Week 10 Application Assignment - Ken Hagihara

Sorenson (2009) states that “an organizational culture defines a normative order consisting of basic assumptions about what are the ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ kinds of behavior” (p. 1).  An article I read about Southwest Airlines’ arrival in Charleston, SC, discussed the value of a strong corporate culture.

According to Sorenson (2009), a strong organizational culture is present when all members of the organization share and hold the basic assumptions of the culture (p. 1).  Southwest Airlines established “a battle-hardened kind of culture – work hard; play hard” (Bird, 2011) which has been adopted across the organization.  In fact, the company takes its corporate culture so seriously that they established a “culture department” which deploys ambassadors to keep in touch with the employees and ensure that they support co-workers in time of hardship (Bird).  Every Halloween, the company “plays hard” when it encourages all of its employees to dress up and participate in talent shows.

Another key tenet of the company’s corporate culture is a dedication to an environment of honesty in its dealings both internally and with its external stakeholders.  The company develops relationships with cities as part of the planning process when they’re considering entering into a new market.  Concern for the company’s culture and people drive it to make honest, cautious business calculations so that they know that once they enter the community, they won’t ever have to leave it (Bird).

The outward visibility of Southwest Airlines’ corporate character is evident in a story in the article in which a Southwest Airlines pilot refused to pull away from the gate in Los Angeles until a man who was stalled in the security line got onboard the flight.  The man needed to catch the flight so that he could see his dying grandson before life support was removed (Bird).

Bird, A. (2011, March 13). Southwest’s corporate culture combines work, play. The Post and Courier.  Retrieved from http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20110313/PC1602/303139924.

Sorenson, J. (2009, September 1). Note on Organizational Culture. Harvard Business School, 1-6. (full article)

Week 10 Application Assignment - Megan Irish

This week I came across the article “Understanding the marketing concept as organizational culture” by Turner and Spencer. This article explored the relationship of marketing and organizational culture. Claiming that the concept of marketing is what a company does as well as what it has,  this culture is vital. They state that “the marketing concept defines a specific organizational culture, a shared set of beliefs and values centered around the importance of the customer in the organization’s strategy and operations,” (Turner, & Spencer, 1997, p. 110).

This importance of organizational culture in marketing mimics the sentiment expressed in one of this week’s readings. Sorenson’s “Note on Organizational Culture” shares the thought that organizational culture is very important. An organization that has a strong organizational culture is likely to perform more cohesively. The social psychology study that was conducted shows how this works--participants’ actions were shaped by processes of social influence.

Because “organizations can ‘define the situation’ for their members, in part simply through the
transmission of beliefs from existing employees to new hires” (Sorenson, 2009, p.4), this study demonstrates how employees contribute to this organizational culture. A strong culture is formed from a consensus of organizational values and norms. Sorenson claims that a “strong corporate cultures enhance goal alignment” (Sorenson, 2009, p. 2). By aligning goals in an organization, performance improves.

With this knowledge Sorenson provides on organizational culture, it is easy to see how it can be used in a marketing concept. Because the marketing concept focuses on the customer’s point of view, an organizational culture that holds this as a major value would lead to better performance.

References:

Sorenson, J. (2009) Note on Organizational Culture, Harvard Business School, pp. 1-6.

Turner, G., & Spencer, B. (1997) Understanding the marketing concept as organizational culture, European Journal of Marketing, 31:2, 110-117.

Week 10 Application Assignment - Joshua Sutterfield

“Chief executives should place a higher priority on creating strong corporate cultures, not to give employees warm, fuzzy feelings, but to spur profitability, says James Parker, former CEO of Southwest Airlines” (Holstein, 2008, ¶ 1).  Certainly, anyone who has ever flown Southwest Airlines will be immediately drawn to the staff members’ incredible enthusiasm.  This enthusiasm in engrained in the culture of Southwest Airlines in an effort increase corporate profits (Holstein, 2008).  

How does Southwest Airlines create their company’s culture?  According to Mr. Parker, creating strong culture first starts with finding the right person to hire (Holstein, 2008).  This is done through a very rigorous application selection process (Holstein, 2008).  In other words, few are going to make the final cut and be given the opportunity to work for them. 

Southwest Airlines’s corporate culture is about developing a great relationship among all company employees (Holstein, 2008).   For example, if you visit the company cafeteria you will notice company executives sitting down to eat with regular employees (Holstein, 2008).  An analysis of Southwest Airlines gives a reader the impression that their culture is one where all employees are treated equality and respected regardless of job status.   

According to this week’s reading in Sorenson (2009), corporate culture can be an important factor in a company’s performance.  One reason for this is that culture can motivate employees (Sorenson, 2009).  For example, a company like Wal-Mart, with a strong corporate culture, tend to perform better overall (Sorenson, 2009).    

However, creating a strong culture requires effort on the part of companies (Sorenson, 2009).  Companies have to invest time and resources in hiring the right people (Sorenson, 2009).  As stated above, this is exactly what Southwest Airlines does in its hiring process (Holstein, 2008).  The challenge for companies to do this is the cost and expense in sorting through potential applicants, and then spending the time and resources to train and develop these employees (Sorenson, 2009). 

Therefore, in today’s competitive business environment it is important to remain competitive.  Southwest does this by creating a strong culture whereby all employees are treated well and provided an environment where they want to work (Holstein, 2008).  Thus, more companies should learn from innovative companies like Southwest on how to create a culture that leads to profitability.    

Reference:

Holstein, W. (2008, February 21). At Southwest, the culture drives success.

Bloomberg Businessweek, Armchair MBA. Retrieved from  

http://www.businessweek.com/managing/content/feb2008/ca20080221_179423.htm.

Sorenson, J. (2009) Note on Organizational Culture, Harvard Business School, 1-6.

