Sunday, January 26, 2014

A630.2.4.RB_PALUGODCAROLYN

         RSA (Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce) uses the strapline or slogan 21st Century Enlightenment because as it states on their website, they pay “tribute to the 18th century founders of the organisation and to the pioneering spirit that inspired them” (RSA website, n.d.).  In essence, their introductory video serves as an introduction to their idealisms and beliefs regarding modern day human evolution (Taylor, 2010).  I believe that this organization has used the slogan “21st century enlightenment” as a way of comparison of the era we live in now and the original period that coincides with the Age of Enlightenment.  The Age of Enlightenment was a cultural movement between the period of 1700 to 1800, a type of rebirth of society.  It was a shift in thinking.  For 18th century philosopher, Emmanuel Kant “the enlightenment was mankind's final coming of age, the emancipation of the human consciousness from an immature state of ignorance." (as cited by Porter "Age of Enlightenment," 2014).  I believe that the mission of RSA and the message that the video tries to convey, is that people today need to shift towards a more conscientious way of thinking and a more humane way of acting.  

            In the video, Matthew Taylor says "to live differently, you have to think differently" (2010).  I believe that this statement mirrors the rising need to shift our awareness and perspectives towards another way of thinking in order to continue evolving as human beings.  It seems that in this era of consumerism, we have become stuck in a stagnant process of an illusory sense of self-betterment.  In my opinion, the economic crisis was the entity of human consciousness itself shaking off a very bad illness: Self-serving individualism.  It seems that the lack of financial stability has woken people up from a narcissistic consumerist slumber.  We now realize we don’t have the resources to change out our iphone every time a new model comes out, we’re not able to change out our slightly used 5 year old Honda accord for the newest model, and we’re no longer able to dine out 7 days a week.   The statement “to live differently, you have to think differently is the new Modus operandi needed in today’s society to continue evolving towards a better species of human being.

Taylor also argues that we need "to resist our tendencies to make right or true that which is merely familiar and wrong or false that which is only strange".  What he means by this is, don’t judge a book by its cover, don’t discriminate, broaden your perspectives, and be open-minded.  So much of the hatred and misjudgments that occur are based on pure ignorance and small world mentalities.  I sometimes get into arguments with my husband about cultural issues that we do not agree on.  I am American/Spanish by nationality but was born in England.  My father is Filipino and my mother is Spanish.  I am a Navy brat and have lived and travelled the world.  I would consider myself quite multicultural.  My husband on the other hand is Spanish, born and raised.  Lived in Sevilla all his life until he moved to Rota where we are now.  Besides leisurely travel to surrounding European countries, he’s really not been exposed to cultural backgrounds long enough to appreciate or understand them.  His knowledge and acceptance of other cuisines besides Spanish food is very limited.  One of his common phrases that really gets to me is “no one thinks like that”.  His profile of “no one” is based on 20-40 year old southern Spanish men from middle-class backgrounds.  What Taylor is suggesting is that we be willing to accept that our beliefs could be wrong or that contrasting beliefs may be right; taking into consideration that “wrong” and “right” are really subjective terms since each person has their own unique perspectives of the world and its relative polarities of “good and evil” or “black and white”.     

I definitely agree with Taylor in that we need to avoid pop culture that degrades people.  So much of today’s television revolves around reality shows that focus on ridiculing and criticizing people.  This focus on the mundane happenings of celebrities, who are not even part of our circle of family or friends, forces us to focus our attention and empathy on the insignificant problems of a stranger, instead of seeing the greater needs and issues of the real world around us.  Our infatuation with pop culture has “dumbed” us down and made us into a superficial and narcissistic culture.  How can you possible worry about world hunger when Brittney has been dumped again by another Hollywood loser.  We cannot fathom a world outside of those blinders.  Pop culture today is successful if it creates a reaction in you, regardless of whether it is positive or not.  We want to be shocked, offended, frightened, and if we are not, then we were not fully entertained.  Psychologist Robert Kegan claims “that successfully functioning in society with diverse values, traditions and lifestyles requires, in his words, to have a relationship to our own reactions rather than be captive of them” (Taylor, 2010).  I think what he means by “have a relationship to our own reactions” is that we need to be conscious of why we react to things and analyze our thought processes.  Don’t just take for granted how you initially react or feel about something; instead ask yourself why you feel that way.   So much of what we feel is influenced by our environment and those around us instead of a reflection of our own true beliefs.  I believe that the only way that we will be able to transform into empathetic citizens is to begin becoming more self-aware instead of reactive.  

      At the end of the video, Taylor uses a quote by Margaret Mead to emphasize how the enlightenment and how our modern day society has crushed individualized creative thinking “never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world, indeed it is the only thing that has” (Taylor, 2010).  As positive as this statement might sound, might we have moved away too much from intuitive and self-autonomous thinking that we have stunted innovation and growth in our society?  So much focus is on teamwork and collaborative ideas that it doesn’t leave much room for the independent thinker.  Although I think it is important that entities such as organizations, governments and companies have some kind of democratic system of consensus, we need to make sure that we are also nurturing environments for creative and independent thought and creating safeguards for this type of thinking.  If not, we can potentially be killing off amazing new discoveries.

