MSLD 521 Module 5 - Core Workplace Values Assessment

Core Workplace Values

Values are estimations not of worth but of worthwhileness. If value is what makes us wealthy, values is what makes us human. (Smith, 2004). Personal values are intrinsically related with different aspect of our lives, including professionally. It is important to know how to distinguish the differences and similarities between personal and corporate values, not simply to increase awareness, but to align what is necessary, to reflect on what can be adapted and to make wise decision (in small and large scale).

Denning (2011) mentions that lack of overlap between personal and corporates values may generate dissonance, consequently it is perceived that the relation between corporate and personal values affects motivation and overall performance. Upon completing The Core Workplace Values Assessment Exercise, developed by Dr. Randall Hansen (consult http://www.randallshansen.com/ to know about the author), I found that my five core workplace values, in no particular order, are:

1. Flexibility

2. Integrity and Truth

3. Having a positive impact in others and society

4. Professional Development

5. Balance between work and family

My values fit my career path, but, at the moment, not my employer’s values. This current gap is due to the divergence between the espoused and operational values, commonly witnessed in organizations. As Denning (2011) says, most values statement or lists of values that companies put together end up as wallpaper. I cannot ignore the overlapping values of some departments in the company, neither the complexity in my organization nature, but the difference between the values of company changed drastically on the past three years, especially from high ranked leaders. Neither I can disregard the fact that the values are still there, slightly, but the power of its wholeness to impact on employee’s life is weakened by top leadership.

My values influence me in every aspect of my life, as expected. Personally, especially conjugally, values as truth, integrity and positive impact were determinant on my overall choices, and are empowered constantly, on the course of my relationship with my husband and with relatives and friends. Truth and integrity are musts as they carry trust as biproduct. Positive impact it what gives sense to everything I look for in my personal, and when possible, my professional life. If is not to impact positively in people’s life, what am I on Earth for?

The result of the assessment, taking in consideration all five core values, explains my low performance at my current organization, although I still fulfill the job description. It also expands the clarity that now I have on my upcoming career path. As I plan to move from my current base, consequently I will need to shift to another organization. Independent of the position I will apply, my choice of my next organization will rely upon this result. I have taken my values in consideration before choosing to work for and with my current organization, but the clarity will assist me on making a wiser decision in the near future.

            Currently speaking, the type of values that best represent my organization is of the hardball strategists. My organization has a single-minded focus on winning, even if the espouses values contradicts my conclusion. Financial results, at the moment, are above everything and rooted in every action. For instance, they are changing everyone’s contract, to a maximum of three months sickness a year, (resulting in termination of contract after this period), being six months previously. They are terminating employees under expensive medical treatments due to its expenses. Promotions are also being cancelled if a sick note is placed between the assessment results and the initial training. This are examples among a list of others which make me perceive the leaders of my organization hardball strategists.

            The company has five corporate values: service excellence, innovation, people, financial strength and safety. They transmit their values (except people) through different channels and ways. Service excellence is taught through initial training for the position, random workshops for some of the departments, and punishment if the value is not followed. Safety value is shown by using its safety manual to back employees up for any decision to be taken, when opposites interest is at stake (at least it is how it works in my department), and also through recurring annual assessment and safety sessions. Innovation is the only espoused value which is entirely operational. My organization keeps innovating and communicating the changes through internal and external advertisements, also through workshops clarifying the reason and details of the changes. Financial strength, and focus, is what characterize my company as of hardball strategist. They do everything in their power for financial gain (small and large actions and changes). They strive doing so, which also explains its strong position in the field, but my concern is the lasting effect of putting financial strength in front of people, as explained on Collins and Porras (1994) on their comparison of companies built to last.

I do not see other values that could serve the organization better, but simply putting their values fully in practice. People should be the value with more attention spent, as it creates emotional connection and consequently long-lasting results. Valuing people is not simply providing a tone of benefits but being there where they need most, and encouraging personal and professional development with internal and external resources and policies. Focusing on people requires constant meeting for praise, follow up and genuine conversation, not meeting organized as to implement a punishment or as a form of guiderail to apply policies and procedures. I believe that practice, as said, and a rank on our current values would benefit more the organization, than the creation of new ones.

