Week 7 - Mastering the Art of Corporate Reinvention

Without continual growth and progress, such words as improvement, achievement, and success have no meaning.

Benjamin Franklin

We are now in the wind down phase of the semester, however, the amount of information we cover weekly remains at a very steady pace. This week our focus was understanding three basic integrated elements of OD intervention strategies – structural, technological, and behavioral strategies. As I mentioned in our discussion this week, we have already learned in other chapters this semester that part of the daunting challenge with mastering OD is the perspective in which we are tasked with viewing every thing, every decision, and every team, as part of a greater whole. There will always be some instances in which these strategies could be used independently, however, it is highly unlikely that at some point they will not crossover to other areas and other imperative elements that will need to be addressed. Very simply stated, “A change in one aspect of a system to solve one problem may result in newly created problems” (Brown, 2011, p. 180) and it would be foolishly myopic to think that if we focus concentration of change in one area, it would not lead to uncovering other areas were interconnected and should be part of our overall evaluation and strategy.

This week we also watched a video highlighting the impressive career of Michael Bonsignore, CEO of Honeywell. I enjoyed how he portrayed a leadership figurehead that felt it would be realistic to create a new culture but “punish” those whom do no embrace it (Films.com). Although I applaud where his heart is, he may find it rather difficult to actually punish those employees who are not looking for best practices and bringing about a new corporate culture. I think that it is entirely plausible for leadership to work with other resources and internal teams, such as HR, to find ways to compensate and reward employees who are looking for new ways to bring about the types of best practices he is looking for. In doing so, by constantly rewarding and encouraging employees to display the desired behavior or results, he can slowly bring about a new direction of culture for sure. 

Furthermore, I do find it admirable that he is looking to blend the best of both worlds that Honeywell and Allied have to offer. I think if the message is transparent, clear, and consistently reinforced, this could work towards his goal of creating a new culture.

I think outlooks such as this bring about collaboration, brings about a sense that leadership considers everyone on the same side and wants employees to operate as if they are all part of the same team. We are all connected, and as I mentioned in my blog last week, connectivity with others is crucial to our success at any level. One of the barriers I saw in the video was that Bonsignore stated he wanted cohesion, but wasn’t necessarily discussing how he wanted to install this belief with his teams and embed this into a newly formed culture. I think he spoke of the clarity he desired to instill in what the company is doing and what he wants to accomplish, but didn’t portray a clear vision or call to action with his people. I did like that he also spoke of the importance that he absolutely believed in keeping everyone at every level involved at all costs, even through hardship and uncertainty; but his message was constantly delivered in what I felt was a cold and unconnected manner. At this point, I liked the analogy that Bethune mentions; he spoke of how football works as a great example because everyone on the field has to be involved in the huddle to execute the next play effectively (Films.com). This further supported Bonsignore’s point that everyone has to be involved for us to rise to the challenge and achieve our next level of success.

As it pertains to what life lessons I can apply as a leader, I think that I have to remember to remove stereotypical thinking as part of the process of change. I shouldn’t always assume that everyone has a problem with change and ready myself to help fight a battle that may not exist. Additionally, bigger doesn’t always mean better. For example, as mentioned in the video, expansions are not always better for organizations. Sometimes they work right off the bat, but we also have to be willing to evaluate when enough is enough and define what our version of success is. There may be overlap, there may be redundancy, but as leaders, when communicating the desired elements of change, we have to ensure that we thoroughly go through the diagnostic process to appropriately identify what areas are interconnected with other areas. As we learned this week, the structural, technological, and behavioral elements have subelements that must be considered prior to enacting any type of intervention.

I think that as our video mentions, we are all looking to identify personal experiences that differentiate us from our competition. In order to get us to this cognitive level, we have to change our mindset to develop towards, “do I fully understand where we are now”, but more importantly, “do I know what is the vision for what we want to be and how we will get there”.  

I think that elements such as clear messages and recognition that progress is never singular moment in time where there is a definitive beginning and end; it is a continuous momentum in order to be successful (Films.com) and allows us to plot a specific agile course towards success. I think that although Bonsignore probably in his mind felt it insignificant to discuss details in how we visualized rewarding and punishing people who either were, or were not, on board in helping establish this new cultural wave, he could have had a more profound impact and acceptance of his planned intervention if he had spent time in discussing the “specific means, activities, and programs that can make change happen” (Brown, 2011).

