Last Wednesday Kenon Brown came in and talked to us about organizational crisis management. Mr. Brown is in his second year of pursuing his Ph.D.
We first started out by talking about the BP Oil Spill and the impact it had on our country and Gulf Coast lines. The oil spill stretched 320 miles of the Louisiana Shoreline and all the way down to Destin. I could see the affects of the oil spill because I live in Orange Beach, Al and we were one of the places that was hit hard by this spill. We also talked about the stress that it caused on the different communities around the shorelines. We said that it causes numerous anxiety, stress, and health problems for the people. The fishing industry also took a hard hit. The reaction of the CEO of BP acted like it was not his fault and did not take the blame. When the stepped down, the person who took over, also took over the blame and started trying to make amends. In the end the United States government blamed BP responsible for the oil spill.
Next we talked about the definition of crisis? A crisis is a perception of an unpredictable event that threatens important expectancies of stakeholders and can seriously impact an organization’s performance and generate negative outcomes. A crisis is also unexpected. You never know when a crisis is going to arise and it can spring up at any moment. We had know idea that the BP Oil Spill, Katrina, or any other natural disasters were going to happen.
We also talked about the importance of crisis management. Here are the things to keep in mind:
1. Value of reputations
2. Stakeholders activism (very important)
3. Communication technology (all correct information, and get it fast)
4. Broader view of crises
5. Negligent failure to plan
The last thing that we talked about is the best practices in crisis management
• Process approaches and policy departments
• Pre-event planning (we need to plan for these things, so when they arise we are not in total shock.)
• Partnerships with the public
• Listen to the public’s concerns and understand the audience
• Honestly, candor, and openness
• Collaborate and coordinate with credible sources
• Meet the needs of the media and remain accessible
• Communicate with compassion, concern and empathy
• Accept, uncertainty, and ambiguity
• Message of self-efficacy
The last thing that we did in class was play out crisis scenarios. We had to come up with a message to tell the media, and make a client look in a good light. Even though the situation they might be in are bad. After we came up those messages we had breaking new, where get received another message where something else went wrong. It was fun getting to play out these scenarios because some of these could actually happen.
My question to the class is: have any of you ever been involved in a crisis? If so what did you do to prevent and/or help the situation.
By: Reed Ellis
Monday, April 18, 2011
Managing a Crisis
During class Wednesday, Kenon Brown gave a presentation on organizational crisis management. He first discussed the recent BP Oil Spill, providing an example of lack of crisis management preparation. A crisis is a perception of an unpredictable event that threatens important expectancies of stakeholders and can seriously impact an organization’s performance and generate negative outcomes. Crisis management is vital to all organizations. Lack of preparation or an inappropriate response to crisis can negatively effect the reputation of the organization and can cause stakeholders to show negative criticism towards the organization. There are four steps to the ongoing process of crisis management: mitigation & prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery. When faced with a crisis, there are a number of practices an organization can use to guarantee the best outcome. The organization must first have a plan in response to given situations, and must then act on that plan. Strong partnerships with the public and media can help organizations receive positive criticism while dealing with the crisis. Meeting the public’s needs with honesty and openness can help build the organization’s credibility.
After discussing crisis management, its process, and the best practices when dealing with crisis management, Mr. Brown divided the class into groups for an activity. Each group was given a situation when organizations were forced to deal with crisis management. We were asked to determine what each organization should do in response to the crisis it was dealing with. Our group was given an example of a crisis that Regions Bank was faced with. The CAO of Regions was indicted on charges of fraud. Regions claimed they had no knowledge of this and that he acted alone. In response, our group chose to explain that it was an ongoing investigation and made no comments about the CAO at the time. After each group announced their statement or plan of action to deal with their particular crisis, we were given new information about the crisis, forcing each group to rethink their proposal. It turned out that the CAO of Regions was framed by a member of the SEC who was previously fired from Regions for stealing funds. Have you been a part of an organization that was forced to deal with a crisis management situation? If so, was the organization prepared for the situation? What did the organization do in response to the situation?
By: Drew Snider
After discussing crisis management, its process, and the best practices when dealing with crisis management, Mr. Brown divided the class into groups for an activity. Each group was given a situation when organizations were forced to deal with crisis management. We were asked to determine what each organization should do in response to the crisis it was dealing with. Our group was given an example of a crisis that Regions Bank was faced with. The CAO of Regions was indicted on charges of fraud. Regions claimed they had no knowledge of this and that he acted alone. In response, our group chose to explain that it was an ongoing investigation and made no comments about the CAO at the time. After each group announced their statement or plan of action to deal with their particular crisis, we were given new information about the crisis, forcing each group to rethink their proposal. It turned out that the CAO of Regions was framed by a member of the SEC who was previously fired from Regions for stealing funds. Have you been a part of an organization that was forced to deal with a crisis management situation? If so, was the organization prepared for the situation? What did the organization do in response to the situation?
By: Drew Snider
Monday, April 11, 2011
Desiring Ethics To Be Real in the Business World
Ethics are an individual’s moral principles. Companies incorporate ethics into their corporate profile through mission statements and/or code of values. However the meaning of ethics is hard to pin down. When someone asks you what are ethics you may replay, “Ethics are what my gut tell me is right or wrong." or “Ethics are what the law requires” or “Ethics are what society views as appropriate behavior”. There are many views of what ethics are and this was reflected in subjects of the Inside Job. As a class we were angry after watching the movie but the “economic experts” that contributed to the US economic crisis felt they did nothing wrong. Their moral principles, we view as flawed, told them they were profiting so what was the problem. The economic crisis destroyed the credibility of corporations along with our trust in ethics. After watching the movie I feel that companies disregard their code of values. So why are ethics important if companies simply disregard them? Ethics are important because they might be a step to help us out of the economic crisis. Ethics help us organize our activities, create a sense of community, remind people what is important, create positive role models for others to follow, and keep people in line. If companies can follow their code of values then public trust can be regained. People like those who are strong and committed to their values.
In life we find ourselves in many different situations that require us to make difficult moral choices. The one that most people find themselves in is “having a life” versus “making a living”. How do you choose? You use your moral code as a guide. No choice is easy. The choices the subjects of the Inside Job made upset us and changed our lives but no matter our feelings the choice was not easy. They gave up apart of themselves when they made their choices. Our belief system, our ethics, are different from theirs and allows us to come up with a better decision. But as we discussed in class, we were not in their shoes so how do we really know what choice we would have made. It is easy to say you would stick to your ethics when you are not faced with a decision. In the book there was a survey of MBA that demonstrates how easy ethics can change. “MBA students enter B-school with relatively idealistic ambitions, such as to create quality products and be of service to consumers. By they time they graduate, though, these goals have taken a back seat to such priorities as boosting their company’s share price”. How do we prevent this, how do we keep our ethics intact?
We also discussed in class who is the blame, who do we hold accountable. As an individualistic society we like to blame individuals but by doing this sometimes we miss the larger forces at work. Sometimes there is no individual to blame. Especially when powerful organizations can control who we blame. Organizations like to acquire power and scatter accountability thus making it difficult to assign blame and hold people accountable because we can’t find who really did it. Organizations say, “it was done in the name of__(inset political ploy here)___”. We should stop trying to find someone to blame because as the movie showed the “economic experts” are not going to jail, they are getting better jobs. The public needs to start talking about the importance of ethics. Organizations need to recognize how important they are and encourage their employees to follow their own morals and the company’s code. Really commit to their ethics and stop pretending they are committed. But how do you talk about ethics when they are hard to spell out? A few questions I believe are important to ask are: How do you justify or excuse your own actions? Do you blame or take responsibility? Are ethics only important when someone is watching or holding you accountable?
Amanda Bjorklund
In life we find ourselves in many different situations that require us to make difficult moral choices. The one that most people find themselves in is “having a life” versus “making a living”. How do you choose? You use your moral code as a guide. No choice is easy. The choices the subjects of the Inside Job made upset us and changed our lives but no matter our feelings the choice was not easy. They gave up apart of themselves when they made their choices. Our belief system, our ethics, are different from theirs and allows us to come up with a better decision. But as we discussed in class, we were not in their shoes so how do we really know what choice we would have made. It is easy to say you would stick to your ethics when you are not faced with a decision. In the book there was a survey of MBA that demonstrates how easy ethics can change. “MBA students enter B-school with relatively idealistic ambitions, such as to create quality products and be of service to consumers. By they time they graduate, though, these goals have taken a back seat to such priorities as boosting their company’s share price”. How do we prevent this, how do we keep our ethics intact?
We also discussed in class who is the blame, who do we hold accountable. As an individualistic society we like to blame individuals but by doing this sometimes we miss the larger forces at work. Sometimes there is no individual to blame. Especially when powerful organizations can control who we blame. Organizations like to acquire power and scatter accountability thus making it difficult to assign blame and hold people accountable because we can’t find who really did it. Organizations say, “it was done in the name of__(inset political ploy here)___”. We should stop trying to find someone to blame because as the movie showed the “economic experts” are not going to jail, they are getting better jobs. The public needs to start talking about the importance of ethics. Organizations need to recognize how important they are and encourage their employees to follow their own morals and the company’s code. Really commit to their ethics and stop pretending they are committed. But how do you talk about ethics when they are hard to spell out? A few questions I believe are important to ask are: How do you justify or excuse your own actions? Do you blame or take responsibility? Are ethics only important when someone is watching or holding you accountable?
