A630.6.4RB_SeabournBeau

How do you react when you hear your colleagues using some of the excuses listed in the 50 reasons not to change graphic?

Personally, its become quite annoying to me to hear colleagues complaining about situations, situations that they could change and then do nothing about. It has become pretty common in our small environment to complain about personal items or irrelevant work related items. I've now begun to offer small solutions to their issues, not as an expert but as a leader. If they have ask a question, I try to rephrase it in another perceptive. The thing that use to upset me is, they have the power to change the situation, but they use excuses off of that list to avoid fixing the problem. They'd rather complain then fix. I now say, "if you want advice, I'd like to see you use it". I feel like that's appropriate. If they want to complain, we will work toward a solution, if you're not willing to change, why are we talking?

Do you ever use any of these excuses yourself?

Yes. I wish the answer was no but it's not. I feel like the "another company/person has tried it before" applies most to me. I've been thinking of things that could actually apply to change in our organization. I feel like someone's already brought that up or their just not interested. As I've come along in grad school, I've tried to not be so afraid of trying new things. The issue is, who likes change? Am I willing to risk my job for change? All I come up with are excuses from the list.

How can you overcome the thinking that creates those responses to change efforts?

The first step to overcome that thinking would be to explore what other people think about that idea. Sometimes, the idea doesn't leave my mind. What I should be doing is running the idea by other people who might share my enthusiasm or give me a boost in the right direction. If someone isn't willing to try to change, maybe all it would take in some encouragement and trust in that person.

Do you agree with Seth Godin's concept that change is driven by tribes?

I thought about this for a little while. I actually do agree with the tribe idea. I agree with it however as it applies to social media. There are many groups (tribes) that form online and do nothing but communicate and explore with each other online. Like our conversation last week, I find people to be more timid then they once were and although they may share commonalities online, how many people are turning that into face to face time? What I'm thinking is, people are connecting more then ever but they aren't really getting all of the personal interaction they need.

What can you take away from this exercise to immediately use in your career?

What I take away from that speech the most has to do with how people are linking up together, in new ways then the past. As a new leader, that is something that is important to understand. Additionally, it is important to understand people want to be lead, you just have to find a way o link them together in change or cause. There are some things in my workplace that we all have general issues with, maybe it is time that I try and find a common ground and then a solution to fix these issues.

A630.5.4RB_SeabournBeau

    Why did NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe address NASA employees to describe the plan to bring about proposed changes to NASA's culture?

The main reason Mr. O'Keefe wanted to come on and talk about the changes is because of the recent accident that they were dealing with. There were a lot of questions surrounding the culture of NASA and they wanted to determine where the breakdown came from and what they could do better moving on. It was important to present that data to the public and to address what their intentions were moving forward.

Was he believable? Is it important whether he appeared to be believable?

      Personally, I feel as though he was believable and that the information he presented was genuine. I feel that they actually took the appropriate time to understand the culture and where the potential break downs were coming from. What I found interesting is that he talked about how on paper, they felt like they had a good operating culture but in practice they weren’t living up to it. He said employees were afraid to come forward with safety information or go to higher levels within their department at that time and that is something they were going to address.

Why did he talk about NASA values?

      He talked about the passion and the drive that NASA has and I think he had to do that so there doesn’t seem to be any negligence or shortcomings on their part. The accident itself basically formed the basis for why he discussed what he did. I think he wants the viewer to understand their intent and their motivation in being safe and productive.

What can you take away from this exercise to immediately use in your career?

What I think pertains the most to our organization is the concept of not letting anything stop with you. What I mean is, if you have some information that has safety implications, you should be able to present that information without fear or repercussions. Recently, the FAA has moved to that sort of program. The problem with the program is that when you actually report something, they can pinpoint who was working where and they’ll always know who to talk to. People don’t want to risk their career over something they might deem small. That small thing however could grow into something larger. I will try to apply this process of keeping information flowing here at our facility. Maybe we can determine where the information stops.

A630.4.4_SeabournBeau

Marcia Blenko argues that decision effectiveness correlates positively with employee engagement and organizational performance. How do you think that employee engagement relates to decision effectiveness?

