Random thought that I wrote down during class: People can be reliant upon positive feedback without being achievement focused. As long as they receive positive feedback they will not feel the need to achieve. However, these people will not genuinely feel about themselves, in spite of receiving positive feedback. This is because they are living a double life; they are not achieving while still receiving praise for their minimal achievements. They will feel guilty about this. The better thing to do is to be more achievement focused.
I think it is important to let people set their own deadlines and standards. When they do this, they will be more committed to doing the work. The best way to do this, I believe, is through expectation interviews. An expectation interview is where a manager/leader outlines the needs, resources, and expectations that he or she has of a person. Then, they discuss how something will be completed. Then together they set goals and standards, with the interviewee actually verbalizing the goals and standards. This way, they actually set the rules for themselves and feel like it is something they are doing rather than an imposed mandate.
I cannot overemphasize the need for councils. Working in groups to make decisions is by far the best way to go.
Monday, February 26, 2007
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
Insights for 20 February 2007
I am very pleased with the way the class is going right now. I have realized that although we may not have a textbook and that things have seemed a little crazy, that I have still learned a fair amount (at least, I hope it is a fair amount.) My education usually comes in moments like blogging, where I actually have to cohesively state what I have learned. So, I have found a reason for blooging and writing information down. I learn a great deal by writing because it forces me to think. I suspect that this would apply to everybody.
I came to the conclusion that we will have to rely a great deal on each other. We have multiple committee assignments and obviously won’t be able to be present for all our meetings because we’ll be in different meetings. This will require us to be willing to share knowledge and support each other.
I also believe that we have perhaps turned ourselves into little cliques. It is good for our own group morale, but I think we could have the same feeling throughout the class. I think that we could fix this by making a concerted effort to communicate with people from other groups. As a class, I think we ought to make sure that we are all on the same page, and be open with our information and ideas. Remember, “it is only through the collision of adverse opinions that we have any chance of finding the truth.” –John Stuart Mill
Money. I am a minimalist when it comes to money in business and government. Instead of trying to see how much money we can get, lets try to see how little we can spend and still do a good job. In Elder Eyring’s devotional that we watched, he said that the University will try to do more with less money. President Clark has made similar statements. I think we ought to do our part and minimize the amount of spending we do. Seriously, I have strong emotions (nearing anger) when I see money spent frivolously by companies and governments.
I came to the conclusion that we will have to rely a great deal on each other. We have multiple committee assignments and obviously won’t be able to be present for all our meetings because we’ll be in different meetings. This will require us to be willing to share knowledge and support each other.
I also believe that we have perhaps turned ourselves into little cliques. It is good for our own group morale, but I think we could have the same feeling throughout the class. I think that we could fix this by making a concerted effort to communicate with people from other groups. As a class, I think we ought to make sure that we are all on the same page, and be open with our information and ideas. Remember, “it is only through the collision of adverse opinions that we have any chance of finding the truth.” –John Stuart Mill
Money. I am a minimalist when it comes to money in business and government. Instead of trying to see how much money we can get, lets try to see how little we can spend and still do a good job. In Elder Eyring’s devotional that we watched, he said that the University will try to do more with less money. President Clark has made similar statements. I think we ought to do our part and minimize the amount of spending we do. Seriously, I have strong emotions (nearing anger) when I see money spent frivolously by companies and governments.
Friday, February 16, 2007
Insights from 15 February 2007
Insights from 15 February 2007
Class was a little shorter than usual today, but I still got a couple of good things out of it. For one, I really appreciated Ben’s leadership style (and I am not kissing up!) I like the way that he is staying positive even when it can be frustrating. I also noticed that he doesn’t act like an arrogant dictator but rather looks for other’s ideas and support. Go Ben. Hopefully we can implement this into our own leadership activities.
I have had an idea bouncing around my head lately that has really been bothering me and I got to talk to Brother Adams about it today. My question/moral dilemma was: How can a company run another entity out of business and still feel good about themselves? Is it right to create such a stranglehold on an industry that nobody else can survive in it, especially if your sole purpose is for power or money? After talking with Brother Adams, I took away a couple ideas. Bro. Adams explained that if somebody were to focus just on beating the competition, they would lose sight of the customer. When they lose sight of the customer, their products are no longer designed for the customer but to be better than something else. Eventually, this business will fail because they no longer care about the customer. I had an idea as well. I believe that we are on the earth to help others and make others have the greatest possibility for happiness and enjoyment of their life. So, if you start up a business with the purpose of benefiting others, then your reasons for starting a business are moral and good. If you happen to make loads of money as a result of this (because your product allows people to have a more pleasurable life) that is great. However, if one starts a business for the sole intent of becoming rich, this is not moral and wrong. In this case, the focus is only upon one’s self. This is a strong case of egoism, or, just doing whatever benefits you the most.