Amanda Bjorklund
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
To Change Or Not To Change…
We read Chapter 11 “Organizational Change and Change-Related Communication” to prepare for class on Monday and apply the concepts we had read to the movie Inside Job. Our textbook defines change as “ the process by which alteration occurs in the structure and function of a social system; the difference between two or more successive conditions, states, or moments of time; or, a succession of differences in time within a persisting identity.” Our book explains a model of change as suggested by Kert Lewin that makes it easy to apply to organizations: see that there is a need, come up with a plan for action, imply that new plan, and make that new plan a routine. It seems so easy, right?! If change seems this easy then why is implementing a change in routine so difficult to grasp in organizations?
Change is the result of communication. Lewin’s model involves COMMUNICATING a need for change, COMUNICATING a plan, and COMMUNICATING that new plan and making it happen by implementing it throughout the organization. Communication is very important to change because without it, there would be no change. What would it be like with no change? Boring. Same routine every day, every week, every month.
Communicating the change to different people involved with the organization is very important. Our book explains that communication must be designed around whom the change is being communicated to. For example, if a new plan for change is being implemented in the organization and they are letting the employees know then they might tell the facts, hold a meeting where the groups of employees are all present, and target the important information to the supervisors. Where is the stakeholders are being informed then it might be on a “need to know basis” and information may be released often enough to keep participation equal. There are six dimensions of change: degree, type, intentionality, timing, impetus, and control. All of these are important to successfully implementing change. To whether the degree of change is major/minor or when to execute the new plan for change, each dimension serves as an important role for successful change. Successful change is then measured by whether it is accepted, if the goals of the organization were fulfilled, and what the consequences were of the new change and how those are managed within the organization.
In class, we watched Inside Job, which is about events that happened over time to result in our current economic crisis. Different “key players” in the banking industry were interviewed and they talked about their roles or the roles of others in the banking industry to result in this crisis. The information that was so shocking to me was the amount that the CEO’s and other executives in the banking industry take home each year when our economy was dwindling down. Executives were said to have several airplanes, helicopters, yachts, vacation homes, etc. Is all this necessary? We were given a note sheet to keep track of interesting facts and answer questions that required us to apply concepts from Chapter 11 to this movie.
What do you think could have been done to implement change in the banking industry to lessen the crisis that we are currently in? Are organizations that you are a part of communicating change effectively? If not, what do you think they can do to change the way they communicate change to make the process of implementing new plans more effective?
By: Randi Bellew
Change is the result of communication. Lewin’s model involves COMMUNICATING a need for change, COMUNICATING a plan, and COMMUNICATING that new plan and making it happen by implementing it throughout the organization. Communication is very important to change because without it, there would be no change. What would it be like with no change? Boring. Same routine every day, every week, every month.
Communicating the change to different people involved with the organization is very important. Our book explains that communication must be designed around whom the change is being communicated to. For example, if a new plan for change is being implemented in the organization and they are letting the employees know then they might tell the facts, hold a meeting where the groups of employees are all present, and target the important information to the supervisors. Where is the stakeholders are being informed then it might be on a “need to know basis” and information may be released often enough to keep participation equal. There are six dimensions of change: degree, type, intentionality, timing, impetus, and control. All of these are important to successfully implementing change. To whether the degree of change is major/minor or when to execute the new plan for change, each dimension serves as an important role for successful change. Successful change is then measured by whether it is accepted, if the goals of the organization were fulfilled, and what the consequences were of the new change and how those are managed within the organization.
In class, we watched Inside Job, which is about events that happened over time to result in our current economic crisis. Different “key players” in the banking industry were interviewed and they talked about their roles or the roles of others in the banking industry to result in this crisis. The information that was so shocking to me was the amount that the CEO’s and other executives in the banking industry take home each year when our economy was dwindling down. Executives were said to have several airplanes, helicopters, yachts, vacation homes, etc. Is all this necessary? We were given a note sheet to keep track of interesting facts and answer questions that required us to apply concepts from Chapter 11 to this movie.
What do you think could have been done to implement change in the banking industry to lessen the crisis that we are currently in? Are organizations that you are a part of communicating change effectively? If not, what do you think they can do to change the way they communicate change to make the process of implementing new plans more effective?
By: Randi Bellew
Bully or Be Bullied
We started off class by defining workplace bullying. The definition of workplace bullying according to our slides; repeated health-harming mistreatment of one or more persons by one or more perpetrators that takes one or more of the following traits: verbal abuse, offensive conduct, and/or work interference. I was thinking this was more of someone just messing with another person in a joking matter, not as someone intentionally trying to harass someone. Next, we were asked if we had ever been bullied, the majority of the class had been bullied and some were in jobs while most appeared to be during high school or even younger. Then, we were asked if we had ever been the bully, there were still a lot of people that had but not quite as many as those that had been bullied. The fact that there were so many that had been both bullied and the bully surprised me especially since I assume that most were the ones being bullied before they bullied someone else. If we know what it feels like to be in that situation then why would we put someone else in the same or even worse situation?
In class it seemed that most of the women in class agreed that they would not say anything to the one bullying them, while most of the men said they would confront the person. Regardless of the reason women are targeted more than men it is important to stop bullying. There can be severe psychological and physical health issues and even death from bullying. Some people have even committed suicide over bullying like the example we were given when two adults bullied a young girl over MySpace. According to several videos we watched it is obvious to see that bullying is happening and something needs to be done about it. So what would you do if you were being bullied or knew someone that was? If you were being bullied how would you handle it, would you confront the person even if it was your boss?
By: Zachary McCoy
In class it seemed that most of the women in class agreed that they would not say anything to the one bullying them, while most of the men said they would confront the person. Regardless of the reason women are targeted more than men it is important to stop bullying. There can be severe psychological and physical health issues and even death from bullying. Some people have even committed suicide over bullying like the example we were given when two adults bullied a young girl over MySpace. According to several videos we watched it is obvious to see that bullying is happening and something needs to be done about it. So what would you do if you were being bullied or knew someone that was? If you were being bullied how would you handle it, would you confront the person even if it was your boss?
By: Zachary McCoy
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Get to the Why
In class on Monday we looked into organizational conflict. We discussed how incompatible goals can create disturbances in organizations. We talked about how there are different types of conflict. Two that we discussed were latent conflict and perceived conflict. Latent conflict is where conditions are right for conflict. Perceived conflict is where one or more of the parties believe that there is a problem when there really is not.
There are four ways to address conflict through avoidance, accommodation, compromise, or collaborate:
*Avoidance is rarely good because then the problems will add up and cause frustration within. Also the problem never gets addressed or handled this way.
*Accommodation is where you give up some of your personal objectives and give to the other players needs. This can be an especially good approach when you’re in a fight with your girlfriend! With accommodation your end up giving to get something later or you’re preserving the relationship for the future. The problem is that you give up some of your personal needs to the other person.
* Compromise can be effective because it can keep forward momentum but the problem is that both sides are going to have to give up some needs.
* Collaboration is the most effective approach to keep the best relationship going into the future. Both sides work together to come up with the best solution for the future. This is a step beyond compromise because both sides get more of what they need, they ask the question why.
It is best to handle conflict without involving the courts or an arbitrator. The courts make a final decision. An arbitrator makes decisions that are often binding based on the arguments presented by the parties involved. A mediator can be helpful and save a lot of money, especially compared to court costs. It is not binding and can lead to a resolution in conflict. A mediator helps to facilitate the dispute but has no power. We should always try to avoid the courts and arbitrators because their decisions are often binding and it they take control from our hands.
Using your knowledge of how to address conflict, think about how to resolve the following situation: There are two people in a city. There is one orange left in the city and both of them want the orange, but there is only one. How can these two people have both of their needs met?
Keep in mind that they could have different needs. We need to address conflict, by asking why. People have different needs based on their interests. Get to the core of what both parties want, identify party interests.
By: Grayson Goodstein
There are four ways to address conflict through avoidance, accommodation, compromise, or collaborate:
*Avoidance is rarely good because then the problems will add up and cause frustration within. Also the problem never gets addressed or handled this way.
*Accommodation is where you give up some of your personal objectives and give to the other players needs. This can be an especially good approach when you’re in a fight with your girlfriend! With accommodation your end up giving to get something later or you’re preserving the relationship for the future. The problem is that you give up some of your personal needs to the other person.
* Compromise can be effective because it can keep forward momentum but the problem is that both sides are going to have to give up some needs.
* Collaboration is the most effective approach to keep the best relationship going into the future. Both sides work together to come up with the best solution for the future. This is a step beyond compromise because both sides get more of what they need, they ask the question why.
It is best to handle conflict without involving the courts or an arbitrator. The courts make a final decision. An arbitrator makes decisions that are often binding based on the arguments presented by the parties involved. A mediator can be helpful and save a lot of money, especially compared to court costs. It is not binding and can lead to a resolution in conflict. A mediator helps to facilitate the dispute but has no power. We should always try to avoid the courts and arbitrators because their decisions are often binding and it they take control from our hands.
Using your knowledge of how to address conflict, think about how to resolve the following situation: There are two people in a city. There is one orange left in the city and both of them want the orange, but there is only one. How can these two people have both of their needs met?
Keep in mind that they could have different needs. We need to address conflict, by asking why. People have different needs based on their interests. Get to the core of what both parties want, identify party interests.
