MSLD 521- A521.7.4.RB - Secret Structure

Besides listening to the great content that Nancy shared, one of the first things I observed is how Nancy incorporated her own presentation techniques. By including her techniques, Nancy showed the effectiveness of them. 

Highlighting Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Steve Jobs, Nancy shared speaker-approaches that are effective for any speaker and any presentation. For example, when speaking about the launch of one of his new products, Steve Jobs was unapologetic about the greatness of his product; Nancy said that he marveled over it. As presenters, we have to believe in our idea and marvel over it. If we do not believe in what we are sharing then it will be difficult to convince listeners. Nancy noted that Steve also kept the audience physically involved via clapping and laughing. In keeping the audience physically involved, the audience probably felt that their role in Steve's presentation mattered just as much as the content he was presenting. 

Nancy discussed how Dr. King and Steve Jobs both presented ideas of "what is" vs. "what could be". Using this technique was especially effective for Dr. King because he used a familiar metaphor  comparing present life to what could be if politician-made-promises were kept. Nancy noted that Dr. King used words that reached into the hearts of audience members and he connected with them through familiar songs and scriptures. In addition to connecting with the audience on a very personal level, Nancy shared how Dr. King painted scenes with his words making listeners dream of a better world. While the content is different, Nancy showed us how Dr. King and Steve Jobs used techniques that not only mirror each other, but the techniques were also effective. Like Dr. King, Nancy noted that Steve Jobs used storytelling to help his listeners journey with him. 

As I am growing as a leader, I am learning a lot of useful tips along the way. Two tips that I find most impacting are: 1) believe what I am speaking about 2) include the audience in the story. I find these tips most powerful because they involve connecting with the audience. Speakers could have great content, however, if it seems that there is internal-disinterest or a glaze in their (the speaker's) eyes, audience members will not connect; ultimately, people want to feel connected. In addition to keeping the audience involved, it is important that I believe what I am speaking; just like speaker-distance is communicated, disbelief is also negatively communicated. Dr. King and Steve Jobs were such powerful speakers because they fully believed in what they were speaking and they fully connected with those they were speaking. 



http://www.ted.com/talks/nancy_duarte_the_secret_structure_of_great_talks

MSLD_ 521 A521.6.3.RB - High Performance Teams

Denning (2011) noted that high-performance teams resemble communities; communities tend to be comprised of members who voluntarily join and members have personal investment in a shared interest (p. 155). High-performance teams have clear goals, appropriate leadership and membership; high-performance team members grow strong together and individually; high-performance teams are fueled by interpersonal commitments and high-performance teams carry out their work with shared passion (Denning, 2011, P. 155-156).  

When collaborating with a group it is important to have shared values, however, when you are placed on a team by requirement and not voluntarily, it is harder to ensure resembled-values. For example, when working on a team assignment in the office, some employees may value deadlines over attention to detail. Instead of valuing the work, some may value the monetary reward that the work will bring. Based on those examples alone, I see how working with a team that you did not  choose on your own, can be more difficult. When teams share values, collaboration is more likely; Denning (2011) noted that collaboration rests on values (p. 158).  

I didn't realize that there were specific names for "group work". Before reading about the patterns of working together, I just thought "the work" was named "team work". Yet in reading Denning's explanations, I have a better understanding of Work Group, Team, Community, and Network.  A Work Group is comprised of people who may share the same position but individually report to a supervisor,  with their portion of the assigned tasks; Work Group members work on a project together but not necessarily with one another (Denning, 2011, P. 161-162).  Teams are different from Work Groups in that teams require a high level of interaction among teammates; there are also opportunities for transparency as team members get to know  each others strengths and weaknesses (Denning, 2011, p. 162).  Communities are different from Work Groups and Teams in that they are usually self-organized and its leadership responsibilities are shared by those who volunteer to share information, facilitate meetings, organize events and build Web-sites (Denning, 2011, p. 163). Networks are groups that share a common interest and discuss the issues regarding their shared-interest; some subsets of individuals may have met one another but a lot of the individuals in a Network have never met face-to-face (Denning, 2011,  p. 163). Although those who participate in Networks would like to call it a community, Denning (2011) stated that a Network lacks the necessary web of interpersonal relationships to attain the "community" status; thus, it remains a network (Denning, 2011, p. 163). 