Week 09 Application Assignment: Felipe Camacho

The article “Managing your Team” by Hill (1995) was of particular interest to me this week. It highlighted some points about management styles, teambuilding and individual needs that have expanded my view on being an effective manager. In particular, learning about the five paradoxes helped me to understand some of the dynamics I wasn’t seeing in my day to day work life for being too busy managing the performance of my department (Hill, 1995). In this respect, I see, again, that my management approach is deficient in that I’m still managing from a producer’s, rather than a manager’s, point of view.

To begin, for the first two paradoxes noted by Hill (1995) there is minimal individual difference and a near total lack of confrontation. My department consists of three professional interior designers, all women, and myself, a project manager and drafter. The department functions as a very homogeneous environment because the three designers I manage are very similar, both on a personal and professional level. They are women of about the same age, mothers of school age children, and interior designers by trade. There is a tremendous amount of support for the team, likely because of a strong unity on a personal level. Never has there been any confrontation. The diversity of our team is derived from (besides my being male) my technical skills, both in front of a CAD station and out on the construction site. This imbalance has, at times, stalled the department for lack of additional technically proficient personnel. I wonder how quickly the dynamic of the department would change if even just one my teammates were replaced with someone unlike them, or if I was replaced for someone more like them?

With regards to Hill’s third and fourth paradoxes, the team is highly productive, eager to learn, work well independently, and defer to me when necessary (1995). However, this is more a function, and a testament, to the team’s professionalism than any management skill on my part, as I am often moving too fast to really spend time coaching them either as a group or individually. When I am able to impart some instruction, whether about drafting techniques, product knowledge, or relating to the sales force, it is often one-on-one and for mere moments at a time. The unity of the team, which, again, is largely due to its homogeneity (Hill, 1995) is what helps communicate what I share with one member to the other members of the team. By this same token, they do turn to each other for assistance with completing their individual projects, and to me for when they need assistance with something that has bearing on the whole department, for example, when sales people submit projects with unreasonable turn around times.

This now brings me to the last of the paradoxes Hill noted (1995). Though there is a strong relationship between the individuals and the team and between myself and the team, I see that my individual relationship with each of the team members is purely a professional one, as I do not have a personal connection with any one of them. Fortunately, I believe that each member of the team does feel that sense of “empowerment” which Hill describes as a “tool that managers can rely on to cope with today’s competitive realities”. Yet again, however, I recognize that this is likely a function of the homogeneity of the group than of any managerial direction on my part. I’m going to have to work on that.

Hill, L. (1995) Managing you team, Harvard Business School, p. 1-22

Week 09 Assignment 01: Application Assignment – Damu Bobb

In this weeks readings, I related to the Hinds and Mortensen’s (2005) Understanding Conflict In Geographically Distributed Team to be very similar to my current work situation at HLN The Dr. drew show. The Dr. drew show launched in March of 2011 and the production team is split between the Atlanta head quarters, and the LA staff where the show is shot and where the host of the show is based. As any new show ramps up for production people are always trying to see who is the best fit for certain roles. The majority of the new hires all started approximately at the same time to launch the show. However, there was a subtle but clear divide growing daily among the staff. It was quickly becoming the Atlanta vs. the LA staff. The primary reason for this rivalry or riff was simply because of the lack on interaction on a daily basis and working with each co-work on a daily basis. “A strong shared identity among team members has been liked to reduced conflict, particularly interpersonal conflict. We argue tat when a team has a strong shared identity, the effect of geographic distribution on conflict will me mitigated.” (Hinds and Mortensens 2005)

One of the steps our executive in charged did to enhance team building and the remove the in-group and out group dimensions that were developing was the send LA producers to ATL and vice versa so team members got a chance to work with their counterparts who they normally would not see.

The constant swapping team members to work weeks at a time between locations has been great for moral, and develops trust among the team members.

Reference

Hinds, P. H., & Mortensen, M. (2005). "Understanding conflict in geographically distributed teams:

The moderating effects of shared identity, shared context, and spontaneous communication".

Organization Science, 16(3), 290 -307.

Ebmeier, David - CMGT 500 Application Assignment

For the application assignment for this week, I would like to reference not only to a great Power Point presentation I hunted down from FEMA but also to personal experience.  The presentation is titled “Emergent Organizations and Networks in Catastrophic Environments.”  It can be found as the third entry at the link below.  The presentation discussed many myths and realities about emergent organizations in disaster situations discussed Incident Management Systems as well as extensions to Transactive Memory Systems much like our reading this week by Majchrzak, Jarvenpaa & Hollingshead. 

The presentation touched upon the myth that centralized decision-making and response is always appropriate and went on to discuss many aspects of emergent groups in the context of an emergency.  One of the later slides talked about how after the Towers fell in New York City, Water Taxis, and dinner cruise boats, private boats and ferries jointly worked with the Coast Guard to converge upon Lower Manhattan to evacuate people and help get them home. 

That brought me back to that moment that I watched the 2^nd tower go down as I made my way to the Nonprofit I was running in Soho.   It was pretty awful.  No one knew what was happening, cell phones were down, and the swarms of bloodied, dazed, people pouring up the streets looked like something from a post apocalyptic movie.  They were all trying to flee north and I was trying to get through them , south, to my office and make sure my co-workers were all safe. While I would never equate what I did with the rescue workers on further downtown, in the fray, I will never forget how we opened our doors after I arrived. 

