Insights for the day 12/12

Putting Your Company's Whole Brain to Work

Group EQ. Get people with various levels of EQ together to make a productive team. Rather, you may never have a choice to choose people with the desired level of EQ. Which means that you work with what you have. It is then about making the team with different EQ levels productive. It is more important to recognize the EQ level of each member of the team. While there are tools available to gauge the EQ level of a person, one may also evaluate the EQ levels by pure observation. Recognize the level of EQ and appreciate it. A high or a low EQ isn't necessarily good or bad. Having people with varied level of EQ working together in teams may lead to conflicts as is mostly the case. it is then about having set norms that need to be followed. This is so that people know the boundaries.

I could put this into perspective from the reading of the case - Bob's meltdown. I see that group EQ has a role to play even if it is a group of the Management team. The case reflects this fact and I can relate it back to my workplace. I remember events where behaviour of certain top brass employees in my company was inconsistent with both, their usual behaviour and the company policies. While at that time I never bothered to think about such behaviour, I can now see what goes behind such behaviour. There was an event of a project manager from the consulting team shouting back at his peer from the development team. It was triggered when the manager from the development team asked the manager from the consulting team to stay a little longer to discuss about an ongoing project. The response from the manager from the consulting team was very surprising and this happened in front of most of the employees. Mostly their direct repots. An incident very similar to the one I read in today's case.

I have two thoughts here. One, how to create an environment where such issues do not happen frequently? And second, Issues like this will happen from time to time. What is it that one can do to fix them soon? If I were in a position similar to Jay Nguyen, my work really starts much earlier than just fire fighting later on. It is a function of team building and discipline (norms) that creates an amicable environment workplace. Here team building is the preventive measure and discipline is the corrective measure. From my work experience I believe team building is a mostly a very simple process but can get complex sometimes. Simply put, it is about getting people to know each other and getting them to appreciate each other. There are all types of people out there and everybody always finds someone that he / she gets along well. It is mostly the circumstances / environment that make the difference. I believe that the answer lies here. If I can create an environment then the tam will usually get along well. Further, there will be times where conflicts of emotions arise. And at such times you may need to fall back to the set norms of the team.

Insights for the day 11/12

The Art of Work:

Today’s session started with a discussion on yesterday’s topic of the CAN groups. Most of the things that I reflected in my yesterdays email were reinforced with the example given to us by Professor Borromeo. He talked about an incident back in 1993 where the news of choosing your CAN group mates reached the students. And their reactions to this news were very different than what was expected of them. The high graders got together in groups and the laggers were left all by themselves. There I saw an opportunity for any of the high graders to assume a position of leadership by taking responsibility of the weaker students. But that did not happen. Obviously very disappointing. This goes on to say how important it is to "Learn" human behaviour. Both, to understand others around you but more importantly to understand oneself. How human beings behave in groups vs. individually; how they behave in the good times vs. the tough times; is a very interesting concept to study and I pursue it carefully. What I can reflect right now in reference to the example shared by Professor Borromeo is that any person can be nice when he/she is surrounded by nice easy surroundings. The true self of a person really emerges in situations that are high pressure and difficult.

The discussion for today mostly revolved around motivation: Self motivation and motivating others. Folks reflected on their understanding of motivation and what motivates them. There were as may versions as voices I could hear. But all thought really neared around defining motivation as a feeling to do a particular thing. The act of making your objective so attractive that it drives you for it.

So where does motivation come from?

Some amount / sort of motivation can be sought from your surroundings. In other words you can be motivated by people / things around you. But such motivation is usually short lived and usually dies down with the accomplishment or failure of the objective. Further, one has to 'depend' on other  people / things to seek motivation which may not always happen. Over the past few years that I have spent working I realize that true and sustainable motivation really comes from within the person. I can motivate myself. I know what works best for me; not others. More importantly, I set my own challenges, however big or small they may be, and so in order to live upto my self esteem, I have to fulfil the promises I have made to myself.

