A630.2.4.RB- 21st Century Enlightenment

The philosophical movement of the 18th century emphasized the use of reason to scrutinize previously accepted doctrines and traditions which brought changes to modernize values, norms and lifestyles. I feel as though Matthew Taylor’s piece was named 21st Century Enlightenment because as we have progressed forward there is a need to keep seeking enlightenment. Taylor stated in his video that “we need to live differently, to do so we need to think differently”.

Change your thoughts, change the world. This reminds me of “if you want something you have never had, you have to do something you have never done.” If you keep approaching each situation the same way, the results will be the same. To see change you have to change something and everything we do stems from our thinking. Thoughts become words, words become actions and habitually that shapes character. Your thoughts resonate in what you do and who you are. Matthew Taylor believes this is “the result of us responding automatically to the world around us rather than the outcome of conscious decision making” (Taylor, n.d., n.p.). Instead of reacting perhaps we can train ourselves to slow down and reflect so that we have the opportunity to think differently.

During the video, Taylor brings up another point which is “to resist our tendencies to make right or true that which is merely familiar and wrong or false that which is only strange". I have noticed this practice more than I care to mention. On a more laughable scale, this is the story of Sam I Am and his green eggs and ham. He did not want to try green eggs and ham, he did not think he would like it; perhaps they were just as unfamiliar to him as they would be to us. But alas, he tried it and he liked it. We cling to what we know, perhaps as a protective mechanism. I see election signs starting to take up real estate in yards throughout the community ushering support for selected candidates. I often wonder if those candidates are winning on their merit or their name recognition. I imagine seeing a name on the ballot and a fair number of people selecting that which is familiar to them because time and care was not taken to have a different basis for choosing.

An example of this that I experienced is when I went to college in Mississippi. It was a place that was unfamiliar to where I grew up and culturally quite different. I saw a lot of close-minded fear for people who lived differently like in the gay community, but also for people of a different ethnic background. This made me feel deeply because they felt anyone not like them was wrong. I happened to fit into their cookie cutter mold of being okay, but that made no difference to me. I didn’t want for me to just be okay. What about everyone else? I remember making friends and going to that person’s family event. I loved Pepsi at the time and was enthusiastic to drink a Pepsi with my southern cooked meal. I was met with outrage that I was drinking Pepsi, a company that supported gay rights. I was also told I should not support Disney for the same reason because they hosted Gay Pride events. This angered me and made me feel that they were wrong. They saw something different and thought it was wrong. I saw something different in them and thought that they were wrong. It was a two sided coin, quite a conundrum, and no one was really right at all. How can we love and respect each other if we cannot see beyond our differences?

Taylor argues that our society should eschew elements of pop culture that degrade people and that we should spend more time looking into what develops empathetic citizens. This is a world I would like to live in. While I think it is possible, I am not certain it is probable, at least in my lifetime. I fear that the immediate cultural climate is one of labels, money and personal gain. My impression of our culture is one that competes to be the best or the most at something, regardless of how noteworthy or honorable, and puts down anyone below first. It is quite sad when you see people on Instagram trying to be the first person to comment and claim being first, which spawns fights in the comment section. There surely must be a better use of time. While I think learning self expression is quite important I wonder if this act stops short of true introspection where proclamations are more about “I” and not enough about “us” or “we”. I am not sure where the entitlement comes from, but to degrade someone is to treat them with disrespect. I do not want to sound like my grandparents used to sound to me when I was younger, but I feel that manners have been thrown out the window. Each social convention that we become more lax with is another step toward the normalization of deviance from a polite society.

One of my favorite musical artists is Taylor Swift. By all accounts she is said to be a kind, nice woman. I have never seen her swinging in her underwear on a wrecking ball and her lyrics are not crude, but rather empowering to march to your own beat and be the best you. She has managed success and popularity despite forgoing the degradation of others and is still attacked frequently. Just recently her new video for “Shake It Off” was attacked for elements of racism. While I am not an authority on this subject, I feel there are much clearer cut, dire examples that perhaps should be examined first. Even seemingly innocent elements of pop culture, such as this video which was meant to celebrate dance, are subject to being sullied in the muddy waters of degrading each other and what someone stands for, even if it is correct or not. Ironically this is the motivation for the song itself, that anyone can say anything about you and you have a choice to let that bring you down or you can shake it off. I feel that we as a society are too busy analyzing others to put them down instead of gaining understanding in something that is a step in the right direction of empathetic pop culture.

