Wiki contents

Journals

2019 Learning journals
2018 Learning journals
2015 Learning journals
2014 Learning journals
2013 Learning journals

Blog updates

Recently Updated

Recent updates

Recently Updated

All updates

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

This weeks rollover was unfortunately not the turn around that our company expected to achieve during this rollover.  Reading through the readings that were provided this week I am once again astounded at their relevance to our experiences as a team and the results that were produced by our company.  Although we are still not in trouble, our results are creating a sense that we simply do not have the capabilities to develop from the point we currently sit at.  This may be due to our ambitious nature, and the two week break between our rollovers.  Our ambitions during this rollover were far to grand, and in hindsight we were never going to achieve them, but the allure of higher cash and profit alongside the potential growth of our shareholder value made us forget to truly place the correct reasoning behind the decisions that we were producing (Argyris, 1991).  It has thrown my team for a curve ball and to continue I believe that we have to look critically at the decisions we made, and which ones were simply not a realistic opportunity.  In my opinion it was our desire to meet the same demand as our higher performing competitors, but realistically we should of maintained our position and steadily increased our production and product line as this would have maintained our steady and slow progression.  Therefore, for this coming rollover we have to simply shake it out, take a long look at what our decisions were and how we can possibly change things around in the amount of time we have left.  

I also enjoyed these readings because they focus on how you should reflect upon yourself and identify where you were wrong and how you can change your reasoning (Argyris, 1991).  It therefore, becomes the organisations duty to allow open and clear communication between teams in order for them to grow and fix societal issues rather then continuing what they are doing or deflecting the mistakes or issues onto other members of the team, or those that they are competing against (Synnott, 2013).  This week is going to be a struggle for our team, but these process that are becoming an increasingly dominant factor through 'double looping' demonstrates the importance of setting goals, and if things go wrong discussing it with your team members.  This is a critical step that I believe my team needs to go through, because the mistakes we made were simple ones, which in hindsight is easy, but I admit our ambition and boost from our last rollover made us over estimate, which means this week will primarily be damage control, which reflects how we are going to learn from our mistakes and place goals to develop our strategy (Synnott, 2013; and Argyris, 1991).  Our group simply lost sight of the goals that we continuously set at the end of each previous rollover, and this rollover we simply forgot with our only aim to meet and compete directly with our main competitors.  It was a theory that was flawed from the get go, but from our perceptions at the time on our drive for success and ambition have hindered our results and has made us less ambitious and more likely to be conservative in order to recoup our losses and to create a sense of social learning within our group to understand our mistakes and learn from them (Synnott, 2013).  

Admittedly this weeks rollover feels like a blow to our teams self-esteem, but I believe that through careful analysis and a review of our actions that we will be able to reconvene and take the corrective action that our business requires of us.  We just need to take control of what we have to do, make the decisions that will put us back into a sustainable business and simply Shake It Out.      

 

Argyris, C. (1991). Teaching smart people how to learnReflections, 4(2), 4--15
Synnott, M. (2013). Reflection and double loop learning: The case of HS2Teaching Public Administration, 31(1), 124--134. doi:10.1177/0144739413479950

4 Comments

  1. Hey Anna,

    I really enjoyed reading your journal for this week, especially how you were able to make connections between our group's results and the week's readings. It is easy to see that your journal really reflects daudelins framework. You clearly identified the problem and using the reading to explain the  reasons why the problem occurred, and then you took a next step to explain how we can use the process of self reflection on performance and goals to make a clear plan for the week to come. I particularly like your optimism in this journal. Even after a not so good week, I also think we can turn around our results and do better next rollover.

    I do not think that there is anything to do to improve this journal. You are very clear,concise, critical and to the point, without lacking any relavent details.

    Keep up the good work Anna (smile)

     

  2. Hey Anna funny seeing you here (wink) you really put a lot of effort unto your journals as in our team sessions so it was a pleasure to read. I think Lauren really nailed it when she brought up your connections between our groups results and the readings especially in the case with Synnott.

    I also think you have learnt a lot from Daudelins frame work to really write a good reflection. You are well aware of our groups problems and how we can adress them later this week. Hopefully next weeks roll-over will be a better one once we figure out our quality control.

    Its really hard to suggest improvements to your work, perhaps peter could shine some light on the matter because you write much better then me thats for sure. The flow and content is nothing short of amazing.

    See you in class,

    Michael

     

  3. (Full and frank mode on—as requested)

    I've read this journal three times so far, and I still don't really grasp what your problem is. I can seem stuff happening from a team perspective. But what is your "problem". You use the word "we" far to frequently; can you really speak for the team as a collective?

    Is the problem something like, "I find it difficult to be critical in my decision making in the face of the 'exuberance' of my team members. For example, when X says "Let's increase production", I always seem to say yes without going through the figures"? Whatever it is, you need to be clearer as to the concrete experience and your reaction/action around it.

    Until you articular the problem clearly and unambiguously, it is hard for you to workout what is going on and what you (not the team) might do differently.

     

    E.g., I see X, Y, and Z happening. This looks a lot like groupthink (refs). One of the recommend ways to limit groupthink is to play the devils advocate. Next time we are making decisions I will say, "For the next few meetings, let's take turns at playing the devil's advocate. That way, we can have more confidence in our decision making".

     

    (Full and frank mode off)

    1. Thank you Peter!  This has been a very good guide on how I can improve and how I can alter my journals to garner more depth and be more critical towards my writing and my actions.  Thanks again (smile)