As I think about my work group, team, community, and networking experiences, I am thankful that most of them have been great. Some of my best team work experiences were in college. I was involved in a lot of clubs (or communities) and scholarship-based teams. For example, two years in a row I was a part of our college's acapella  music team which consisted of 12 college students: 6 male and 6 female. Before the academic year began we had to come to school a week early to work on our music; it was our "intensely-learn-the-music" retreat. On the retreat and during weekly rehearsals, our music instructor led the sessions. However, when we toured on weekends and spring break, we were the leaders. Each member had spoken and unspoken responsibilities and we gladly accepted our role. Although our personalities were very different, we had the same goal and our values mirrored one another. There were times when we didn't agree (with all those personalities on the road together, it's expected!) but we still respected one another and focused on our goal. We learned about our strengths and weaknesses and supported one another through them all. 

I hate to admit the bad team-related experiences I've had because I don't want to talk about others in a negative light; however, to deny the bad experiences is to avoid transparency. When I first moved back to the Savannah area from Atlanta, I worked in a doctor's office. I should have known that there were going to be team-issues when one assistant was talking to me about another...on my first day (it may have been the day of my interview!). Still, I needed a job and thought, "It can't be that bad"; oh boy was I wrong. The environment was toxic and lacked professionalism and trust. Because the doctor was inconsistent in his communication and did not make definitive statements, two office workers both acted as office manager--this created continual chaos. Also, since I knew the doctor (my mother was his patient until she passed away), the office managers thought that I was pursuing their positions. What made my experience most frustrating is that I really did enjoy working with the patients; naturally, they could even see that we weren't a team. That terrible experience taught me that good leadership will positively or negatively impact the entire work environment. I wonder how differently things would have been if the doctor would have addressed the elephants in the room?  I think he tried but since he wasn't there to see the chaos, he could not determine what changes needed to take place. 

Honestly, I am not one who gets excited about team work when it comes to my classes; however, I am trying to be open to and learn from these experiences.  The nature of the online environment makes me feel like we are Work Groups or Network groups instead of Teams. I think the course was designed to create a Team environment but that is very difficult to do online...in 9 weeks. Still, with a clearly defined mission and the right people to communicate the mission, working with a team could be a pretty good thing.

Denning, S. (2011). The Leader's Guide to Storytelling: Mastering the Art and Discipline of Business Narrative. San           Francisco : Jossey-Bass .

MSLD_521 A521.5.4.RB - Aligning Values

In developing and aligning organizational values, the organization must first ask the questions: 1.) Who are we? & 2.) What are we about (what do we stand for)?  I call these questions purpose-assessment questions. An organization is able to tell a story when their purpose is established. Once the organization's purpose is established, the company can develop a mission statement or company-creed based on the answers to the above questions. However, once management establishes the values of the company, leaders must transmit those values to employees. Denning (2011) noted that transmitting values to employees is a tricky management challenge (p. 140). Denning (2011) also noted that the best way to transmit values is to avoid moralizing, dictating behavior and to tell a story instead; telling a story embodying the values and letting the listeners see the point can be effective.

The three basic components of an ethical community are trust, loyalty, and solidarity (Denning, 2011, p.132-133). My organization clearly communicates our purpose and what we stand for but what about our ethical stance?  Thankfully, as I evaluate the basic components of an ethical community, I can see that my company does embody all three components. Denning (2011) noted that trust is the general expectation among members that their fellows will behave ethically toward them (p.132). When I go to work, my initial thoughts are not "Can I trust these people?"  or "Are they out to get me?".  I do not experience paranoia and I generally believe that my peers and supervisors have my best interest in mind. I am not saying that all of us exemplify perfect behavior in every moment ; however, I do consistently sense trust among my co-workers. 