By: Grayson Goodstein
Monday, March 28, 2011
What do our U.S. Government, Alabama football, and COM350 class have in common?
During Monday’s class we covered Chapter 8 titled, “Participation, Teams, and Democracy at Work. We began by taking a look at what workplace democracy entails and the necessary steps towards building workplace democracy. Employee participation is implemented within the organizational structure and gives employees power and the ability to identify with organizational goals with a more balanced approach to control. The outcomes of successful employee participation are increased productivity and job satisfaction. (Sounds like a good way to develop more theory Y driven employees, right?) The book gives a case example on Levi Strauss & Co. and their employees opinions on the implementation of more employee participation and team-based models as opposed to their previous assembly line individualized production model. There were several advantages and disadvantages listed, and in my opinion the advantages seemed to far outweigh the disadvantages as far as benefitting their workplace as a whole. We also covered managerially driven programs of employee participation that included problem solving or decision-making teams, restricting of work processes and activities, and ownership as an economic investment in overall governance.
We did a group activity where we were able to role play different personalities of a group. Also, as a class, we were given the ability to exercise our own democracy by making changes to our existing class calendar as well as giving our own suggestions and opinions as to what we would like the remainder of our semester to look like. Something interesting to think about is how our country’s government model of democracy transcends into the workplace and organizations. Our founding fathers believed that democracy was the best way to run a country and now we implement that same model into our organizations—giving the people and employees some buy-in by allowing them to make decisions and participate in the overall function of the whole. Can you think of some similarities and differences between our government and democracy within organizations?
I tried to think of examples of teams and groups and decided that the most relatable examples would be sports teams and group projects. Most of us have probably been a member of a sports team where, as players, you all had similar skills and a communal commitment to an overall goal. This is usually a long-term goal; such as a championship. However, in a group project for class you are placed in groups for the duration of that assignment with a goal to complete the project. Can anyone share experiences they’ve had in either very successful or very unsuccessful teams or groups and why you think that was the case? Were there obvious roles that each person played? I will leave you with a quote about the kind of buy-in that is instilled in our own Alabama football team…this is from Rolando McClain after winning the 2009 National Championship when he played while he was sick. “My team needed me. They needed me to be a leader and out there…For them, I’d do anything. I love them. My team needed me. I had to play.” Do we get this type of passion for a team in the workplace? Why is it harder to implement the model of democracy and team-orientation in some settings than others when it seems so beneficial in any setting?
A final thought for those of you looking for jobs soon: Because of recent team trending, more than ever employers are looking for potential employees who can work well and are willing to work in a team setting. Are there some things we need to be working on before we enter the democracies, groups, and teams of the real world?
Sydney McWaters
We did a group activity where we were able to role play different personalities of a group. Also, as a class, we were given the ability to exercise our own democracy by making changes to our existing class calendar as well as giving our own suggestions and opinions as to what we would like the remainder of our semester to look like. Something interesting to think about is how our country’s government model of democracy transcends into the workplace and organizations. Our founding fathers believed that democracy was the best way to run a country and now we implement that same model into our organizations—giving the people and employees some buy-in by allowing them to make decisions and participate in the overall function of the whole. Can you think of some similarities and differences between our government and democracy within organizations?
I tried to think of examples of teams and groups and decided that the most relatable examples would be sports teams and group projects. Most of us have probably been a member of a sports team where, as players, you all had similar skills and a communal commitment to an overall goal. This is usually a long-term goal; such as a championship. However, in a group project for class you are placed in groups for the duration of that assignment with a goal to complete the project. Can anyone share experiences they’ve had in either very successful or very unsuccessful teams or groups and why you think that was the case? Were there obvious roles that each person played? I will leave you with a quote about the kind of buy-in that is instilled in our own Alabama football team…this is from Rolando McClain after winning the 2009 National Championship when he played while he was sick. “My team needed me. They needed me to be a leader and out there…For them, I’d do anything. I love them. My team needed me. I had to play.” Do we get this type of passion for a team in the workplace? Why is it harder to implement the model of democracy and team-orientation in some settings than others when it seems so beneficial in any setting?
A final thought for those of you looking for jobs soon: Because of recent team trending, more than ever employers are looking for potential employees who can work well and are willing to work in a team setting. Are there some things we need to be working on before we enter the democracies, groups, and teams of the real world?
Sydney McWaters
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Spring Break is Over … Let’s Bring it together TEAM (or) GROUP!
Democracy. We hear about it in our governmental systems and we learn about it in history class, but now it is time to incorporate those lessons into our daily lives at work with organizations. Ms. Murray was gracious enough to allow the class some input on what the class wanted more or less of, what we thought was most interesting, what we disliked, etc. We learned about what work place democracy is, “the principles and practices designed to engage and represent as many relevant individuals and groups as possible in the formulation, execution, and modification of work-related activities.” So, really the point of a democracy is not only to vote on ideas, but for the boss (Ms. Murray), to actually listen, implement, and incorporate those ideas into the system. Some students took ownership of this privilege while others stayed silent. The amount that we decide to participate in the democracy of an organization ultimately may decide whether or not we are fully happy with the organization we are involved with. Why did you give your input? Why did you not give any input? Fear of speaking up, or maybe you just do not believe your ideas will really make a difference?
Participation is key when it comes to working in an organization. Well, some may disagree, but why? When we graduate and (hopefully) obtain a job we enjoy, we will be paid to perform tasks and duties throughout the day. If we perform these tasks, it is okay to head home and end your day, right? Now imagine the other employee who does the exact same job but also gets involved, participates in extra social events with other employees, creates new ideas and networks his way with other levels in the organization. That second employee, the employee who participates is more likely to enjoy that 10% raise, a promotion, or simply a more enjoyable work environment. Employee participation means that you would, “exceed minimum coordination efforts normally expected at work”. Also, for the sake of your organization the extra participation means increased productivity, job enrichment, job satisfaction, a greater sense of organizational democracy, and a more equitable society. So, would you change your mind about the amount of effort you put in to participate in the organization you work for?
We also discussed teams versus groups. The difference is that a team is committed to a common purpose while a group may only have something temporarily in common. Usually in a class or an organization, we hear the words, “get into groups”, and probably have a small panic attack, or at least I do. The mix of personalities and interests are usually so different that it may be difficult to finish a task. This was evident when we broke up into two groups and were randomly assigned a certain “role” within the team. The goal was to create a newsletter for our company and when it came down to it, one group was very unsuccessful because there were too many people that would either take control, or do the opposite and be apathetic to the situation. A main point that was made is that the facilitator needs to be a strong leader because of the many conflicting personalities. We found that the most productive situation is when the facilitator can take control and work with all different personalities. Who found it hard to play their role because it was so different than their own personalities? What did you notice was different about others when you took on the different role? Did others respond positively or negatively toward your behavior?
-Lauren N. Brown
Participation is key when it comes to working in an organization. Well, some may disagree, but why? When we graduate and (hopefully) obtain a job we enjoy, we will be paid to perform tasks and duties throughout the day. If we perform these tasks, it is okay to head home and end your day, right? Now imagine the other employee who does the exact same job but also gets involved, participates in extra social events with other employees, creates new ideas and networks his way with other levels in the organization. That second employee, the employee who participates is more likely to enjoy that 10% raise, a promotion, or simply a more enjoyable work environment. Employee participation means that you would, “exceed minimum coordination efforts normally expected at work”. Also, for the sake of your organization the extra participation means increased productivity, job enrichment, job satisfaction, a greater sense of organizational democracy, and a more equitable society. So, would you change your mind about the amount of effort you put in to participate in the organization you work for?
We also discussed teams versus groups. The difference is that a team is committed to a common purpose while a group may only have something temporarily in common. Usually in a class or an organization, we hear the words, “get into groups”, and probably have a small panic attack, or at least I do. The mix of personalities and interests are usually so different that it may be difficult to finish a task. This was evident when we broke up into two groups and were randomly assigned a certain “role” within the team. The goal was to create a newsletter for our company and when it came down to it, one group was very unsuccessful because there were too many people that would either take control, or do the opposite and be apathetic to the situation. A main point that was made is that the facilitator needs to be a strong leader because of the many conflicting personalities. We found that the most productive situation is when the facilitator can take control and work with all different personalities. Who found it hard to play their role because it was so different than their own personalities? What did you notice was different about others when you took on the different role? Did others respond positively or negatively toward your behavior?
-Lauren N. Brown
There is no ‘I’ in team, but you can’t have a team without me!
The focus of class on Monday involved participation and teams. We began by discussing the meaning of workplace democracy, as well as the four steps towards workplace democracy. We also discussed why participation and teamwork is important and different opinions on whether or not people have to participate within an organization. We determined that people do have to participate within an organization in order to accomplish goals and complete their work.
Another topic that we discussed was the difference between teams, groups, and working groups and the distinguishing characteristics of each. The class was able to experience being part of a team first-hand through an activity called “Making Teamwork Work”. In this activity, we were randomly placed into two ‘teams’ and assigned roles to play for the activity. It was interesting to see real-life roles being played throughout the process. The roles included the group facilitator, the silent type, the intimidator, the monopolizer, the nice guy, and the unhappy camper. There was also a role in which the participant was supposed to ‘play themselves’. Seeing a team work together, being able to distinguish between the different roles, and applying those concepts to various team situations was extremely enlightening.