           

References

Collins, J. C., Porras, J. I. (1994). Built to last: Successful habits of visionary companies. New York, NY: Harper Business.

Denning, S. (2011). The Leader's Guide to Storytelling. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Smith, D. K. (2004). On value and values: Thinking differently about we in an age of me. Upper Saddler River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

MSLD 521 Module 4 - Listening

Listening

Listening is a mental process to make meaning from sound. (Treasure, 2011). It is an essential skill for making and keeping relationships. (McKay et al., 2009). Listening is our access to understanding, however we are losing our ability to listen, which in consequence, is turning us impatient (we don’t want oratory anymore, we want sound bites) and desensitized (it's harder for us to pay attention to the quiet, the subtle, the understated). (Treasure, 2011).

There are several blocks to listening, but regardless of which, they all are causes of partial listening or what is called by McKay et al (2009), pseudo listening. It happens in social, personal and professional environment, and hardly someone hadn’t experience either being blocked or blocking listening.

I remember my first meeting with one of my managers. There was a restructuring in the management in my current organization, and all of sudden a new manager was shown in my profile in the company’s website. At that stage of my career I was working in my promotion, so I would like to meet her to introduce myself and show in which stage of the preparation I was at the time. After six months of the restructuring I finally manage to book an appointment with her, although I have been trying for all those months. I remember as fresh as if yesterday, when I entered her room, excited about getting to know her, and to start a relationship with her, to be cut off at the first sentence. After “saying nice to meet you”: I complemented saying “Finally we were able to meet each other. I am so glad”.

Apparently, she just listened the first part. In a sudden burst, she yelled at me ordering for me not to say that, and added she was overwhelmed with the new task, that she really didn’t have time, and her venting went on and on, lasting around five minutes. I apologized and tried to carry on, but the purpose of the meeting was over. I had folders with my actions towards my promotion, a development plan and a large portfolio of researches, which eventually I put on her table, but she didn’t touch them. The consequence of her interruption was drastic, as it turned the meeting in a tense moment. She challenged me asking if I felt ready for the promotion, and before I could reply she started playing the interviewer. The challenging questions were noticed by her face expression and tone of voice, and the interview looked like a way to win the situation, as if I was competing with her somehow, on something.

I did not introduce myself, neither could show my career progress. Her inability to listen shut me down, and I decided I would never make any more effort to meet her again. I kept my decision. After another restructuring, management changed again, and I haven’t seen her since then.

Peters (2009) touches base on this issue in business. He mentions that even in medicine, seven out of eight doctors don’t listen to the patients for longer than 18 seconds, and he concludes that the single most significant strategic strength of an organization is not the strategic plan itself, but a commitment to strategically listen to all members of the organization (frontline employees, vendor, customers, and so forth). He reinforces that listen takes practice as a profession does, and that should be taught in school. Treasure (2011) highlights exact the same point, the importance of teaching listening.

No two people experience the world on the same way. People don’t experience the world directly, but the subjective representation of it, and their idea of the world becomes reality. (McKay et al., 2009). On that particular day, I wouldn’t have minded listening to my manager’s struggles. In fact, I would love to be able to understand her better, behind the wall of formality built between managers and the frontline in my organization. But her “reality” made her misinterpret my words and jump into conclusions.

From the recommended reading, I believe that clarifying the distortions would be a great tool, instead of keeping apologizing for feeling guilty, for causing that wave of defensiveness. Gently questioning and then active listening would be powerful tools.

Get on the balcony and take a side on the situation, as recommended by Ury (2010), could great strategies as well, and again: listen! Listen to what she had to say, listen to perhaps change my purpose on that day, change to create a bond, an emotional connection (Denning, 2011), this way achieving a better outcome.