At the end of the video, Matthew Taylor talks about atomizing people from collaborative environments and the destructive effect on their growth. His implication in this comment speaks to the collaborative nature of humans. I think true progress in seeking enlightenment will only be possible together. Not everyone has the same strengths or perspectives. By allowing people to come together, you take a sampling of the best of what we have to offer in a way that can build each other up. I think within an organization and within society this will always be essential to our progress and survival. No man is an island, I am certainly not. I cannot figure out this world or this life on my own. We need each other the lean on.

 I feel that something immediate I can take from this exercise would be that we each have the power to choose our thoughts. We can all cultivate the ability to examine with both breadth and depth the implications of our thoughts. Instead of readily dismissing something that is unfamiliar or that we do not understand, we can pull at it like taffy until we have unraveled a better understanding of the situation. We make decisions in our personal lives but also inside of our organizations. Problems and obscure information can come at you at any time. The question is have you prepared yourself to be ready not to jump to conclusions?

This makes me wonder how we can start encouraging a society that informs ourselves and is empathetic towards each other. How can we prepare ourselves that with the examination of our thoughts to gain understanding that this does not give us the right to be judgmental to each other? How can we eliminate labeling unnecessary parts of our lives with being the first or best in a category that is not something to be proud of at all? Perhaps we should be concerned about being the first to help someone else or being the most kind or thoughtful. How can we teach others to think critically without being critical?

Reference:

Taylor, M. (n.d.). RSA Animate - 21st Century Enlightenment - YouTube. YouTube. Retrieved August 24, 2013, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AC7ANGMy0yo&feature=youtu.be

A630.1.4.RB- Board of Directors

If you are like most people that are part of the daily grind, you wake up in the morning to go to work. It might be just a simple day like any other. If your phone does not serve as your alarm clock, it is likely you will check it as you head to the bathroom and brush your teeth. You will make some coffee or even get some on the way to the office; get in your car and head to work. What if a phone that also has the capacity of a computer was never created- a one stop shop for connectivity? Some say the world would be better off; others cannot live without that multitasking lifeline. What if someone said the water that flows into your home, which is often taken for granted, that enables you to easily brush your teeth was a ridiculous, impossible idea? Can you imagine if someone challenged the way coffee used to be made (however that was) prior to the invention of a coffee pot or Keurig machine? To take that a step further, what if someone said no one would stop to pay for coffee when it could be made at home cheaper? And the automobile… there was someone that probably said that a metal box on wheels is the craziest death contraption they could imagine. For better or for worse there were organizations along the way filled with a full spectrum of individuals that were bound together as a collective to bring us into a new era.

It is said that no two individuals are alike and that we are all unique and important because of our differences. If we lived in a society of sameness, what would that be like? After all, variety is the spice of life. The same is true of the DNA of an organization; it requires a healthy mixture of power players, visionaries, pragmatists, the crowd and yes, even the pessimist. Exploring the changing organizations of the twenty-first century companies are evolving and have become focused on being faster and maintain quality in addition to being smaller and involving the employees to focus on the customers of their organization. (Brown, 2011) To achieve organizational survival, I would argue that a diversely rich composition of varying attitudes and outlooks bound together through organizational culture are required to bring meaning and innovation.

To explain this further, I watched a video that can be found on YouTube, A Tale of Power and Vision, a simple video with a thought provoking message about types of people and how they handle obstacles. A pessimist and pragmatist encounter two cliffs labeled the present and the future with a deep divide separating one side from the other with no bridge provided. The pessimist says it cannot be done, sits down and gives up. The pragmatist being unambitious looks at the situation, almost embarks on a journey and sits down with the pessimist. Good luck, it cannot be done. Power and vision run by with stick figure smiles on their faces and vision becomes the human bridge and power crosses it. Once across, power calls the crowd and the pragmatist and pessimist follow suit. Vision is helped up and everyone has arrived together into the future, some still in disbelief.