Personally, I began to look back on different teams I have been a part of in the past. I realized that I have never quite had one definite role. Sometimes I would classify myself as the silent type. Other times I would classify myself as a facilitating monopolizer. How could I, at one time or another, act in ways such as these opposite extremes? I assume the cause of these differences would be related to how comfortable I am in a situation, or even how passionate I am about the topic at hand. This makes me wonder if taking on different roles within a team is a universal feature, or does it depend on the individual?
After thinking about what we learned in class and the role playing exercise, several questions came to mind. Is there one particular role that is more important than another within a team? What participatory roles have you played within a team, or does that usually change depending on various factors for you as well? How would a team be different if one particular role were eliminated? Are all roles needed for a team to function properly?
By: Mary Kathryn Carroll
Another topic that we discussed was the difference between teams, groups, and working groups and the distinguishing characteristics of each. The class was able to experience being part of a team first-hand through an activity called “Making Teamwork Work”. In this activity, we were randomly placed into two ‘teams’ and assigned roles to play for the activity. It was interesting to see real-life roles being played throughout the process. The roles included the group facilitator, the silent type, the intimidator, the monopolizer, the nice guy, and the unhappy camper. There was also a role in which the participant was supposed to ‘play themselves’. Seeing a team work together, being able to distinguish between the different roles, and applying those concepts to various team situations was extremely enlightening.
Personally, I began to look back on different teams I have been a part of in the past. I realized that I have never quite had one definite role. Sometimes I would classify myself as the silent type. Other times I would classify myself as a facilitating monopolizer. How could I, at one time or another, act in ways such as these opposite extremes? I assume the cause of these differences would be related to how comfortable I am in a situation, or even how passionate I am about the topic at hand. This makes me wonder if taking on different roles within a team is a universal feature, or does it depend on the individual?
After thinking about what we learned in class and the role playing exercise, several questions came to mind. Is there one particular role that is more important than another within a team? What participatory roles have you played within a team, or does that usually change depending on various factors for you as well? How would a team be different if one particular role were eliminated? Are all roles needed for a team to function properly?
By: Mary Kathryn Carroll
Monday, March 21, 2011
Do not ignore..
Stop and ask yourself have you been impacted by something or someone? More than likely the answer is yes. Whether it is in a positive or negative way we all know how something can affect our everyday lives in a tremendous way. We started class off with a different vibe that affected most of us with great concern and care. This could be said to be a touchy subject to discuss in class, but we cannot ignore it and nor would we like to act like nothing even happened. We reflected on some funny things that Ricky had mentioned during class like "I walk from Krispy Kreme everyday." With knowing that we have all lost a fellow classmate and some to others a friend, I believed right from the get-go that our class should do something for Ricky’s family or if not I was planning on doing something myself. Once arriving at class Monday night we discussed different options and decided on sending a card to his family directly after our midterm. This is a great idea and much appreciation would come from this simple task if we all participate, where I know we all will. In addition to the card we can write a note of some sort to be sent along. My reflection may be slightly different from others in this class, but I believe highly in everything happens for a reason. What morals do you believe in?
After settling on this decision, we discussed what will be on the midterm for Wednesday night. The midterm will not contain information from What is Leadership and Leadership Vision. You must bring your ACT Card!
-Annie Logan
After settling on this decision, we discussed what will be on the midterm for Wednesday night. The midterm will not contain information from What is Leadership and Leadership Vision. You must bring your ACT Card!
-Annie Logan
Monday, March 7, 2011
Follow the Leader…
Leaders are around us every day. Weather it be a professor, boss, or someone you look up to. At the beginning of class Monday Dr. Chilcutt started us out with by putting us into groups so we could come up with a common definition and traits of a leader. In my particular group we identified a leader as a person who has professional authoritative qualities that separates them from others. We also discussed some character traits of a leader. Some examples we thought of were professional, someone you look up to, authoritative, controlling, and powerful. Did you have any other definitions or character traits that came to mind after our discussion in class? I was thinking that being a leader and having leadership capabilities are two separate things. In order to be a successful leader one must have leadership capabilities. Leaders can see if their leadership style is effective through feedback.
Dr. Chilcutt discussed the different types of leadership styles in class. There are A, B, C, and D leadership styles. We took a test to see what leadership style suited us best, and shockingly mine was pretty dead on. I was split between an A and B leadership style. If a leader knows his or hers style then they should be able to be more productive in what they do. They should be able to understand the kind of people they need to be around in order to be successful.
Knowing the qualities of a successful leader are important. When you are following someone as a leader or someone you look up to you want to make sure they are qualified as someone that is worthy of leading you. For example when voting for a person such as a president, weather if be for the university or the United States, you are going to make sure that person has qualities that make he or she capable of being a successful leader. I would have to say it’s somewhat hard to come by successful leaders. Not everyone can do it. It takes a person of great stature to take on such a role. Can you think of any organizations or teams that once had a successful leader then there was a change of leadership and the organization or team was not as well off? I would say this happens much more in sports teams than organizations, however it still occurs. One particular example that comes to mind is the Alabama football team. When asked the question, who was our defensive leader on the team this past year? Who would you say? It’s tough to say. Maybe Donta Hightower, Marcell Darues, or Mark Barron? You can’t really identify one. However two years ago when we won the National Title most people would answer that question by responding Rolando McClain was our defensive leader. He was the one responsible for everyone on the field at the time. He made the play calls, check off the audibles, and lead the team in tackles. Those are qualities a leader demonstrates.
In closing I leave you with a couple of questions. Who will be Alabama’s leader this year on the field? Would you consider yourself someone who has leadership capabilities? And lastly, what would you say your strongest leadership quality is?
Roll Tide-
Max McGIll
Dr. Chilcutt discussed the different types of leadership styles in class. There are A, B, C, and D leadership styles. We took a test to see what leadership style suited us best, and shockingly mine was pretty dead on. I was split between an A and B leadership style. If a leader knows his or hers style then they should be able to be more productive in what they do. They should be able to understand the kind of people they need to be around in order to be successful.
Knowing the qualities of a successful leader are important. When you are following someone as a leader or someone you look up to you want to make sure they are qualified as someone that is worthy of leading you. For example when voting for a person such as a president, weather if be for the university or the United States, you are going to make sure that person has qualities that make he or she capable of being a successful leader. I would have to say it’s somewhat hard to come by successful leaders. Not everyone can do it. It takes a person of great stature to take on such a role. Can you think of any organizations or teams that once had a successful leader then there was a change of leadership and the organization or team was not as well off? I would say this happens much more in sports teams than organizations, however it still occurs. One particular example that comes to mind is the Alabama football team. When asked the question, who was our defensive leader on the team this past year? Who would you say? It’s tough to say. Maybe Donta Hightower, Marcell Darues, or Mark Barron? You can’t really identify one. However two years ago when we won the National Title most people would answer that question by responding Rolando McClain was our defensive leader. He was the one responsible for everyone on the field at the time. He made the play calls, check off the audibles, and lead the team in tackles. Those are qualities a leader demonstrates.
In closing I leave you with a couple of questions. Who will be Alabama’s leader this year on the field? Would you consider yourself someone who has leadership capabilities? And lastly, what would you say your strongest leadership quality is?
Roll Tide-
Max McGIll
Saturday, March 5, 2011
hmmmmm....Leadership
We all have somehow been influenced by leadership. Let's go back to grade school, where you might have been on a cheerleading or football team where there were captains; or high school, where you were voting for SGA president and class presidents. What characteristics or traits in those particular individuals influenced you to vote or title them to represent that particular organization, team or squad? In today's reading we discover the role of "leadership" and what makes a leader. Just because one is a leader, does this mean that they have good "leadership"? My opinion is that "leaders" and "leadership" are two different words, with two different connotations. A leader is a title issued to an individual, meaning, this title can be handed down (for example, if the mom hands the family business down to her daughter- which is more along the lines of "old leadership") or it can be given, by votes. And we can probably think of that cute, bubbly, popular cheerleader who ran for class president, and won- simply because she was that cute, bubbly popular cheerleader. Now, she may or may not had leadership qualities, but because she was "popular" or "well-known" she most likely won over the nerdy guy, who sits in the back of the class, who knows the in-s and out-s of the school, the school mission, models effective behavior, brings important issues to the open, intelligent, has good ideas, etc, just because she was popular and well known. In this scenario, the cheerleader, who won class president, would be the "leader," and the nerdy kid, would be "of leadership qualities." Which is why I question does a leader, necessarily mean they have "leadership."
We learn through our reading, that leadership is a perception. It is "something" seen in others that perhaps influence attitude or action. But what exactly is that "something." In certain situations such as businesses or corporation, one might look for interactive leadership, where that leader is familiar with the business, mission, goals, and can effectively communicate that knowledge to his/her staff. In school or extra-curricular activities, you might look for more of a empowerment leadership, where you are encouraged or expected to deliver high performance and the leader is their to execute confidence in your ability. What types of traits do you look for in a leader? For me, it is leadership that exudes agreement versus control. I, like Mrs. Murray, am not a fan of authority. When leadership is forced and the leader feels better than- or in a powerful state- I tend to resent or rebel. Whereas, when leadership is an agreement, much like the constitutive approach of leadership, where it doesn't highlight the importance of the ability to manage meaning, but to persuade or influence in a social way. Those leaders who take time to understand the issues, listen to the concerns, and interactively decide a solution. Now, when I say agreement, I don't mean I will always agree with certain leadership styles or actions done by that leader, but the simple fact of understanding and equality, where my opinions or out-look is taken into consideration.
