Individual Blog Week 5

In week 5, I found great interest in chapter 3 "Is Work Fundamentally Different from the Rest of Our Life and Should it Be? Pfeffer and Sutton exaimne how once people cross the "magical threshold" from nonwork to work, different behaviors, appearance, and social forces come to fruition. Many of the ideas such as "Don't Think, You'll Weaken the Team-Just Do What You're Told," and "Clothes Make the Person" are great examples, of how we are expected to work differently. For example, many employees who are well educated, and run small businesses on the side have many suggestions, or ideas that are never explored, or even comprehended. These employees are told "thats not the way we do things here."But these ideas are coming  from experienced workers, who should be motivated by the upper level instead of being shut down. Don't you think that managers should be more open to individuals ideas, which would lead to simulation and greater satisfaction with bosses and employees? United Airlines is guilty of this offense. It is said that their employees are expected to not behave like intellegent, and experienced workers, and to never offer advice. Instead they are to follow orders. Surveys have been done to show that satisfaction with employees and bosses is not very high due to this. Clothing in my mind is another major issue. Having a degree in fashion merchandising, my passion is clothing and I have had the privledge to work in companies that are not so closed minded and strict. Mandating people to dress in narrowly presecribed ways, is a constant reminder to employees that they are expected to give up their individuality and to put their own tastes and judgment aside (Pfeffer, 2006). Everyone looks the same, thinks the same, and acts the same. How is there room for innovation or creativity? I find that managers need to find a happy medium, a way in which business can still be accomplished and be professional, but at the same time let these employees who are devoting most of their life to this job can express themselves in their appearance, and ideas. The text illustrates the results done by surveys, and first hand interviews to see how this issue has a direct impact on individuals. What are your experiences with these examples? Is your workplace strict and uniform, or do they allow ideas to flow and individuality to shine?

'What Organizations Don't Want You to Know" offers multiple examples of how organizations sometimes don't get to the root of the problem and poses the question "are organizations doing enough?" It was evidence to show us all that many organizations are not eager to dive into their problems. Investigations can be costly, assign blame, and most of all create possible lawsuits. The example of the company Merck, shows how organizations can ignore such obvious and serious claims. In this case the company was faced with clinical trials that showed patients that took the painkiller Vioxx had five times the number of heart attacks than those taking an older drug. The company continues to sell this prescription and the result was not favorable. They got hit with 14,000 lawsuits, and the company still denies any wrong doing, and plan on defending every lawsuit. I find it interesting that when you are in an MBA program, you are continuously learning how to be open, honest and trusting when in a managerial position. There is an ample amount of literature that teaches us this as well, yet managers aren't practicing what they prech. Do you feel that most companies are dishonest, and never really get to the root of their problems? Who is to blame, executives or employees? Do you think organizations are doing enough to solve their problems?

I found a follow up article, to one I reported on in an earlier session, and it focuses on work life. This articles proves that how your boss views work life balance affects how the organization will. I found it interesting and relevant, and perhaps if your boss is more laid back then the half-truths discussed in "Hard Facts Dangerous Half-Truths & Total Nonsense" may not apply. The article is titled "Your Boss's Work-Life Balance Matters as Much as Your Own."The studies done showed how we look to those with the most power for cues on acceptable behavior. Through 360 feedback a managing partner, Carla Christofferson at a law firm, found that her own long hours were a primary reason her associates were putting in so many hour, which led to them feeling burnt out. When she cut her hours back, and openly talked about it, her associates felt like they could slow down too. This is a perfect example of how management can really change the culture and spirit of a workplace. It was also found that leader's attitudes and behaviors have a powerful influence on their employees. Those who claimed to have a leader who "communicates a vision that is clear, consistent, and inspiring" reported a 65% high engagement, 82% higher job satisfaction,and 1.3 times greater likelihood to stay with the organization.

Every week I find more and more examples or information that I can personally apply to my career. I find that I will be taking most of this with me as I move up, and begin to manage and work within an organization. All of the examples, both good and bad, have aided me on this journey with wisdom and insight that I  did not have prior. I look forward to the remaining weeks of this class.

Individual Blog Week 4

This week we focused on "Power and Politics, Conflict and Negotiation." Power really stood out to me the most. Power Play written by Jeffery Pfeffer, shined the spotlight on "The Exercise of Power."This illustrates how to gain power, when one does not have it in 11 Steps:

1. Mete out resources

2. Shape Behavior through rewards and punishments

3. Advance on multiple fronts

4. Make the first move

5. Co-ot antagonists

6. Remove rivals-nicely if possible

7. Don't draw unnecessary fire

8. Use the personal touch

9.Persist

10. Make important relationships work-no matter what

11. Make the vision compelling. 

 Laura Esserman was used as an example, this was a women who had great intentions, ideas and responsibilities. Yet, she was unable to reach her goals, because she was powerless. Research has been done to support the view that when politics is predominate in a workplace it tends to decrease job satisfaction, morale and commitment and increase intentions to quit (Pfeffer, 2010). However, there is empirical research that proves the opposite, that seeking power, and being politically savvy may actually pay off. From your experiences, do you think that seeking power will pay off, or does power cause issues and lack of motivation in your work place? Should those in search of power look to "The Exercise of Power" or are their other ways to achieve power, and have the "ability to have things your way."

