Wiki contents

Journals

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

Blog updates

Recently Updated

Recent updates

Recently Updated

All updates

Page tree
Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Week two has been interesting to say the least. Developing our understanding of Mikes Bikes and building the foundation of what is meant to be a collaborative team has presented both challenges and insights into what I value. I have drawn more value by reflecting on our MikeBikes process, therefore I will focus on this in an attempt to reach the higher level of Blooms Taxonomy, as opposed to drawing on learning experiences around the topic of team formation.

When given the task to individually learn MikesBikes, and in a similar case to playing Monopoly, I was competitive to say the least. After leaning that a SHV over $100 was attainable the standard was set. However instead of thinking about it as maximizing SHV I approached it as a calculation that I was attempting to understand. I approach the simulation holistically targeting things that I look for in a strong business (eg: indications of businesses confidence in it’s future as well as tangible results). To put is plainly, similar to a child playing Superman, I was Reuben playing CEO.

When I changed my strategy of thinking, I was reminded of what I like to do. I love understanding a system, understanding the intricacies of what makes it tick and then being able to manipulate the outcome. In reality, that’s what a business is, just a big system of relationships and decisions. Despite a touch of guilt, I can’t help but being more satisfied with my efforts, knowing others found the task difficult. It is only now, and upon reflection, that I realize my confidence in my ability to achieve my life goals of building and leading a large companies and my results in the MikesBikes simulation are inextricably linked. I realize now that this task wasn’t simply another assignment. This was personal. My motivation was slightly discounted by ‘student thinking’ around how the task wasn’t worth marks and the thought that I shouldn’t attain too high of a score for fear of being used to bring the average score of a low scoring team up. Despite this, I now realize that my self-efficacy (for my life goals) hung on my ability to do the best in the class.

This is the type of enthusiasm I want to create in my classes and in my career. If I can link a task to my assumptions of my self-concept, motivation is no longer an issue and failure is no longer an option. I intend to explore and foster this linkage in the coming months and I’m excited to see the result. 

2 Comments

  1. This reflection was interesting for me to read: your focus on MikesBikes entirely rather than the readings was a pretty fair assessment of the importance that competitiveness is for you personally. As your goal for the course markedly differs to mine, I did find it interesting how you recognised and used your strengths to help your goal of maximising SHV. I personally would have liked to hear you discuss any problems or difficulties you may have had during the week, it seemed MikesBikes was quite easy for you which is fair enough, perhaps you might be concerned that your team dynamic may affect the way you wish to run MikesBikes?

    On the other hand, the reading for this week 'Why Teams Matter' does clearly propound that teams achieve more than the sum of the individuals. It seems sort of like a challege between you and the theory so far and your self-confidence is certainly refreshing. It will be interesting to see whether you keep to your personal goals for the entire semester or adapt to suit your team. Good luck to you either way!

  2. It is good to see an individual who is confident about their abilities, and enjoyed MikesBikes, unlike most. The perception of a business as an open system that is linked to decisions and relationships is compatible with most experts on this topic. While I did appreciate the approach to MikesBikes an example of sorts would add tangibility and another level of understanding. What decisions that you first made didn't turn out so well. I love how you linked self concept and self efficacy with the MikesBikes task. I urge you to explore the critical implications of how you view the task, if you found it relatively easy or moderate does this mean others who don't aren't cut out for this paper? Or is it because most people have difficulty with application of knowledge. Good luck for this semester !