Class was a little shorter than usual today, but I still got a couple of good things out of it. For one, I really appreciated Ben’s leadership style (and I am not kissing up!) I like the way that he is staying positive even when it can be frustrating. I also noticed that he doesn’t act like an arrogant dictator but rather looks for other’s ideas and support. Go Ben. Hopefully we can implement this into our own leadership activities.
I have had an idea bouncing around my head lately that has really been bothering me and I got to talk to Brother Adams about it today. My question/moral dilemma was: How can a company run another entity out of business and still feel good about themselves? Is it right to create such a stranglehold on an industry that nobody else can survive in it, especially if your sole purpose is for power or money? After talking with Brother Adams, I took away a couple ideas. Bro. Adams explained that if somebody were to focus just on beating the competition, they would lose sight of the customer. When they lose sight of the customer, their products are no longer designed for the customer but to be better than something else. Eventually, this business will fail because they no longer care about the customer. I had an idea as well. I believe that we are on the earth to help others and make others have the greatest possibility for happiness and enjoyment of their life. So, if you start up a business with the purpose of benefiting others, then your reasons for starting a business are moral and good. If you happen to make loads of money as a result of this (because your product allows people to have a more pleasurable life) that is great. However, if one starts a business for the sole intent of becoming rich, this is not moral and wrong. In this case, the focus is only upon one’s self. This is a strong case of egoism, or, just doing whatever benefits you the most.
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Insights from 13 February 2007
Insights from 13 February 2007
From Tuesday’s class I realized that change starts with me. Brother Adams emphasized this, and I am glad he did. I have grown a little tired of the negativity that seems to exist in our class. I often will find myself annoyed with other people and our overall lack of progress as a class. However, today I realized that my negativity will get us no where. If I choose to be negative and constantly critical, nothing constructive will come about. If I choose to be positive and optimistic, then the likelihood of good things happening is much higher, even if it takes awhile. As an individual, team, or organization, our self-fulfilling prophecies will surely come to pass.
Beginning with the end in mind: The 11-year goals sheet is an awesome idea. When we know what we are working for, and we are dedicated to a cause, then it becomes easier to want to suffer now for the end goal. If we don’t have the end in mind, then all suffering that we currently go through seems meaningless and it will be easy to give up.
My final insight is to include others. Sometimes there are those that will withdraw from the group. That is not a good thing. One of my philosophies is that a society has a responsibility to itself, whether the society is a class, a business, a nation, or the world. We are put here to help others out. In lifting others, we lift our society, which in turn lifts one’s self.
From Tuesday’s class I realized that change starts with me. Brother Adams emphasized this, and I am glad he did. I have grown a little tired of the negativity that seems to exist in our class. I often will find myself annoyed with other people and our overall lack of progress as a class. However, today I realized that my negativity will get us no where. If I choose to be negative and constantly critical, nothing constructive will come about. If I choose to be positive and optimistic, then the likelihood of good things happening is much higher, even if it takes awhile. As an individual, team, or organization, our self-fulfilling prophecies will surely come to pass.
Beginning with the end in mind: The 11-year goals sheet is an awesome idea. When we know what we are working for, and we are dedicated to a cause, then it becomes easier to want to suffer now for the end goal. If we don’t have the end in mind, then all suffering that we currently go through seems meaningless and it will be easy to give up.
My final insight is to include others. Sometimes there are those that will withdraw from the group. That is not a good thing. One of my philosophies is that a society has a responsibility to itself, whether the society is a class, a business, a nation, or the world. We are put here to help others out. In lifting others, we lift our society, which in turn lifts one’s self.
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Insights for 8 February 2007
The drawing relates to my second comment.
