With regards to the group setting and how I generally relate to the team, I find myself somewhat split. By necessity of me often being designated as supervisor or officer in charge, I have to take on elements of a task-facilitating role. This happens in that I'm often seeking information on an issue, giving information to superiors or clients, and almost always passing instructions to my subordinates and monitoring their progress. That, however, requires me to be consciously taking on that role and acting accordingly. I find that if I'm left to my own devices and not designated as a leader, such as in a class setting or team effort not related to my work, I fall into a relationship-building role. In most average group settings, I tend to blend in more and am more apt to occasionally relieve tension, help with development or the construction of consensus, and sometimes empathize with the plight at hand. Generally speaking, that kind of interaction felt more comfortable to me than taking the lead on tasking.
Again, by nature of being the supervisor, its quite necessary for me to engage with my teams in order to get orders out to them, as well as to receive any feedback for queries or updates on action taken so I can update my leadership. I do, however, make it a practice to do more than just that. I try and regularly check in the offices on which I have oversight to see to their general welfare, and I might even casually chat as well.
On that same token, I am cognizant of trying to maintain our cohesion and general collaboration with the rest of the unit and our clients. I heard more than once in my bachelor's program about the idea of horizontal communication, and I try to promote that wherever I go, as having everyone in synch with the information available is often critical. Again, I'm also somewhat prone towards relationship building, so I'm often trying to get everyone's buy in on the issue at hand, or otherwise trying to encourage us forward as necessary.
Sunday, April 29, 2012
Sunday, April 22, 2012
A520.5.3.RB_SienkiewiczRaymond
Russ Forrester's Empowerment: Rejuvenating a Potent Idea, and what's written in Whetten and Cameron's Developing Management Skills presents what seems to be similar thoughts on the same topic of empowerment, but they have some subtle variance in tone and how they word what is good or bad for empowerment. On top of that, they also have subtle differences in their definition of empowerment.
To begin, they both agree on the use of the word "empowerment" and that it does involve power. Forrester sees empowerment as implying the freedom and ability to make decisions, rather than merely suggesting participation. The bottom line given is that empowerment is about power and its enhancement. Whetten and Cameron provide a definition more towards personal development, stating not only that to empower is to enable, but that it means "to help people develop a sense of self-confidence", and to "overcome feelings of powerlessness or helplessness". So, both considered the power aspect, but one took in more consideration of the individual being empowered.
As for how they discuss the best conditions or methods for empowerment, although they may use different terms, both writings have the same general idea. Among other things, the necessary resources need to be provided to subordinates, and the people themselves need to be supported as well via positive emotions or getting needed assistance with any obstacles. Additionally, both call for stating clear goals and maintaining a sense of what needs to be accomplished.
Where there seems to be more notable differences is in the discussion of what can go wrong in empowerment. The textbook's noted issues are few and seem rather broad, mainly noting the that the individual responsible for delegation may not think their subordinates can handle the work at hand, or may maintain a high need for control over the situation and thus may micromanage the work. Forrester, on the other hand, presents six common issues to contrast his six channels for empowerment, and mainly warns against a one size fits all style, relying too heavily on the idea and not the actual act of empowerment, not getting buy in from the organization or not being well invested in empowerment, and not adjusting the overall work system for the changes made in a smaller part. Overall, the text's chapter makes some broader strokes on the idea of empowerment, mostly on the positive aspects and how to make it happen. Forrester, on the other hand, noted both potential pit falls and means for success in the format of six bullets to both halves of the story, taking a very structured approach to the discussion.
To begin, they both agree on the use of the word "empowerment" and that it does involve power. Forrester sees empowerment as implying the freedom and ability to make decisions, rather than merely suggesting participation. The bottom line given is that empowerment is about power and its enhancement. Whetten and Cameron provide a definition more towards personal development, stating not only that to empower is to enable, but that it means "to help people develop a sense of self-confidence", and to "overcome feelings of powerlessness or helplessness". So, both considered the power aspect, but one took in more consideration of the individual being empowered.