Five out of ten of Headlee’s (2015) rules for better conversation also could also assist me on the outcome, as: the use open-ended questions, the tranquility to go with the flow, keep being honest about my true intention, but also not being repetitive/redundant, and last, a rule that validates the other rules: listen!

“Every human being needs to listen consciously in order to live fully, connected in space and in time to the physical world, connected in understanding to each other. (Treasure, 2011)

References

Denning, S. (2011). The Leader's Guide to Storytelling. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Headlee, C. (2015). 10 ways to have a better conversation. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/celeste_headlee_10_ways_to_have_a_better_conversation/transcript, on March 2017.

McKay, M., Davis, M., Fanning, P. (2009). Messages: the communication skills book. (3^rd edition). Oakland, CA: New Harbinger.

Peters, T. (2009). Leadership thoughts: listening. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwB7NAvKPeo&feature=youtu.be, on June 2019.

Treasure, J. (2011). 5 ways to listen better. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/julian_treasure_5_ways_to_listen_better/transcript, on June 2019.

Ury, W. (2010). The walk from no to yes. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/william_ury, on June 2019.

MSLD 521 Module 3 - Credibility

Credibility

Making people believe in us is a challenge we, leaders, face of the contemporary changing world. Managing credibility is essential for leaders to achieve their goal. (Whalen, 2007), as trust is a crucial aspect in the corporative environment. Dealing with strangers, force people to create their truth about others, based on a story they build with fragments of observed facts. The issues of this effect are that the facts do not reveal who the other person really is, and that stories based just on observations possibly neglect the essence and the motivators of others’ actions. (Denning, 2011).

            There are four pillars of credibility (Whalen, 2007) which lay directly on the leader perspective, and another pillar that lays on the audience point of view. The four first pillars are trustworthiness, expertise, goodwill and dynamism, and the fifth one is attribution.

            Trustworthiness involves abstract aspects as values, ethic, authenticity, integrity and so forth (Whalen, 2007; Hurley, 2006). It takes time to build and it is the main aspect of credibility, as all the others becomes worthless if this pillar is not present in a leader. Non-verbal communication (McKay, 2009) is highly important on this pillar, as it needs to be coherent with leader’s speech.

            Expertise lays on the capability aspect presented by Hurley (2011). It is the leader’s technical skill, revealed by ideas, speed, accuracy, the facility terminologies are used and translated into commonly understood vocabulary, and the leader’s job title, which affects the image of credibility. (Whalen, 2007)

            Goodwill relays on Hurley’s (2006) factors of benevolent concerns and alignment of interest. Ulukaya (2019), through his storytelling, shows clearly the goodwill pillar of credibility and its impact. A leader cannot fake goodwill, as people are sophisticated at detecting insincerity (Whalen, 2007). To project goodwill a leader must have a respect and real admiration for the audience. This connection is crucial for a communicator.

            Dynamism, in the subject of communicating credibility, involves enthusiasm and is also linked with goodwill. Leaders shows dynamism when they make it obvious they care about the audience. Negativity gets people attention, but positivity sparks change (Denning, 2011).      

            The attribution pillar is related with the attribution-theory: an information-processing model. The listeners are constantly trying to understand the depth of a leader’s speech, which has an intrinsically relation with the trustworthiness pillar. Brown (2018) talks about the anatomy of trust, which supports both pillars.

            I believe that expertise is the component of credibility in which I need more development. I am a type of person that focus on the big picture and neglect the superficial details. For followers, knowledge is power, and I have experienced my subordinates taking advantage of my lack of expertise. Procedures, in my company, changes so often that is hardly impossible to cope with them, not just by the speed of changes, but by the fact they are communicated in different channels. As employees (leader or followers), we do not receive all the changes by email, so we need to search for it in the employee portal. Apart from this communication issue, some changes do not affect me directly, however when employees under my responsibility needs clarification, they turn to me.

            Although I have never been strongly affected by my lack of expertise (as I have online access to all manuals while on duty, the final job is always completed, and all my office meetings are previously booked allowing me time to refresh my knowledge), I know it is an attribute I need development.

