Insights for 25 January 2007
My first insight isn’t necessarily from something that happened in class today but is something that I have realized as we have worked in this class. One of the reasons that groups or organizations can be difficult to work in is that often people will understand words or directions in different ways. For one example, we had the word “courage” on the board when talking about win-win, lose-lose type situations. Some people in the group defined the word courage in its traditional sense, meaning moral courage. Others defined it as the will to accomplish a task regardless of the consequences. When we had these differing views, it was impossible to come to a conclusion. The same problem exists whenever we work in groups. So, it is important to make sure all people in an organization have the same definition for words and directions.
Another important insight I gained is the necessity of having a clear cut mission. This mission should be something that all members of an organization can work for. Also, when people participate in defining an organization’s mission, they are more likely to put their hearts and minds into the group. I don’t feel that NASA’s employees all had a clear cut sense of mission. The overall group probably had some broad goals, but I don’t get the feeling that there was a goal that ran throughout all the company. When there is an ideal or high mission to achieve, people tend to have a new sense of energy. When this happens, the whole organization gains the energy and bonds together.
Sharing information will win hearts and minds. We are all products of what others think about us. When good ideas are shared, people can receive positive feedback. When they receive positive feedback from the people in their organization, they will feel a greater desire to work with those people and there will be greater cohesiveness. Eventually this desire to work with people can build to unconditional caring or even compassion. Then, employees will work for the aggregate as much as themselves.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Dear Rick,
Forgive me I know not who you are and unfortuatly I have not had the opportunity in formally meeting you. But I wish to make a comment about what you wrote. I found what you said very true about definitions and how words can be looked at from different perspectives. In fact I think everything is looked at from different perspectives because they are 2 ,or more, different people who have lived very differently and although may share some common beliefs but none the less different people. This difference will always cause difference in perspectives. Anyway what I would love to discuss with you is what you said towards the bottom of your post you said, quote "We are all products of what others think about us." I know you probably ment this differently then how I took it but what I'm hearing from that line is we are what people think we are. I'll have to respectfully disagree with you. An example of what I hear that line saying is about the native americans. According to the British and Spainards and Prtugues and all else who went to the new world said the Indians are savages. They dressed immodest and their language sounded like animals, whooping sounds and what not, they live in huts and tents and they shave their heads. Now from their 1600 European perspective I could agree. Now looking at it from a different perspective they were far more advanced then the people from the old world. Maybe not worldly things such as metal, and elaborate dress and guns and such things but many Indian tribes had no sence of lying, cheating, stealing, jealousy . They took only what they needed from mother earth. They shared everything within their community, etc. The list goes on. I don't find those characteristics as savage like. But going back to the beginning the word savage is being defined differently. Anyway sorry to give you an ear full but I believe we are products of our character and actions. I think what's is what defines us not others oppinion.
P.s. this isn't meant to be an argument. But I would love some feedback.
Hey Rick,
I would have to agree with the fact that we all need to share our ideas in an organization and have a clear cut plan and in a utopian society everyone would work for that one goal with the utmost ability that they had.
I however, from what I got out of reading your blog, is that I do not agree that when all ideas are known that everyone will or want to share any compassion or love because in this imperfect world people will tend to take offense immediatly when their idea is not the one and only in consideration. Yet this is only a thought so do give me your feedback on how people will share love and compassion when all thoughts and ideas are know in a clear cut plan.
Post a Comment