Wiki contents

Journals

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

Smartsims Support Centre

Blog updates

Recently Updated

Recent updates

Recently Updated

All updates

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Last week my teams Mikes Bikes rollover was extremely successful. We grew our shareholder value from fifth place in our region, to first place in the region. We were the only team in our region to increase our shareholder values, every other teams decreased. I believe my team works well together at the meetings, we all put in equal amounts of effort and all get along well. If I was asked last week, I would have said that is part of the reason we had been doing well, as I believe it contributed to our success. Because my team all work so well together and contribute to decisions, there is no one person leading our group and making all the decisions, instead as we all make decisions together as on our team’s strategy is based on a decentralised structure (Knights & Wilmott, 2012). However, this week, nothing had changed in terms of our team dynamics, but our results have definitely taken a turn for the worst. Just as we were getting into the swing of things and believed we were making some good progress with our bike company, we had a decrease in our shareholder value after this roll over. Maybe our decentralised structure wasn’t so effective after all? Were the issues we faced this week because of our informal team dynamics? Or were the results we obtained inevitable regardless of the structure of our team? I am beginning to believe that my team may be falling into the trap of being made up entirely of people whom have traits of a follower because my team is so decentralised with its structure, this may be preventing us from stepping up and become more successful as individuals in our roles assigned within the group.

According to Katz (1955) I will be able to develop and train myself in order to become an effective marketer in my group. Because the team dynamics have in effect created a group of followers with no true leaders, I was beginning to think I would not be able to fulfil my designated role as a marker as effectively as I could have with a different management structure in place within the group. Katz (1955) explains that there are three main skills I can develop to become more effective within the group. These skills are technical skills (knowledge and skills), human skills (social skills) and conceptual skills (abstract thinking and thinking outside the box). Becoming an effective administrator in my opinion is very similar to becoming an effective leader. I believe this because I believe they are almost the same thing but I still question my own ability to become an effective leader within the group. Does my personality meet the requirements set by theorists (Collin, 2005; Katz, 1955) in regards to becoming a good manager?

Although I am unsure if it will work out, I am still vowing to strive to become a more effective leader within my group. However I would ideally like to achieve this whilst retaining my follower aspects of my character.  


References:

Collins, J. C. (2005). Level 5 leadership: the triumph of humility and fierce resolve. Harvard Business Review, 83(7/8), 136--146

Katz, R. L. (1955). Skills of an effective administrator. Harvard Business Review, 33(1), 33--42.

Knights, D., & Wilmott, H. (2012). Introducing Organisational Behaviour and Management. (2nd edition). London: Thomson Learning.

3 Comments

  1. Hi Fraser

    Your reflection outlines the problem well however is lacking in both the analysis and also the testing of a potential hypothesis. There is a lot more analysis that can go on here as I felt you didnt draw on past experiences or really analyse what was going on.  In terms of the readings, you could have applied them better to the situation and answered the questions you posed to yourself in the end of the second paragraph. Although these are things you can work on, you writing style is very clear and I dont see you running into too many problems in the summative learning journal.

  2. Hi fraser, I feel for your team as it's never nice having a decreasing SHV, but I congratulate you for the week before's progress. I can see you have clearly outlined your problem and see you are having trouble with the decentralized structure in your team. I would recommend explaining how you are going to fix the problem you have in your team more. But other than that you have done well, it is clear you have an understanding of the readings and were able to take some of the theory and use it. You raise some interesting questions, and this will help you achieve better results through the process of thinking and reflection. Goodluck!

  3. Hi Fraser, this week I am meant to be commenting on your most recent journal and how you have improved however since you have not done a most recent one I will just comment on this one.

    In week 4, I asked you to start elaborating on some of the points you have made. I think there has been an attempt been made to do so. Although I think that you could have done this more by answering some of the questions you have posed throughout your learning journal. I also feel like there may still be issues with your use of Daudelins structure as I feel like your journal lacks focus, instead you talk about your problems in a much more general sense of problems in team dynamics. You have suggested a potential solution to the one problem of lack of leadership however I feel like again this is lacking analysis. I think overall like last time there is a lot of potential within this learning journal however a more thorough analysis is needed to be more reflective.