A631.1.5.RB_PALUGODCAROLYN

The EcoSeagate team development process is definitely a very valuable tool and I think would be an amazing team-building experience for any company.  I have participated in a few teambuilding exercises with a few of the companies I worked for, never on this scale, but still very noteworthy.  At the IT firm I used to work for they did a company-wide sky-diving excursion.  Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately) I was hired right after that event.  Everyone except for a handful of employees participated, even the oldest member, a 65 year old executive manager and his wife jumped out of a plane.  The next year we did laser tag.  It was a great team-building and morale-building exercise.  Last year during our annual graduation/conference event we all participated in a zip line course in Germany.  There were a few low-risk mandatory events that required a lot of teamwork and little physical activity.  This was a great feeling and taught us to let down our inhibitions and open communication with our fellow workmates.  Some exercises had us skin to skin with each other.  Shy people opened up and aggressive people toned down.  It seems that these types of intimate experiences made us all more aware of ourselves and our behaviors.  After the mandatory group exercises, those who wanted to continue were grouped into teams of four to do the zip line courses through the trees.  This was extremely challenging for me because of my atrocious fear of heights.  To top things off, the regional dean and mega boss of the entire region, was one of my teammates.  But titles and positions disappeared the minute he had to hold my hand and gently nudge and encourage me across the line when I became frozen with fear on the line.  My relationship with him completely changed.  And, although I continued to interact with the same kind of respect for his authority, my admiration of his leadership increased.  This same feeling also carried across to other members of our company such as the President/Chancellor and directors.  The CEO of Seagate, Bill Watkins explained in an interview that the team building experiences always take place in awe-inspiring environments that feel foreign to the participants (O'Brien, 2008).  The idea is to make the participants feel off-balanced and “making them uncomfortable as a way to open their minds” (2008).

I believe these types of experiences are important in high-performing organizations such as mine because it gives us the opportunity to cross barriers that we would have never felt comfortable crossing.  Before the zip line experience, I would have never felt comfortable having a casual conversation with the President, but afterwards, it seems like the most natural thing to do.  It seemed to bring everyone to ground zero.  These exercises forced us to trust each other and brought to the light, not only our weaknesses but our strengths.  I learned a lot about myself, and realized that my self-consciousness was auto created and auto-maintained.  Also, the belief that my teammates had in me brought out a confidence and assertiveness in me that I was unaware existed.  One thing that Jeffrey Pfeffer, professor of organizational behavior at Stanford University, forewarns us about is making sure that the “underlying ethic” lives on after the event.  Meaning that the experience is completely worthless if members don’t take the lessons learned and apply them to their professional environments.  The beauty of EcoSeagate is that each day started off with a pep-talk and a theme such as Conflict, Commitment, and Accountability.  The experiences were then related back to the themes which made the experiences not only personal, but added to their professional growth.

References

Max, S. (2006, April 2). Seagate's morale-athon. Retrieved from http://www.businessweek.com/stories/2006-04-02/seagates-morale-athon

Ming Chao.  (2008, April 26).  Eco Seagate 2008 2/3 [Video file].  Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Etwuap-_Azk&feature=youtu.be

Ming Chao.  (2008, April 26).  Eco Seagate 2008 1/3 [Video file].  Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCOfOFMiLtE&feature=youtu.be

O'Brien, J. (2008, May 21). Team building in paradise. Retrieved from http://money.cnn.com/2008/05/20/technology/obrien_seagate.fortune/index.htm 

A630.9.4.RB_PALUGODCAROLYN

          After watching Schmidt’s video, I do feel that the Google Culture makes sense and that the building blocks for a culture that inspires effectiveness, efficiency and success are the employees.  Therefore, it all has to start at the hiring process.  Schmidt makes a very valid point when he says “you need to develop a culture where people actually are going to do what they’re going to do” (McKinsey&Company, 2011).  Google is successful because they hire the brightest talent.  But Schmidt also explains that they are passionate about what they do, enjoy their jobs and feel that this is a long-term fit.  Schmidt also mentions that one of the most important elements when recruiting is to look for compatibility.  I think the key here is not that everyone will be the same, because he mentions that discord is important so a company can evolve and make good business decisions.  But members have to be team players.  Also, Brown explains in his book that employees have to feel as part of the company, this creates ownership.  It not only matters that you hire the right kind of people, but you know how to retain them (Brown, 2011). 

            I think the business model that Google uses in regards to their hiring, as well as how they manage their employees (which is a kind of hands-off management), can be tricky and does take courage.  In essence, you are trusting your employees that they are going to do what they said they were going to do.  You have faith in their passion for their work and for the company.  That is why it is essential to start at the hiring process.  For example, at my husband’s company this model would be impossible.  First of all, there is a lot of favoritism and a lot of internal hiring of family members.  Members of the company have no loyalty to the company and only go to collect a paycheck.  They don’t necessarily feel passionate about their jobs and see it as a means to an end.  I don’t think the Google model would work for certain industries.  I suspect that it would not work for most unskilled workers who learned to do their jobs not because of passion but because of necessity.  

