In my reflection for this week, I will be attempting two questions: What did I learn this week? and What does it look like? I will revisit Week 2 because I did not really reflect on the team formation and then write to what some are referring to as the scandal, instead I will refer to as the ‘the situation’. Lastly, look at the readings for this week regarding leadership and followership.
The team formation has allowed me to meet five very different people who have great vision to want to achieve the excellence in academia. I learnt that each member has high expectations of themselves as individuals and they recognise the challenges and opportunities of this Management 300 course paper. As a team - we are learning to talk to one another and not at one another, offer suggestions and solutions, question with sincerity, note requests and requirements, and take on tasks to develop a paper trail of foundational beginnings, redevelop for improvement and implement very positive strategies as a cohesive unit. We are a team that is constantly reflecting our processes to learn from each other with those with strengths in knowledge of managerial roles or those with weaknesses in technology of the MikesBikes simulation. In all, learning from each member as manager’s in our own experience (Daudelin, 1996) to adapting to the current team environment with the assistance of reflecting on how we think and behave as a managerial team.
The ‘situation’ that took place this week really does look at the reading of ‘why teams matter’ (Katzenback etal., 1992). As students being formed into teams to set up pretend organisations; there is an element of trust, belief and if anything, value from team building. Additionally, there is an expectation when you are a man, woman, mother, father, son, daughter etc. to gain a fair deal - out in the real world, but as a university student the expectation is to believe in a fair playing field for all, and not some. However, I have noticed in a number of learning journals – some students did care about this 'situation' whereas others did not. Did the situation offer an effective design and management of teams? (Oakley etal., 2004). No, not in respect to the ‘situation’ and the university does have a strict policy surrounding plagiarism or cheating, whether knowingly or not – is it relevant or irrelevant? Yes, it is relevant because the ‘situation’ surrounding one team wanting to win the competition (knowingly or not) have since been stripped of that right to compete and on a personal note, I am glad that this team who caused a ‘situation’ and divided our student class for a ‘them versus us’ culture, are being allowed to still work together as a team but denied any extras. Most importantly, improvements to the CV MikesBikes criteria in the Management 300 course wiki has already been implemented and I hope this situation can never resurface again but there could be a likelihood that word may get out that this is not your ordinary kind of management course paper and to enrol with care.
Lastly, in my new team - our motto has become as I see it, is ‘one for all and all for one’. I learnt that this team will strive for all and because we are learning focussed, we think to behave as one. Moreover, the leadership argument that leaders should be a Level 5 leader (Collins, 2005) is so what has happened in my experience with these five wonderful people who see everything as not a problem or an issue and that a very positive solution can be reached in a timely and professional manner. I agree with Kelley (1988) that bosses are necessarily not good leaders but I would add that with my experience with Fusion Partnerships, the chemistry and real-ness of wanting to work together with the ability to investigate, to improve, to conclude and to move forward is not only followership attributes but of Level 5 leadership qualities too because you can never do everything on your own. As a result, we are a managerial team of leaders who follow one another in acceptance of our roles and responsibilities, in pursuit of excellence in business.
Daudelin, M. W. (1996). Learning from experience through reflection. Organizational Dynamics, 24(3), 36--48
Katzenbach, J. R. & Smith, D. K. (1992). Why teams matter. McKinsey Quarterly, (3), 3--27
Oakley, B., Felder, R. M., Brent, R., & Elhajj, I. (2004). Turning student groups into effective teams. Journal of student centred learning, 2(1), 9--34
Collins, J. C. (2005). Level 5 leadership: the triumph of humility and fierce resolve. Harvard Business Review, 83(7/8), 136--146
Kelley, R. E. (1988). In praise of followers. Harvard Business Review, 66(6), 142--148