            My takeaway from this video is the idea of going back to practices that are founded in compassion, respect and integrity.  In the video Taylor points out that “we live in a world where so many of us feel that the shape of our lives is dictated not by the idea of a life fully lived but by the social convention and economic circumstance” (2010).  I believe that most of us want to make a difference in the world and that genuinely we are an empathetic species.  I also believe that people will resonate better with an organization that inspires an empathetic work culture which in the end will create positive outcomes.  Another takeaway is the idea of practicing more intuitive ways of thinking.  I think that we have become such logical thinkers that we have completely snuffed out the type of conscious thinking that creates greatness.  Conscious thinking also gives way to self-awareness which is an essential behavior that leads to empathy.

 
References

Taylor, M. [RSA]. (2010, August 19). RSA Animate - 21st Century Enlightenment  [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AC7ANGMy0yo

Thursday, January 16, 2014

A630.1.4.RB_PALUGODCAROLYN



My first professional job came to me while I was working on my Masters at VCU in Richmond, Virginia.  It started as a work-study program which quickly turned into full-time employment, forcing me to make the decision to put my Masters on hold.  It was a starter-up nonprofit organization that provided surgical services to children in developing countries.  Part of the organization’s mission required running a small office of five employees, while the other part of the job required the planning, organization and execution of medical missions to our partnering countries that received these volunteer services.  Part of our mission was to bring children from Guatemala, Honduras, St. Vincent and other underdeveloped countries to Richmond Virginia for life-saving surgeries.  Children always came with a parent or guardian.  Many of these families were not used to modern day conveniences, some, especially families from remote Mayan villages, had never even seen things such as a toilet, lamps, microwaves, or light switches.  Therefore, when these families arrived in Richmond, they needed constant guidance and attention.  Families had to be picked up from the airport, sometimes arriving at airports that were 2 and 3 hours away.  Once they arrived, they needed to be taken to their accommodations and given an orientation.  Depending on their level of knowledge, orientation could range from giving them a tour of their surroundings and explaining the rules of the house to showing them how to turn on a faucet.  The families also relied on our organization as their primary source of transportation for hospital visits, trips to the grocery store, church (if they requested it) and general entertainment.  Beyond all the responsibilities that came with caring for the families, we also had an office to run that was open from 0900-1700 Monday through Friday.  

When I began with the organization, they disposed of 5 or 6 volunteers and a few friends that assisted with the families.  It quickly became clear that we were severely understaffed and way over our heads.  But everyone was so busy, between running the office, going on missions and assisting with the families, that there was no time to develop any changes in the way we did things.  We had to keep trudging along the best we could.  Burn-out came quickly, and slowly the environment in the office became very negative.  I had never worked for a nonprofit before and had no experience with volunteerism, but it was clear to me that we needed help.  Although I couldn’t label it back then, I was in the beginning stages of organizational development by observing the problem and brainstorming solutions.  Our reading effectively explains that “OD is based on a systematic appraisal and diagnosis of problems, leading to planned and specific types of change efforts” and “is aimed at overall organizational health and effectiveness” (Brown, 2011, p. 5).  It was obvious an appraisal of our current situation was necessary and the health of the organization itself as well as the employees was seriously affected. We didn’t have the money to hire people, so volunteers were our only solution.  I took the initiative to begin a volunteer program at my organization with no idea as to what I was doing.  I began to do research and asked the Director if they would pay for me to attend some volunteer training seminars.  My Director agreed, but again, no one had the time to help me get this program off the ground.  I was the only person that saw the big picture and understood that it would be difficult in the beginning to get the program going because it required a lot of work and time, all of which we had none.   With some general training I started to recruit volunteers.  I would visit local civic groups in the area and advocate our cause.  Sometimes I would even bring one of the children with me as pity bait.  Finally people started biting.  
  

When the first real group of volunteers started working with us, my co-workers started noticing.  At that point, we were all tired of the trips to the airport in the middle of the night to pick up families who had taken the red-eye flights.  Little by little, the volunteers started taking over the responsibilities that kept us out of the office all day, allowing us to focus more on fundraising, advocacy and missions.  Once my team realized the change in our responsibilities, they began to acknowledge the need for a formal volunteer program.  My title changed from Administrative Assistant to Volunteer Director. 
 


As our organization increased, and administrative duties grew exponentially, I also incorporated an internship program.  Again, I was faced with some resistance at first.  I was again able to convince my Director that the benefits we would receive from senior college-level interns in our office would outweigh any minor resources needed to get this program off the ground.

Needless to say, when I left my organization five years later, we had a volunteer pool of about 60 individuals and 3 part-time interns.  The simple staff of five employees was able to focus primarily on the administrative responsibilities and adhere to a reasonable work schedule.  The moral of the story is that sometimes it is difficult to convince an organization of change, especially if it risks disrupting their regular patterns of work.  People with high demanding jobs sometimes have blinders on their eyes which keep them from seeing the big picture.  They are just trying to stay afloat.  I believe that organizational development and change is essential for the survival of an organization because it prevents it from becoming too stagnant.  As Brown states in his book “organizations are never completely static and they do not exist in isolation of other entities” (2011, p. 3).  

 To compare to the video A Tale of Power and Vision I would say that my co-workers played the characters of pessimism and pragmatism because they were not able to overcome the obstacle because it required too much work and did not seem fathomable at the time (Sally Kohn, 2007). I played the part of power and vision because I was able to look ahead and see a better future for us despite the immense crater that separated us from that future.

References