            At my office and my company, most of us from my experience, love what we do.  Interestingly enough, our offices have a high turn-over rate.  Not because people are unhappy, but because of the nature of the military life.  Most of our hires are dependent spouses who have to leave their positions because their military spouses are being sent to another destination.  Also, we work in small communities so everyone knows everyone and we get great satisfaction in helping people.  In my opinion, the Google culture is a bit of an anomaly.  I can imagine it working for smaller companies but am still fascinated by how it functions with a company with such a large employee-base.

            I think that the culture that Schmidt describes in his video takes a very special type of leader and very distinctive types of employees.  It only takes one “bad apple” to rock the boat, and if leadership is not careful, this one person can end up tipping the scales.  Although I admire what Google has been able to achieve in regards to its culture, I don’t see its realistic application in the real world so easily.  I think it is the kind of culture that has to be constantly nurtured, observed, and tweaked in order to survive.

References

Brown, D. R. (2011). An experiential approach to organization development (7th ed.). Retrieved from http://www.coursesmart.com/9780136106906/firstsection

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

A630.8.4.RB_PALUGODCAROLYN

        Tom Wujec tells us in his presentation that kindergarteners are better on the Marshmallow Challenge then MBA students and most adults (TED, 2010).  I will have to agree on this point for many reasons.  At that age, children are naturally curious and intuitive.  They haven’t been tainted by modern world views which in many ways can restrict free imagination and creativity.  In an article I read online, it says that children from between the age of 4 and 5 will “construct elaborate ways to solve problems” (Scholastic, n.d.).  And when they are using objects, for example to create or represent things, they will also add to those objects to create new things.  This is what Wujec describes as building the prototypes.  Whereas the business students are trained to follow and execute one single plan, the kindergartener is building from the marshmallow, successive prototypes and “fixing” the errors with each try (TED, 2010).  
 

            In the marshmallow challenge, Wujec also points out that CEO’s who have an executive assistant on their team do better at the challenge then CEO’s alone.  He explains that this happens because the executive assistants have the special skills of facilitation and of managing processes.  I can vouch for this first hand and I can see how facilitation skills suffer when one steps out of the administrative role or spends more time delegating tasks as CEO’s.  Before I was hired, my Director had my position as Assistant Director and she was under the supervision of a person who travelled most of the time, therefore leaving her to run the show.  When I was hired, she took the Director position and I took over a lot of the administrative tasks and in turn left her open to focus more on working on reports, marketing plans, future projections and other big projects.  She is really a wonder woman and has been able to run the office flawlessly for many years without me.  When I started, we had a lot of changes not just in processes and policies but technology as well.  New programs have replaced old ones and administrative functions have been streamlined to make things more efficient.  Since I’ve begun taking over many of the administrative functions, she has begun to rely on me more and has allowed me to take care of “managing the processes” while she oversees and works on bigger projects and long-term goals.  And although she assists me when needed with the more mundane responsibilities, I am very capable and delegate very little to her (this is one of the things I need to work on).  I have noticed over the years that she is not as up-to-date with some of the newer processes or some of the technology we use since I manage more of the everyday activities in the office.  I believe me and her make an excellent team for this reason because she is able to focus on the types of projects that would never get done if consumed by all the small processes involved in keeping our office going.  As the facilitator, I see how things work, I watch how things evolve and can better predict the outcomes sometimes because I have to fix and tweak things constantly along the way.

I think that the marshmallow challenge is a perfect example of how process intervention works.  Brown defines process intervention as a process that aims “at helping the work group to become more aware of its own processes, including the way it operates, and to use this knowledge to solve its own problems” (Brown, 2011, p. 199).  The marshmallow challenge is also a way to bring members of a group together to work through a process to solve a problem, in this case create the tallest structure that will hold a marshmallow.  Also the five crucial areas for effective organization performance which are: “communication, member roles and functions in groups, group problem solving and decision making, group norms and growth, and leadership and authority” (Brown, 2011, p. 200) are also needed in successfully executing the marshmallow challenge.