Another interesting question the book asked was- which goes hand-in hand, with the question asked on the first day about the need of bureaucracy... Is leadership needed? In todays "new leadership" we are caught up in independence, democratic, laissez-faire society, where people can make their own decisions, and have more a free-will. But image if that cheerleading squad didn't have a coach or captains, who would issue and execute practices and punishment, who would care to abide rules without a leader to enforce them? SO, do we need leaders?
By: Amoi Savage
We learn through our reading, that leadership is a perception. It is "something" seen in others that perhaps influence attitude or action. But what exactly is that "something." In certain situations such as businesses or corporation, one might look for interactive leadership, where that leader is familiar with the business, mission, goals, and can effectively communicate that knowledge to his/her staff. In school or extra-curricular activities, you might look for more of a empowerment leadership, where you are encouraged or expected to deliver high performance and the leader is their to execute confidence in your ability. What types of traits do you look for in a leader? For me, it is leadership that exudes agreement versus control. I, like Mrs. Murray, am not a fan of authority. When leadership is forced and the leader feels better than- or in a powerful state- I tend to resent or rebel. Whereas, when leadership is an agreement, much like the constitutive approach of leadership, where it doesn't highlight the importance of the ability to manage meaning, but to persuade or influence in a social way. Those leaders who take time to understand the issues, listen to the concerns, and interactively decide a solution. Now, when I say agreement, I don't mean I will always agree with certain leadership styles or actions done by that leader, but the simple fact of understanding and equality, where my opinions or out-look is taken into consideration.
Another interesting question the book asked was- which goes hand-in hand, with the question asked on the first day about the need of bureaucracy... Is leadership needed? In todays "new leadership" we are caught up in independence, democratic, laissez-faire society, where people can make their own decisions, and have more a free-will. But image if that cheerleading squad didn't have a coach or captains, who would issue and execute practices and punishment, who would care to abide rules without a leader to enforce them? SO, do we need leaders?
By: Amoi Savage
Workplace Relationship
We started class on Monday by watching a clip from the movie The Devil Wears Prada. In this clip, the main character Andy Sachs is running countless errands for her boss, Miranda Priestly. As the clip progressed you could tell that Miranda had very little respect for Andy, and as soon as Miranda would enter the office she would throw her purse and coats on Andy’s desk as if it was a coat rack. Miranda saw Andy as a way to accomplish those mundane tasks that she simply didn’t have time for during her busy day. The second clip we watched was from the movie Office Space. In this clip, Peter comes into work on a Monday and as soon as he sits down he is confronted by his boss, Bill Lumbergh. As soon as the conversation between Peter and Bill concludes, Peter is again confronted by a “higher-up”. This conversation unfolds just as the previous one had. You can tell Peter is very frustrated by this and wants to change some things about the communication within his office.
The showing of these clips led into the class discussion of workplace relationships, organizational climates and organizational networks. Organizational networks are defined as systems of communications linkages within the workplace. An example of an organizational network is the University of Alabama’s very own elearning system. These organizational networks share three common characteristics; the nature of information, media/virtual networks such as Twitter and Facebook, and Network Density or the number of connections among people in the network.
Organizational climates define the emotional quality of an organization. There are specifically two different types of climates, defensive and supportive. Defensive climates are generally rigid in structure and contain very little support. On the other end of the spectrum are supportive climates, which tend to be more welcoming and supportive. Communication within organizations is based around six dimensions; Strategy vs. Spontaneity, Dogmatism vs. Flexibility, Control vs. Collaboration, Evaluation vs. Description, Detachment vs. Empathy, and Superiority vs. Equality. These dimensions define the drastic difference between supportive climates and defensive climates.
Workplace relationships can be divided into romantic relationships and professional peer relationships. While there are several different types of professions peers, there are only two types of romantic relationship. Professional peers include informational peers, collegial peers, special peers, and virtual peers. Romantic relationships include mixed-status relationships which are relationships between coworkers of different organizational status. The other romantic relationship is a supervisory relationship where one person outranks and supervises another.
The central and most important theme among all workplace relationships is communication. Whether this communication is verbal or non-verbal it is extremely detrimental to the success of any organization. As we discovered in our case study on Monday, two way communications between informational peers can make a difference in job security. Granted, certain topics that are shared between informational peers are often very private and should only be made known between certain workplace peers.
Certain companies have a strict policy not to hire couples or even relatives. Should these companies always abide by this policy or should they give some couples/relatives a chance to work with one another?
By: Ross Fielder
The showing of these clips led into the class discussion of workplace relationships, organizational climates and organizational networks. Organizational networks are defined as systems of communications linkages within the workplace. An example of an organizational network is the University of Alabama’s very own elearning system. These organizational networks share three common characteristics; the nature of information, media/virtual networks such as Twitter and Facebook, and Network Density or the number of connections among people in the network.
Organizational climates define the emotional quality of an organization. There are specifically two different types of climates, defensive and supportive. Defensive climates are generally rigid in structure and contain very little support. On the other end of the spectrum are supportive climates, which tend to be more welcoming and supportive. Communication within organizations is based around six dimensions; Strategy vs. Spontaneity, Dogmatism vs. Flexibility, Control vs. Collaboration, Evaluation vs. Description, Detachment vs. Empathy, and Superiority vs. Equality. These dimensions define the drastic difference between supportive climates and defensive climates.
Workplace relationships can be divided into romantic relationships and professional peer relationships. While there are several different types of professions peers, there are only two types of romantic relationship. Professional peers include informational peers, collegial peers, special peers, and virtual peers. Romantic relationships include mixed-status relationships which are relationships between coworkers of different organizational status. The other romantic relationship is a supervisory relationship where one person outranks and supervises another.
The central and most important theme among all workplace relationships is communication. Whether this communication is verbal or non-verbal it is extremely detrimental to the success of any organization. As we discovered in our case study on Monday, two way communications between informational peers can make a difference in job security. Granted, certain topics that are shared between informational peers are often very private and should only be made known between certain workplace peers.
Certain companies have a strict policy not to hire couples or even relatives. Should these companies always abide by this policy or should they give some couples/relatives a chance to work with one another?
By: Ross Fielder
Monday, February 21, 2011
Organizational IDENTITY???
Such organizations as Disney, Apple, and Google are original aren’t they? Well that is at least what we as consumers would like to think. At the beginning of class on Thursday we struggled to come up with organizations that could be qualified as thriving and having a unique identity. We came up with ONE organization that we all agreed had a unique identity and that was WikiLeaks, however, soon enough it will inevitably fall in to the category of “unoriginal”. Perhaps there is not an organization with an extremely unique identity and what is actually so unique is the consumer. Consumers, as we discussed, are very loyal and many times prideful. They stick to their brand or organization till death do them part. A person’s allegiance with an organization is serious and when that organization is threatened most consumers take it personally. For example, Ms. Murray mentioned phone company services asking, “Who would want to pay $200 for phone service instead of $100 with “her company” for a cheaper price?” later referring to the others as snobs. Ms. Murray’s identity with her phone company service is validated by the more expensive phone company services that she will never pay for. Sigmund Freud stated that organizational identification was a defense mechanism. No one talks about their own organization and the people in it. This idea facilitates an elitist mindset that helps organizations identify themselves. We will never hear Ms. Murray talk bad about her phone company service, because being a part of that organization gives her a sense of pride and connection with something that is bigger than her blackberry.
There are certain aspects of organizations that keep consumers involved such as “stories” and personal experiences. Every organization has its story and it tends to tell people about the essence of the organization. We know that when we go to Best Buy they have the option of buying a geek from the Geek Squad, and Alabama Power strives off of its “southern appeal”. We as consumers buy into those ideas and try to pick up whoever we can along the way to jump on board. The other way that people become so attached to an organization is how the organization markets itself. What suits a person’s lifestyle tends to help create their identity with that organization. Normally the most identifiable aspect of an organization is its slogan. Nike says to “Just Do It”, Gatorade says “Is it in you?”, and Verizon says to “Rule the Air” each of these slogans in some way or another represents each of our lifestyles, beliefs, morals, and everyday approaches to life.
Towards the end of class we compared three major companies Target, Wal-Mart, and Kmart. We discussed each company’s mission and uniqueness. For Target their mission was to expect more and pay less and it’s preferred shopping with clean colors and Starbucks. Wal-Mart says that low prices are their promise and the consumer can find just about anything in Wal-Mart from tires to taxes done. Kmart’s mission is broader and is closely related to that of any retail store but it is prided on its layaway plan. These companies are only unique to the consumer’s preference. None are more special than the other as far as who is winning the greatest retail store competition, but they are special because of what the consumer has to say about them. Organizational identity is a very vague thing. So many organizations share similar qualities that make it hard for them to be out of the ordinary. But as we discussed in class conceivably it is the consumer that makes the organization extraordinary. Are we as consumers buying too much into the hype? Do we think there will ever be an organization that stays unique over time?