As for how they discuss the best conditions or methods for empowerment, although they may use different terms, both writings have the same general idea. Among other things, the necessary resources need to be provided to subordinates, and the people themselves need to be supported as well via positive emotions or getting needed assistance with any obstacles. Additionally, both call for stating clear goals and maintaining a sense of what needs to be accomplished.
Where there seems to be more notable differences is in the discussion of what can go wrong in empowerment. The textbook's noted issues are few and seem rather broad, mainly noting the that the individual responsible for delegation may not think their subordinates can handle the work at hand, or may maintain a high need for control over the situation and thus may micromanage the work. Forrester, on the other hand, presents six common issues to contrast his six channels for empowerment, and mainly warns against a one size fits all style, relying too heavily on the idea and not the actual act of empowerment, not getting buy in from the organization or not being well invested in empowerment, and not adjusting the overall work system for the changes made in a smaller part. Overall, the text's chapter makes some broader strokes on the idea of empowerment, mostly on the positive aspects and how to make it happen. Forrester, on the other hand, noted both potential pit falls and means for success in the format of six bullets to both halves of the story, taking a very structured approach to the discussion.
Saturday, April 14, 2012
A520.4.3.RB_SienkiewiczRaymond
In answering the question of what motivates people to work, Andy Mulholland offered three reasons: to do interesting work, to expand one's skill sets, and to be valued.
The first reason is fairly intuitive, as the average person wants to be engaged in, interested in, or otherwise have some kind of buy in with their work. It is said that one who does what they love for work isn't really working at all, and generally speaking, a person interested in their work is more likely to keep doing the same job. Certainly, I find that when I'm doing a task where I'm interested in the subject or activity, I give a stronger effort in terms of quality and being relentless in the completion, thus overall creating a more satisfactory result for myself and whoever I'm working for.
The second reason may not be quite as obvious, but it makes good sense. Most people also want to expand their skill sets, or in the most general sense, they want to feel like they accomplished something with the work they're doing. To tie in somewhat with having interesting work, a person on an assembly line turning the same set of screws will eventually get bored doing the same thing, and they may eventually feel like they aren't doing anything new or broadening their horizons. To speak from experience, I spent nine months working a new single-manned help desk position, much longer than anyone originally planned. Not too long after the six month mark, I got very bored with waiting for things to happen, and I especially didn't feel like I was making any developments in the leadership and managerial skills essential for my continuing success as an officer.
The third point, to be valued, is a culmination of the previous two points. People want to know that what they're doing matters in some way, and they would like to hear some form of thanks every so often. To not do so increases the likelihood for bitterness, and potentially decreased will to go the extra mile as needed. I can relate in that going for long periods of time without any positive feedback doesn't feel particularly good, and I also recognize it is something that my people want as well. No one enjoys thankless work.
As for what else my motivate me, there are about three I can think of. First and foremost, in my work I feel a measure of duty. Although I don't believe its the single best run organization to exist, I still believe in doing my part in the Air Force as a simple matter of believing that everyone should do some part for the greater good of the nation. Although it doesn't necessarily make me feel a whole lot better on early mornings, it does keep me running. Second, I'm motivated by the sense of obligation I feel towards the people I've worked with in the past and work with now. A lot of good people have helped me to get where I am today by teaching me or by recognizing what I can do, and I feel that not doing my job and not doing it well would be a disservice to them. Finally, I'm motivated by the hope of my own dreams. Although what I'm doing now isn't what I had in mind when I graduated from college, and I don't intend to do it for the rest of my life, I do hope that doing well now will eventually get me to a more enjoyable job in the military, and maybe someday in the future when I have greater financial stability I can pursue my more fantastical dreams of writing a novel or getting to work writing for a major publication. Arguably, my motivators are somewhat "soft" and not easily defined in a managerial text, but for now I think that is what has and for now will continue to work for me.
