Organizations - Culture & Change Management

I really enjoyed reading chapter 3 in Hard Facts, Dangerous Half-Truths, and Total Nonsense, “Is work fundamentally different from the rest of life and should it be?” written by Jeffrey Pfeffer and Robert I. Sutton. The authors defined the dimensions of why work should be separate from the rest of life, and also why integrating work with the rest of life gives some benefits. Pfeffer and Sutton examined both benefits and drawbacks of these dimensions with evidence-based examples. One of the insights that I think is crucial in management is Love – Maybe Even Friendship Is a Dirty Word. According to Pfeffer and Sutton (2006), since many people spend lots of time in close proximity at work, relationships often develop. However, many companies have policies forbidding dating among coworkers. The companies hope to avoid legal liability from sexual harassment claims, charges of nepotism and favoritism, and the intrusion of workplace gossip (Pfeffer & Sutton, 2006, p. 64). In contrast, some companies, such as Southwest Airlines, encourage people to embrace and build relationships, including friendships and family intersections, in the workplace. Southwest believes that it is easier to achieve coordination through informal relationships. Pfeffer and Sutton examine both advantages and disadvantages of this issue. It is like a double-edged sword. From my dad’s experience in his own business, one of his employees who worked in another province dated another employee, who worked in accounting, in the office based in Bangkok. They conspired to cheat my dad’s company. I do not think that I need to challenge implicitly this assumption of the concept since the authors who wrote this concept have a strong argument and scientifically evidence-based examples to support the insight. I wonder what you guys think about this issue? Or have you ever heard about this kind of issue in your workplace?

I also found a set of eight questions to consider before launching a major organizational change in chapter 7, "Change or Die," to be important in change management. The set of questions consists of the big eight questions: 

• Is the practice better than what you are doing right now?
• Is the change really worth the time, disruption, and money?
• Is it best to make only symbolic changes instead of core changes?
• Is doing the change good for you, but bad for the company?
• Do you have enough power to make the change happen?
• Are people already overwhelmed by too many changes? 
• Will people be able to learn and update as the change unfolds?
• Will you be able to pull the plug?  (Pfeffer & Sutton, 2006, p. 167).

These questions can help executives, employees, analysts, academics, and business reporters to shape and scan which changes are worth making, delaying, or avoiding (Pfeffer & Sutton, 2006, p. 166-167). These questions should be applied in my internship workplace’s change management since my boss has many ideas in his mind to develop his company, such as the HACCP in food safety and establishing a new retail outlet without considering data base demographics. I wonder what could help executives, employees, analysts, academics, and business reporters to decrease their bias and answer honestly these eight questions. I mean, it is quite difficult for people to avoid taking side with themselves.

A Good Way to Change a Corporate Culture, by Peter Bregman
This recommendation is evidence-based. Bregman’s argument is based on coherent scientific reasoning of the study, which was conducted by the University of Illinois researcher Leann Lipps Birch. Birch conducted a series of experiments on children to see what would get them to eat vegetables they disliked. Birch found one thing that worked predictably. She put a child who didn’t like peas at a table with several other children who did. Within a meal or two, the pea-hater was eating peas like the pea-lovers. This was called peer pressure. Bregman adapted this study to use as the recommendation for one head of the firm, who wanted to change an organizational culture.

I have taken a lot from this session. I have learned a foundation of change management, culture in organization, and national culture. I found the most rewarding lessons from this session to be why work should be separate from the rest of life, and also why integrating work with the rest of life gives some benefits, from chapter 3 in Hard Facts, Dangerous Half-Truths, and Total Nonsense. People cannot predict which one will succeed or fail unless they experience it and/or use scientific evidence to support their perspectives. Since human beings are the biggest resource of any organization, I am looking forward, with interest, to learn the next session's materials.