Most people saw our doors open and just kept on heading uptown as fast as possible but some stopped in begging for some water and just needed to sit down and catch their breath.  I had my small staff make room for them and give them water from our cooler.  When people realized that our phone was working at the front desk they were desperate to call home.  I let the receptionist give control to the phone to any of the victims that rambled in, so they could let their loved ones know that they were ok. People from several different countries stopped in to make tearful calls to places all around the globe.  While other larger scale emergent groups put together blood drives and enlisted civilian help to search through the rubble. In our own little way, we helped quite a few people take a breath in a moment where there seemed to be no air.

http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0oGdUcp9m9PHlgAZn9XNyoA?ei=UTF-8&fr=clearspringff&p=emerging+networks+in+natural+disasters&SpellState=&fr2=sp-qrw-corr-top

Week 9 -Application Assignment-Lauren Y. Walker

I will preface my comments this week by saying first, my intent is not to put my teammates that I am working with on the 500 final project on blast.  I do feel, however, that ours is a great case study and reflective of the comments made in the article by Hill, 1994, entitled, Managing Your Team.  After reading this article just prior to this posting, after our 500 group meeting, I felt duped in one regard that we didn't have(or at least hadn't read) this info several weeks earlier.  As well, I felt energized and just a little more than proud of me that my contribution to our group's meeting this evening was in line with what Hill mentioned are the key paradoxes in effectively managing a team.

Our team assessment gives a snapshot of our experience and progress thus far, but I'll elaborate a bit further in this forum to tie in a few of the key points Hill mentioned.  A bit of background on our team--we came together as a group based on individual experiences in working with at least one other person in either 500 or 540 group projects and in the case with Xio and myself, we work together professionally.  Quite frankly, I kept my fingers crossed that my strength's assessment was different than Xio's because I figured it would give us a better chance of being paired by professors in a group.  I got my wish.  Then trepidation set in, as I thought, will this be too much "togetherness."  How much of me can any one human take???!?!?  My fears were mere foolishness.  Xio and I decided to join forces on the final project for 500 without hesitation and we each invited a person that we worked well with from another group to join us; she inviting Damu Robb and I inviting Felipe Camacho.

Initially, all was well.  We had no trouble solidifying a topic and the form in which the finished product would be-a video.  Soon after the "kuumba ya" moment ended.  Two people in one group with similar professional skills in production with no leadership was a disaster waiting to happen.  I am being a bit dramatic, but there were a couple of unpleasant weeks.

Here we are, three weeks from needing a finished product and Felipe is announces he ready to bail ship.  Managerial hat went on and I without much thought, began to explain why that was not an option and how I thought we could still pull off completing a project worthy of our names being on it.  I immediately proceeded to off the cuff, give a revised "production schedule" propose individual tasks for people, confirming that they were getting some personal benefit out of the portion of the research being assigned to them and reiterating, that the tasks at hand are daunting but can be completed if we take on small chunks that we are interested in completed so as not to make it so arduous.  After confirming the schedule(agenda), confirming tasks all while managing my delivery and approach with the hope and intention to make everyone feel included, provide an avenue for feedback, while setting limits that this is what has to be done and we ALL have to step it up....collectively.  We can't be the baseball team that we were functioning as, everybody was a silent manager, no subordinates and nothing really being accomplished, but rather we had to look to the NFL for guidance...playing our positions but as a team and in the presence of awkward silence on the phone, I stepped in as "manager"....coordinator, orchestrating how tasks need to be handled in the next three weeks on the part of everyone.

My suggestion of how to complete this project was met with favor, Felipe stated that he felt more comfortable and more assured that we could accomplish our goals in producing a quality project and I think this method will allow each of us to shine in terms of showing off our research and interviewing skills, or analytical skills and our writing skills without any one of us feeling so put upon with a mountain of tasks that we are overcome by.  

After the meeting, I read the article and  realized that in my "back being against a wall" to make sure the team stayed together and we met our goal, I quickly assessed our differences and offered a solution that I believe will showcase skills collectively.  My reassurances offered support and trust of my teams individual abilities and rather than just focusing on performance, which I think we were all silently doing, prior to today, I encouraged a working environment that we can learn something about the topic and ourselves in the process.  I hope that my stepping in and taking the lead was not seen as a dictator but one of just enough "authority" that we harness our autonomy in a way that benefits us collectively.

THe challenge will be to sustain the momentum in the next three weeks personally and with my teammates to finish and present a well crafted end project.

Hill, L.A. (1994). Managing your team, Harvard Business School, 1-22.

Week 9 Application Assignment- Shanah McKnight

This week I interviewed A. Guembes, office manager at Help You Sell, in order to asses her team’s overall effectiveness. According to Hill (1995), managers should apply the following interrelated principles to examine team effectiveness:

1.    Does the team’s output (e.g., decisions, products, services) meet the standards of those who have to use it?

2.    Does the team experience contribute to the personal well-being and development of the members?

3.    Does the team experience enhance the capability of the members to work and learn together in the future?

I asked A. Guembes the three questions listed above. While these questions initially appear to be straight forward, A. Guembes spent much time considering each prior to responding. A. Guembes (2012) asserted that her team’s output did meet the standards for all that have to use it. We discussed the various factors used to determine whether or not this was true. She emphasized the importance that all members of the company agreed that the output met the applicable standards (personal communication, March 24, 2012). Hill (1995) states that “the various constituencies who rely on the team’s output may focus on different performance standards” (p. 3). This is true at Help You Sell as well. One example of this is that the service of the office team is measured by quality from their customers, and quantity from the executive management.

Additionally, A. Guembes (2012) also asserts that the team’s experience contributes to the individual well-being of the members. She explained that their recent employee satisfaction survey demonstrated that the employees felt the environment was conducive to enabling individual growth and a sense of well-being (personal communication, March 24, 2012).  On the other hand, A. Guembes (2012) does not feel that the team effectively utilizes potential learning opportunities in regards to their experiences working together. The environment that she describes would be characterized as “individualistic”, since the team members are often concerned with their own identity. So while they may feel the environment enables their own growth they do not necessarily create a collaborative environment where the team members learn from each other. This was marked by A. Guembes as an opportunity for improvement (personal communication, March 24, 2012).