Personally, I find that the more an employee is engaged in the decision making process or in the involvement of important issues, the more productivity you gain from them. There is nothing more rewarding then being allowed to partake in a decision making process, sometimes that you're not qualified to offer input on. If management is willing to let people engage in these processes, I feel like they will get the maximum amount of effort from them.

What are some impediments to good decision making?

The first thing that comes to mind is fear. If there are a lot of repercussions for decision making efforts that come up short, you're not going to get the risk-reward output from employees. It is important to take risks and o encourage staff to go out on a limb, Sometimes the best ideas can come from someone who isn't even involved in a process at all. It is a good idea to encourage idea sharing and open door policies at all levels. Second, I feel like having trust, or at least sharing your trust of employees is important. They need to know that no matter what they do, you'll support them, good and bad.



Blenko suggests that there are four elements of good decisions: quality, speed, yield, and effort. In your opinion, is there anything missing from this list?

Although all of those are great and she details them as most effective, I feel like we could add risk to that mix. What I mean is, how much are we thinking outside the box? Is this something that is going to really push us into something new? On some scale, we should be able to determine how risky the project or deal might be. That might persuade people one way or another on whether to peruse that option.


What can you take away from this exercise to immediately use in your career?


I feel like implementing this exercise I can try and apply my company's decision effectiveness at a corporate level. If I can find viable information or perhaps some shortcomings, I could share that with my management team and see if anything I come up with is viable to solving the issues.

A630.3.3RB_SeabournBeau

Is the Culture Committee at Southwest effective in establishing cultural norms?

My response to that question is no. The reason I say that is because although their actions and motivations are good, they seem like they only preform these actions here and there. Basing from what I saw in the video, the group was formed at LAX that day to do something that they don't normally do. A cultural norm would revolve around daily operations and more employees at Southwest would know about these sort of events and would have more knowledge. It seemed like the video was made to raise awareness about the event, it hasn't become a norm yet.

From what you can tell, what is the purpose of the culture committee at Southwest?

I think their main purpose is to provide employees with knowledge that Southwest is trying to show that they care about their employees. The committee seems as though they are there to help the crews when they can, boost moral, and raise awareness about the culture in Southwest. It seems like they're in the early stages of this, at least that actual program we saw in the video. I was surprised to see that most of the crews hadn't experienced anything like that before, although some said they had heard of it. I would have thought that the committee was bigger and did things like this more often, not just in cases like this where they film it to get exposure. I hope that they do that nationally, more often.

What would you see as a viable mission for a culture committee in your place of work?

At the current time, there is an increased awareness on fatigue and safety in our organization (and nationally). What would be viable is that a committee could actually spend a small amount of time at each facility a get a better grasp of what factors are contributing to those issues. It would be beneficial for our organization and us as employees is there could be a way to fix schedules, rotations, and work loads. There is such a contrast between one facility to the next, that the committee should spend some time fitting individual needs to each facility.

What can you take away from this exercise to immediately use in your career?

I've learned that employees want to know that their company is actually making an effort to address issues within the organization. Sometimes, we hear about programs but we never see them in action or they never end up being relevant to us personally. I now see that just by showing some initiative, we can really have an immediate impact on the daily operations. Short term, I'll try to make sure that we can all see the benefits of the current schedule or rotation we are in my highlighting its advantages. Not being in a management role yet, I have limited access to change in our current facility.

Reference

Southwest Airlines "A Day in the Life of Culture Committee" (2008, May 31). Retrieved February 1, 2015, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7P0T9IbYKU&feature=player_embedded

A630.2.4RB_SeabournBeau

I find the thoughts and insights of this weeks video to be thought provoking and at the same time, intriguing. I would suggest a happier medium for viewing the presentation though, the constant graphics were diminishing to my thought process.

Why do you think the talk is titled "21st Century Enlightenment"?

I personally feel as though it is titled "21st Century Enlightenment" because he is trying to present an idea base to us that fits his interpretation of where we should be in this ever changing time we are in. The ideas he presented were more modernized then past thinking and he offered some insights into how we can be more productive as a society moving forward.  

What does Matthew Taylor mean when he says "to live differently, you have to think differently"?