Group - Power and Politics, Conflict and Negotiation

I really enjoyed listening to Professor William Ury’s talk, “The Walk from No to Yes.” The concept that I have learned from Ury is taking the third side in conflict. Conflict often has two sides. When people have different perspectives and all of them need to seek out for a solution, each person should step back and look at the situation as the third person. This technique gives people an opportunity to get out of their own personally hyphenate involved feeling with that particular situation. Then people will have broader vision on that conflict. The better solution will come out afterward. According to Ury, the third side is us, and it steps us closer to peace (2010). Ury gives so many examples that make me understand his concept. For instance, Ury gives the example of Abraham who could turn some hostility in the Middle East to hospitality from his walking journey with his family. Abraham’s and his family’s walking symbolized the unity in family. This unity acted as the third side that influenced to those conflicts in the Middle East. It’s implied to those Middle Eastern people that what they need to solve any conflicts is unity. I think Ury’s concept is absolutely great. We can apply this concept in any conflict in the world, this absolutely includes for management. It is so simple, but sometimes just not so easy to do. For management, in a conflict between employees ,or a conflict between managers and employees and/or managers, everybody should step back and look at the situation with the third-person view. Looking at the situation with an unbiased attitude can resolve the conflict. I do not have any thought to challenge this concept. However, I am looking forward to hearing the next talk from Ury about what alternative skills he would suggest to solve a conflict when one or both sides do not want to step back and take the third side to solve the problem.

When I first started listening to the interview with Linda Babcock and Sara Laschever “Women Don’t Ask” I knew there was going to be a topic on feminism or gender. Babcock and Laschever talk about gender differences in negotiation. Babcock says that the data from her research show that only 7% of the women in her study asked for their job offer, while 57% of the men asked for it. The speakers give some logic as to why women do not usually negotiate for themselves. One of the reasons is the way women were taught when they were young. Aggressive women are not acceptable in some cultures, but not being aggressive can lead those women receive unfair treatment. Two speakers advise women to get out and ask every question they wonder about in negotiation. Starting by setting a goal and negotiate for it. This concept helps women be more visible in organizations, and receive an equal treatment with men. I think this concept is very beneficial for every gender, not only for women. Asking does not hurt anyone. If you never ask, you never know. In addition, the two speakers suggest that women also need to set a bottom line for which offered conditions that they cannot accept in negotiation. I wonder if some women have had bad experience after asking for things that they should get and if they recieved negative effects afterward, are there any ways to make them feel better and not afraid of negotiating for the next time? 

5 Tips to Resolve Conflict (Before it Gets Out of Control) 
This recommendation has been shared 1.2k times, even though this recommendation is not evidence-based. This recommendation is examined from Paul Spiegelman’s experiments and experiences over the years dealing with conflicts in his company. There is no sample size of the research that the author uses to make the argument since it is based on his personal opinion only. I would like to see some results of studies showing that his concepts work and diminish the conflict.

The topic of power and politics is challenging to me. The two readings in this week session are a little bit difficult since a lot of examples and organizations that I have never known are mentioned in these two articles. So, I could not see a clear picture of the examples the author talks about. It was a little bit tough for me to follow. By the way, I really enjoyed watching the clips about negotiation, especially the topic of gender differences. I think it is rewarding especially for women, but also everyone. I am so excited to step forward to learn a bigger scape of management field, organizations: culture and change management. This topic will be more challenging because culture is something that is quite hard to control, but it is so important for every business. I have never paid attention to this topic before, so I hope the next session will be very worthwhile for me.

Group - Team, Communication, and Leadership

 

Some important insights that I have learned from the third week’s learning materials are three solutions for good team outcomes, lectured by professor Melissa Thomas-Hunt. These three solutions are: identify and leverage your expertise; enlist early support; and engage others. These keys make a successful team. What does successful team mean? According to Thomas-Hunt, the successful team is measured by team output, team viability, and member development and growth. These three recommendations will leverage member knowledge and help people to expose their unique ideas into the team and this will lead the team to create effective outcomes. Identifying and leveraging your expertise is the most helpful knowledge for me because I am not a person who likes to talk in meetings or discussion. It does not mean I do not have any ideas in my mind. But I personally do not like to talk in a big group. This performance is not good in management or even in study, so that is why I think this technique is important. Thomas-Hunt reminds that air time matters, so jumping into the conversation early can also help your idea be identified, and also do not forget to prepare to explain it with evidence. This is the rewarding technique that I have learned from this session material, and I will use it to improve myself in class discussion, group meetings, and my future career. I do not have any outstanding questions concerning the concept since Thomas-Hunt and the other three people in the talk (Gina, Kim, and Odette) explained and gave some thoughts in a variety of cases clearly in the talk.