I am truly amazed that we have flown through seven weeks already and I cannot wait to see what awaits us to uncover next week!

Until we blog again…

References

Brown, D. R. (2011). An Experiential Approach to Organizational Development, Eight Edition. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

Films.com. (n.d.). Mastering the Art of Corporate Reinvention. Retrieved from films.com: http://digital.films.com.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/play/BB94P2

Week Six - 50 Reasons Not to Change/The Tribes We Lead

“We cannot live only for ourselves. A thousand fibers connect us with our fellow men; and among those fibers, as sympathetic threads, our actions run as causes, and they come back to us as effects.” 
― Herman Melville

I had a tremendously humbling experience this week that reminds me exactly of the underlying nature of what our MSLD program is about…connectivity with others and what impacts our connections have, just as our TED video with Seth Godin demonstrated this week.

I received a phone call late Friday afternoon from my mentor, Matt Earnhardt to discuss my upcoming semester, as I had previously emotionally vomited to him regarding my skepticism and sincere ability to flourish in his upcoming class offering this October.

Again, connection…Matt gets me…and if I was the type of student who was just taking these classes to take them, I wouldn’t have batted an eye when reading his rigorous syllabus; but I crave personal growth, connection, and life meaning to the work we do at ERAU.

I had the privilege of connecting with Matt in my very first class with ERAU and haven’t skipped a beat learning from him, even when I have been on this journey with other professors. The same is now true and can be said about Daryl; I used to think that unicorns are one-in-a-million…dare I now say I have found two of them roaming the same pasture…and I couldn’t be more disappointed that I am so far along in the program, that my actual time will be limited with as I approach the conclusion of this journey. Then it dawned on me late last night; Matt and Daryl aren’t the type of people that just drift in and out of someone’s life…they are there for life, and I am so completely enamored by both of them and their perspectives that I can assure you…I have drank every last drop of the MSLD Kool-Aid!

This program has awaken a giant in me; I obsess every day about knocking down the barriers that bind us towards living with the status quo…as well as try to encourage myself with being keenly aware of the weaknesses I still have time to overcome. See, what people don’t realize is that we all have things that drive us, that give us momentum, that propel us to that next level…and for me I have discovered that mine lies in what connections I find that fill my heart and encourage me through life. Daryl, in just a short time, you do this for me as well – and I feel beyond blessed that you and I have connected over the past six weeks. Your encouragement, your shared perspectives, and your ability to find positivity in daily life, has allowed me…invited me actually…to connect with you as a student and professional…and I am so lucky to have seen the OD world through your eyes. Both you, as well as Matt, are the reason I have wanted to become a better person and a more inspirational leader; not so much just for myself, but because the power of influence and connectivity is so incredibly important throughout life…and for a while there, I think I tended to forget that. Thank you for the push and reminder back in that direction.

This week I would have to say was most impactful; I am still repeating to myself what we learned from NASA last week…and I have been working towards retraining my perspective to guide me to thinking “…yes, if…” instead of “…no, because…” (OKeefe, 2004). Although we uncovered everything from the discussion of how globalization can affect a business of any size, all the way to ensuring you have a definitive direction and well communicated vision of change from our case study, my favorite portion of this module is identifying and finding effective ways of removing the barriers that are in place preventing our desire to embrace change. And I believe that it comes full circle to the importance of connectivity.

For example, Daryl gave us a dazzling Prezi presentation that literally showed us about 50 ways in which we state why we cannot make a change (Watkins, 2011) and the one I hear most often in my organization tends to be, “that is the way it has always been done”, which truth be known, drives me absolutely bonkers bananas. Often times when I ask someone, “well, why do we do it that way” and they give me that answer, I now instantly know it is because they do not see the connection of their work to the overall operations of the department and the company…but sadly, also because they have not found an intimate connection to what they do, why they do it, and why it is important to them. That is the part as a leader that worries me most.