-Angelica Howard
There are certain aspects of organizations that keep consumers involved such as “stories” and personal experiences. Every organization has its story and it tends to tell people about the essence of the organization. We know that when we go to Best Buy they have the option of buying a geek from the Geek Squad, and Alabama Power strives off of its “southern appeal”. We as consumers buy into those ideas and try to pick up whoever we can along the way to jump on board. The other way that people become so attached to an organization is how the organization markets itself. What suits a person’s lifestyle tends to help create their identity with that organization. Normally the most identifiable aspect of an organization is its slogan. Nike says to “Just Do It”, Gatorade says “Is it in you?”, and Verizon says to “Rule the Air” each of these slogans in some way or another represents each of our lifestyles, beliefs, morals, and everyday approaches to life.
Towards the end of class we compared three major companies Target, Wal-Mart, and Kmart. We discussed each company’s mission and uniqueness. For Target their mission was to expect more and pay less and it’s preferred shopping with clean colors and Starbucks. Wal-Mart says that low prices are their promise and the consumer can find just about anything in Wal-Mart from tires to taxes done. Kmart’s mission is broader and is closely related to that of any retail store but it is prided on its layaway plan. These companies are only unique to the consumer’s preference. None are more special than the other as far as who is winning the greatest retail store competition, but they are special because of what the consumer has to say about them. Organizational identity is a very vague thing. So many organizations share similar qualities that make it hard for them to be out of the ordinary. But as we discussed in class conceivably it is the consumer that makes the organization extraordinary. Are we as consumers buying too much into the hype? Do we think there will ever be an organization that stays unique over time?
-Angelica Howard
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
The Organizational Culture of UA and Organizational Identity
On Wednesday, our class finished discussing organizational culture and began our discussion of organizational identity. We began Monday by talking about social networking and its relationship with organizational culture. The advantages of social networking with organizational culture were that people involved had a constant and quick outlet of communication with each other. Through Twitter and Facebook, members of the group can speak without opening their mouths or being together at all.
The disadvantages of social media communication were a lack of privacy and formal communication. A couple of students said that they didn’t feel like talking through this outlet was down to earth or they felt that it was too much. A few students felt that social networking was good for organizational communication because of it being constant and open.
After the discussion of communication through social media, we began to talk about the organizational culture of UA. We discussed our culture through the “Six Communicative Practices Prepared by Shiv Ganesh.” The first practice listed on the sheet is facts. The class came up with facts we knew about UA, like the university was founded in 1831 and the football team holds 13 national titles. The next practice listed on the handout is practices. The class discussed UA student practices like studying at Gorgas and tailgating on the quadrangle. Vocabularies was the 3rd communicative practice that we spoke about in regard to UA organizational culture. We of course said that Roll Tide was the common vocabulary or speech used among students at the university. Although metaphors are the next communicative practice talked about on the handout, we didn’t really touch on this. The class talked about the communicative practice of stories and we mentioned the story of how the football team became the Crimson Tide and we talked about the integration. The 6th communication practice we discussed was rites and rituals. The class agreed that a common ritual for UA students was taking pictures in front of Denny Chimes or your college after graduation.
When we came to the conclusion of the six communicative practices, we began our discussion of organizational identity. The discussion began with talking about what our ideas of identity were. A few students related identity back to their COM 340 classes and we discussed the common misconception that people have completely different identities than each other. The identity of companies and organizations such as Wal-Mart and Target were then discussed. A few students said that they wouldn’t shop at Wal-Mart because of their reputation for poor business practices and dirtiness. The identity of Wal-Mart had been tarnished by documentaries and law suits. Target’s identity was well received because of their cleanliness, lack of poor feedback and media coverage, and because we knew people who worked for Target that said positive things. Although the business and missions of Target are similar, Target had a better identity for the students of our class. Professor Murray asked at the end of our session for us to think about an organization or company that had a completely unique identity and mission/goals. The class seemed to be stumped. Are there any thriving or successful companies or organizations with a unique identity? Are there any organizations that you support because of their unique goals/missions and organizational identity?
-Ricky Norris
The disadvantages of social media communication were a lack of privacy and formal communication. A couple of students said that they didn’t feel like talking through this outlet was down to earth or they felt that it was too much. A few students felt that social networking was good for organizational communication because of it being constant and open.
After the discussion of communication through social media, we began to talk about the organizational culture of UA. We discussed our culture through the “Six Communicative Practices Prepared by Shiv Ganesh.” The first practice listed on the sheet is facts. The class came up with facts we knew about UA, like the university was founded in 1831 and the football team holds 13 national titles. The next practice listed on the handout is practices. The class discussed UA student practices like studying at Gorgas and tailgating on the quadrangle. Vocabularies was the 3rd communicative practice that we spoke about in regard to UA organizational culture. We of course said that Roll Tide was the common vocabulary or speech used among students at the university. Although metaphors are the next communicative practice talked about on the handout, we didn’t really touch on this. The class talked about the communicative practice of stories and we mentioned the story of how the football team became the Crimson Tide and we talked about the integration. The 6th communication practice we discussed was rites and rituals. The class agreed that a common ritual for UA students was taking pictures in front of Denny Chimes or your college after graduation.
When we came to the conclusion of the six communicative practices, we began our discussion of organizational identity. The discussion began with talking about what our ideas of identity were. A few students related identity back to their COM 340 classes and we discussed the common misconception that people have completely different identities than each other. The identity of companies and organizations such as Wal-Mart and Target were then discussed. A few students said that they wouldn’t shop at Wal-Mart because of their reputation for poor business practices and dirtiness. The identity of Wal-Mart had been tarnished by documentaries and law suits. Target’s identity was well received because of their cleanliness, lack of poor feedback and media coverage, and because we knew people who worked for Target that said positive things. Although the business and missions of Target are similar, Target had a better identity for the students of our class. Professor Murray asked at the end of our session for us to think about an organization or company that had a completely unique identity and mission/goals. The class seemed to be stumped. Are there any thriving or successful companies or organizations with a unique identity? Are there any organizations that you support because of their unique goals/missions and organizational identity?
-Ricky Norris
Monday, February 14, 2011
@World. #Who have we become?
The aspect of social media has shaped our generations culture. We find ourselves tweeting about restaurants we dined at, as well as current fleeting and possibly irrelevant thoughts about our busy lifestyles. Due to Facebook, the phrase “Long lost friend” no longer exists in our vocabulary anymore. But words such as “Fail, FML and BBM have become normal in our daily conversations. Instead of reciting the pledge of allegiance before our day begins, we tune into our Ipods and recite Glee songs. Whether we want to admit it or not, we have created a culture where one-way communication has become our greatest companion.
Are you hot with Bieber fever? If you asked Ozzy Osburn this question he would blankly stare at you. Even though that is nothing new for Ozzy, many older cultures would stare vacantly as well because they are unaware of our younger generations sophistication. The Best Buy Superbowl commercial that aired on Sunday confirmed the distinction of how culture has changed over the years. This commercial did a great job showing how trends as well as individuals interests alter overtime. Ozzy demonstrated the idea talked about in class about cultural reproduction. Ozzy has passed down his own system of beliefs and ideals relevant to his time and Bieber has altered them to make them current. The commercial stated, “We are going to lose Ozzy and bring the new one.”
Our culture is also being defined by the organizations we are building. Say goodbye to tiny cluttered cubicles and hello to free open workspace. Google began a culture as a carefree work environment where no barriers exist. Communication flows equally among members, which creates a positive new work environment. Members can sit in a hammock and eat lunch while typing up their next project. If an employee feels the need for a break, they can benefit from a bike ride or even enjoy a swim. Google is known for the philosophy of being serious without a suit. Many companies are following in Google’s footsteps, which are creating a new organizational culture in our world.
Our culture has fashioned the concept that everything is easy. You no longer have to go find the news or the movies you want, they will magically discover you. Prior generations would have never imaged a world without physically touching and folding a newly printed newspaper. Our culture just has to press the “On” button and our Ipads will effortlessly flash high definition videos of breaking news. Has our culture gone too far? Are we going to look back 50 years from now and wonder if we have lost everything we were founded on? Or better yet, are things such as Facebook and twitter helping us build a stronger connected culture than ever before?
By: Courtney Brennan
Are you hot with Bieber fever? If you asked Ozzy Osburn this question he would blankly stare at you. Even though that is nothing new for Ozzy, many older cultures would stare vacantly as well because they are unaware of our younger generations sophistication. The Best Buy Superbowl commercial that aired on Sunday confirmed the distinction of how culture has changed over the years. This commercial did a great job showing how trends as well as individuals interests alter overtime. Ozzy demonstrated the idea talked about in class about cultural reproduction. Ozzy has passed down his own system of beliefs and ideals relevant to his time and Bieber has altered them to make them current. The commercial stated, “We are going to lose Ozzy and bring the new one.”
Our culture is also being defined by the organizations we are building. Say goodbye to tiny cluttered cubicles and hello to free open workspace. Google began a culture as a carefree work environment where no barriers exist. Communication flows equally among members, which creates a positive new work environment. Members can sit in a hammock and eat lunch while typing up their next project. If an employee feels the need for a break, they can benefit from a bike ride or even enjoy a swim. Google is known for the philosophy of being serious without a suit. Many companies are following in Google’s footsteps, which are creating a new organizational culture in our world.
Our culture has fashioned the concept that everything is easy. You no longer have to go find the news or the movies you want, they will magically discover you. Prior generations would have never imaged a world without physically touching and folding a newly printed newspaper. Our culture just has to press the “On” button and our Ipads will effortlessly flash high definition videos of breaking news. Has our culture gone too far? Are we going to look back 50 years from now and wonder if we have lost everything we were founded on? Or better yet, are things such as Facebook and twitter helping us build a stronger connected culture than ever before?