Overall, I would say that this team is effective in what they do. As with the majority of teams, they do have their areas that should be improved to increase effectiveness. I was eager to share the information I had learned in this week’s reading to assist A. Guembes in managing her team towards success. As Hill (1995) points out, “Managers have to proactively build the collection of individuals who work for them into a team” (p. 12). I am quite confident that the team at Help You Sell will soon have an ideal balance of the paradoxes.

Guembes, A. March 24, 2012. Personal Communication.

Hill, L. (1995) Managing Your Team, Harvard Business School, 1-22.

Week 9 - Application Assignment - Xiomara J. Moncada

      This week's application assignment was very interesting because we are assessing teams and analyzing what works and what does not and the reasons behind the failure or success of a team.  This week I interviewed Jackie Zeledon, a project manager and team supervisor for an agency that treat patients who have been physically and mentally abused.   When I interviewed Jackie, I had the article written by Hinds & Mortensen (2005) in mind that focused on shared identity and shared context.  In this article the authors argue that "shared identity and shared context are emergent states within teams" (Hinds & Mortensen, 2005, p.291)

      When I asked Jackie what she felt were the weaknesses or strengths of her team, she stated that everyone in her team has strengths, which have been used to create a cohesive group and have allowed her to assign tasks to obtain the best results. She also stated that it has also helped to create a strengths based atmosphere because everyone is involved in the process of changing or creating the best quality of care to their clients.  Jackie believes that each member’s individual strengthens brings the team together and makes everyone be more positive because the team is strong and functional.  Jackie also mentioned that spontaneous communication has played a positive role in the success of her team.  In addition to her team meeting on a weekly bases they also engage each other in brief meetings to discuss patients, issues in the office or to ask for help from each other.  These briefs meetings are the spontaneous communication needed to reduce conflict in teams and aids in the development of shared identity and shared context (Hinds & Mortensen, 2005).

     In Jackie's organization individuals who are part of her team "reduce ambiguity and promote self-enhancement by partitioning their colleagues on the basis of relative similarity to themselves.  They create 'in-groups' composed of similar others" (Hinds & Mortensen, 2005, p. 292).  Jackie mentioned that she is happy that her team members work well together and that they create a positive atmosphere, where all of them help each other in various ways, as well as complement one another with their suggestions.   She said that it is very noticeable that everyone is working well together and the results of their work show her team's capabilities and positive team spirit.  It is important that teams have strong shared identities so that they see each other as partners and not enemies who are competing against each other, which does not allow the team to be cooperative.  Jackie is very lucky that he team is able to have shared identities and that the team is positive, effective and productive.


Hinds, P. H., & Mortensen, M. (2005).  "Understanding conflict in geographically distributed teams:

       The moderating effects of shared identity, shared context, and spontaneous communication".

       Organization Science, 16(3), 290 -307.

Week 9 Application Assignment - Kristina Quinn

     The five steps to failure in the The Nut Island Effect article was interesting to read because it is happening to a team project at my work (Levy, 2001).   There is a group from different departments who are currently working to change the channel program.  They were given instructions by the Sr. V.P. to present 4 possible scenarios but with little direction on how to do it.    The team worked well together and openly shared ideas to develop those 4 scenarios.  They were all self-sufficient and good at setting goals and completing them.  This all fell in line with the first step of failure outlined in the article “..they become adept at organizing and managing themselves..” (Levy, 2001, p. 6). 

      They presented the scenarios to the management team but management disagreed with the ideas and wanted to change direction.  Management's ideas would save the company money but disrupt the channel.  The project team felt it was the wrong time to make drastic changes since our revenue is down year over year.   The team voiced their concerns but management responded with a strong "just do what I say" response.   The team floundered as they couldn't figure out how to make the changes that management recommended without severely disrupting revenue.  After a few weeks the Sr. V.P. finally inquired about the progress of the project and the team was caught by surprise.    He had taken the silence for those few weeks as indication that the team was actively working on the project when they were actually struggling to make progress.   Apparently, the Sr. V.P had been meeting with partners promising them that changes were coming soon so he was surprised to hear that the team wasn't further along.  When the partners found out that the changes were not happening at the beginning of the quarter there was backlash and management took it out on the project team.  The team felt defeated and it resulted in anger towards management because they felt like they were being “thrown under the bus”.   This was in line with the second step of failure outlined in the article, “…senior management…ignores team members when they try to help or try to warn of impending trouble…  When trouble strikes the team feels betrayed by management..” (Levy, 2001, p. 6).

      Once the team was asked to fast track the changes, the team worked well together to try to get the project completed.  All along the team knew there were issues and knew the changes would have a negative impact on revenue since the partners would be adversely affected.  But they all kept it to themselves since management was not responsive the first time they brought it up.  This was in line with the third step of failure in the article, “..driven by the desire to stay off managements radar, the team grows skillful at disguising its problems..” (Levy, 2001, p. 6).

     The team was afraid to reach out to management when they identified the holes in their plan so they covered them up with solutions that they felt were sufficient.   This was in line with the fourth step of failure in the article, “..the team begins to make up its own rules.  The team tells itself the rules enable it to fulfill their mission…” (Levy, 2001, p. 6).

     They are 1 week away from launching the new program and not ready to roll it out.  But they have agreed not to inform management because they are afraid of retaliation.  As of today, management still has not reached out to them for updates on the progress.  This will likely result in some things not being implemented the way management is expecting and the roll out will have to be pushed out.  This was in line with the fifth step of failure in the article, “..both management and team form distorted pictures of reality that are difficult to correct.  Management, for its part, tells itself that no news is good news and continues to ignore team members and the task. ” (Levy, 2001, p. 6).