So what does that mean? It means that everyone has a purpose even if you cannot see it. I have worked in many different organizations and have yet to encounter the right ingredients to see real change occur. I have the utmost confidence I am where I need to be right now to see that happen, I just have to stay tuned long enough. Change is imminent so when that call to action arises I will be sitting in the front row if not ready to help make it happen myself. To explore what is necessary and helpful about each organizational agent, if we are going off of sweeping generalities, it is clear what certain agents do like the power player and the visionary. The power player is the doer, the mover and the shaker. While the optimist and the pessimist argues about how filled the glass is, the opportunistic power player is drinking it. Power players make it happen. Visionaries see ideas that would be full of wonder to experience without boundaries and limits. It is a blessing sometimes to not know that other people think it cannot be done. Together the dreamer and doer really spark a fire. The crowd is important because you need supporters to carry out the journey with you. The pragmatist and the pessimist are just as essential, in moderation, of course. The pragmatist is the anchor that keeps the dreamers and power players from floating away. The pessimist can be that challenging voice that makes you dig deep and do it anyway. They remind you exactly what it is that they think cannot be done. I found a picture quote online that said, “If the visionary created the airplane did the pessimist create the parachute?” A healthy dose of fear and practicality keeps everyone in check, together they can flourish as one within an organization.

With a calculated and encouraging blend of the characteristics of organizational development, planned change to improve can be achieved and performance enhanced. All organizational agents can approach change collaboratively, while allowing opportunity for each agent’s human potential. The relationships among the elements align and through checks and balances of the scientific method, success can be a practical experience. (Brown, 2011)
 

Reference: Brown, D. R. (2011). An Experimental Approach to Organization Development (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

A521.9.4.RB- Reflections on Leadership

What does it take to be a different kind of leader? Being the best at doing a particular type of work and being appointed to oversee others doing the same work? Have the best ideas? Be someone who talks the loudest and the most? Is it someone who is creative, caring and genuine? We have a come a long way from the early days of childhood leadership, which came in the form of Follow the Leader. First a leader or "head of the line" is chosen, and then everyone lines up behind the leader. The leader then moves around and everyone must copy what is done. Any players who fail to follow or do what the leader does are out of the game. The last person standing other than the leader is now the new leader. In some corporate cultures perhaps that is still a relevant application to what some consider leadership, but I don’t see it that way at all. Exploring Chapter 12 of The Leader’s Guide to Storytelling, Denning describes several different dimensions of interactive leadership and what elements he feels should be present in a leader who takes an interactive approach to thinking, speaking, and acting.

There are several dimensions that are listed in his text that I feel I relate to which are: The interactive leader works with the world rater than against it, interactive leadership builds on personal integrity and authenticity and interactive leadership doesn’t depend on the possession of hierarchical authority. One of the most prominent themes is that regardless where you are within an organization you are able to exercise leadership. This point is highlighted in the idea that leaders benefits from working with the world, not against it. If you go with the forward momentum, the current, if you will then you do not have to spend extraneous energy paddling against it. It is a lot easier to let the world do some of the work for you instead of trying to force your agenda on others (Denning, 2011). Another point that I think is relevant to life in general and especially helpful in leadership is be who you are, your authentic self. Denning does point out that integrity is huge part of being a successful leader. Respect others, speak the truth, do not see others as a means to your own ends and act in accordance to your values (Denning, 2011). Incorporating integrity and authenticity can go a long way and help yield positive results “because you are open to innovation, happy accidents happen” (Denning, 2011, p. 271). The work world will be a better place because you bring meaning to it and in turn can receive superior results. There is nothing worse than a leader who struggles to motivate and inspire. Most importantly I feel that you do not need a title to be a leader and it certainly doesn’t make you good and leading or being effective just because you have one. An interactive leader does not depend on hierarchical authority. You can be a fitting example, help others around you and guide the way without anyone telling you that you have permission to do so. Those who help clarify the direction or improve the structure is a person who provides leadership (Denning, 2011).

I don’t feel like I really have a title in my organization that who make me an obvious leader. However, my role advising students becomes better when I embrace these dimensions. I work diligently to communicate truthful, helpful messages and am constantly concerned for the academic well being of my students. I want to see their success and celebrate that with them. I feel that I coach them to victory. I certainly do not try to gain control and impose boundaries in order to receive compliance. I feel that I am an equal partner in their journey. I think outside of advising the same viewpoint can be applied to guiding others to accomplishing the tasks at hand. Graduation is an obvious milestone and sometimes thought of as the end result, but you do not need a clear finish line to work the steps of being an interactive leader. A final thought on the matter is appropriately quoted from Denning that, “participants grasp the interrelatedness of things in the world- and so are able to connect with the world in new ways” (Denning, 2011, p. 269). It is a shame to see the Follow the Leader or else mentality and effective leadership embraces better ways to lead.

Reference: Denning, S., (2011). The leader’s guide to storytelling; Mastering the art and discipline of business narrative. San Francisco, CA. Jossey-Bass.