            For that I developed the following action plan to be implemented constantly, with immediate effect an no deadline, as the actions stated are necessary to be put in place permanently.

EXPERTISE PILLAR – Action Plan for Development

1.      Establish a time of the week for looking into changes in all communication channels of the company.

2.      Write down the found changes.

3.      Share it with my team member to assist on building credibility.

4.      Involve the team on possible changes to suggest to the company.

5.      Communicate with departments any possible doubts.

6.      Send monthly suggestions to departments which affects directly the job of my team, or any pertinent changes I observe in any are of the company.

7.      Copy my manager in all communication, to maintain the trust I have built along the years. 

References

Brown, B. (2010). The power of vulnerability. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/brene_brown_on_vulnerability, on June 2019.

Brown, B. (2018). The anatomy of trust. Retrieved from https://vimeo.com/263043433, on March 2018.

Denning, S. (2011). The Leader's Guide to Storytelling. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Hurley, R. F. (2006). The Decision to Trust. Harvard Business Review. 84:9, 55-62.

McKay, M., Davis, M., Fanning, P. (2009). Messages: the communication skills book. (3rd edition). Oakland, CA: New Harbinger.

Whalen, D. J. (2007). The Professional Communications Toolkit. Thousand Oaks, Ca: Sage.

MSLD 521 Module 2 - The Danger of a Single Story

The Danger of a Single Story

Speaking is inherently more powerful than writing (Whalen, 2007). Telling a story with oral communication is highly effective to pass a whole message, explained by McKay, Davis and Fanning (2009) to a message that involves the four kinds of expression.

Looking at Adichie's speech with a technical perspective (not analyzing the context), the first reason why I believe her message was effectively passed, is the type of communication she chose, as 93% of the factors impacting on the meaning of a message are visual and audial (tone of voice), according to Whalen (2007). Being able to include grooming, face expression, tone of voice and all other paralanguages (as per Whalen, 2007), played a role in favor of Adichie, in my opinion, which assisted her on achieving her goal successfully.

To illustrate my point of view, follow my analysis according to the context of communication skills:

Kinds of expression (McKay, Davis & Fanning, 2009)

Kinds of expressions are defined by communications categories, which requires different styles of expressions. On Adichie’s speech I believe she managed to combine all kinds, although some being more present than others.

* Thoughts

Thoughts are conclusions and inferences based on the experienced lived, intended to synthesize observations and provide an understanding of the events. I believe this was the main expression on Adichie’s speech, as the message is based entirely on her experiences and her perceptions of them. She used her observations, as facts, to reinforce her thoughts, but her point of view was the base of her speech.

* Observations

As mentioned, to reinforce her message, Adichie worked with facts she observed or experiences she lived. Although she included her thoughts, feeling and need, her observations illustrated her message, empowering it and bringing more relevance to the “table”.

The speaker observations, as a whole, was a biproduct of her thoughts, feelings and needs, but it was crucial for the meaning of the message and the effectiveness of the speech, linked with the purpose of the story.

* Needs

When people supportively and clearly express their needs, they get a closer relationship with the audience. Adichie was the protagonist of her story, which involved a message that impacted direct in her life and involved values. As part of the audience I could bond easily with her message. Although it does not involve directly my reality, I could empathize with her needs, as she was clear about it and presented in a way to inspire change.

Being a victim of judgement and pre concepts created by mass media, inspired her to actively support the idea of the importance of holistic perspectives. Her needs became her engine, her inner-motor, so important as a protagonist of a story (Denning, 2011) and so influential in oral communication, as it impacts on the speakers attitude, considering  that 90% of what a person communicates is based on the way he/she feels. (Whalen, 2007)

* Feelings

As inferred, Adichie’s feeling is intrinsically related to her needs (not only as an individual, but as part of a group of people, acting as the protagonist). She does not focus on her feeling, neither show it to the audience, but it is clear, in my opinion, that her feelings drove her to speak, and led her to provoke a thought, communicate a new idea, and possibly inspire action towards it.