By: Courtney Brennan
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Rationality (Second half)
On Wednesday, February 2, our class discussed the second part of Rationality. We started class reviewing Monday’s lecture about the theories of Max Weber and Frederick Douglas. Then we were introduced to Henri Fayol’s Theory of Classical Management. A summary of this theory is, the employees should know where they fit, should receive individual rewards and should think about the company’s goals before their own. The problem with this theory is that it does not adequately explain how the organization works.
The second half of class we reviewed two different case studies to determine which theory each was using and the problems involved with their theory. The first case study is an example of Henri Fayol’s Theory of Classical Management. This case was about a small southern ice cream parlor called Creamy Creations Ice Cream Shoppe. A retiree owned it by the name of Bob Peterson. After a year and a half of owning Creamy Creations, Bob decided to sell the business to Burger Barn, a local fast-food chain that was striving to expand into other types of food services. After the turnover, Burger Barn wanted more efficiency within the parlor so they instituted more workstations behind the counter. Creating more workstations increased efficiency but took away from the personalization of Creamy Creations Ice Cream. While Bob owned the parlor, his main goal was personal interactions and friendliness between the employees and the customers. Not only were there less personal interactions but also less people were staying and eating their ice cream at the parlor. The problem that Creamy Creations Ice Cream was experiencing was that Burger Barn was not concerned about the personal aspects among the parlor but more concerned with the efficiency of the business and what would speed up the process allowing less people to wait in line. If I was called in as a communication consultant by Burger Barn executives, I would tell them they need to keep a quality product, encourage customers to come back and also personalize their interactions rather than the customers just getting their ice cream and leaving.
The second case study was an example of Max Weber’s Bureaucracy theory. The setting of this case study is in a mental hospital with many ill patients. One specific patient was Horris James Wilcox Jr. It was documented that Wilcox watches too much TV and has emotional outbreaks because of the different tragedies he sees on TV. Recently, he was complaining, “The sky was falling.” Wilcox watched an Air force Fighter plane explode in the sky on TV so the nurses thought of these statements as an emotional reaction to what he saw. It wasn’t until a few days later when the wall behind Wilcox collapsed onto him. Apparently, there has been a leak in the water pipe and the wall has been painted over 3 times in the last year. It turns out that there was miscommunication among all the employees at the hospital. The head of residential life was having her secretary sign all of her documents for her without reading them which led to the complaint of a water pipe leak being overlooked in Wilcox’s room. The hospital follows a bureaucracy system. The problem that the hospital ran into is that the miscommunication or lack there of it, lead to Wilcox’s death. The employees within the hospital only care about money and promotions, which led them to their current lawsuit.
Which theory is most commonly recognized within businesses in 2011?
By: Katie O’Laughlin
The second half of class we reviewed two different case studies to determine which theory each was using and the problems involved with their theory. The first case study is an example of Henri Fayol’s Theory of Classical Management. This case was about a small southern ice cream parlor called Creamy Creations Ice Cream Shoppe. A retiree owned it by the name of Bob Peterson. After a year and a half of owning Creamy Creations, Bob decided to sell the business to Burger Barn, a local fast-food chain that was striving to expand into other types of food services. After the turnover, Burger Barn wanted more efficiency within the parlor so they instituted more workstations behind the counter. Creating more workstations increased efficiency but took away from the personalization of Creamy Creations Ice Cream. While Bob owned the parlor, his main goal was personal interactions and friendliness between the employees and the customers. Not only were there less personal interactions but also less people were staying and eating their ice cream at the parlor. The problem that Creamy Creations Ice Cream was experiencing was that Burger Barn was not concerned about the personal aspects among the parlor but more concerned with the efficiency of the business and what would speed up the process allowing less people to wait in line. If I was called in as a communication consultant by Burger Barn executives, I would tell them they need to keep a quality product, encourage customers to come back and also personalize their interactions rather than the customers just getting their ice cream and leaving.
The second case study was an example of Max Weber’s Bureaucracy theory. The setting of this case study is in a mental hospital with many ill patients. One specific patient was Horris James Wilcox Jr. It was documented that Wilcox watches too much TV and has emotional outbreaks because of the different tragedies he sees on TV. Recently, he was complaining, “The sky was falling.” Wilcox watched an Air force Fighter plane explode in the sky on TV so the nurses thought of these statements as an emotional reaction to what he saw. It wasn’t until a few days later when the wall behind Wilcox collapsed onto him. Apparently, there has been a leak in the water pipe and the wall has been painted over 3 times in the last year. It turns out that there was miscommunication among all the employees at the hospital. The head of residential life was having her secretary sign all of her documents for her without reading them which led to the complaint of a water pipe leak being overlooked in Wilcox’s room. The hospital follows a bureaucracy system. The problem that the hospital ran into is that the miscommunication or lack there of it, lead to Wilcox’s death. The employees within the hospital only care about money and promotions, which led them to their current lawsuit.
Which theory is most commonly recognized within businesses in 2011?
By: Katie O’Laughlin
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Rationality (first half)
In this chapter, we are going to learn about how people do business in different places, and how rationality plays a role in this. Aristotle’s rhetorical theory, the “enthymeme” involves both “rational” and “intuitive” thinking. Rational plans are schemes that show relatively direct paths to the accomplishment of our goals. Men like Robert Ivie and Max Weber believed that rationality is subjective, and that it is colored by attitudes, preferences, historical trends, and politics. These men argue that employees should be hired and promoted through merit, and that there should be a clear chain of command. Also, organizations should take input from their consumers when planning change. In South America, however, it seen as more reasonable to hire someone they know or are related too because they believe in “palanca;” which is the theory that people need to be interdependent in order to survive.
The four principles of scientific management invented by Frederick Taylor are also very important to the idea of rationality. This theory really brought science into the business world, and ties strongly into efficiency and effectiveness. If there is a standardized system for doing work, businesses would be more efficient. Scientific management is closely linked too Theory X in that work cannot be satisfying and that there must be external rewards for incentive. In contrast, Theory Y states that people can be satisfied through their jobs if they are treated with respect and their work is enjoyable. This theory ties back into Aristotle’s theory of “enthymeme.”
There must be some way to incorporate all these theories together without losing your employees or going bankrupt. Trying to incorporate parts of both sides of the spectrum is where Chester Barnard defined efficiency and effectiveness. Mr. Bernard stated that effectiveness is the extent to which an organization meets its primary objectives which is getting the product manufactured and sold. Efficiency came next and Bernard states that embracing values, goals, and hopes would lead to employee satisfaction and would lead to individual and organizational achievement of goals.
There are many different theories on how to run a business in the best way, and there are many different theories on what is the rational way; what theory do you think is the best business model?
-Anthony Bolz
The four principles of scientific management invented by Frederick Taylor are also very important to the idea of rationality. This theory really brought science into the business world, and ties strongly into efficiency and effectiveness. If there is a standardized system for doing work, businesses would be more efficient. Scientific management is closely linked too Theory X in that work cannot be satisfying and that there must be external rewards for incentive. In contrast, Theory Y states that people can be satisfied through their jobs if they are treated with respect and their work is enjoyable. This theory ties back into Aristotle’s theory of “enthymeme.”
There must be some way to incorporate all these theories together without losing your employees or going bankrupt. Trying to incorporate parts of both sides of the spectrum is where Chester Barnard defined efficiency and effectiveness. Mr. Bernard stated that effectiveness is the extent to which an organization meets its primary objectives which is getting the product manufactured and sold. Efficiency came next and Bernard states that embracing values, goals, and hopes would lead to employee satisfaction and would lead to individual and organizational achievement of goals.
There are many different theories on how to run a business in the best way, and there are many different theories on what is the rational way; what theory do you think is the best business model?
-Anthony Bolz
Monday, January 31, 2011
The most effective styles of Leadership
We continued to discuss chapter 2, which was about organizational structure and process. Class covered the different structures that organizations typically have in order to keep their companies running effectively and efficiently. Max Weber had a major influence on social theory, social research, and the discipline of sociology itself In regards to structure, he looked into how and what circumstances do people obey others, especially institutions, even when no force is applied. According to Weber, there are three legitimate powers or authorities: Charismatic, Traditional, and Legal-Rational (Bureaucracy).
Charismatic is highly personal in exercising authority. The person’s character is an assistant in how they lead and how they are perceived. President Barack Obama is a prime example of a charismatic leader. During the election Obama swept the nation off their feet with his comforting and inspiring speeches and an overall presence, leading the nation believing that “Yes we can”. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R83xMWtEp7k&feature=player_detailpage
The challenges that consist of a charismatic authority is there are problems finding a successor and how to keep the organization’s culture and structure once they leave. There is current worry of the future of Apple if Steve Jobs retires once and for all.
After discussing charismatic authority, we went on to talk about traditional authority such as Monarchs. However, challenges that are present with traditional authority are there is only one leader, which is designated by the family, and people do not want to “rock the boat”.
The final and most popular type of authority we discussed was legal-rational or Bureaucracy. Bureaucracy consists of a fixed division of labor and a clearly defined hierarchy of positions. Weber stated bureaucracy equated with administrative rationality. The key elements of Bureaucracy are fixed division of labor, clearly defined hierarchy of positions, applicants selected based on technical qualifications, and fixed salaries. The idea of bureaucracy is the harder you work and your loyalty to a company the greater the chances are of a worker to being promoted. There is a dominant sense of management and everyone has rules to follow for their particular position in the company. The benefits of bureaucracy are a person is based on their merit and is systematic, helps organize large systems, and rules can be learned and passed down over time. A police force is a good example of a bureaucratic organization.