A521.8.4.RB- Making Contact

I am very fortunate to be a person who is quite comfortable in their own skin. I have plenty of things I could consider wrong with me, but I have a sufficient amount of confidence. I do not suffer from a fear of public speaking and do not mind talking to other people. In fact, I barely care if I am talked about in a negative fashion, this helps a lot with the fear of rejection. As long as I approve of myself I am confident regardless of others opinions. I always say that it is okay with me if I am the most interesting part of someone elses day, if they are talking about me, I must be.  For arguments sake, I do not think this happens much. I often make jokes about myself when I see the someecards that are popular on the internet. One in particular says: I should be ashamed of myself. Let’s be clear; I’m not, but I should be.  This is not to say I am Miss Personality and wheel and deal my way around a room of strangers, but I get by just fine. I will talk to anyone, at least briefly; I would even consider a tree, especially if I was in a “Castaway” situation, perhaps a Volleyball named Wilson.

I grew up with two shy parents. I had no idea that they were shy for a long time, but the shy gene seemed to skip me and I came out guns blazing. When I was a little girl I was a sassy little thing. Due to my everlasting energy I was put into gymnastics and dance classes. A big part of learning skills and choreography is performing, which I loved. I could not get enough of it. Let us just say that when I was little I had a big ego and applause was my favorite thing. As I have grown up I learned some manners and have changed quite a bit. I would categorize myself as an introvert with extroverted tendencies. My preference is to be at home, like a hermit and keeping to myself. When I spend a large portion of time engaging with others I find that it drains me the older I get. I think as I am getting older I am getting more stuck in my ways. I find that social conventions, like my refusal to drink alcohol, causes a severe lack of interest between myself and others, especially in my immediate peer group. Though I do not mind morally when others imbibe, I find that it gets old quickly when it gets out of hand and being the sober person makes you eternally the designated driver. If any event with strangers involves this aspect I tend to withdraw and not do as well making acquaintances as I could do.

McKay, Davis & Fanning refer to the fear of strangers as a main reason others have difficulties making contact. I find that this applies to me in the physical sense, not the emotional sense. I have a strange, huge fear of not being able to trust strangers because I am afraid I may be harmed. I also watch too much TruTV and crime shows.

This is not to say I am completely immune to the issues that come along with making contact with new people. I do much better in person due to body language, but have found the necessity to adapt when I know I am going to have a “cold” conversation on the telephone. When I began college, I moved out of state and knew no one. I met a classmate in my first class and we ended up exchanging numbers. I needed to call for notes and assignment related reasons. In case it went south quickly, I made a note card of talking points to keep the conversation on track. Luckily I did not need them. Later I found that my classmate did the same thing and we became friends for a while after college. He taught me the term awkward turtle and I try at all costs not to go all awkward turtle when talking to others and try to bail them out from doing the same. To this day when I need to call new people while I am at work, I have a sticky note on hand just in case I need to recall my talking points.

I find that I employ a lot of the same techniques the McKay, Davis & Fanning text suggests. I use body language to try to convey my openness to communicate such as smiling and making eye contact. I also use icebreakers. I find something I genuinely like about someone, which is not very difficult and let the other person know in a sincere manner. This seems to allow the other person to feel receptive to my presence. I also am quite a goofy person and am comfortable with adding a little humor. The McKay, Davis & Fanning text also discusses the art of conversation. It has come to my attention that I am basically a nosy person, especially when I want to know something. I have a curious mind. I am willing to ask questions like I am interviewing you for a news segment as well as pry when necessary. I am comfortable with follow up questions. I also actively listen so that I can learn the answers to my inquiries and am not fearful of self-disclosure. In fact, I could use a little work reeling that in. Those who have known me long enough know not to ask questions when you are not prepared for very candid, very frank, full-detailed responses. The term too much information can often apply to me. Like I mentioned earlier, I should be ashamed, but I am not.

From experience I find that the most pleasurable conversations result in finding another person that is truly willing to make contact when you are. I can weasel responses out of someone and do my best to be friendly, but sometimes you just don’t make that connection or feel that spark. The best conversations are when two people have a meeting of the mind. I find that it is very rare for this to happen, especially as others are becoming less social in person, maybe due to social media. When I do find someone who I meet that is receptive, I could talk for hours and it is rewarding and exciting to know interesting people.

Reference: McKay, M., Davis, M., & Fanning, P. (2009). Messages: The communication skills book. Oakland: New Harbinger Publications, Inc.