The first point was about gaining power, and led into the question do you even want power or do you shy away from power? I think this is a very important question to ask yourself. It is essential to know, do you want power, or does your company require power in order to do a job? Pfeffer, shares three common barriers, that I think we all should be aware of. One being "the belief that the world is just a place" this when an individual believes that if they do a good job and behave appropriately, everything will work out and when they see behavior to be "pushing the envelope," they believe they can learn nothing from it. I have personally seen people with these beliefs in the workplace. They rarely take risks, or try anything new. They simply do their jobs, yet gain nothing from it, and never moved up the professional ladder. The second barrier is "leadership literature,"meaning that many books and lectures are involving leaders exploiting their careers, but it does not show the power struggle. They speak of being modest and following their inner thoughts, making readers believe that is the road to success. The final barrier is "your delicate self-esteem."This implies that if people don't actively seek power, and never obtain it it won't be seen as a personal failure. Have you experience fellow employees, or even classmates who experience these barriers? Or have you personally been affected by a barrier? If so, how did you overcome it?

HBR posted a blog by Pravin Nath titles "What Makes a CMO Powerful." I am personally interested in marketing and found this article very informative. This illustrates ways in which Chief Marketing Officer can gain power within an organzaition. Nath along with Vijay Mahajan research a sample of 167 firms over a five year period found that innovation, differentiation, branding strategy, diversification, functional experience in marketing and the chief executive officer and being an outsider are associated with the likelihood that a CMO will be present in a top management team and have power. This articles shows that perhaps "The exercise of power" is not the only way to gain power, and be placed on a top management team. This research was done to see if having a CMO is
beneficial to management teams. It is still in it's early stages and I am eager to see the findings that many academic fields are pursuing.

This session raises many questions for me personally. I find myself relating my personal work, and schooling experiences to the lessons and articles. It is interesting to me to see how some people can be so power hungry, even when their job does not require it, and yet so many people can be so relaxed, and just want to get through the day. I learned that there has to be a happy medium. There has to be a motivation and drive to gain power, even if it is uncomfortable, and you have to do it in a professional way while being as nice as possible. My final thought is that I do lean towards following the 11 steps in order to gain power. I feel that in order to progress in your career you must take risk, do things that may be uncomfortable, but once you have power, and the possibility to achieve your goals I could do my job better. What do you think?

Individual Blog Week 3

This week leadership was in the spotlight. The question is “are leaders as important as we think they are?” The argument has been made that leadership is extremely important in smaller companies and teams, and almost irrelevant in large corporations. Pfeffer and Sutton explored the half-truths of are leaders in control, and if they have an influence. They explore this theory greater. For example, studies have been done, and systematic quantitative research shows that leadership can influence organizational performance. It was found that having a leader with experience and the right knowledge could increase a firm’s performance. For example, in the 1980’s Ford was desperate for a change. They employed a CEO who knew something about cars and trucks, not just how to run a business. A leader needs to be knowledgeable of the product and their values need to be in line with the companies. The theory that leaders have more control in smaller organizations, make the criteria for a leader even more crucial. The decisions made by these leaders can create financial crisis for small organizations, so finding a leader with the right experience and track records are a must, because of their influence on the organization. Then there is the opposite argument that managers have far less influence over performance. This study was done over 20 years studying the performance of 167 companies. It was found that other variables such as economic conditions had a greater impact on the company then changes in leadership or leadership style. Do you feel that leaders have a major influence on companies? Or do you side with the idea that leadership is not what drives a company?

I think another great point from this session came from Melissa Thomas-Hunt’s video on "Team Dynamics." Shared vs. non-shared knowledge is something that we all need to think about when in a group setting. There is always the common knowledge between a group and then hesitation to consider anything that strays from that knowledge. But sometimes it’s the unique thoughts that are unrelated to the shared knowledge that could be a solution, or a great idea for a company. We also need to consider whose voice gets to be heard. It is very important to allow all to speak and share ideas no matter where they fall on the hierarchy. This is where some of the best ideas come from. There has to be a culture in which all feel comfortable to speak and share their solutions.

This week was also focused on how to prevent conflict within teams. There was a relevant article from Harvard Business Review titled “4 Ways to Decrease Conflict Within Global Teams”, that offers four tips to decrease conflicts while working as a team. Pamela Hinds author of this piece bases her advice off of multiple studies, and experiments done to different companies throughout the world. She has studied teams in-depth to find that team members are worried that their jobs will be shipped over seas, making them resistant to form relationships with those in say India, which causes a riff in the workplace. In another study of 43 teams, 22 collocated and 21 distributed from a large multinational company, it was proven that harmonious teams have a shared identity, and this significantly reduced conflict. Through interviewing and receiving first person responses on the extent to which their work tools or processes were incompatible, priorities were different and information about what others were doing was incomplete. When the differences were high, conflict soared. It was found as long as team members understood what is different they were less likely to blame each other reducing conflict.  Site visits were found to be a powerful way to understand how processes and practices varied and built rapport. She also found that informal, unplanned communication dramatically reduces conflict. Hinds uses sound facts and data from experiments that she has done, and evaluated this data to share.