     Time will tell how this project turns out.  The changes that the management team made that they are incorporating into the program will adversely affect the channel and the truth will become evident when revenue drastically declines.   

References: Levy, Paul. (2001) The Nut Island Effect: When Good Teams Go Wrong, Harvard Business Review, pp. 5-12 (full article)

Week 9 Application Assignment - Dawn Whitaker

Television super network, ABC, was in need of the integration of their digital media content into the company’s overall format and developed a team to complete this task, consisting of five members (Becker, 2006). Albert Cheng, who oversees the Digital Media Department of Disney-ABC, is the team’s immediate supervisor (Becker, 2006). In addition to their team-related responsibilities, they are responsible for educating other departments within ABC on the company’s digital media content initiatives and acting as liaisons between digital media and all other areas. In the Nut Island Effect, Paul Levy (2001) states that teams that have too much autonomy and isolate themselves from the rest of the organization, is a formula for failure. Acting as liaisons between digital media and the rest of the company allows the team to stay connected to other departments, increasing communication, education and innovation.

Hill (1995) stresses the importance of choosing the right team members when constructing an efficient team, adding that, “a team can only be as strong as its weakest link” (p.6). The members of Cheng’s team hold titles which include, VP of Digital Media, Senior VP of Business Development, Senior VP/General Manager and VP of Digital Development. The team has just enough diversity to be effective in their productivity yet the expertise and experience to add value (Becker, 2006). According to Hill (1995) team members should “be neither so similar that they are clones of each other and offer no added value, nor so different that they cannot learn from one another or work together” (p.7). Cheng’s team represents a healthy balance of the two.

One of the primary challenges of the digital media team will be maintaining Disney-ABC’s brand value and presence while distributing its content across digital media channels, and allowing it to be available without oversaturation (Becker, 2006). Simultaneously, the team must develop ways to shield digital content from piracy (Becker, 2006). Cheng’s team has their work cut out for them ahead, but creating a strategically-designed team which embodies the formula for improved efficiency and performance, can only help them to get there faster.

References:

Becker, A. (2006). ABC's Digital Evangelists. Broadcasting & Cable, 136(13), 13.

Hill, L. (1995) Managing Your Team, Harvard Business School, pp. 1-22

Levy, Paul. (2001) The Nut Island Effect: When Good Teams Go Wrong, Harvard Business Review, pp. 5-12

Week 9 Application Assignment- Cathryn Lottier

This week, I found Hill’s (1995) Managing Your Team to relate closely to my management experience.  I first began my career at Macy’s as a new manager in the stores.  I fell into the trap of most new managers and tried to build relationships with my team members on an individual basis (Hill, 1995).  As I coached my associates individually, I saw people’s performances improve, but the team’s overall numbers remained about the same.  Something in my coaching was missing.  I asked the other more senior managers for their advice in somewhat of an informal survey style, and I decided that I needed to create a team feeling.

I needed to be creative when trying to make my individual associates feel like a team.  There were about thirty associates that reported to me in three separate departments.  To begin the team building, I started to have my associates create their own lunch schedules utilizing their teammates from other departments as cover (or help).  I created contests between departments and also with mixed department teams to allow the associates to work together with people they normally did not interact with due to spatial reasons.  Hill (1995) wrote about the necessity of a team to work like a team and feel like a team in order to produce results.  As I began to manage my associates on a team basis, as opposed to an individual basis, I began to see the numbers in my departments rise and my subordinates were generally happier. This was something that we could then celebrate as a team.

Recently at Macys.com, I have been promoted into a managerial role in the site merchandising division.  After a year of not having any subordinates, my managerial skills have gotten rusty.  In this role, I will have a much smaller group (only three) reporting to me.  Hill (1995) gave me a great outline as to how I can most effectively approach this new supervisor role and create the best team.  While I do not have the ability to hand pick my team, I can create the team’s agenda, foster teamwork, create the team’s structure and culture, and coach members of the team individually and as a team (Hill, 1995).  I can also utilize Hill’s (1995) “Managing Paradox” to balance the personalities of the team and work with each member of team’s strengths to get the best results.

Hill, L. (1995) Managing Your Team, Harvard Business School, 1-22.

Week 9 Application Assignment – Peggy O’Connor

Timing, as the old saying goes, is everything. Last week, I reached a tentative agreement with my current workplace to extend my full-time contract for one year as Director of Marketing & Communications – but working from a new home base in my native Michigan: 1,972 miles from my Bellevue, Washington, organization. There are still many details to be worked out, including the distribution of workload between me and the two part-time departmental assistants who will work on campus and serve as the onsite “face” of our department, as well as the need to create a solid communication structure on which the functionality and likely, the success, of this innovative venture will depend.

That’s why I was immediately drawn to one of our readings this week, Understanding Conflict in Geographically Distributed Teams: The Moderating Effects of Shared Identity, Shared Context, and Spontaneous Communication (Hinds and Mortensen, 2005).

The fact that “geographically distributed teams [are] increasingly prevalent in the workplace” (Hinds and Mortensen, 2005) was evidence to me that my idea to continue directing the marketing and communication activities for my Bellevue-based private, Catholic girls school despite my pending relocation to Michigan was not as far-fetched as I had first thought when contemplating this change.

Family circumstances require me to return to my native state in June; yet I enjoy my job, have been successful in the implementation of an effective marketing and communication program over the past four years, and have received positive performance reviews. Our organization is currently undergoing a great deal of change in top administrative positions; we will be recruiting replacements for two of three key positions in the school’s Institutional Advancement Office: Director of Admissions and the top job, Director of Institutional Advancement. To add a third replacement in this area in period of 60 days would be a serious organizational challenge, not to mention creating a negative public relations issue for the school. This would also come at a time when the school was in the midst of launching three major curricular and institutional programs, all of which require high level marketing activities delivered in a timely basis (without taking time to recruit, hire and train a new marketing director).