Last class was…interesting…
“Only by the collision of adverse opinions do we have any chance of finding the truth.” –John Stuart Mill, it probably isn’t the exact quote, but the general idea is there. No one person has the right idea. One person is incapable of having the whole truth. When there are two opposing views, the correct/ best answer is probably in the middle. It requires two people who are willing to work with each other and to be equally open to persuasion in order to make the best decision. Why do you think the bishops of the Church have counselors? Why does the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles meet as a council to make decisions? It is because the collective knowledge, skills, and ideas are greater than one person can possess on their own. In these initial stages of start up, it is important that we recognize that there will and should be debate. This debate need not be angry or high-spirited, but there will be people that disagree with you and that is okay. I do not have a monopoly on the truth and neither does any other person. We may have good ideas and strong opinions, but we need to be willing to change our minds if there is something better than what we have in mind.
Having said this, here is one of my ideas (open to correction!) The way the Church organizes the missions is an example of an adhocracy. If the mission president (or the Lord, really) needs a certain type of missionary as a district leader in one area, he can call him to that position. If he needs another type of missionary to serve in a struggling branch, he can move that missionary there. If he no longer needs a certain type of missionary to be his assistant, he can release him and call a different missionary. And in the Church, generally people are alright with that. But when it comes to the corporate world, many are not alright with this method because they want to remain in power, regardless of what is best for the company or community. I drew the little diagram to illustrate the communication channels of a mission. I think our little firm should have essentially the same structure. I know my idea isn’t complete and I feel like I need to sit back and think on it a bit, but I am going to post it as is with the hopes that it will improve over time.
Last class was…interesting…
“Only by the collision of adverse opinions do we have any chance of finding the truth.” –John Stuart Mill, it probably isn’t the exact quote, but the general idea is there. No one person has the right idea. One person is incapable of having the whole truth. When there are two opposing views, the correct/ best answer is probably in the middle. It requires two people who are willing to work with each other and to be equally open to persuasion in order to make the best decision. Why do you think the bishops of the Church have counselors? Why does the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles meet as a council to make decisions? It is because the collective knowledge, skills, and ideas are greater than one person can possess on their own. In these initial stages of start up, it is important that we recognize that there will and should be debate. This debate need not be angry or high-spirited, but there will be people that disagree with you and that is okay. I do not have a monopoly on the truth and neither does any other person. We may have good ideas and strong opinions, but we need to be willing to change our minds if there is something better than what we have in mind.
Having said this, here is one of my ideas (open to correction!) The way the Church organizes the missions is an example of an adhocracy. If the mission president (or the Lord, really) needs a certain type of missionary as a district leader in one area, he can call him to that position. If he needs another type of missionary to serve in a struggling branch, he can move that missionary there. If he no longer needs a certain type of missionary to be his assistant, he can release him and call a different missionary. And in the Church, generally people are alright with that. But when it comes to the corporate world, many are not alright with this method because they want to remain in power, regardless of what is best for the company or community. I drew the little diagram to illustrate the communication channels of a mission. I think our little firm should have essentially the same structure. I know my idea isn’t complete and I feel like I need to sit back and think on it a bit, but I am going to post it as is with the hopes that it will improve over time.
Thursday, February 8, 2007
BLOGGING ISN'T AS HARD AS WE TRY TO MAKE IT!
Okay, blogging isn't that hard. I had no clue what to do at the beginning of this class. I hardly even knew what a blog was. However, by just being patient, reading and perserverance, I feel like I have been able to become a successful blogger and feel fairly confident about the whole thing. It really isn't that bad.
6 February 2007 Insights- A rather revealing day
Insights for 6 February 2007
I cannot emphasize how much the level of dysfunction graph impressed me. I believe that it is very relevant to any organization. I also liked the explanations of what dysfunctional behaviors are. Whenever I begin exhibiting some of those behaviors, I can look at what is building to my dysfunction and try to rectify the problems. Also, when I see others who have the same problems, I can show empathy instead of frustration with them and attempt to help them cope with the events that lead to their frustration.
I also realized during this class period that I need to worry less about being perfect all the time, especially when I am new to something. I like the levels of progression: forming, storming, norming, performing, and then adjourning. It made me realize that when I begin a project, I should not expect to master it straight away. By knowing this, I can reduce my stress levels and teach this same concept to others.
