Beat the Heat!

So I'm sitting here watching the Heat-Celtics game, wildly underwhelmed by the performance Miami has put together through one and half quarters, and I came across the article for class tomorrow called "Why Treating People Right Pays Off", and all I can really think is...duh?

The article does make sense, and it does make some valid points. People, being far more likely to change jobs and careers than in the past where a job was a job for 40 years, are often looking at the work environment as being something that is almost as important as the paycheck they receive, if not equally so. People are now much more likely to leave due to a poor work environment than they were in the past, where a job was a job, and you were grateful to have one. Of course back then, you walked 15 miles to school in the snow, uphill both ways.  The article also talks about the changing business culture and how that has increased the importance of treating people well. Globalization of competition means that employees can look at examples all over the world of how companies treat their workers, and the threat of outsourcing makes a lot of workers nervous. The article also talks about how new technologies are forcing companies to adjust how they treat their employees. Nothing has had a greater impact on business, possibly ever, than the Internet. The Internet is so new and such an uncharted wilderness, no one really has any idea of how to handle it, not even the government. Here's a link to a story about a few things the current administration are doing with about the internet...this is a link.

To me, the title of this article is pretty self-explanatory, and I'm not sure why it took so many pages to say this: Treat your employees right, and they will reward you with loyalty and their best efforts, which will help your company improve and become more powerful.

Heat down 15 at the half? Hahahahahahahahaha.

Walk it off, Tony

So I've been sitting here for the last 45 minutes trying to think of how to turn Tony Romo getting hurt into a blog, and still make it about Org Theory. I'd much rather just go off on another rant about how much I hate the Cowboys, but I don't think that's what Dr. Weyant wants with these, so here goes.

What does a company do when a leader goes down and there is no one capable of replacing them? As we're seeing with the Cowboys right now, not having a suitable replacement is possible of crippling an organization. Whether it happens due to injury, illness, death, or emergency, losing someone that everyone relies on can de-rail a team and a plan. An incident, like tonight, highlights the importance of having a qualified back-up who can step in when needed to fill the gap left by the missing leader.

Personally, I know that when my bosses are not at work for whatever reason, their absence means much lower productivity and a much higher rate of "goofing off" to put it lightly. Part of this is due to the fact that none of the students wants to step up and make sure the work gets done, because they'll be seen as the "bad guy" who's killing the joy of "no boss day", so peer pressure is a factor. PS-Peer Pressure always wins. I can only assume that in a working environment things like deadlines play a factor, but let me ask you guys, when the cat is away, is there a bit of mouse play going on?

PS-Despite the fact that Tony Romo did break his collarbone, haha, Cowboys suck.

Paper Break! Write a Blog

First things first. Thanks to Jeff H for his help and advice on this paper. Check out his blog, he's got a few good ideas. Damn it! Sorry, the Phillies just lost. Stream of consciousness writing. Seriously starting to hate the Giants.

So this second post of the week will be about Conflict Management, but NOT much of what is in my paper. My own personal views, lucky you. I don't do well with conflict, at least in the professional areas of my life. If someone at work disagrees with me, that's fine, but if something more arises, I go in one of two ways. I either back off and defer, or I escalate and try to get them to give up and just be a complete a-hole until I get my way or the other person gives in. I don't think I've ever gotten to the point that anything in work or school ever needed to be mediated by a teacher or boss. I also just bottle up rage against people in these settings and take it outside, because I don't really think work is the time or place for conflict.

Now, outside of work, that's where the crazy comes out. Particularly when I'm doing something competitive, such as competitive sports. If someone does something in that setting that I don't like, I'm calling it on them, and I'm doing it loudly and publicly. Do I take this overboard at times? Yes. Have I been in fights that stemmed from both intramural and pick-up sports in college? I can neither confirm nor deny that. Have I tried to start fights in these games or tried to back-up someone from my team in these settings? Absolutely. Now, you all know what I look like and the rippling muscle mass that I possess, so you can assume that I do VERY well in these altercations, but that's the kind of person I am outside of work in that setting. I do participate in a number of pick-up things around here, and I know it's all in fun, so I try to take it less seriously, but if I'm losing, and my team's not putting forth the effort, I might say something. Sports are serious business, show up or sit down.

Now that none of you ever want to play sports with me, good luck with your papers, and I'll see you in a week. No class tomorrow!

Time Management? I'm too busy.

Today's blog is applicable for several reasons. 1) A few people talked about this last week, and I wanted to contribute in some way, 2) I've got a great deal to do this week, so it's on my mind, and 3) I'm absolutely terrible at it. There have been a number of times where my classmates have asked me "Have you started on [assignment X]?" and my response has almost always been "No. Never crossed my mind." (Don't worry, Dr. Weyant, I HAVE started on my paper.)

Both of these cases we reviewed had firms that were struggling with time management as well. In the more recent case, RL Wolfe, the union plants had a particular problem with this when the machinery broke down. The floor workers often knew what was wrong and how to fix it, but because of the union contracts, they were not permitted to touch the machines until the mechanics/machine techs got there to fix the problem.

Words like "efficiency" and "effectiveness" are key buzz words in business today, and my Global Economy professor, Dr. Daneshar (spelling, I know) always talks about how the United States has the most productive workers in the world. He feels that as long as the US has this edge in productivity, it will be easy for us to keep our place in the world, but how do we ensure that this happens? Clearly, one of those ways is through effective time management in the workplace leading to the ability to do more in 24 hours than anyone else. Plenty of companies and government agencies have spent time and money to look into time management, and it just so happens that I found one -----> here <-----

Time management is something that people need in their lives, and as I've come to appreciate recently, its also something businesses need in order to stay on top of their field or to ensure their effectiveness.