As Godin discusses, there are cycles that ebb and flow, but constant change and desire to improve, will (or at least should be) a part of the equation. However, as we listen to his points, reflect on Daryl’s 50 ways, and reinforce our readings this week, it is apparent that there is a life cycle of resistance to change that we can expect to encounter as leaders. And the pull (not push) of a group of people coming together in unison with a common vision of change is exactly what is needed to turn a change into a movement (Godin, 2009). To me, and my current position in life, is all about finding “my tribe…my vibe” and that mostly is because who we tend to surround ourselves with often times becomes our life and our journey. If we can find others that share the same mission or vision, doesn’t that make our connection to them more concrete and worthwhile?

Some of the ideas that Godin shares makes complete sense; as leaders we should frequently ask “…who are you upsetting?” (Godin, 2009), as this allows us to take pause and identify complacency while simultaneously driving more questions and changes. Additionally, his rules of the road for challenging the status quo are implicitly perfection; what we have to do is “…build a culture…” that refuses to accept the status quo (Godin, 2009) and find others that connect to our meaning. We have to be willing to put ourselves out there so that we can drive curiosity that resonates with others that may share the same vision or beliefs (Godin, 2009) in order to begin to essentially build our tribe. Leadership is far more profound and effective when you have one person that shares meaningfulness that resonates with others, rather than trying to reach everyone individually; our message, our vision, and our actions should be visible exponentially to build our army of change agents. And when they share our stories, our visions, and our actions, we begin to grow again and again, never letting the status quo mentality breed again.

When we think of change, part of being able to successfully implement change comes from embracing the resistance to it. I again, beating a dead horse, come back to the importance of connectivity. If we are connected to our people, we are able to introduce change, identify the forces that are resisting it, find stabilizing elements that can reduce conflicts caused by implementing change, as well as connect to employees which allow us to share “greater understanding…” which may “…lessen the perceived threat…of change” (Brown, 2011).

As a leader, going forward, the best chance I have of building my tribe that refuses to accept the status quo, or any of the 50-plus reasons we can find to avoid change, is to build connections with my followers so that I can help them embrace change, just as Matt has taught me over the past years. And although it may not be as easy as Daryl makes it seem, constantly work towards finding the rainbow after the storm, and embrace those positive outcomes as often as possible, and share those stories to help spread the power of positivism to enact lasting change with my peeps! Instead of finding 50 reasons not to change, I challenge all of us to find 50 reasons why we should...

Until we blog again!

References

Brown, D. R. (2011). An Experiential Approach to Organizational Development, Eight Edition. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

Godin, S. (2009, February). The tribes we lead. Retrieved from TED.com: http://www.ted.com/talks/seth_godin_on_the_tribes_we_lead/transcript?language=en

OKeefe, S. (2004, April 13). NASA Cultural Changes. Retrieved from c-span.org: http://www.c-span.org/video/?181348-1/nasa-cultural-changes%20

Watkins, D. (2011, August 24). 50 Reasons Not to Change. Retrieved from Prezi.com: https://prezi.com/z2v2cvo4t9tc/50-reasons-not-to-change/

Week Five - NASA Culture Change

Learning and innovation go hand in hand. The arrogance of success is to think that what you did yesterday will be sufficient for tomorrow.
- William Pollard

This week was a module of enlightenment for me; the focus on accountability, the ability to accurately analyze the performance gap in situations, as well as all of the key elements used towards making an accurate diagnosis of the current state of affairs within a troubled organization was fantastic…I really connected with how we have to ensure we focus on the entire organization as a whole system and how “…every member of an organization participates in developing a vision and improving the corporate culture” (Brown, 2011, p. 116). It is chapters and modules such as this that make me think…PhD? Yeah, probably not, but it is always nice to dream!

Noting the above, I was also shocked on what we uncovered and research showed regarding NASA! I am not sure why, but basically seeing that their lack of awareness towards what was detrimental to the organization and the gap between espoused values versus their written code of safety was really eye-opening to say the least. This week, we watched a C-SPAN video noting Sean O’Keefe, Administrator at NASA, addressing the culture, the gaps, the lack of mutual respect, and the challenges facing the organization that contributed towards the Columbia disaster.