We also made a list of all the stressors that can affect BYU-Idaho students. The list was pretty long and comprehensive. I can make a similar list for myself. By doing this, I can identify specific issues that are elevating my stress and anxiety levels. Once the identification is made, I can begin to address the issues at hand. This principle has universal application.
I cannot emphasize how much the level of dysfunction graph impressed me. I believe that it is very relevant to any organization. I also liked the explanations of what dysfunctional behaviors are. Whenever I begin exhibiting some of those behaviors, I can look at what is building to my dysfunction and try to rectify the problems. Also, when I see others who have the same problems, I can show empathy instead of frustration with them and attempt to help them cope with the events that lead to their frustration.
I also realized during this class period that I need to worry less about being perfect all the time, especially when I am new to something. I like the levels of progression: forming, storming, norming, performing, and then adjourning. It made me realize that when I begin a project, I should not expect to master it straight away. By knowing this, I can reduce my stress levels and teach this same concept to others.
We also made a list of all the stressors that can affect BYU-Idaho students. The list was pretty long and comprehensive. I can make a similar list for myself. By doing this, I can identify specific issues that are elevating my stress and anxiety levels. Once the identification is made, I can begin to address the issues at hand. This principle has universal application.
Tuesday, February 6, 2007
Insights from 1 February
The necessity of a purpose: I will admit to bieng slightly confused and not suer where we were really headed in the class. I wasn't angry about it, but just slightly frustrated because I wasn't sure of the expectations. However, after Brother Adams outlined the desired results for the class, I felt much reassured. I fell that once I knew what my purpose was, I have a stronger desire to work hard and to learn. I now know what I should be learning as a result of this class.
Ever since I have heard of the Stephen R. Covey's steps to interdependence, I have tried to follow them. We can be so much more productive by being in the interdependent stage. I especially like the idea of synergy-combining energy with others to create more than we could alone, or as a disjointed group. When synergy occurs, 1+1=3.
Ever since I have heard of the Stephen R. Covey's steps to interdependence, I have tried to follow them. We can be so much more productive by being in the interdependent stage. I especially like the idea of synergy-combining energy with others to create more than we could alone, or as a disjointed group. When synergy occurs, 1+1=3.
Thursday, February 1, 2007
30 January 2007
Insights for 30 January 2007
The principle of stewardship delegation is very important in providing people with a sense of purpose. On my mission, we were trained in giving “expectation interviews” which were interviews to explain the responsibilities of one’s stewardship. In these interviews, I would use the same basic format found in the steps for stewardship delegation. The principles used there can apply to the “real world” as well.
It is important to understand who has stake in the success of a company or program. When we know who the stakeholders are, then we know who is affected. When we know who is affected, then we know who we have leverage with to receive help. Identifying the stakeholders also helps us to see how interconnected everybody is. My success is dependent on others support, and other’s success is dependent upon my support. Therefore, in order for me to have optimum success, I should support others as much as possible.
To optimize the whole the parts cannot all be optimized. Therefore, parts must be sub-optimized. This is a true principle, wherever we go. To use an analogy, we could talk about a football team. A coach could spend all his time training the quarterback, and never work with anybody else. As a result, the linemen wouldn’t block, the receivers wouldn’t catch, and there would be no point to having a good quarterback. However, if the coach spread his time throughout the team, they could work together as a whole and hopefully be good.
The principle of stewardship delegation is very important in providing people with a sense of purpose. On my mission, we were trained in giving “expectation interviews” which were interviews to explain the responsibilities of one’s stewardship. In these interviews, I would use the same basic format found in the steps for stewardship delegation. The principles used there can apply to the “real world” as well.
It is important to understand who has stake in the success of a company or program. When we know who the stakeholders are, then we know who is affected. When we know who is affected, then we know who we have leverage with to receive help. Identifying the stakeholders also helps us to see how interconnected everybody is. My success is dependent on others support, and other’s success is dependent upon my support. Therefore, in order for me to have optimum success, I should support others as much as possible.
To optimize the whole the parts cannot all be optimized. Therefore, parts must be sub-optimized. This is a true principle, wherever we go. To use an analogy, we could talk about a football team. A coach could spend all his time training the quarterback, and never work with anybody else. As a result, the linemen wouldn’t block, the receivers wouldn’t catch, and there would be no point to having a good quarterback. However, if the coach spread his time throughout the team, they could work together as a whole and hopefully be good.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)