Thus the benefits analysis of my proposal was easy: establish a “distributed team” to allow me to continue to work from a distance on these important projects without interruption, rely on my 28-years of experience in private school communication and the existing, successful marketing and media relations programming, and use my expertise to fully market these new programs. However, the more difficult challenge was the need to explore fully the idea of establishing a distributed team with respect to anticipated conflict and pitfalls. It was at this point that I was pleased to see this week’s reading.

In their study, Hinds and Mortensen noted that while there is an increasing amount of research on distributed teams, the study of the dynamics of distributed teams versus that of co-located teams is not as robust. Hinds and Mortensen’s study focused on addressing the dynamics of distributed and co-located team and in particular, to how these teams handled conflict. Using a web-based survey of geographically distributed and co-located R & D teams within a single multinational corporation (Hinds and Mortensen, 2005), the researchers sought to prove the hypotheses that shared identity, shared context and spontaneous would be interrelated and would moderate the relationship between geographic distribution and conflict.

Results of this research did, indeed, support the authors’ hypotheses. I was particularly interested in the results that showed clearly that shared identity was important in models predicting interpersonal conflict (Hinds and Mortensen, 2005), that shared context was more important in the models predicting task conflict, and that spontaneous communication was associated with both strengthening shared context and identity and in moderating conflict in the distance relationships. Spontaneous communication, in particular, was found to contribute substantially to the success of the distributed team (Hinds and Mortensen, 2005).

My idea of spontaneous communication with respect to my own personal case study now ongoing is that it will be important for me to not only have planned, regular meetings with my colleagues, working teams and those in my own department, but to ensure that spontaneous communication (informal calls, emails, Skype meetings and even site visits) takes place as often as possible to prevent and/or resolve the inevitable conflict that will occur.

I found this information particularly helpful as I plan the new “identity” for my full-time position for the next year. As I seek to brainstorm all possible conflicts and challenges, it is good to know that there is research out there about distributed teams. I plan to make full use of research like that which Hinds and Mortensen conducted and in particular, to focus on developing a pattern of spontaneous communication.

Hinds, P. H., and Mortensen, M. (2005) Understanding Conflict in Geographically Distributed Teams: The Moderating Effects of Shared Identity, Shared Context, and Spontaneous Communication. Organization Science, 16, pp. 290-307

Week 9 Application Assignment - Joshua Sutterfield

This week I had an opportunity to interview Kittma Boonsirisermsook, a Dental Officer with the United States Navy.  Lt. Boonsirisermsook manages a dental clinic for the military in Southern California (Personal Communication, March 24, 2012).  Everyone in her department is assigned roles and works together in a team environment (Personal Communication, March 24, 2012).  Employees, both civilian and enlisted, interact constantly with one another (Personal Communication, March 24, 2012).

Lt. Boonsirisermsook further discussed how she worked in a team environment when she was given orders by the military to participate in humanitarian relief in Cambodia (Personal Communication, March 24, 2012).  There she worked with both enlisted US military and local Cambodian dentists and personnel (Personal Communication, March 24, 2012).   Each person was assigned specific roles and duties were compartmentalized (Personal Communication, March 24, 2012).  For example, there were stations for extracting teeth, and another for cleaning instruments (Personal Communication, March 24, 2012).  The US did a good job of developing and fostering relationships with local persons.  This, no doubt, aided in the US Navy being able to provide first class medical services to the indigent people of Cambodia.

Similarly, in this week’s reading “Coordinating Expertise Among Emergent Groups Responding to Disasters,” we studied how team environments interact in emergency situations. There the authors’ state that “[e]mergent response groups are characterized by a sense of great urgency and high levels of interdependence.” (Majcharzak, Jarvenpaa, and Hollingshead, 2007, p. 147).  People need to know and understand their roles and how to handle a volatile environment (Majcharzak, Jarvenpaa, and Hollingshead, 2007).

Majcharzak, Jarvenpaa, and Hollingshead (2007) further discuss how the relief effort in Hurricane Katrina involved rescue efforts from various organizations, including the US military, to rescue the lives of victims of the storm.  Similarly, my conversation with Lt. Boonsirisermsook also discussed this need to coordinate with various group entities, such as the US Navy coordinating supplies and resources with the local Cambodian peoples (Personal Communication, March 24, 2012).  Without this exemplarily teamwork between these groups, it would be unfortunate to think of all the people who would not have been provided desperately needed humanitarian relief.
  

References:

Boonsirisermsook, K. March 24, 2012. Personal Communication.

Majcharzak, A., Jarvenpaa, S., and Hollingshead, A. (2007) Coordinating Expertise Among Emergent Groups Responding to Disasters. Organization Science, 18( 1), 147-161.

Week 9 Application Assignment - Megan Irish

With this week’s readings on teams, I could not help but compare roles in which I have worked to those explained in the readings. In the article, “Managing your Team,” Hill explains what makes an effective teams and ways that managers should manage their teams. Hill also discusses the different types of teams as developed by Drucker. These different types of teams are useful for different types of organizations. Drucker claims that there are three types of teams - baseball-type, football-type, and tennis double-type. Hill states that it is important to determine what type of team a manager is working with to better know how to manage the team (Hill, 1995).