I do think he came across as genuine with his message of wanting everyone to help contribute towards making NASA “…a better, smarter, safer, stronger agency…” (OKeefe, 2004). Being able to admit where the deficiencies are, all the way up to their leadership, shows reflection of the issues, the “signals that were being sent”, as well as resolving the issues that were raised ultimately led to the consequence and failure of functions in which contributed to the Columbia disaster (OKeefe, 2004).

O’Keefe talks about how there is a true and genuine element of family between one another, and they need to continue to build upon them exponentially and throughout each research location. This is where NASA can excel…it’s not bad, “…it’s not nearly good enough” and they want to do something to change the level of this, and the priority of a culture of safety in which is “…embedded in our organization…”and is linked to every thread of what we do each and every day at NASA, but when the employees were asked in anonymous surveys, it turns out that we weren’t doing as well as we all thought (OKeefe, 2004). Again, identifying the gap between perception and the reality we all live in is a case for every leader to take pause periodically and self reflect on what is really happening versus what we think we are doing.

He takes the approach that it takes everyone, including him, to make this happen…and how it starts with him first. I loved that he owned his portion and what he has done to contribute to this mindset and why he wants it to be changed. He was able to articulate the vision of what is…to what will be, and that gets an audience hooked every single time! He is committing what he will do, what he is willing to sacrifice, and what he is willing to contribute to help make this change a reality.

Overall, he articulated what they problem was and is, why it has happened, what can be done to change it, and how NASA will go about bringing the change into being part of its new culture. He took ownership, admitted what he contributed towards, but more importantly, engaged the audience with what he was going to do immediately, and already started doing prior to the conference, to change their course of actions.

This reminded me of areas discussed in chapter four last week; it was a very charismatic model that NASA operated under. They believed they were doing well, most likely because employees were “…looking for cues from their leaders…” (Brown, 2011, p. 101) when discussing amongst themselves. They tended to learn to operate also in a more apathetic driven mode because although there were some willing to go against the grain and verbalize concerns in their areas, those viewpoints were seemed to be dismissed and subsequently others may have learned the “why even bother” behavior (Brown, 2011, p. 101).

They found more importantly, that there was a great performance gap between what we think our values are and how NASA walked the walk. Respect for each other is one of the critical elements lacking from their current culture; the support they provide one another, including their leadership, is lacking and the survey results showed it. What is the “absolute imperative” of what we must do and how we must do it; he talks about how to change the NASA mindset to a positive agenda using the term “yes, if…” instead of “no, because…” (OKeefe, 2004) and puts “the burden of proof on others…” to what can start to change our cultural approach.

Going forward, there are small ways to identify those priorities, that identify both the positive and negative ways, in which if change doesn’t happen, what will become of our reality and how our approach towards our teams and our leadership driven style. I think more importantly, O’Keefe stressed the importance of how we go about respecting others within our units and organizations, and how this impacts our abilities to further progress our goals; without demonstrating respect for one another, outside our area of expertise, we have no foundational basis on which we can work with. We have to learn to recognize what others do right, not just what they do wrong…we have to enrich our followers by being able to identify what we all do well, and what we need to do better in order to get to the next level. I like his idea about “yes, if…” versus the “no, because…” approach because it brings about learning to retrain our thought process to think on a positive note, rather than being automatically closed minded towards what is being presented before us.

Overall, this week opened my eyes to the downfalls of being functionally dysfunctional. I liken it to being a functional alcoholic. The alcoholic thinks because they go to work and don’t have an issue, that when they are at home passed out on the carpet, all is fine. NASA thought they were the epitome of safety cultures and technological breakthroughs. They even had surveys to “prove” they were one of the best places to work…what they missed the mark on was what questions they asked and how the employees answered in confidence. As I mentioned in one of my discussion posts this week, it all lies in what we are trying to uncover in our questions. If you ask someone why they are resigning from their position, they may respond with better wages or hours or shorter commute. If you ask them why they started looking for a new place to work, you may find out because of management, performance gaps, or other underlying issues that are truly at the heart of your turnover issues. As leaders, we have to learn to ask the right questions, but more importantly, be willing to take actions on the answers we uncover.