The first reason is fairly intuitive, as the average person wants to be engaged in, interested in, or otherwise have some kind of buy in with their work. It is said that one who does what they love for work isn't really working at all, and generally speaking, a person interested in their work is more likely to keep doing the same job. Certainly, I find that when I'm doing a task where I'm interested in the subject or activity, I give a stronger effort in terms of quality and being relentless in the completion, thus overall creating a more satisfactory result for myself and whoever I'm working for.
The second reason may not be quite as obvious, but it makes good sense. Most people also want to expand their skill sets, or in the most general sense, they want to feel like they accomplished something with the work they're doing. To tie in somewhat with having interesting work, a person on an assembly line turning the same set of screws will eventually get bored doing the same thing, and they may eventually feel like they aren't doing anything new or broadening their horizons. To speak from experience, I spent nine months working a new single-manned help desk position, much longer than anyone originally planned. Not too long after the six month mark, I got very bored with waiting for things to happen, and I especially didn't feel like I was making any developments in the leadership and managerial skills essential for my continuing success as an officer.
The third point, to be valued, is a culmination of the previous two points. People want to know that what they're doing matters in some way, and they would like to hear some form of thanks every so often. To not do so increases the likelihood for bitterness, and potentially decreased will to go the extra mile as needed. I can relate in that going for long periods of time without any positive feedback doesn't feel particularly good, and I also recognize it is something that my people want as well. No one enjoys thankless work.
As for what else my motivate me, there are about three I can think of. First and foremost, in my work I feel a measure of duty. Although I don't believe its the single best run organization to exist, I still believe in doing my part in the Air Force as a simple matter of believing that everyone should do some part for the greater good of the nation. Although it doesn't necessarily make me feel a whole lot better on early mornings, it does keep me running. Second, I'm motivated by the sense of obligation I feel towards the people I've worked with in the past and work with now. A lot of good people have helped me to get where I am today by teaching me or by recognizing what I can do, and I feel that not doing my job and not doing it well would be a disservice to them. Finally, I'm motivated by the hope of my own dreams. Although what I'm doing now isn't what I had in mind when I graduated from college, and I don't intend to do it for the rest of my life, I do hope that doing well now will eventually get me to a more enjoyable job in the military, and maybe someday in the future when I have greater financial stability I can pursue my more fantastical dreams of writing a novel or getting to work writing for a major publication. Arguably, my motivators are somewhat "soft" and not easily defined in a managerial text, but for now I think that is what has and for now will continue to work for me.
Saturday, April 7, 2012
A520.3.5.RB_SienkiewiczRaymond
The concepts of supportive communication aren't entirely foreign to me, thankfully, and I've been practicing the use of some of these ideas for a little while. I remember first hearing about "I" statements in a high school health class, and I was advised early on in college to work on eye contact and general communication. As for the PMI program, this is already built into my workplace through regular feedback sessions and annual performance reviews.
I do, however, see where I can further integrate ideas from the book. Certainly, I can stand to better learn assessing communication situations as times for coaching and times for counseling, as there are times when one or the other might be conducive to the growth of subordinates at the office. I also think I could stand to be a little more honest about my opinions in certain circumstances, which I think would help build congruence between myself and higher leadership.
I also think that myself, and my entire organization for that matter, could stand to do a better job of being more supportive in our communication with and about other organizations we need to work with. Especially when talking about the actions of other Air Force IT organizations that don't necessarily mesh with our objectives and timelines, we tend to make rather broad, evaluative, and organization specific statements, and we aren't always the most understanding of whatever circumstances they may be working under. This leads to frustration for us, and certainly strained relationships overall.