Overall it seems that bureaucracy is the clear choice of the three leaders for a company’s type of leadership, but like the other options, bureaucracy has its faults as well. The disadvantages of bureaucracy are that there’s over centralization of power at the top, there is a threat to individuality, and people may forget the big picture and focuses on the small calculated tasks.
Overall I believe the leadership style that is most effective is pertinent to the type of organization it is a part of. My question is, if bureaucracy is not the end all solution for type of leadership, what elements or aspects of it could be eliminated and/or could it use aspects of charismatic/traditional leaderships?
By: Haley Schwartz
Charismatic is highly personal in exercising authority. The person’s character is an assistant in how they lead and how they are perceived. President Barack Obama is a prime example of a charismatic leader. During the election Obama swept the nation off their feet with his comforting and inspiring speeches and an overall presence, leading the nation believing that “Yes we can”. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R83xMWtEp7k&feature=player_detailpage
The challenges that consist of a charismatic authority is there are problems finding a successor and how to keep the organization’s culture and structure once they leave. There is current worry of the future of Apple if Steve Jobs retires once and for all.
After discussing charismatic authority, we went on to talk about traditional authority such as Monarchs. However, challenges that are present with traditional authority are there is only one leader, which is designated by the family, and people do not want to “rock the boat”.
The final and most popular type of authority we discussed was legal-rational or Bureaucracy. Bureaucracy consists of a fixed division of labor and a clearly defined hierarchy of positions. Weber stated bureaucracy equated with administrative rationality. The key elements of Bureaucracy are fixed division of labor, clearly defined hierarchy of positions, applicants selected based on technical qualifications, and fixed salaries. The idea of bureaucracy is the harder you work and your loyalty to a company the greater the chances are of a worker to being promoted. There is a dominant sense of management and everyone has rules to follow for their particular position in the company. The benefits of bureaucracy are a person is based on their merit and is systematic, helps organize large systems, and rules can be learned and passed down over time. A police force is a good example of a bureaucratic organization.
Overall it seems that bureaucracy is the clear choice of the three leaders for a company’s type of leadership, but like the other options, bureaucracy has its faults as well. The disadvantages of bureaucracy are that there’s over centralization of power at the top, there is a threat to individuality, and people may forget the big picture and focuses on the small calculated tasks.
Overall I believe the leadership style that is most effective is pertinent to the type of organization it is a part of. My question is, if bureaucracy is not the end all solution for type of leadership, what elements or aspects of it could be eliminated and/or could it use aspects of charismatic/traditional leaderships?
By: Haley Schwartz
Thursday, January 27, 2011
On Monday, January 24th, our class discussed the first part of Chapter 2: Organizational Structure and Process. We started by looking at a flowchart of the University of Alabama’s Division of Student Affairs. The chart showed the chain of command process that occurs within all the offices that report to the head of the Division of Student Affairs, Dr. Mark Nelson. We discovered that there are six individuals who report directly to Dr. Nelson, and these people are also over multiple offices. We created several hypothetical situations and discussed the flow of command that would occur. For example, the Director of the Blackburn Institute, Dr. Philip Westbrook, would report to Dr. Kathleen Cramer, the Senior Associate Vice President of External Affairs, who in turn would report to the Dr. Mark Nelson, who is both the Vice President of Student Affairs and Vice Provost for Academic Affairs. Our teacher, Creshema Murray, queried the class as to how long we thought this system had been in place. Many of us were surprised to hear that the system denoted in the flowchart had only been in existence for two years. We learned that the old hierarchy had been streamlined to allow for increased and more fluid communication. This example served as an introduction into the lesson. We discussed the structure of an organization, how it denotes the solid parts of an organization and provides a snapshot of how an organization works. We also learned about the duality of structure, that structure is both an outcome of and a resource for interaction, and that structure can be both enabling and constraining. A term we identified was structuration: the process by which structures emerge from interaction and then become resources for constraints on future interaction. We then discussed two of the three elements of organizational structure: hierarchy and differentiation/specialization. Hierarchy refers to the distribution of authority among organizational roles. It involves the levels of power within an organization, one group being dominate over another. Hierarchy is necessary in an organization, but it can create problems. If there are too many levels in an organization, communication can be strained between the levels. By restructuring the hierarchy of an organization, as was done in U of A’s Division of Student Affairs, the flow of communication between the differing levels of hierarchy can be improved. We then talked about the second key element of organizational communication: differentiation/specialization, which refers to an organization’s division of labor. While specialization is necessary since organizations want people who are experts in certain fields, it can lead to alienation. By learning about these key elements of organizations, we can become key employees and members of an organizations we become a part of in our future
By: Alex Goolsby
By: Alex Goolsby
Monday, January 24, 2011
Chapter 1
Chapter One talks about how we think about organizations, why theories and thinking critically. This chapter starts off about talking about bureaucracy which is a large organization characterized by hierarchy. This section talks about the downsides of bureaucracy which is rigidity, depersonalization, and the diffusion of responsibility. Bureaucracy is still happening today in our society. This chapter also talks about how we should look at each organization and organizational problem on multiple levels and from multiple perspectives. This chapter continues by talking about how making the invisible visible. When something is very familiar to us we tend to take it for granted and it becomes transparent to most people. When a new idea or technology is introduced it is not taken for granted because its new. We tend not to take the new things for granted until they become familiar to us. Next we go on to talk about metaphors and how it is another form of invisibility. We tend to overlook the significance of the representation of metaphors as we become accustomed to their usage. Metaphors help us understand one thing in terms of something else. Its is very easy to overlook the significance of a metaphor. Metaphors are used a lot to describe organizations that are complex. Metaphors are also used to describe the communication process and to simplify our understanding of it. However some simplifications can get us into trouble when understanding the true meaning of the metaphor, which was used. Sometimes people use metaphors and whoever is receiving this information doesn’t understand the full meaning of what the sender is saying. Next it talks about theories and why they are important. A theory is a generalizing across different situations or cases or for our purposes organizations. Theories help us predict things, deciding the best course of action, which is why theories are so practical. This chapter was basically and introduction of what we will be learning in this class and the organizational process of organizations.
In class last Wednesday we discussed the different groups that each of us were involved in. We also talked about our different roles in those organizations and how everyone could relate to each other. We also went around the room talking about how to really define communication. The discussion during class helped me relate to everyone in different ways. Hearing about organizational communication and all the different activities people were involved in was really interesting to me. That class period was basically just an introduction of the class and what we will be doing in this class throughout the year.
By: Emily Beck
In class last Wednesday we discussed the different groups that each of us were involved in. We also talked about our different roles in those organizations and how everyone could relate to each other. We also went around the room talking about how to really define communication. The discussion during class helped me relate to everyone in different ways. Hearing about organizational communication and all the different activities people were involved in was really interesting to me. That class period was basically just an introduction of the class and what we will be doing in this class throughout the year.
By: Emily Beck
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Welcome to COM 350-320: Organizational Communication
The purpose of this course is to provide you with a closer examination of the taken-for-granted, communicative nature of organizational life. Readings, discussions and assignments will challenge you to think critically about the diverse perspectives people bring into organizations as they perform tasks and make sense out of their work experiences. We will focus on the role that communication plays in shaping both relationships and structures of organizing. As you prepare for your careers, this course will help you develop your critical thinking and writing skills of and about communication.
First, we will explore various approaches to studying organizational communication and discuss how these perspectives are a part of organizational life today. We will investigate these issues by progressing through a number of topics important to organizational communication (decision making, identification, teamwork, democracy, conflict, gender, race/class and emerging issues in the field).
Organizational communication is a complex phenomenon. Throughout the semester we will define communication in a number of ways, including: (a) tool or a "skill" used in interactions with co-workers or with customers, (b) a linkage creating information or relational networks between organizational actors, (c) a symbolic process or performance constructing organizational reality, and (d) a "voice" often silenced or needing to be heard in the organization. We will not only explore what organizational communication "is" but what it “could be” by challenging what scholars know about organizing and communicating today.
Students will identify and define primary concepts and apply them to discussions of real-world situations. As such, students are encouraged to share personal perspectives and experiences in class and use course concepts to evaluate their own organizational experiences as well as case studies.
First, we will explore various approaches to studying organizational communication and discuss how these perspectives are a part of organizational life today. We will investigate these issues by progressing through a number of topics important to organizational communication (decision making, identification, teamwork, democracy, conflict, gender, race/class and emerging issues in the field).
Organizational communication is a complex phenomenon. Throughout the semester we will define communication in a number of ways, including: (a) tool or a "skill" used in interactions with co-workers or with customers, (b) a linkage creating information or relational networks between organizational actors, (c) a symbolic process or performance constructing organizational reality, and (d) a "voice" often silenced or needing to be heard in the organization. We will not only explore what organizational communication "is" but what it “could be” by challenging what scholars know about organizing and communicating today.
Students will identify and define primary concepts and apply them to discussions of real-world situations. As such, students are encouraged to share personal perspectives and experiences in class and use course concepts to evaluate their own organizational experiences as well as case studies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)