I think the biggest takeaway for me from Wujec’s presentation is one of the main lessons of the marshmallow challenge which is to “identify the hidden assumption” in the project or task that you are working on.  Sometimes we are so focused on what we think we know about something that we miss everything else around it.  So much of what we do on an everyday basis is done with blinders on or automatically.  We tune out our feelings and intuition and rely on facts and what we see with the human eye.  There are so many other ways to gather information and as Wujec explains that it “demands that we bring all of our senses to the task, and that we apply the very best of our thinking, our feeling and our doing to the challenge that we have at hand” (TED, 2010).  I think the marshmallow challenge and all problem-solving tasks challenge our realities, and the beauty of working in teams is that you approach that challenge from many different angles because of the advantage of multiple perspectives.  The real feat of accomplishment is to learn to respect every angle as a possible solution and work those angles together as a group.

References

Brown, D. R. (2011). An experiential approach to rrganization development (7th ed.). Retrieved from http://www.coursesmart.com/9780136106906/firstsection

Scholastic. (n.d.). How children solve problems. Retrieved from http://www.scholastic.com/browse/subarticle.jsp?id=3434

TED (Producer). (2010). Build a tower, build a team [Video]. Available from http://www.ted.com/talks/tom_wujec_build_a_tower

Michael Bonsignore, CEO of Honeywell, states that Honeywell will not be an extension of the old Honeywell or Allied Signal (Bethune & Bonsignore, 2011). To create a new culture that blends the best of the two merged companies of Allied Signal and Honeywell, he will reward those who look for best practices and punish those who don’t.  I definitely feel that rewarding and compensating members of both organizations who practice good management and good work is definitely a major factor for the future success of the merger.  Punishment on the other hand, in my opinion, needs to be dished out delicately.  We have to remember that corporate culture is very difficult to change and therefore tact, patience, understanding and compassion is needed when trying to change the cultural beliefs of the companies.  Brown explains that during a merger, when there is a clash of corporate cultures there will be a clashing of beliefs, norms, values and that these differences “can manifest a nonproductive ‘we’ versus ‘they’ situation if the parties involved are not made aware of, and sensitive to, the cultural differences”(2011, p. 66).   I think that Honeywell will be successful as long as they are sensitive to these changes and to the cultural differences.  Brown makes a reference to the Honeywell and Allied Signal merger in his book and refers to the situation of the employees as being on a burning platform.  Bossidy, former CEO of Allied Signal explained that “to inaugurate large-scale change, you may have to create the burning platform. You have to give people a reason to do something differently. . . . Scaring people isn’t the answer. You try to appeal to them. The more they understand why you want change, the easier it is to commit to it" (Brown, 2011, p. 149).  

The barriers that I see with the Honeywell and Allied Signal merger are the same barriers you see in any merger.  Future shock is a definite barrier as the cultures will clash and change will happen quicker than members can assimilate.  This is a typical reaction to a merger and one that an effective leader will need to deal with immediately to avoid a complete management melt-down.  Other barriers would be related to the reactions of employees affected by the merger and their resistance to change.  The resistance can rise from such things as uncertainties and fears of the unknown, disruption of routine and lack of desire to change how they do things (Brown, 2011).  They may feel their job security is threatened or their position of power.  And social networks within the company are disturbed as well creating more conflict.  It is important to create a climate that is conducive to change and to increase employee motivation and morale.  

Some of the success factors to consider when strategizing for a change in culture is to make sure to consider all three major systems which are the behavioral, technical and structural (Brown, 2011).  As new technologies are incorporated into Honeywell, careful attention has to be made to how these changes affect the other systems.  Structural systems may change due to shifting of power and responsibilities, changes in company policies due to the merger and other procedural changes.  And of course, the system most impacted and that will require the most attention is the behavioral system which will be challenging the cultural clashing of two different companies.  

My takeaway from this exercise in regards to my company and future leadership opportunities is that you capture more flies with honey.  Mr. Bethune, explains that there is “100% correlation between employee happiness and customer satisfaction” and that is why he was able to turn a 200 million loss into a 200 million profit (Bethune & Bonsignore, 2011).  People work hard and treat customers well because they are happy and they are being treated well.  It is the old adage “treat others as you would like to be treated”.  This really is a philosophy I have always lived by.  Mr. Bonsignore also gives some good advice that I will definitely remember which is “you have to be adaptable despite the circumstances around you”.  Sometimes I forget this when I get into a tough situation where I don’t like the changes that are happening.  Working against the current will get you nowhere, at some point you have to adapt to survive.  This is a natural law of survival.  Most of what both of these CEO’s talked about are the basic courtesies that most of us grow up with.  Be nice to people, don’t lie, don’t cause trouble, try and get along and play well with others.  These are basic playground rules that we all learn as children and have to remember to continue practicing as adults.  

References

Bethune, G., & Bonsignore, M. (2011). Mastering the art of corporate reinvention (Jeff Greenfield, Interviewer) [Video]. Available from Films on Demand.

Brown, D. R. (2011). An experiential approach to organization development (7th ed.). Retrieved from http://www.coursesmart.com/9780136106906/firstsection