I interpret this to mean that we as a society are and have been living our lives based on ideas and fundamentals that were set long ago. I think he wants us to try and understand that is we want to live a different life, we need to think about how we go about that life in a different way. We need to approach our needs and wants in a different light and we need to go about obtaining happiness in a new way.

At one point in the video, Taylor argues that we need "to resist our tendencies to make right or true that which is merely familiar and wrong or false that which is only strange". What is he talking about?

I think he means that we need to learn to resist things that are not true to us, that we were taught to know, and look at things in a new light. It sounds like he wants us to be able to gain a new perspective on old ideas or past experiences. How can we change if we cannot challenge what we already know to be true? I think we need to think outside the box as it pertains to things we already know. I think we tend to make things we accept (because we were forced to by society) acceptable to us no matter what. It is like a national pressure to make sure that we follow inline. I think that statement challenges that concept.

Can you think of an example within your company or your life that supports this point?

The first thing that came to mind for me, is the label that air traffic controllers get for being stressed or now "tired'. In the recent past, there has been examples of a few controllers being asleep at work and or exhausted. Nationally, we are known for being in a career field that is "stressful". The issue I have of that is the perception that we are not afforded enough time off for sleep or the assumption that we cannot handle our jobs and thus the "high suicide rate". The media and or public has blown (in my opinion) this data out of proportion. Secondly, there are ways to fix these issues (if we have any) if they needed to be. If people has a better understanding of the work day, pay, and hours, they could better understand our career.

Taylor argues that society should eschew elements of pop culture that degrade people and we should spend more time looking into what develops empathetic citizens. Would this be possible?

 To answer that bluntly, no. If you look at the value today's society has put on the degradation of people, you couldn't argue otherwise. I think of all of the athletes globally that we pay millions and millions and dollars to have on "our" team and then look how we are bias in prosecuting any of them for their wrong doings. I see all of the attention teens who are pregnant at a young age are on tv and how young, wild adults are put on tv every chance they get. I see now, how all of this has got us to where we are today. The public doesn't seem to mind that swearing and using the Lord's name in vein is now allowed on tv or how we have unlimited access to pornographic material online. So is it possible? Nope. I imagine us as a roller coaster. We happen to be on the part where we are gaining the most speed (on the downhill) toward utter destructiveness. 

At the end of the video, Taylor talks about atomizing people from collaborative environments and the destructive effect of their growth. What is the implication of these comments for organizational change efforts?

  

Well I think he means that people, when put into organizational groups, tend to find a common ground for the good of the group. The larger the group gets, the less likely it becomes to meet their needs anymore. I don't feel as though all groups are bad however. I feel as though there are ways in which the purpose and drive of the group will change thus changing their overall mission and potential to solve issues. I personally feel as though it means that an organization needs to monitor the health of any group they form. I look at modern day unions (some not all). I feel as though they were created for the purpose of serving the workers needs. Somehow, that group has moved to more unhealthy needs and demands. That's not always the case but if left un-monitored, who is to say a group can't gain traction and strength?

What can I take away from this exercise and immediately in my career?

I think this video has given me the opportunity to put my thoughts and aspirations under the microscope. Maybe what is driving me to succeed are expectations and wants of others and not my own. i want to be able to think for myself at a management level while trying to keep the organizations needs understood. I want to be able to understand the ethical and moral objectives of the company I work for and make sure that my thoughts and actions go hand in hand with theirs.

Reference

Taylor, M. (2010, August 19). RSA Animate - 21st Century Enlightenment. Retrieved January 23, 2015, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AC7ANGMy0yo&feature=youtu.be

A630.1.4RB_SeabournBeau

The thing that most companies will face in their growth is people that are not willing to put in the effort, time, or energy to see the company succeed. It often times will take the people with a vision and power to motivate those non-believers into getting on board with the future aspirations of that organization. 