The case in today’s HBO class today was Billy Bonsai. It has taken me a while to appreciate that every case being discussed in the class doesn't really have a solution or a key. And the more I realize this fact that more openly I am able to think. Realizing that these isn't a perfect solution for the case makes me thing out of the box. I think this has been the most important learning at AIM yet. If I imagine being in the situation of Hidayat (the case character) I would most probably consider Billy as a valuable employee that I may not want to lose. He is a positive character of skill, motivation and high on energy. Someone who is always an important ingredient of a team. the issues at hand is really about having Billy be a little more dedicated to his work. And this is never a difficult task as long as the person in question has motivation and positive energy. It is only channelling his energy. As a manager, the most difficult people I have come across are the people who do not have a drive. When there isn't a drive, the only thing you can do is constant monitoring and that can really become very energy sapping.

Insights for the day 10/12

Trouble brews in the team:

Today’s class started with a discussion on the functioning of a group with our CAN groups as an example. We talked about what are the common goals of a particular CAN group.

 I realize that different people have different objectives in a group some of which may be common among its members. In the CAN group example people listed group learning, team work, better grades, completing projects on time, etc as common objectives. However I have a different viewpoint on this. Since in our CAN groups, the performance of one member has no impact on the performance of the others, there cannot be too many common objectives. With the exception of completing projects that have to be submitted by CAN groups as a whole. And such projects are few and far between. With that said, members are mostly guided with their own independent objectives which seldom have other members in the scheme of things. I believe that for a CAN group to really work as team, the performance for the team members should be interrelated. How my fellow group mate does should have at least some bearing on my grades as well. Most of the academic learning happens during the classes and self study sessions. Hence what I expect to take away from my CAN group is experiential learning in terms of group dynamics. The eventual work environment will mostly be marked by working in groups. What I study in MBA will only be useful if I am able to reflect my learnings while working in a group; and frequently a difficult group to work with.

The ideal objectives of working in a CAN group should not be purely academic. I would want to learn how people's behaviours change while working in a group. I would want to learn what works in a group and what doesn't. For some others I see an opportunity to learn things like leveraging other people’s knowledge about a particular subject, experiencing how to make oneself heard in a competitive group, assuming leadership among peers, etc. The CAN groups provide us with a low stake practice ground as compared to the real world. And this opportunity should not be lost in purely maximizing academic learning. While studies are a medium and enhanced academic learning a useful by-product, it is group dynamics that is the real take away for me.

When I reflect back to the case in discussion today, I again realize the importance of understanding the working of a group. It should not have taken Larry Franco as many emails to realize that the group "HAS" to work together. From my experience I believe that it is more important to get the group working together towards a common objective even if it means letting go of the top performer. One cannot hold the cohesiveness performance of the group a ransom to the performance of a single member. While star performers are valuable, it does not necessarily follow that they cannot work in a group. A small amount of counselling and perhaps a stricter action sometimes can do the trick. There will however still be a few exceptions and I know them as "Brain Boxes". For such people to be most productive and successful an individual contributor role would be most suited.

Insights for the day 08/12

The Survival Manual -

The session today started with a discussion on how to build an indept understanding on the subject in discussion. How is it that one can (or in a group) achieve breadth and depth of understanding.

The key lies in probing, in poking the point of discussion from all directions by asking questions. Every question answered will lead to multiple other ideas and observations. Each of which could be probed further until such time that the breadth and depth of the topic is measured. More so in a group discussion.

So how is it really done?

Dont let go of any idea or observation. Explore it further to generate related questions. Keep the though process open by asking open-ended questoins.

One should start by taking a overview of the discussion / topic. Whats going on here? What underlying message is emerging.