The second most important concept that I have found from reading “Are Great Leaders in Control of Their Companies?” written by Jeffrey Pfeffer and Robert I. Sutton, is “Believing That You Are Powerful Can Wreck Your Organization,” one of the recommendations that the authors suggest in “What Should Good Leaders Do?” Leaders, who act with too much power, excess centralization, talk more, ignore what other people say or want, and have also too much influence and control can create billions of lost productivity (health, happiness, loyalty, and productivity of their subordinates), and bring failure to the organizations (Pfeffer & Sutton, 2006, p.191). To be good leaders, these kinds of behaviors should be avoided. There are ways to avoid these problems such as reducing power differences and shattering illusions of leaders’ superiority by surrounding themselves with people who do not hesitate to tell them they are wrong and why (Pfeffer & Sutton, 2006, p.207). For instance, Ko Nishimura, the CEO of contract manufacturer Solectron, did not have a reserved parking place and sat in an open office. This concept and its key implications are useful in managing people in the organizations. Sometimes the hierarchy and the difference of power affect the team dynamics. I have had this kind of experience in my old workplace. The leaders of my department were in too much control. All the subordinates including me had never have an opportunity to share ideas, knowledge, and opinions. So the turnover rate in my old workplace was, and is still, very high. The centralization in my old workplace is excessive and this has also created mum effect (see p. 207 in Hard Facts, Dangerous Half-Truths, and Total Nonsense) in the company too. “Believing That You Are Powerful Can Wreck Your Organization” is good in theory, but tough to do in reality. I wonder, if it happens in the big organization like my old workplace, how in reality can this problem be reduced or solved because people in high position do not want to change themselves and get out of this system.

4 Reasons to Grab a Drink With Your Employees: How Bosses Can Use Informal Social Events To Improve Culture And Teamwork by Ian Jackson, a managing partner with Enshored, an operations consultancy and outsourcing business based in Los Angeles. Ian had 20 years experience in financial technology, leading global businesses for BARRA, Multex, Reuters, Dealogic and Fitch Ratings. I chose this recommendation to discuss because it is from the person who works in the operation consultancy. I would like to see if he uses any scientific evidence to support the recommendation besides the personal experience, ideologies, or other non-scientific evidence. In addition, this topic is similar to the recommendation that Alex “Sandy” Pentland, a professor at MIT's Media Lab advises in “The New Science of Building Great Teams” that the center’s manager should revise the employees’ coffee break schedule so that everyone on a team took a break at the same time. That would allow people more time to socialize with their teammates, away from their workstations.

This article is not evidence-based. However, it is based on Ian Jackson’s 20 years of personal experience of working in financial technology and leading global businesses. The recommendation is based on his own opinions and experiences. I would like to see more studies and examples that can help readers to visualize each particular situation that can support his arguments.

Leadership is a skill that nobody can teach you to do, it is a craft that you can learn only through experience (Pfeffer & Sutton, 2006, p.211). I agree with this statement. I have never stood in the high-level position, but used to work as a small team leader. I mentioned that my old workplace exhibited excessive centralization, so what I acted and performed to my team members was in such contrast with them. I managed my team with my understanding, and respected people’s performances. So I think the reading from chapter 8 ensures that I am in a good direction of how to avoid being a bad leader. Next session I will be learning about group - power and politics, conflict and negotiation, which is my team project’s topic. I am so excited to learn more about how to deal with the conflict within the organization.

