understand. In my organization, I find people to be more forward thinking and accepting of new concepts. We tend to embrace the unfamiliar as the nature of our business involves keeping up with whatever is trending in the industry. For instance, MOOCs or Massive Open Online Courses, was in its fledgling stages just a couple of years ago. Just this week, Embry-Riddle offered its first MOOC, drawing over 400 interested students.  Although this was not an avenue that the university had pursued in the past, key players within the organizations saw the value and were willing to find out more about what they were and how to make them happen.

Taylor (2010) argues that we should shun pop culture that puts people down and instead concentrate on what will make us more empathetic. This is an extremely difficult task. It is like telling a lifelong smoker to quit cold turkey or a morbidly obese individual to los 200 lbs. Although these requests are not out of the question they certainly are not going to be easy to accomplish. Because pop culture surrounds us, it is easy to get sucked in whether we want to or not. Examples abound however, one in particular stands out to me: reality television shows. There seems to be a trend to put hidden cameras around and record people in unfamiliar or embarrassing situations. I refuse to watch these kinds of shows for many reasons, among them the fact that there is nothing intellectually stimulating about them and most of the time, I end up feeling sorry for the people on t.v. So, although it is possible, I would venture to say that improbable is a better adjective to describe the likelihood of people adopting this mindset.

In my organization, collaboration is a vital part of our culture. In order to bring new technologies on board, we have to work together. IT has to evaluate its support of the product, the faculty have to embrace this technology, trainers have to teach people how to use it, and ultimately, the students have to incorporate it into their classes. If we were to work as fragmented parts, each independent of the other, implementation of new technologies would become much more difficult and frustrating for all involved. Collaboration allow for the sharing of ideas and incorporates many points-of-view. Most organizations rely on some type of collaboration but I think that Embry-Riddle is a shining example of how collaboration (throughout many departments) promotes growth and success.

For me, the phrase that really stood out to me in this assignment was, “to live differently, you have to think differently” (Taylor, 2010).  While I am not opposed to change and growth, my personality type prefers a stable, predictable environment. For instance, when going out for lunch or dinner, I tend to frequent the same places and I order the same things in those places. On the other hand, if I do not change my way of thinking and try a different place, I might miss out on some great food or interesting experiences. Another example of this would be my move to Embry-Riddle a couple of years ago. I had been unhappy in the public school environment for many years but I was scared to make a change. After talking to a close friend I realized that if I continued to be scared, my life would never change. When I finally decided to make the jump to ERAU, not only did I feel relieved, but I also opened up an entirely new world of ideas, innovation, and opportunities for myself. So, as I move forward in my career, I will keep that quote in mind. If I want change, I have to be willing to change the way I think, too. As a leader, the question that occurs to me is, how do you make other people realize this, too? Half the battle is getting people to see the need for change. I think that passion and charisma have a lot to do with this process and hope to be that kind of leader, formally or informally, for someone else in my life like my friend did for me. 

References:

Bristow, William, "Enlightenment", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2011 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2011/entries/enlightenment/.

Taylor, M. (Performer). (2010, August 19). RSA Animate - 21st Century Enlightenment [Web Video]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AC7ANGMy0yo&feature=youtu.be

A630.1.4.RB_HansardCarey

Change is difficult. I do not care who you are or if you know about it ahead of time it is just as hard; however, it is an essential part of life and the evolution of an organization. Charles Darwin said, “It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is the most adaptable to change”. To me, this means that you do not have to be the biggest or even the best but you do have to be flexible. If you do not recognize the trends within your business and stick with the status quo, you will be left behind and eventually fail while those in your field who remain flexible and open to change move forward.

The representation in the video this week reminds me of the recent EagleVision upgrade that took place this past March. We had been using a desktop client (software installed on your computer) but the future of the product was moving to a web based application. Therefore, a lot of time was spent testing the proposed environment. Initially, many were on board for the change. However, after many months of testing, there were several issues noted and many, including myself, were ready to scrap the idea for change. Our CTO, however, had a different vision. My teammates had become pessimistic and doubted the need for and ability to promote this change. The CTO continued to fight for the change and the vision that she had for an improved EagleVision environment. She combined her vision and power with many of the Organization Development (unknowingly) techniques to lead the crowd over the hurdle so that the upgrade could occur. She, along with other members of our team, developed a plan for the change that included working closely with the vendor to figure out why there were so many issues. Her collaborative approach involved the vendor, the training team, IT Support, and leadership and focused on the improved performance of the new environment and how it would affect the quality of our EagleVision sessions for students and instructors. Bringing different systems together allowed us to understand that the issues were solvable if we opened the lines of communication with the vendor. From that point on, (as in the video) there was a crowd following her to the other side, so to speak. Once the upgrade happened, we still had many faculty and staff left in the past begging for the old environment to return but most of us were cheering on the other side coaxing the others across.  

Change starts with one person believing it can happen. Just as difficult as the change itself is, convincing others that change is good and beneficial is just as challenging. The right leader possesses the traits and skills that keep the crowds believing and following. Luckily, we have that type of leader in WW Technology Services.

References:

Brown, D. R. (2011). An experiential approach to organization development. (8th ed. ed.). Boston: Prentice Hall.

Kohn, S. (Producer). (2007, 11 07). A Tale of Power & Vision [Web Video]. Retrieved from 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZVIWZGheXY

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/c/charlesdar398645.html