I believe that if I were to practice supportive communication, and eventually set the example for my organization, it would certainly go a long way towards increasing trust and confidence between our members, and might over time improve morale and unit cohesion if we felt we were on the same page, could lean on each other, and had the confidence that when things happened we would be judging the problem, not the individual. Eventually, if we can provide supportive communications to our partner organizations, our IT support mission might see improvement as we would likely be more focused on constructive feedback targeted upon actual problems, rather than wasting energy and effort upon any friction created by perceived lack of support.
I believe that if I were to practice supportive communication, and eventually set the example for my organization, it would certainly go a long way towards increasing trust and confidence between our members, and might over time improve morale and unit cohesion if we felt we were on the same page, could lean on each other, and had the confidence that when things happened we would be judging the problem, not the individual. Eventually, if we can provide supportive communications to our partner organizations, our IT support mission might see improvement as we would likely be more focused on constructive feedback targeted upon actual problems, rather than wasting energy and effort upon any friction created by perceived lack of support.
A520.3.1.RB_SienkiewiczRaymond
Checking out the presentation we were provided gave me a few handy descriptors for how I perceive my decision making style. Certainly, it would be fair to call it more cautious, rational, and open to input by others. Some might even say my decision making is a little passive, pending a push from external forces. One word that really stuck out to me was "agonize". Some every day decisions I can make rather quickly, such as when I go to buy cereal or bread I look past brand names and find whatever has the lowest unit cost and is the type I like to eat. On other decisions though, I take a very long time, such as when I'm deciding whether or not to buy a nice electronic gadget or other big ticket item. Even when I do agonize, I don't have the greatest of confidence, having been in circumstances where I gave, say, my first college and my new car a whole lot of thought and ended up not being especially happy (and thus having to make adjustments).
Now on consideration of opposite descriptors, I can think of active, internally driven, daring, irrational, and decisive. Only one of those words comes off as particularly undesirable (irrational), and the rest are generally regarded as good qualities, at least from the perspective of an American or Westerner.
Frankly speaking, to solve problems from the opposite of my typical approach might be rather beneficial in some circumstances, particularly being in a career field that sometimes demands swift and effective action on the part of anyone in a leadership position. Of course, irrational decisions are generally frowned upon and I would want to avoid doing that in any event. I could also still see usefulness in continuing to use caution, receiving feedback from others, and taking my time in decision making, as there are also long term projects with lots of resources in money, equipment, or manpower that may require thorough and deliberate action.
Thus, assuming I were to consciously move my decision making style towards one that could flex between deliberate and well thought, as well as rapid and decisive, I believe that would in turn make me a flexible leader better able to perform in a wider variety of situations, and in turn make me more effective during the course of our rapidly changing tasks and requirements. In short, although it would take some time and continued practice, I could move closer towards what I think would be considered an ideal decision making approach.
Now on consideration of opposite descriptors, I can think of active, internally driven, daring, irrational, and decisive. Only one of those words comes off as particularly undesirable (irrational), and the rest are generally regarded as good qualities, at least from the perspective of an American or Westerner.
Frankly speaking, to solve problems from the opposite of my typical approach might be rather beneficial in some circumstances, particularly being in a career field that sometimes demands swift and effective action on the part of anyone in a leadership position. Of course, irrational decisions are generally frowned upon and I would want to avoid doing that in any event. I could also still see usefulness in continuing to use caution, receiving feedback from others, and taking my time in decision making, as there are also long term projects with lots of resources in money, equipment, or manpower that may require thorough and deliberate action.
Thus, assuming I were to consciously move my decision making style towards one that could flex between deliberate and well thought, as well as rapid and decisive, I believe that would in turn make me a flexible leader better able to perform in a wider variety of situations, and in turn make me more effective during the course of our rapidly changing tasks and requirements. In short, although it would take some time and continued practice, I could move closer towards what I think would be considered an ideal decision making approach.