Loyalty is the second component of an ethical community; Denning (2011) said that loyalty is the acceptance of the obligation to refrain from breaching one another's trust and to fulfill the duties entailed by accepting that trust (p.133). Like trust, I experience loyalty within my organization. In any interaction, I still  believe that it is important to carefully consider what you say and to whom. While I know there is a sense of loyalty among teammates, I am mindful of what I say if I know that others may be tempted to share that confidential information with someone else. 

The third component of an ethical community is solidarity. Solidarity is caring for other people's interests and being ready to take action on behalf of others, even if it conflicts with personal interests (Denning, 2011, p.133). The only line that gives me pause in solidarity's definition is "even if  it conflicts with personal interests". In some ways this statement makes it sound like I'd be compromising my own values. Therefore, in an effort to understand Denning's reasoning in this statement, I will give a positive example of what I think it means: As we are developing curriculum and training materials as a team, there are times when we do not agree with one another; in the moments of disagreement, I have to look at the big picture, consider my teammates ideas and finally surrender my personal interests for the greater good. If I am understanding solidarity correctly,  then I definitely see how this component abides within our organization. 

I am dishonest if I say that our organization is not missing important values. On the upside, employees are able to communicate with upper-management about the values we sense are missing. As a result of respectfully articulating our concerns, positive changes have been made. There are still weaknesses within our company but there is a willingness to learn from and grow in the areas in which important values have not been a priority.

Denning, S. (2011). The Leader's Guide to Storytelling: Mastering the Art and Discipline of Business       Narrative. San Francisco : Jossey-Bass.

MSLD_521 A521.4.3.RB - Subtleties of Communication and Hidden Messages

As I was reading the McKay, Davis & Fanning text, I saw myself in many of the terms and defense maneuvers. Honestly, I think I have seen myself in several of the Hidden Agenda behaviors. For example, the "I'm Good" agenda is where I've spend most of my young adult/adult life. The "I'm Good" agenda highlights the attributes that I value most; a frequently encountered "I'm good" agenda is the caring and sensitive person (McKay, Davis & Fanning, 2009, p. 81). I don't know if it was this course or one of my previous courses but I have written about important changes that I made over the last few years. Admittedly, I am a person who struggles with codependency. I have carried this need to please others and present a picture of perfection even though perfection was not even close to who I  was. Because of this battle with codependency, I felt like I had to communicate a perfect story about myself so that others would never want to reject. I thought that I was responsible for others' happiness and a part of making people "happy" was giving them the best version of me. I didn't know how unhealthy my behaviors were until certain events occurred that brought my hidden behaviors to light.

About two years ago I began pursuing recovery for codependency. I realized that I had issues from the past that I did not deal with...I buried them instead. As a result, codependency became a way of life for me; not only was I good, I communicated messages showing how good I was and how bad others were; this is the "I'm Good (But You're Not)" agenda ( McKay, Davis & Fanning,  2009, p. 83). Deep down I knew I wasn't better but I experienced temporary relief in knowing that others were not as good me (in my mind anyway). On the outside, my messages were "I'm Good" and "I'm Good (But You're Not)", but on the inside, I experienced "You're Good (But I'm Not)" (McKay, Davis & Fanning, 2009, p. 82).  I don't like to admit it but I had low self-worth and felt like others would reject me at the drop of a dime. Therefore, I had to keep up appearances. I had to let others know how good, kind, caring and sensitive I was; in some ways, I felt that I had to be perfect for others to truly like me...love me.

Thankfully the last two years have been life-changing. I have courageously faced issues from my past as they are the root of my behaviors. I have confided in others about my insecurities and "hidden agendas" and admitted my need for help. I am becoming the person I wish I was years ago. I no longer grab the mask that I so desperately thought I needed...even though I never wanted it. I am learning how to be me without the agendas...what a discovery! 

McKay, M., Davis, M., & Fanning, P. (2009). Messages: The Communication Skills Book. Oakland: New Harbinger Publications, Inc.