My example revolves around my current career field, at a past facility. At some point throughout my first year there, my manager made it clear that our company was changing some of it's policies and that the facility management had the right to initiate those procedures to the best of their abilities and for what they thought would best serve their needs. Basically, they wanted to implement new procedures and see how it worked and they gave our manager some leniency to make it work. This particular implementation was focused around our schedule. The manager there worked 9-5, Monday through Friday while all of the controllers worked a rotating schedule with days off changing and time at work constantly flexing. The manager told us that he didn't see any reason to change anything at our facility, "we were all happy". His perception of the situation was incorrect. To be honest, we hated our schedule and disliked how the manager didn't assist us with our rotation burden. He had no sympathy for us, mostly due to him not ever being in our position.

He gave us the option to find a new schedule that the company would agree to (they initiated this change) and that the manager would agree to. As a group, we actually presented three different, in depth changes that her would be a part of and that we would love to work. Each time we presented them to him, he shot them down and said he didn't want to work them. Instead of working with the team, he worked against us. Not long after, I transferred to the facility I am at now. The remaining (and new) controller actually unionized and fought to have one of those schedules passed. It wasn't until after that happened and the company getting involved, did he actually get on board with the change. To this day (or so I've heard), he still resents everyone there and he is not an easy person to work for or with. It is much like the video we watched this week. Sometimes it takes power and vision to get things done. How can you make that known to people who are not interested in helping the organizations cause?

On a side note, dictionary.com defines pragmatism as a "philosophical movement or system having various forms, but generally stressing practical 

consequences as constituting the essential criterion in determining meaning, truth, or value" (dictionary, 2015). I find that that manger focused and stressed to much about the practical consequences of the situation. He could have been more open to the idea initially and not drug out the entire situation for his personal gain. After all of that, he still ended up conceding to the new procedures. Was all of that worth it?

Dictionary.com(2015, January 1). Retrieved January 17, 2015, from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pragmatism?s=t

Kohn, S. (2007, November 7). A Tale of Power & Vision. Retrieved January 17, 2015, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZVIWZGheXY

A632.9.3RB_SeabournBeau

In this video, Prof. Baba Shiv of Stanford University talks about the importance of emotion in decision making. After watching this video, reflect on two situations; one, in which you were extremely confident of the outcome and what your attitude was towards the subject; and second, a situation in which you would less confident or not so confident and how you felt about the situation. Based on this module's readings and this video write a reflection blog detailing the situations above and describing the role emotion plays in decision making.  Identify three emotional reactions for each scenario. 

I find myself to be a very emotional decision maker, In some cases, it is the downside of my leadership skills and on the upside, the reason why I think I'm a good leader. The video discussed the confidence that people should show when they're making a decision. According to Prof. Shiv, you want to be confident for your followers, that way there is an instilled sense of follower-ship and direction. People who tend to give direction without confidence are less able to get people to believe in their success.

For my first example, I wanted to share a time when I was successful because of my confidence. When I was in boot camp, there was an opportunity for a select group of individuals to go before a performance board to show why we thought we were the best sailors in our graduating class. We were selected prior to the board by our division leaders as outstanding candidates. When I got to the board, most of the other candidates seemed to be very worried about the procedure and intimidated of the people on the selection board. They had talked themselves out of being successful before they even got the chance to prove themselves. When I went for review, I was extremely confident and happy to have the opportunity. Although I made an error, I apologized and carried on as if it were no issue. Much to my happiness, I was selected for the second highest award at boot camp. The others that had no confidence, left the board one at a time, the same way they came in, unsure about themselves.

The second situation was when I was less confident and I wasn't as successful. During my training as an air traffic controller, there comes a time when you are given the chance to become a supervisor. These chances come after your trainers feel as though you showcase enough control and leadership to handle a facility all on your own. When given the chance, you are sat down in a room with your superiors and they ask you a ton of procedural questions to see how you'd respond. When I was given my first chance, there happen to be double the amount of people in the meeting do to the turnover of personnel. There were people observing the meeting so they could learn how to be on the board. When the meeting began, i was told that everyone in the room would be now participating and asking more detailed questions. For some reason, that threw me for a loop and I immediately got very un-confident and shaky. As soon as the first question was asked, I was shuddering and I couldn't recall any of the information I had studied.  I must have looked foolish but I didn't show any confidence and I didn't trust myself. I felt at that time, like I had given up. I failed that board and went back and studied for a week more. I then passed because I knew what to expect and I then knew what was required of me.