Sunday, April 1, 2012
A520.2.6.RB_SienkiewiczRaymond
In revisiting the time management assessment I took from the book this week, my skill level is a very mixed bag, and not a highly developed one at that. I can say with certainty that I get at least one thing done a day, that I schedule some "me time", and that I'm cognizant of increasing my daily efficiency whenever I can. I can also say with certainty that I've never taken advantage of a time log, nor have I ever done much in the way of a cost-benefit analysis for my daily tasks. The rest of the prompts I rated as being very midland, and I usually only do things like making lists and taking on a "get it done" attitude when I'm at work. The prompts for working meetings and utilizing subordinates are also relatively new ideas to me. Once at home, I tend to get very complacent, and while my work and academics don't usually suffer, I don't often feel like I'm accomplishing very much towards my personal goals.
When I do take time management measures, such as setting personal deadlines, making lists, prioritizing, and keeping an orderly workplace, I believe that does increase my internal locus of control and allows me better control and accountability for what I get done. The most important action I take at the office on the daily basis is keeping my notepad handy to write down my personal list of "check boxes" to establish my priorities for the day and give an at-a-glance overview of what's left. Something I do engage in frequently by the nature of my work is delegation and letting others take credit. Due to the sheer number of tasks and technical expertise required, there's no way I could do everything in my section by myself. Thus, I let my subordinate experts work the issues they can at the lowest possible level, have credit for their individual performance, and I'm content that the work is complete while I still have credit for supervisory authority.
I think that if I were to give more structure to my meetings, that might give me a bit more certainty about our focus for the week and reduce my stress from ambiguity, as well as maybe allowing my staff to more quickly get on with their day. I would also like to be more vocal about the initiative my subordinates can take so they can engage issues with reduced administrative turnaround and perhaps even feel a measure of trust and empowerment. Both of these points would also serve to increase my external locus of control. Finally, I'd like to integrate more of my work practices into my daily personal life, as increasing my productivity and accomplishments at home will lead to reduced stress across the board, and lead to more positive quality of life.
Starting tomorrow, I'll see about writing myself a reminder note in my notebook cover to keep myself cognizant of the improvements I'd like to make, and I would also like to give myself more permission to be less of a perfectionist and take some reasonable risks to try some other management approaches. It seems like these improvements are something that will hold once I've done it enough times for it to become routine. I also think, given that keeping a list helps out at work, that I might have to invest in a sturdy notebook or memo pad to carry with me at home.
When I do take time management measures, such as setting personal deadlines, making lists, prioritizing, and keeping an orderly workplace, I believe that does increase my internal locus of control and allows me better control and accountability for what I get done. The most important action I take at the office on the daily basis is keeping my notepad handy to write down my personal list of "check boxes" to establish my priorities for the day and give an at-a-glance overview of what's left. Something I do engage in frequently by the nature of my work is delegation and letting others take credit. Due to the sheer number of tasks and technical expertise required, there's no way I could do everything in my section by myself. Thus, I let my subordinate experts work the issues they can at the lowest possible level, have credit for their individual performance, and I'm content that the work is complete while I still have credit for supervisory authority.
I think that if I were to give more structure to my meetings, that might give me a bit more certainty about our focus for the week and reduce my stress from ambiguity, as well as maybe allowing my staff to more quickly get on with their day. I would also like to be more vocal about the initiative my subordinates can take so they can engage issues with reduced administrative turnaround and perhaps even feel a measure of trust and empowerment. Both of these points would also serve to increase my external locus of control. Finally, I'd like to integrate more of my work practices into my daily personal life, as increasing my productivity and accomplishments at home will lead to reduced stress across the board, and lead to more positive quality of life.
Starting tomorrow, I'll see about writing myself a reminder note in my notebook cover to keep myself cognizant of the improvements I'd like to make, and I would also like to give myself more permission to be less of a perfectionist and take some reasonable risks to try some other management approaches. It seems like these improvements are something that will hold once I've done it enough times for it to become routine. I also think, given that keeping a list helps out at work, that I might have to invest in a sturdy notebook or memo pad to carry with me at home.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)