Storytelling (Denning, 2011) linked with Expression Categories

On chapter 3 of Denning’s book Storytelling, he presents a way of motivating others to action. The most effective tool for business narrative, in Denning’s opinion, is a Springboard Story, which means a story that springs the listeners into a new future. We can see Denning’s idea not only on this book, but in other resources (see references) from the author.

Although Adichie was not using a narrative focused in business, she was trying to spark action, consequently her speech had some similarities of a springboard story, as follow:

1.      A clear and worthwhile change idea - (thoughts, feelings and needs)

2.      A single protagonist’s (and probably typical to the audience) - (feelings and needs)

3.      Time and places where it happened - (her observations)

4.      The consequences of not applying the change idea (thoughts)

5.      Positive tone with authentically happy ending (thoughts and feelins)

6.      A story linked entirely with the purpose - (thoughts and observations)

Communication Effectiveness

I do not believe she has shown superb vocal tones, neither wise nor animated facial expressions. In my opinions she did not have any outstanding body posture and gestures to boost her presentation, which are all important aspects for message delivery, related by Whalen (2007), but still, I believe Adichie was successful on passing her message

Adichie effective communication, in my perspective, was led mainly for her desire to deliver the message she has mastered and passion to deliver (Whalen, 2007). She was enthusiastic about her message, and this was the winning move Adichie made.

References

Adichie, C. N. (2009). The danger of a single story. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/chimamanda_adichie_the_danger_of_a_single_story, on May 30^th, 2019.

Denning. S. Master Business Narrative. Retrieved from http://www.stevedenning.com/Business-Narrative/springboard-story.aspx, on June 5^th, 2019.I don’t

Denning, S. (2011). The Leader's Guide to Storytelling. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Denning, S. (2011). The Springboard: How storytelling ignites action in knowledge-era organizations. New York, NY: Routledge.

McKay, M., Davis, M., Fanning, P. (2009). Messages: the communication skills book. (3rd edition). Oakland, CA: New Harbinger.

Whalen, D. J. (2007). The Professional Communications Toolkit. Thousand Oaks, Ca: Sage.

MSLD 521 Module 1 - Your Favorite Storytelling Leader

My Favorite Storytelling Leader

 Most leaders operate with a particular mind-set. Analysis is what drives business thinking, and its strength lies in its objectivity, impersonality and heartlessness. This is not to say that reason and analysis are not important. Narrative in story telling does not replace analytical thinking but supplements it. (Denning, 2011).

A current billionaire CEO, from Turkey, migrated to United States to study English in 1994, and now he is an advocate of the anti-CEO to achieve business success. His name: Hamdi Ulukaya. I have heard about him months back while watching interviews with people who creates positive impact in the world, and although impressed by his personal story, I did not dig in deeply. Last week, I was searching extra materials for my current Masters class, when TED Talks App recommended me his talk. Since then, I am amused by not just his story, but his storytelling techniques and mainly the message he was able to pass through his narrative, while keeping the audience attentive (at least speaking for myself).

Hamdi have grown up raising sheep in Turkish Farms, where his family owned a small cheese and yogurt factory. He decided to leave the business and study political science, and as mentioned, he migrated to United States in 1994 to learn English. He was living in upstate New York, when he found a yogurt factory on a dead-end road, to late discover this factory was closing its doors and leaving the yogurt business.

When he entered the building, which was looking abandoned, he stooped seeing the detail of the ruined building, and his attention was drawn to the people still working there. He got to learn deeply about them, and the business, and afterwards, he decided to buy the factory. At first, he was discouraged from his lawyer, due to his financial situation at that time, but with a loan from the Small Business Administration, he bought this old yogurt plant in 2005, and started selling his products in 2007.

He could not have built his billionaire empire without the help of his subordinates, the community around and without the customers inputs. Although he sells yogurt, and Chobani is the number one Greek yogurt brand in America and well known all around the globe, people are the center of Hamdi’s business.