Obligatory 2nd weekly post

Ok, once again, we have a case study due, so we don't have anything else to read. Also, I already wrote a post on self-managing teams, so that would just be redundant, and you'd all report me to the Department of Redundancy Department (get it?). So that leaves me in the precarious position of having to write a second post to get the credit, but to not just blather on incessantly in a way that is neither helpful nor related to operations management. Wait, I'm doing it right now, aren't I? I know, let's talk about motivation! It's applicable since I spent a majority of yesterday unable to motivate myself to do any work, and just spent it listening to Deadmau5 songs and playing FIFA10. My god, that sounds like the first 20 minutes of a stoner movie...

Motivation. Another of those ideas that seems like it needs to be tailored to each individual that you have working for you. The employees in the Treadway Tire case seemed to be motivated by the fact that failure to meet these deadlines would lead to their termination. That led to burnout and the high turnover rate that we spent two hours talking about in class a few weeks ago. These self-managing teams seem like they would work well as self-motivating teams as well, but as I said in my previous post, these groups could also get easily distracted/off topic, and then it would be difficult to reign them back in. I, personally, am more motivated by keeping the status quo and not getting in trouble to failing than I am to gain advancement, which is probably bad, but I'm a deadline kind of guy. A lot of my co-workers, who are more "motivated", as least in the pop culture definition, are the kinds of people who want to do everything, learn everything, be everything, and then go home for dinner. Those are all admirable qualities, but when I've tried that, I found it exhausting. So, as I like to say, "To each their own", which leads us back to the point I made at the beginning, that it's an individual approach that works for each person, specifically, and perhaps for no one else.

OK, that's enough of that, and I'd like to congratulate the freaking Yankees for getting to watch Cliff Lee and David Price pitch a Game 5 in the ALDS, meaning that they'd only see these aces twice in the ALCS as opposed to 3 times. Because if there's anything that the Yankees need in this world, it's luck...Go Phillies!

Welcome to Doctober

A few thoughts on tonight's class and our discussions. I'm gonna try and pull a Roy Halladay here and write a perfect blog.

I liked the discussions we had and the ideas that were presented. The first group's presentation on stereotypes was the most interactive, and really did a great job of putting the idea forward that we all make assumptions, intentionally or unintentionally. I knew when they put up the three names on the second sheet, there would be a question like "Which one of these is most likely to...", and I made a few guesses in my head, all of which were, ironically, stereotyping.

The presentation on glass ceilings was also interesting. The idea that people are refused promotion because of gender or race is deplorable, and I think the fact that we all recognize that fact is a positive step, because I'm not sure the old guard sees what a problem it is. There is a great episode of "The West Wing" that deals with the argument of equal pay for men and women, which I believe was in Season 2, that covers this better than I ever could. I recommend it. I recommend all 7 seasons, actually.

I'll end this post with a few thoughts on the "Work-Out" plans that GE put in place that the last group talked about. The idea of firing 10% of your workforce and replacing them just can't be that inspiring to the people that work for you. How can you keep morale up when 1 in 10 employees are being turned over? The other idea about GE that struck me is the fact that they like to be #1 or #2 in their industry. A quick Google Search on GE showed that they are buying two more companies, an energy company and a finance firm. It will be interesting to see how these two companies perform in the coming months and years. GE Signs 2 Deals.

Not a perfect post, lost it in the 4th on a looper over short. Oh well, gotta try again next time. Until them, you stay classy, San Diego.

Self-Management For Dummies

So this week, I thought I'd wax poetic on the Druskat & Wheeler article "How to Lead a Self-Managing Team". (20). No, I'm kidding, I'm not doing that bit again.

This is an interesting concept, and on the surface, it seems like an oxymoron. Why would a self-managing team need a manager? Aren't those diametrically opposed to each other? Who can we fight? Who can we sue? Hide your kids! Hide your wife! Rabble Rabble Rabble Rabble!

However, having been a part of organizations that run largely on self-managing and self-governing teams, I will admit there are times where a manager or overseer would be beneficial. People can get off track easily, especially if the "de facto" leader is someone charismatic who either intentionally or unintentionally leads the group astray.

The four factors and eleven behaviors the article lays out are all very good ideas, and as I read this article, I found myself agreeing that all of these would be excellent ways to reign in a self-managing team. That being said, I can see a few of these coming into conflict with each other, such as influencing the team and delegating authority. Influencing the team sounds a lot like managing to me, especially if what you want to do goes against the group's ideas. Delegating authority could also swing you into the "infringement zone". If you choose someone who the group does not want to have that power, you run the risk of violating the group's perceived sovereignty, whether or not that is a real thing. If you tell a group of employees they are a self-managing team, and then you start managing them, they'll realize pretty quickly that they're not as free as they thought.

Here's an article I found online with a few more tips for how to be an efficient "Self Managed Team Leader": Oh boy! A link! I thought it provided some insightful stuff, even though some of it is a bit redundant after the Druskat & Wheeler article. Anywho, that's my piece for tonight, I'll see you all tomorrow.

Tom

We’ll be washed and buried one day my girl,
And the time we were given will be left for the world.
The flesh that lived and loved will be eaten by plague
So let the memories be good for those who stay!