What an interesting week this has been. Our first week trying to devise strategies and learn to work together as a team, we are instead confronted with the dilemma of how to compete against a team of experts. Since I was particularly happy with my team selection, I did not have as strong opinion as some others who felt there had been a miscarriage of justice. As there was unlikely to be any adverse effect on my grades I was perfectly amenable to his solution. Reflecting on the situation and comparing it to some of the readings what particularly struck me was the reading on the destructive potential of overachievers (Spreier, Fontaine, & Malloy, 2006). Not that this reading entirely relates to the situation that we were faced with in terms of our class, but as Peter repetitively said in class, success in Solo Mike does not necessarily translate to success in Mikes Bikes. As a result, overachievers may be so obsessed with goals that they do not see the bigger picture or work well together as a team (Spreier et al., 2006). This may be a stretch, but what many of us see as a disadvantage could also be an advantage as we may have a far greater understanding of the simulations intricacies, or may have been faced with a greater variety of problems we had to find solutions to that the ‘expert’ team may not have seen before. Like I say, it is a bit of a stretch but I felt like this had such a polarising effect on the class it was something that I needed to mention in my reflection.
In addition, I was particularly intrigued by the article on level 5 leadership (Collins, 2005). I found this appealed to me because as an individual who has often been privileged enough to be in leadership positions it was fascinating to learn about this style of leadership. Humility and intense professional will blended together helps a company go from good to great (Collins, 2005). Going through the reading it all seems like common sense; running a company is about teamwork and you should choose a successor that will exceed your achievements, not bring the company down to prove a point. This I feel is almost elementary, things I have read about in course work for other management classes. Since I am in the position of CEO the next step is to determine how much of this leadership style applies to my situation. I feel that it is unlikely that the course will be long enough to make significant adaptions to my leadership style, in comparison to the several years that the examples in the reading had to be able to make their impact on the company. Humility is an easy part of the equation. This is because I in no way feel that I could be considered an expert in business management, or Mikes Bikes so I will happily defer to others on my team for their knowledge. Professional will is a lot harder to display in the context of this course, but it is easily something that I can take away and use in my professional life. This is what I particularly like about this course, is that I can really see a real world application for the readings when combined with the practical example of Mikes Bikes.
So would I be able to level up as a Leader? Like I say it is difficult to determine in the context of this course but I hope to be able to apply it to my future career. Hopefully the different topics of this learning journal do not affect the depth of reflection that can be found. I hope to continue to improve my leadership skills in relation to my group work and hopefully can lead our company to some level of personal success.
Collins, J. (2005). Level 5 Leadership: The Triumph of Humility and Fierce Resolve. (cover story). [Article]. Harvard Business Review, 83(7/8), 136-146.
Spreier, S. W., Fontaine, M. H., & Malloy, R. L. (2006). Leadership Run Amok. [Article]. Harvard Business Review, 84(6), 72-82.