Sunday, October 6, 2013

A630.8.4.RB_MedinaM.


After watching the TED video “Tom Wujec: Build a tower, build a team” by Tom Wujec, I have to say I agree with Wujec’s analysis. I think one of the reasons why kindergarteners perform better than MBA students is because they have fun building things and watching whether or not they succeed. Whenever kindergarteners see that what they currently built is not going to succeed, they have no problem starting up again from scratch. It just does not bother them. Another reason might be that MBA students are taught to have some type of structure to go off from, and whenever they have to channel their inner creativity some students have a hard time creating something from scratch. In another aspect, it can be taken as far as saying that MBA students are taught structure and therefore, become narrow minded on how to complete tasks. Kids are free of any feelings or emotions of failure, while adults aren’t since they know the consequences of failing. MBA students also spend plenty of time planning and organizing while kindergarteners just begin by building the tower.

 These types of different approaches into the spaghetti challenge help determine the success rate of the group. If the group spends too much time planning, then when they begin to actually build the project they do so with less time. So if they mess up or if the tower falls apart, chances are they will not have enough time to try again. But, when it comes to kindergarteners they just start working as a team from the beginning. I think another reason why kids perform better is because not one kid will get in front of the group and say, “I’m the team leader”. MBA students tend to establish first who is in charge in the group, who is responsible for what part of the project, and so on. But how are kindergarteners and engineers/architects alike? Do they have the critical thinking skills that MBA students must learn? Do kindergarteners and engineers/architects understand more the how and why of things, while MBA students lack the why?

            From my point of view, I believe the reason why CEOs with executive assistants perform better is because: CEOs have the ability to guide people, set expectations, lead the group to success, view from an overview perspective what would happen if a certain decision is made, and the executive assistants have the ability to communicate with the CEOs how they think the group will succeed as well as what to do to improve and/or follow what the CEO’s decision. In other words, they bounce off ideas and the CEO makes the final call on which way to go about completing the project. CEO’s alone cannot lead an entire group of CEO’s to success. One of CEOs would either rise to the occasion while the other CEOs follow or the entire group remains neutral on which CEO should be the person to take charge of the project. No one would want to step down, so I believe they just gather all the information they have and try to make the best of it. In other words, they don’t have someone to follow or choose someone specific to lead the group.

            If I was asked to help a process intervention workshop, I think I could help relate the video to intervention skills by demonstrating how each group communicated to each other, how member roles and functions were determined, how was the leadership and authority of members determined, and how each group approached their problem solving methods as well the decision making aspect of the project. This video will also help by displaying the different and combination types of process intervention. For example, one group asked questions, listened for the each members’ input while another group provided support, coached, counseled team members, provided feedback, and suggestions, and so on. Each group expressed and showed it’s own dynamic and form of approaching a challenge or problem. I think by implementing this video into the workshop may help members understand the different types of process intervention skills and processes of each.

            I think that one of the things that I take from this exercise is the different ways each position on a company thinks differently, and how when you combine or create a form of open communication through various levels of the organization, the organization works more effectively and efficiently. Combining or putting people with diverse and unique set of skills together to create a high performance team is a very efficient form of accomplishing tasks. Another thing that I take away from this exercise to use immediately in my career is to open up my mind to new ideas, to free myself from the every day structure and norms of society and to think for myself, to try different things, not to let others get on the way of accomplishing tasks or goals, and if I fail to get back up with my head held high and continue trying. Also, I now understand the more effective ways to help teams grow and improve as a team and individually as well as the different types of process interventions and group processes.

No comments:

Post a Comment