Individual - Motivation, Decision Making, and Emotions

I really enjoyed listening to Dan Gilbert’s talk, “Why we make bad decisions.” He uses a lot of examples of poor decision making that usually happens in our daily lives. I think it is more important to learn from these poor decision making examples than learning from the principles only. The concept that I have learned from Gilbert is “errors in odds and errors in value.” When we have to choose something, we like to compare between two things and that can change the value, and sometimes the errors from underestimating or overestimating occur. People compare things with the past instead of what is possible for the present/future. People often use their own decision making based on personal experiences, and something that can threaten their future/well-being/finance might occur. All the cases and concepts that Gilbert presents are surprising me because all is true that people mostly make a decision based on their own opinion without using facts. For example, the errors in valuing, Gilbert pulls out the case that if you have $20 bill and a show ticket, which is worth $20 in your wallet, but when you arrive at the theatre you have noticed that you lost the ticket. Would you spend your remaining $20 bill on a ticket? Most people say no because people use their common sense (believable, according to Fiske and Borgida) that why should they have to pay $20 again. Put another way, if you have two $20 bills and you have lost one of them and you know when you already arrive the theatre, would you buy the ticket? – yes, because you are already there for the show. In fact, either way is same in value. This example implies that some common sense may contrast true fact. This skill is useful when you have to make every decision in your life. Overestimating or underestimating the odds and values without considering through the facts can lead to bad decision making. I do not have any outstanding questions concerning the concept since Gilbert explains his concept and the result of his experiments clearly in his talk.

Another most important concept that I have learned during this session is the guidelines for using incentives. It is good to develop a more complete view of human psychology and its implication for using financial incentives (Pfeffer & Sutton, 2006, p. 129). Many managers or higher level executives often choose financial incentives for the first choice to encourage employees to put more effort into their work, or solve any problems, which often comes with disastrous results. Sometimes less is more effective, one of the guidelines that Pfeffer and Sutton suggest interests me. They give the example about one company that emphasized the concept of teamwork and team selling – helping others when they were waiting on customers, and that impressed the customers and made them stay longer and bought more products in the store (Pfeffer & Sutton, 2006, p. 131). This case is similar to the phenomenon that I have seen in last spring. I went to Baltimore, MD for a food event, and stopped by Anthropologie. The store provided the area for kids for having fun with painting, drawing, and having some free cookies while they were waiting for their parents to shop. There was a staff who took care of those kids. I liked that idea though. I wonder if the Anthropologie might have the same strategy as the example that Pfeffer and Sutton recommend. If yes, it is kind of a good management idea because the staffs will have good team building, one takes care of the kids, two of them work at the cashier counters, and others work on displays and helping customers. They are not required to compare and compete with each other for increasing the sale, and they support each other to make the team achieve the goals they expect. Everybody will be happy at the end. One thing that I question is: are there any failures from using this kind of management to motivate employees since Pfeffer and Sutton show only an advantage side of this concept.

  

9 Things That Motivate Employees More Than Money By Ilya Pozin from Inc.com

lya Pozin is a serial entrepreneur, writer and investor. Pozin suggests 9 ways based on what he has learned from Josh, who had 12 years in the corporate world, which included running a major department at Comcast. Josh has helped Pozin in developing the ability to motivate employees. Nine tips that Pozin suggests are not based on reliable data, but personal experiences and opinions from the professional and human psychological point of view. I do not see the specific sample size of this study since all nine tips are mentioned in general ways. I would like to see some evidence that strongly support all these recommendations. For example, Pozin suggests that the company should throw parties, have a company picnic, organize birthday parties, hold a happy hour, and organize events throughout the year to remind your staff that you are all in it together. I would like to see the results if these work well as the potential motivator. Some feedbacks from employees by interview, survey, and so on are going to be valuable evidence to support the arguments Pozin makes.

The topic in the second week session is going to be one of my favorite topics from this class. I really enjoyed reading the chapter that the professor assigned, and also the recordings from many professionals. All the learning materials make me have more and more sense in organizational behavior. I have found that all this week lessons are rewarding. I have learned that beside monetary incentives, other factors are more effective in a long-term human resource management. I have had some bad experience about pay-for-performance practices from my previous job, and this must not happen again in my own company (if I have it in the future), so that is why this week’s session is really interesting to me. I hope the next session will help me develop more skills in this field of studies.