He comes from a family of Turkish story tellers, and the ability of telling a story is in his “blood”. Hamdi tells all this in a natural, fun and passionate way. The four principles presented by Denning (2011) is well followed. The style of his message, the presentation, his dressing code and the counter-narrative of choosing a title contradicting his own title on the company is, in my opinion, on point. The truth covered, is the truth his own life, and he uses it to his advantage as the story teller. He clearly prepared his speech, by the structure of it, and how he can keep the audience connected. His delivery matched all Denning’s (2011) recommendations related in his fourth element of storytelling.

           

            The purpose of the story was not sharing his life events, but to reinforce the importance of polyarchic leadership, and the value of people on the business. He achieved his goal from beginning to end, using his personal story to illustrate his perspective in business.

            His vision is that people (independent of background) matter, and in a modern business world, people cannot be neglected. More than that, they must be valued not just to achieve business success, but because they truly matter. Success cannot be measure by financial achievement. It goes beyond wealth. This is Hamdi’s vision, effectively communicated in his story, as he covers with past and present life experience, linking his personal and professional values. While communicating his vision, Hamdi covered al the elements stated by Whalen (2007) for effective communication.

            This storyteller, to connect with the audience, dig in the most common human need, in my perspective: relevancy. His narrative creates a feeling of importance, of care, crucial values for people to feel connected. In this story, the creation a feeling in the audience was not done by a hidden input, but it was in fact the message of the story, which made it even more relevant. He also tunes a felt sense, (at least tuned mine), because of the same reason in which he connects with the audience: the feeling of relevancy.       

            There are several leaders I could choose, whose I believe on the ideas and are great story tellers. The reason I have chosen Hamdi Ulukaya is because he not just shares a story, but he lives that story. He is the protagonist of this story of modern business, he breaks the protocol of traditional leadership, and he focus on the values more than the actions.

References

Denning, S. (2011). The Leader's Guide to Storytelling. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Forbes. Hamdi Ulukaya. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/profile/hamdi-ulukaya/#1d4747314052, on June 2^nd, 2019.

Ulukaya, H. (2019). The anti-CEO playbook. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/hamdi_ulukaya_the_anti_ceo_playbook, on May 27^th, 2019.

Whalen, D. J. (2007). The Professional Communications Toolkit. Thousand Oaks, Ca: Sage.

MSLD 632 Module 9 - Role of Emotion in Decision-making

Role of Emotion in Decision Making

            Decision making process is often faced by a factual and rational process (Shiv, 2011), where the cognitive undeniable human trait is neglected. Shiv brings the emotion factor of the human cognitive ability to reality when it comes to decision making, specifically on the confidence aspect of the process.            

            Emotion is present in decision making on the consumer (buyer, student, cadet, follower and so forth) perspective as it is in the provider (seller, professor, sergeant, business leader and so on) perspective. No matter for how long the subject was neglected, neither how it still is condemned by some researchers, entrepreneurs, traders and the long list of the fact-only-based rational defendants, it is crucial that emotion is invoked in the decision-making process for persuasion and confidence purpose (Shiv, 2011). Hence, in order to have anything like a complete theory of human rationality, we have to understand what role emotion plays in it (Simon, 1983).

Reflecting on my own experiences related to emotions and confidence, and can recall two situations, one in which I was extremely confident of the outcome, and a situation in which I was less confident of the outcome.

High Confidence Experience

            Ten years ago, I decided to shift my career from the hospitality field to aviation, and I faced a challenge in this decision-making process. The general manager of the hotel I was working in that moment, when I asked my resignation, disapproved my decision. He mentioned that I have been promoted twice in the period of six months, and the last promotion happened one month before my resignation. It was a new position in that branch, and a prosper one, which could open several doors for me in the company and in the field in general. I was quality inspector, responsible also for customer satisfaction, service recovery, preparing the hotel for internal and external audits, and analysis of the rooted issues with proposal of solution to headquarters.

