A631.1.5.RB_FogartyShawn

I see a tremendous amount of value in the EcoSeagate team development process. It works to push the limits and combat the sources of team problems. As an avid seafood connoisseur you have to crack the shell to get to the meat. EcoSeagate does just that. It places people in an uncomfortable environment, removing their security blankets, and allowing them to explore new ways about doing business. The major sources of team problems are derived from internal goals, the needs of members, behavioral norms, decision-making, leadership styles, and the overall size of the team (Brown, 2011, p. 267). EcoSeagate manages to remove the common barriers that would otherwise hinder a team’s progress and build upon individual skills sets that foster teamwork.      

Another major function of these team-building exercises is to address the human aspect of interpersonal connections and relationships found in organizations. EcoSeagate provides the framework to establish and build relationships. Bill Watkins, leader of Seagate Technology, stressed “The key to modifying behavior is creating an environment where we can't rely on experience. In unfamiliar situations, people - especially when tired - are more apt to ask for help and work as a team” (O’Brien, 2008). High-performing teams need to operate free and clear of turbulence.

A team building exercise of any magnitude is necessary in a high-performing organization. Regardless of the size and capabilities of the team members involved, anytime humans are involved you have to assess their personalities. Equally important, the team members have to get in sync. This can be accomplished on the main task at hand, but another practice is to ease into the problem with a warm up, similar to exercising. Bill Watkins authorizes the use of 2 million dollars annually in order to send 200 employees through and adventure course as he stated it “teaches his people something about priorities” (O’Brien, 2008). 

My organization would most definitely benefit from a similar activity. Presently, my organization is facing major turnover in various leadership positions. The staff equally is in shambles and we are not functioning well as a collective unit. A team building activity would be very beneficial to open lines of communication and establish trust. Lastly, the activity would work to establish a new climate, an environment that fosters teamwork and cooperation.

           

References

Brown, D. R. (2011). Team Development Intervention. In An experiential approach to organization development (8th ed., pp. 261-293). Boston: Prentice Hall.

O'Brien, J. (2008). An inside look at extreme corporate bonding - May. 21, 2008. Retrieved October 22, 2013, from http://money.cnn.com/2008/05/20/technology/obrien_seagate.fortune/

A630.9.4.RB_FogartyShawn

            Schmidt's description of the Google Culture makes perfect sense to me and I fully support their concept of 70-20-10 (Schmidt, 2011). I had previously researched and analyzed their concepts and it works fundamentally against the stressors that most companies struggle against. Most companies focus maximum efforts against their top priorities, and allocate time and resources to other areas when available. This results in high stress levels and personnel reaching job burnout. The concepts supporting the 70-20-10 model is that 70% of ones time is on core elements, 20% of their time on adjacent activities and lastly 10% on other activities. This promotes good diversification naturally. Ironically, Schmidt expressed a disposition about reality and how “management books all say stuff generically.”

Another major practice supported by Google, Inc. is one where individuals spend 80% of their time on tasks outlined by their superior and the other 20% of their time on individual projects of interest. This is a very reasonable way to view the work that most people are doing in your workplace and if my organization could establish and maintain an operating practice similar to this I believe we’d be even more successful. Presently, my organization burns the candle at both ends and personnel are essentially burnt out. It make it difficult to maintain a personable environment and one the is as Schmidt expresses is “compatible with other people” (Schmidt, 2011).  

As a leader, it takes courage to implement this point of view and this approach could potentially backfire. As a leader aims to establish a climate encouraging certain values or implement changes to harness their culture it can be scary. Much like any investment, it takes resources and time; the return on investment is not usually immediate. As a leader, you must analyze the market and make investments; failure to commit is worth than failing within a particular investment.

            The most important facet I can take away to use immediately in your career is that there is no one size fits all approach. Realizing what works well for Google, Inc. is a starting point, but their model will not be an off the shelf package that works well for my organization. It was humorous to hear Schmidt express discourse about the generalities of management textbooks. An effective implementation of leadership and management practices are by no means considered to be easy. I think another overarching lesson retained throughout this program is that leaders must invest in their people, enable systems and promote communication. Once the plan is established back off and let the organization grow, keep it resourced and the benefits with speak for themselves.

References

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

A630.8.4.RB_FogartyShawn

I agree with Tom Wujec's analysis of why kindergarteners perform better on the Spaghetti Challenge than MBA students. The simple fact is the MBA students attempt to over think the process and work diligently to “find the single right plan” (Wujec, 2010). Additionally, kindergarteners do not have distorted leadership roles to facilitate, it’s a trial and error approach whereas MBA students expended resources trying to “Jockey for power.”

            I think the simple aspects that the kids look at it as a fun and simple project, they do not place any high stakes about the outcome nor would they overly critique the team-building concepts on the backside. Sometimes, and this is selective at best, you just have to go with the flow and have fun. Stress, especially over simple tasks like building a marshmallow tower, can distract individuals from task accomplishment. Self-imposed stress is the easiest element to overcome but likewise is easily embedded into ones workmanship. Lastly, kids are relatively stress free, if their marsh mallow falls over, they still go to recess.

            I would think that CEOs with an executive assistant perform better than a group of CEOs alone since there is a pre-established understanding of roles and responsibilities. Rather than jockeying for positions of power, the likely fall in on the ones previously established. Time and energy is not spent on role assignment and thus residual stress is likely to be reduced. Also, Tome Wujec points out that “the challenge provides a shared experience, a common language, a simple stance to build the right prototype” (Wujec, 2010) as it allows a practitioner to “identify the hidden assumptions” about group task functions.

            If I were asked to facilitate a process intervention workshop, I would relate the video to process intervention skills in the team aspect. Particularly as an observer watch to se

e who applies task and maintenance functions to the project.  Initially, I would like to see the teams come together asking questions and seeking opinions and ideas, establish a plan. Throughout the project, I’d also observe to see who support with the maintenance functions, keeping everyone on task and timeline while supporting and encouraging solid teamwork. The last aspect would be to share the results in an after action review that is run by the group. Allowing them to self-critique first prior to sharing outside observations.

           The spaghetti challenge is the best take away in the concepts of a simple exercise that allows varied elements of teamwork and leadership to be evaluated. The low cost and low impact aspect can be fun; yet, the elements of teamwork and leadership can be incorporated without the intense nature of a fancy meeting. I think the crafts aspect can actually open more people up to learn as it distracts them from the mainstream processes. I would like to run this on a small scale within my section to evaluate the group task functions.

References

Wujec, T. (2010, April). Tom Wujec: Build a tower, build a team | Video on TED.com [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/tom_wujec_build_a_tower.html