The baseball-type team is a one where players “play on the team” (Hill, 1995, p. 5). Each player has a set task to complete and this task rarely ever changes. Assembly lines and a team of surgeons were the examples used by Drucker (Hill, 1995). For a few summers during college, I worked for an educational consulting company. It was my duty to assemble all of the educational material - binders, class roster, etc. This position was very much a baseball-type team role. I was never asked to handle any other work, but co-workers and managers trusted that I would complete my assigned tasks on my own.

In the football-type team, players all have their set roles but play as a team. Drucker uses an orchestra as an example of this type of team. Each player has a set function, but each is necessary for the team to succeed (Hill, 1995). For almost two years I worked in a ticket office for a large arena. In this office, the football-type team was used. Each member had their set roles, but there was no way that the office could have functioned without one member carrying his or her weight.

The third type of team according to Drucker is the tennis double-type. In this type of team, players have primary positions, but also adapt and step in to help in any area needed. Drucker compares this type of team to improvisational jazz (Hill, 1995). The office that I currently work in would fall into this category. We all have our primary tasks, but any time one member feels overwhelmed or is out of the office, we each step up and handle the situation.

Even though different organizations may require different types of teams, it is important to know the differences in each. By understanding these different types of teams, managers can be better equipped to lead their team.

Reference:

Hill, L. (1995) Managing Your Team, Harvard Business School, pp. 1-22.

Shane Collins - Week 9 - Fostering an effective team

For this week’s application assignment, I chose to further examine Hill’s (1995) keys to an effective team by interviewing the brand manager at Zappos.com, Jennifer DiBlasi. Three interrelated elements contribute the overall effectiveness of a team: (1) “Does the team’s output (e.g., decisions, products, services) meet the standards of those who have to use it?” (2) “Does the team experience contribute to the personal well-being and development of the members?” and (3) “Does the team experience enhance the capability of the members to work and learn together in the future?” (Hill, 1995, p. 3). DiBlasi explains how she implements these three elements in order to foster a healthy team environment.

DiBlasi explained that quality output by a team starts with the hiring process. It is imperative that the most qualified employees are hired so operations run efficiently and expectations are surpassed. Further, she explained that an expectation of what quality outputs are must be set so the team has a goal to work toward. For example, if the department is undergoing a logo redesign, they must understand the company brand in order to know what direction to take a logo in. With this expectation set, the team is able to successfully create a new logo that meets the overall brand. According to DiBlasi, these guidelines instill confidence in employees, as they are better able to gauge end results.

However, DiBlasi explained that an environment of teamwork must be fostered in order to have meaningful output. “If two or more employees are working against each other, they will never create an end product that meets or exceeds the expectations set by management.” She continued that on her team, morale-building exercises bring employees closer together and nurture an environment of teamwork and growth. This goes hand-in-hand with the third element of Hill’s (1995) effective team determination. DiBlasi’s morale exercise helps bring the employees together and instills confidence in them that everyone has similar goals.

Finally, to the point of fostering an effective team by contributing to well-being of its employees, DiBlasi said she offers workshops and growth labs where employees learn different lessons once a month about a marketing topic. “This way, there are constant opportunities for employees to learn and grow. They gain confidence in their work and have a better understanding of what they are doing for the company.” Additionally, junior members of the team are encouraged to ask other employees questions and learn from them – no one sits in an office, making for a more open office environment, allowing team members to freely approach one another. This aids in quality output.

In these ways, DiBlasi says she has never had a major problem on her team. “If managers understand how to manage a team and place less importance on individuals, they will find that outputs are of much higher quality and the team’s overall morale and confidence is up.” In many ways, she manages her team by following the three interrelated elements of Hill’s (1995) guidelines to an effective team.

Reference:

Hill, L. (1995) Managing Your Team, Harvard Business School, pp. 1-22

Week 9 Application Assignment - Ken Hagihara

The article “Understanding Conflict in Geographically Distributed Teams: The Modeling Effects of Shared Identity, Shared Context, and Spontaneous Communication,” identified a few of the issues and challenges that I’m dealing with in my company as our clients expand the reach of our public relations activities from North America to various countries in Latin America, Asia, Europe, and Africa.  In order to properly provide public relations support in the countries in Latin America, I decided to subcontract the work to a team of consultants that were very familiar with the culture and the way that the client needs to work with the various media. I hired an agency in London that is charged with extending my client’s public relations efforts into various countries in Latin America.

While working with a team that differs from a cultural and language standpoint is challenging, perhaps the biggest challenge is the fact that we’re physically separated by the North American continent and the Atlantic Ocean and have never met face-to-face. As explained by Hinds and Mortensen (2005), misunderstandings between geographically-separated teams can be more extreme than if our teams were collocated. The issue of communications, already strained by the language barrier, is only exacerbated by the need to use telecommunications to collaborate.

“A strong shared identity among team members has been linked to reduced conflict, particularly interpersonal conflict (see Jehn et al. 1999)” (Hinds & Mortensen, 2005).  As public relations agencies working together towards the objectives of one client, my agency has been able to develop a shared identity with the Latin America agency that creates a bond of shared perspectives and experiences that tends to strengthen our interagency relationships.  As the article stated, our distributed team utilizes Skype, email and telephone calls to interact which can result in less-than-ideal team interactions (Hinds and Mortensen, 2005).  However, our shared group identity has helped to create a strong, trusting, productive relationship.

We have also opened the channel of communications to encourage spontaneous, informal interactions between the London and domestic team via Skype, instant messaging and email.  This has helped to strengthen our shared identity (Hinds & Mortensen, 2005) and enhanced the trust in our relationships by reducing miscommunications and greatly minimizing the barriers imposed by the geographic separation of our teams.

Collaboration between geographically separated team, whether by a few hundred miles or half a world apart can cause issues that can negatively impact morale, productivity and effectiveness.  However, by focusing on ways to create a shared identity, enhance shared context and promote spontaneous communication, organizations can still build strong, trusted relationships that are increasingly important in today’s global economy (Hinds & Mortensen, 2005).