At first the answer may be vague and broad and thats healthy for developing a broader undestanding about the topic. Each idea generated here needs to be probed further untill the depth is exhausted. Asking questions like Who? When? Where ? How? and Why? and asking questions like Who not? When not? Where not? How not? and Why not? will add much more dimension to the though process. An indepth discussion on these thoughs will in most cases paint a picture in your mind. Try to read the patterns from this picture. Try and generalize these patterns it and you may end up developing a theorey that could be replicated in other situations too.

This is a constructive method in maddness to the expand the thinking process.

Insights for the day 11/06

The Tipping Point

There are two things I would like to talk about from todays session. These are:

1) The Tipping Point

2) Path to success as I know it

The Tipping Point - 

"The levels at which the momentum for change becomes unstoppable" - Wikipedia

The essence here is again "change". I have expierenced this in the past, both at work and otherwise. But could never give a name to this phenomena. How sometimes things start changing (for good or bad) at a very rapid pace on a very large scale. Some times the initiation of this change is unintentional; unexpected. Eg, a certain movie character, the spread of AIDS, the spread of sudden affinity to a celebrity, an adoption of a behaviour, practicing yoga, etc. If you look around countiously you would realize that these changes happen all the time at various scales.

So who initiates such changes? Who catalizes it? Who follows? These are things I never though of in the past. I learned about these dimensions form todays session. But am not yet able to relate to these very well.

But with insight in the topic now, I am sure I will be more contious about these dimensions.

The other thing I would like to talk about is "The path to success". This is something that i have followed and preached at workplace. Exactly the way it was discussed in the class.

1) Where are we currently? - Unless we know where we are currently, we will not be able to plan to get any where. How would one know how much distance is left to be travelled? And in which direction?

2) Where do we want to get to? - It is important to know our target. Else how will you aim? Unless you know your destination, you would not know the route to get there.

3) How do we get there? - With the above two questions answered we have won half the battle. If a person is countious enough to know where he is and where he needs to go to, he will most likely get there. Such a person would be able to find his own directions. So It is really the first two answers that are most important.

4) How do we know that we are getting there? Ofcourse, you will need to stop and keep evaluation your progress. This lets you change direction / strategy in time if there is a need to do so.

Insights for the day 11/05

The Dance of Change

The essence of todays discussion was CHANGE and how people and organizations react to changes that effect them. Change is the only constant in todays business environment. There are companies that have made fortunes only because they were able to quickly adapt and change according to the changing business needs. At the same time there have been faliures bacause organization were unable to change when required.

I have always known that people are resistant to change but have never really thought about it in much detail; until todays session. "People are usually resistant to a change" was more of a given for me. But I now think about why it is so. Why are people resistant to change and what will it take to make them change, either willingly or forcefully? And is change even required?

Primarily, people are accustomed to a set practices and behaviours. A change may be required form time to time as the external environment changes. We know the business environment today is continously changing and organizations need to be able to adapt quickly and frequently.

People are usually accustomed to their comfort zone. Changing usually means that they step out of their comfort zone. Unless there is a real need or mandate they will not be very willing to do so. So, to change people you will need to make them step out of their confort zone. This can be done by showing them a need to change. Show them what is in it for them. Unless they see a benifit of changing, they will not change. People will do something that makes them feel good. Sometimes, a quick reward, quick results may need to be showcased to help people change. Reward the behaviour that you want people to repeat. Of course, there will always be people who are always unwilling to change. No amount of motivation / reward can make them change their behaviours. This is a common scenario I had seen in my work environment. In such sitations one may need to 'force' people to change. Punish them if need be. Punish them if they are too stubborn for change. Perhaps create an amount of discomfort in their comfort zone.

Furthermore, there may still be people who will just not cchange. Afterall it may not be a bad idea to let such people go. 

Some open questions I would like to be answered

Is there an end to motivation ? I can motivate my people but this is a never ending exercise. The performance goes back to square one as I stop motivation them. Isn't there an end to it?

I may not always be doing the job that I love. What then will keep me motivated all the time?

How do you balance between being people focussed and performance focussed? When to stop being considerate and start firing people?