 

I found many of the EIA videos very rewarding. I always feel that I take a lot of knowledge away from the speakers. Professor Wendeln, and Melissa Thomas-Hunt, I think gave some terrific insight into team dynamics, and I found that very rewarding. I hope to be able to take as much away from the session next week as I did this week. I hope to relate this information on teams and leadership into power, politics and conflict negotiation. 

Individual Blog Week 2

I feel that the bottom line of this week was financial incentives are not always the answer. We tend to think that people will respond to money. It is as if money is the answer to all problems, when in reality it is not. Financial incentives can create a motivational effect, informational effect, and selection effect if used correctly. These can be achieved by offering a pay-for-performance schemes, which motivates their employees to work harder in order to achieve higher financial rewards, providing people with information about the priorities and values of the company, letting the true mission shine through, then there is the selection effect which is the idea that motivated people who are motivated to work harder will chose a workplace that will give them more money for their efforts. This makes workplace feel like financial incentives are the way to go, however there are implications to this idea, which could backfire on a company. For instance, the motivation could cause more problems or costs to the company. For example, “Hard Facts Dangerous Half-Truths & Total Non-Sense” illustrates how garbage truck drivers were given the incentive that if they finished their eight hour shift early, they could go home, and be paid for a full days work. However, this led to many issues such as a decrease in the quality of their work, illegal practices as well as safety issues such as driving unfit trucks. The drivers were motivated to finish their job early, however the quality of work decreases greatly. There were cases in which garbage was not even picked up. These financial incentives can also attract the wrong kind of talent. For instance, would you rather have someone would work hard but could only be motivated by money? Or would you rather have an employee who is wired to work hard all the time, and be promoted to more senior positions, which in turn have a higher paycheck? This helps in proving Jame Treybigs theory “if they come for money, they will leave for money.” In management it is extremely important to look at the big picture to try to determine if a financial incentive will be helpful or hurtful. For instance in my experience at Nordstrom having a base pay plus commission  as well as cash for every credit card opened attracts individuals who are motivated, and confident, it made everyone more focused on customer service, and helps to let Nordstrom’s mission and desire to serve the customer shine through. This company made an excellent choice by choosing this style. As a manager it is important to know what kind of people your system will attract and if it is right for the company, a lot of research and time will have to be put in to determine if incentives are for you. I agree with the idea that incentives are a great way to motivate employees, but financial incentives are not the only option. We have to begin to understand that there are intrinsic values that are important to individuals, motivation through these values, will help to eliminate the implications of financial incentives. What kinds of incentives have been successful in your work place? Is it a company wide incentive or just in your department? Do you feel that incentives would motivate you to work hard, or do you work to your full potential at all times?

I enjoyed Dan Ariely’s videos on decision-making. “Are we in control of our decisions?” video intrigued me the most. What he means by this is, are we making a decision or is the picture or preconceived notion we have making the decision. He had some great points that I feel need to be showcased. One being his idea of illusions. He felt as if people made decisions based on illusions not on a realistic situation. For example, he shows a picture of a vertical table, which to the eye looks longer than a horizontal table next to it. He asks the question, which table is longer? Most people would answer the vertical table, he then draws lines across both tables, and puts the lines together to show that the horizontal was actually the right answer, to show that we were not in fact in control of our decisions the illusion was. Being able to be in control of your decision is a must have skill. A manager needs to be able to look at infomation and determine if something is an illusion to the eye, or straightforward  evidence to back up a decision. The manager needs to find a happy medium in-between evidence, and their own wisdom, to determine what decision needs to be made to benefit the company/team as a whole. I think this concept should be examined more. We need to know how we can test managers to see what drives their decision making skills. Do you feel that most managers are in control of their decisions? If not, what do you think drives their decisions?

The blog on Harvard Business Review titled, “The Power of Meeting Your Employees’ Needs” by Tony Schwartz, found that there are ways to increase performs other than financial incentives. If you meet four basic needs. The needs are renewal, value, focus and purpose. Once these are met the quality of work improves. A survey was done, that shows how meeting these needs correlates with the variables that influence performance. It was found that when one of an employees needs are met, they report a 30% higher capacity to focus, are more engaged  and have a higher retention rate. This is a good example of research and proven data. There was a meta-analysis of 263 studies across 192 companies and employers with the most engaged employees were 22% more successful. This was not based off of personal opinion, or experience. It was a major undertaking to gather and sort through this data. There seems to be scientific reasoning behind this study. There was a clear goal, framework, and hypothesis. There was an experiment, that yielded data, that was then evaluated. This provides great evidence. As a manager you could look at this study and determine if you wanted to instate a system to help meet the needs of the employees to become a more successful company.

This course in my opinion is very rewarding. I take away warning signs and what to look out for. I found that I am able to look at situations and decipher what is evidence based and what isn’t. Having this ability and then the ability to form recommendations is a great skill to have, and I am excited to watch that skill mature.