When he approached me with his disapproval arguments I have had already challenged myself with the same arguments. I was leaving this position to be a flight attendant.  I got information from people in the aviation field, I did my researches on where my new career, and challenged my medium and long goals as a professional, and apart from all this, I really wanted the shifting. I wanted to have different perspectives from different background, I wanted to impact on more people’s lives in a daily basis, I had my personal dreams also of travelling and learning new languages. In the meeting with him, on the day I received the invitation of a domestic airline to join the company, he tried to convince me of his reasons, and I ended up convincing him.

I had my factual arguments, which made him doubt of his (at least looked like by his facial expressions), but when I put my emotion on the arguments, and all my personal reasons also, he had no arguments left and wished me good luck. I believe that what made the shift on his mentality was the passion and the confidence I had in my speech on that meeting. there were some information cascades influencing his decision on that point and I made a conscious decision, and I knew what I was risking, what I would perhaps miss, and knew the possibilities waiting for me. I was fully confident at that point and my attitude reflected as so.

Low Confidence Experience

            Last week I was buying and selling used furniture and house décor. As I mentioned before in discussions and blog posts, I am a horrible negotiator when it comes to monetary value. I am not comfortable at bargaining, and I am not even too attached to money, so I easily influence by persuasive “traders”. Selling my couches, I advertised based on the second market prices, their conditions and design. I ignored the utility factor and how much I would spend to get another sofa set. The price I accepted on the offer was lower that I believe today that could be. I was not just showing insecurity on the sale, but I mentioned that I was not sure on the decision of selling, although I had accepted the deal already on the price. As soon as I trembled, I got a call from the buyer, setting up the time to pick up the couches, and as insecure I was, just accepted and went with the flow of the negotiation set by the buyer.

            On the same week, as a buyer, I was in doubt of my purchase on the second-hand home décor. Clearly in doubt, the seller pushed me on the time argument, stating she had an appointment and didn’t have much time for my indecision. I spend 10 minutes looking at it, and finally bought them, still doubting while driving back home. 

Learning Outcomes

            There are several learning outcomes of these two experiences, but on the subject matter, my main learning point is that when someone lack confidence, the other party on the negotiation process can use it as an opportunity to “win” the deal. I believe the same applies when trying to sell an idea, to influence a follower, and in any other situation where confidence plays a crucial role. Emotions reflect in confidence, and confidence is one of the defining point of the a successful outcome.

References

Shiv, B. (2011). Brain Research at Stanford: Decision Making. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRKfl4owWKc&feature=youtu.be, on March 09^th, 2019.

Simon. H. (1983). Reason in Human Affairs. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press

MSLD 632 Module 8 - Reflections on the Cynefin Framework

Reflections on the Cynefin Framework

Often leaders chose one leadership approach claiming to be their leadership style. Other leaders base their decision in past experiences only. Effective leaders learn to shift their decision-making styles to match changing business environments (Snowden & Boone, 2007). Simple, complicated, complex, and chaotic contexts as presented by the authors, call for different managerial responses. By correctly identifying the governing context, staying aware of danger signals, and avoiding inappropriate reactions, managers can lead effectively in a variety of situations.

The authors present four contexts and add a new one, which represents the context and many leaders find themselves for not knowing where the situations is placed in the framework quadrant.  The main four context are:

1.      Simple Contexts: The Domain of Known Knowns

2.      Complicated Contexts: The Domain of Known Unkowns

3.      Complex Contexts: The Domain of Unknown Unknowns

4.      Chaotic Contexts: The Domain of Unknowables

This week I presented examples of decision making based on the Cynefin framework on

the discussion board of my Master studies, and I believe they are my best examples. Two of them which I think represent and can bring up the traits of Cynefin are in the complex and simple domain.