Until we blog again!

References


Brown, D. R. (2011). An Experminetal Approach to Organizational Development, Eighth Edition. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.


OKeefe, S. (2004, April 13). NASA Cultural Changes. Retrieved from c-span.org: http://www.c-span.org/video/?181348-1/nasa-cultural-changes%20

Week Four - How Companies Can Make Better Decisions

Change is the law of life. And those who look only to the past or present are certain to miss the future.

-      John F. Kennedy

Week four and we are almost half-way through another busy semester. It is has been a great week and this class hasn’t let me down yet; I am loving learning so much about OD and what consultants have to learn to balance. There is more and more thought I keep placing into what I want to be when I grow up; I have never felt the finance world that I have been in was really “it”, and the more I learn about consulting and the balancing of intricate relationships, the more intrigued I become. I definitely reinforced this week that when it comes to planning interventions, I certainly have the “pathfinder style” wrapped up because I lean towards a more interactive and participative leadership style. Pathfinders tend to use a collaborative approach to help “…the organization to focus on its most critical issues and questions” (Brown, 2011, p. 92).

This week we discussed the importance of understanding the epic levels of responsibility when being an OD consultant. My favorite portion of this, however, was teaming up with an internal OD champion. The practitioner-client relationship is so incredibly important, and what a better way to do this by teaming up with an internal champion that already understands the culture, the norms, and the ropes. This ties greatly into the importance of our decision making capabilities – how will we know what needs to be addressed and how to address it if we don’t have vital information and understanding of the organization? The answer, I believe, is that we simply can’t; in order for us to make better decisions, we have to have better information and the resources in which to carry out the desired results. I had mentioned in one of my discussion postings this week that one way we can do this is to rely upon the maturity of our emotional intelligence. We need a certain amount of emotion, or potential empathy and sympathy to become great leaders. Without emotional maturity and intelligence, chances are that the quality of our decisions will be impacted.

Research has demonstrated that better decision making has helped leaders of organizations achieve better organizational results and higher yields of financial performance (Harvard Business Publishing, 2010). It has also shown us that better decision making and execution of those decisions are positively correlated to higher levels of employee engagement; when leadership is able to make “good, high quality decisions” and do so in an expedited matter that allows for positive impacts throughout the organization, people tend to become more connected with their work and commit to higher levels of performance to get things accomplished (Harvard Business Publishing, 2010).

Obstacles getting in the way from us doing this include lacking appropriate leadership talent, the complexity of the organizational system and org charts, as well as international growth opportunities in attempts to reach more consumers has led to more complicated ways of conducting business. Because of the added layers of complexity, it becomes a greater challenge to figure out who should be making what decisions, as well as what are the meaningful decisions that have to be made, and what do we all as a team have to do to make things happen (Harvard Business Publishing, 2010). More complicated hierarchies have also meant less accessible information to the decision makers. This ultimately means that those who are tasked with critical decision making responsibilities may be making decisions in a vacuum or without critical information that would inform them greatly on what is most appropriate for the situation at hand.

Five steps for leaders to make better decisions include conducting a self-awareness assessment regarding our current capabilities, being able to identify what are the “critical” decisions to be made, take the critical decisions into an action plan that includes “the what, the who, the how, and the when” (Harvard Business Publishing, 2010), then making sure all other organizational systems and resources are focused on carrying out the critical decision action plan, and lastly, includes embedding this focus throughout the organization (Harvard Business Publishing, 2010).

This is not to diminish the daily questions and decisions that need to be readily made regarding daily operations. Those need to follow suit as well in order to guide us closer to our strategic goals and initiatives; it is the overall decision making process that leaders need to improve upon to bring about higher level of organizational improvements and HBP has certainly opened our eyes a little wider towards the importance of making better decisions.


Until we blog again!

References

Brown, D. R. (2011). An Experimental Approach to Organizational Development, Eight Edition. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

Harvard Business Publishing. (2010, October 13). How Companies Can Make Better Decisions. Retrieved from youtube.com: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbxpg6D4Hk8&feature=player_embedded