Hinds, P. H., and Mortensen, M. (2005). Understanding Conflict in Geographically Distributed Teams: The Moderating Effects of Shared Identity, Shared Context, and Spontaneous Communication. Organization Science, 16, pp. 290-307

Jehn, K. A., Northcraft, G.B., & Neale, M.A. (1999). Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in workgroups. Admin. Sci. Quart., 44, 741-763.

Wk 9 - Application Assignment - Megan Samuels

I was really interested in the Majchrzak, Jarvenpaa & Hollingshead article about emergent groups responding to disasters (2007).  I related to this article on a few fronts.  I am an evacuation captain at work (with a day-glow vest, hard hat and walkie) and I wrote my 540 paper on adhocracy.  I’ve had some emergency training (how to use a fire extinguisher, first aid) and having lived through two plus major earthquakes so I do think about major disasters on a more frequent basis.
I decided to interview my company’s National Emergency and Risk Manager, John Hammett, to see if he was familiar with what was in this article, and if these types of emergent groups are taken into consideration at his high level of training.  My company insures businesses, and we offer training in business continuity in the event of a disaster.  But we advocate implementing more formal structures as the conversation below will reveal.

What was most interesting about my conversation with John, who has had years of training, is how the idea of an emergent response group as it pertains to our company did not really seem to sink in with him.  When it comes to our company, his focus is making sure the formal structures are in place in the event of an emergency.  He tests these structures, he seeks better and more effective ways to bolster these structures, and he trusts these structures.  Before I asked him questions, I briefed him on the content of the article and spoke to him about Transactive Memory Systems (TMS) theory (Majchrzak, et al., 2007), which the article refers to often.  Let’s just say that there are some topics best left to conversations with your fellow MCM students and professors and I decided not to pursue this aspect of the article in my interview.
Below are some excerpts from a conversation I had with John this week.

Megan – John, in the event of a disaster, what would happen if there was a breakdown in communication from here (Woodland Hills home office)?  Would you rely on the employees to form groups to assist?

John – If the command center was to go down here, within 30 minutes John (Florida branch manager) would start calling people in Woodland Hills to see what’s going on.  He would start managing the incident from Sarasota.

Megan - So that’s the formal structure.  Do you do anything additionally to anticipate that there may be an informal structure to take hold that you may have to create ad hoc groups.  In the article I’m referring an article I read where as an example during Hurricane Katrina  these emergent response groups (Majchrzak, et al, 2007, p. 148) stepped in where the formal rescue structure was absent, which is just people coming together in the time of crisis.  Do you have training around figuring out what competencies people have to assist.

John - Yes, we can do that.  That would be through the “send word now” through individual groups.  Each group has their own business continuity plan, which is the formal structure, each plan tells the group what to do, but if that plan went down, without having the overall formal structure, then it would get down to the divisional level, your manager would call to ask you if you and your home was OK, is your family OK, and then they would ask you if you were able to help out. (note:  “send word now” is an automated emergency response system that calls all the employees to check on their status).

Megan - But if people spontaneously started to show up, for whatever reason, they can’t get on the freeways, etc. is it so rigid? Or do you understand in your position that you may have to improvise?

John – Absolutely

Megan - You know, we (the evacuation captains) have all been trained in first aid.  Are you trained as an organizer to assess the capabilities of the group and send them off where their skills can be utilized?


John - We kind of have that as a formal thing, but when a disaster happens, you may have to rely on the ad hoc structure.

Megan - Are you trained at all in sociological methods such as building trust, do you have this kind of training?  I mean you have emergency response training from a much higher level as a leader, but do you have training for what I’ve been discussing?

John - That would be CERT training which is put on by the fire department and is community based.  In those instances, it would be less formal and members of the local community would come together in case of emergency to help.  And that would be your ad hoc, informal structure where I would just show up to help.  I’ve also trained in the Los Angeles Emergency Center which is a big facility in downtown LA.  If something happened and I could get down to this facility, I would act on behalf of businesses, but that would be a formal structure.

My good friend John started to see what I was asking about emergent response groups, but I really believe that he is so conditioned to stick to the formal structure that this may seem anathema to him on some level.

A colleague of John’s came to speak to our company last year and I would kill for a recording of it.  Brent Woodworth is the President/CEO of the Los Angeles Preparedness Foundation.  He’s one of the people who flies around the world after a major disaster.  He camped on a devastated island near Banda Aceh after the tsunami in 2004, in Turkey after a major earthquake and countless other disasters.

He spoke about the unknowns of emergency relief efforts, and how you never know who or what groups you’ll be working with until you are actually on site.  He spoke about local, national and international sourcing for relief, the good, the bad and the ugly.  In case you’re wondering, he said to never give clothes.  The disaster victims can rarely use them and they usually end up getting buried or trashed.  That’s the bad -- the ugly is the story he told of a jet load of antibiotics the Iranians sent to the Turkish relief effort after the earthquake there.  The antibiotics were long expired and were considered toxic waste.  So not only were they useless, they posed a serious problem of their disposal.

I found this article very interesting and it seemed to touch upon many of the subjects we’ve covered during the semester, but especially some of the theories we wrote about including: Transactive Memory Theory, Contingency Theory, Organizational Information Processing Theory, Communities of Practices, Collective Action, Organizational Ecology and Sensemaking. It’s nice to see these theories in their practical applications.

Another exciting thing is that Professor Hollingshead, one of the authors of this paper, will be teaching us next semester!

Majchrzak, A., Jarvenpaa, S.L., and Hollingshead, A.B., (2007).  Coordinating expertise among emergent groups responding to disasters. Organization Science (18)1, 147-161.