 My Simple Context: Rending First Aid On-board

It happens often, as I frequently operate flights from 7 to 17 hours non-stop. All the traits from the domain mentioned above is present in this constant decision I need to make while working. At first, me or my team members are approached with the initial information, and from that point on, thought questioning, we get to find the patterns and cause-and-effect, and go through the knowledge we gained in medical training. All our decision are based on facts, with no room for emotions or intuition on decision making, as any mistake from not following the facts can lead us to legal consequences.

As the context traits involves repeating patterns and consistent event, clear cause-and-effect relationships, existence of right answers and fact-based management, I need to first sense, then categorize, and lastly respond to the situation. It happens in seconds, depending on the medical situation. I also need to ensure that proper processes are in place, delegate some tasks depending on the complexity of the incident, base my action in best practices, and communicate in clear and direct ways. All these traits presented by author fits in this example.

Complex Contexts: In-flight Decompression

In 2014, I passed through a decompression on board, with 200+ passengers and 10+ crew members. There were a variety of factor raising, and with that, the challenges as well. The aircraft, from 37.000ft descended to 8.000 ft in, and this caused extended consequences. Me, along with the other leaders, had the safety to be concern and to apply procedures, the crew looking for guidance, and mental and emotional support, the for passenger for clarification, and at a later stage for first aid. It is a pattern-based situation with competing forces and ideas.

This is a typical multiple context situation and decision-making process. At first, I took the steps of a simple context, acting first and following commands from the Captain. It started becoming complicated when customers and crew members started reacting to the event (physically and mentally), when the command changed three times in ten minutes about what to expect as a final decision, consequently affecting my current decision. From this point, when I could move around until hours after landing the situation was complex, and that was the stage I mainly could play as a decision maker. That was my and the other two leaders call. Where to land, the time available, the customer medical conditions, the crew emotional state, the preparation for priority and emergency landing is case another system fails, and mainly my own mental state, as my life had just been in threat since I have faced the unknown situation until declared it was a decompression, after a rapid and nose down descent. In this complex stage of the situation I probed, sensed, and then responded, increases the level of  communication, quickly opened up for discussion with other leaders onboard, managed starting conditions and monitored for emerging conditions.

5 Ways Cynefin can provide an improved context for decision making

1.      Diagnosing the context: the frameworks allows analysis of he context based on characteristics of the situation

2.      Guideline for action: based on each context, the framework provides a guideline for leader to act, and takes in consideration the transition of context, consequently the possibility of the actions.

3.      Presents the threats: highlights the two side of the coins in the leaders action, showing how vulnerable a leader can be, independently of how good the approach is. This brings awareness to the “table”, pushing a leader to constantly self-reflects on the Cynefin presented dangers and any other threat that could be arisen.

4.      Provides recommendation suggests how to deal to each threat, which in my opinion works as a closure on how effective the framework is, while wrapping the entire context.

5.      Reinforce the importance of flexibility: independent of the guidelines, and the list of the traits, leaders job, dangers and response, it highlights the importance of flexibility in diagnosing and action based on the contexts.

3 Ways each quadrant of the Cynefin Framework assists my decision-making

Simple Context

1.      Increase my awareness of complacency

2.      Keep me focused on the context diagnosis, not facing complex and complicated context as simple

3.      Reinforce the importance of micromanaging avoidance

Complicated Context

1.      Make me consider the creation of panels

2.      Reinforces the importance of inclusion of stakeholders.

3.      Makes me aware of the common neglection of nonexperts and its risk

Complex Context

1.      Highlights patience and the importance of deep reflection

2.      Increase my awareness of possibly acting as in simple context, with command and control approach

3.      Makes me aware of how important it is to be aware of emergences, more than fact awareness.

Chaotic Context

1.      Makes me accept there is not right answer and failing is part of the context

2.      Makes me understand how to understand the context, pushing me to act first, instead of sensing first.

3.      Teaches the right approach on transforming the chaotic, a complex context, gaining control and awareness and the decision making process unroll.

Reference

Snowden, D. F., & Boone, M. E. (2007). A leader's framework for decision making. Harvard Business Review, 85, 68-76.