This week’s rollover was kind of interesting including my team and other teams’ performance because some companies (perhaps my company :P) actually started trying to takeover other firms. This is interesting but also scary at the same time as a particular firm which used to have a little market share will possibly double it through the takeover. We actually did not take the takeover opportunity so seriously so I was a bit surprised at that such dramas were going on out of my intention. Although I reckon that my team members all are contributing to our entire performance with their own capabilities, this new trend allowed me to realize the importance of our further decision making to be successful in this competition that is increasingly getting fiercer.
This week’s reading “Skills of an effective administrator (Katz, 1974)”, there are three types of skills that may be required to be a successful administrator who can lead people to a particular goal. I remember that my team confirmed if any of us had a particular background of each department at the very first team meeting of MikesBikes, and nobody in my team had a specific knowledge about our own department. Therefore, I guess that technical skill out of three skills was what we did not have and the majority of my team might struggle with obtaining technical expertise for own department.
On the other hand, I find myself lucky because I think that my team members had relatively high levels of human and conceptual skill to maximize our team effectiveness. The most outstanding skill of my team members was probably human skill because all members (I don’t know about myself though) were really good at effective communication, therefore could have been cooperative with each other. In terms of conceptual skill, I guess that we already have a degree of skill to recognize the relationship between the individual and the community but this conceptual skill may be the key factor that leads to a victory. Now that our team members are fairly familiar with their own department and can understand how their individual decision will affect our entire firm. However, on the other hand, it is questionable that we are able to understand how others members’ actions or decision affect their own department.
Katz (1974) suggests that coaching of subordinates through assigning a particular responsibility is the key to develop conceptual skill. Moreover, question or opinion searching style of coaching may be more beneficial (Katz, 1974). If this style is just for simple learning, I agree with that the coaching may be effective but I just doubt that any team in MikesBikes simulation has subordinates. At least in my team, there does not seem to be subordinate although we may have followers when some members show their leadership. Therefore, coaching may not be able to be applied to our simulation. I think one of the most effective ways to develop conceptual skill is experience, particularly unsuccessful one. In my opinion, even though we get a number of training and education about conceptual skill, we cannot get enough comprehension or wisdom about it although we still can get information or data itself. No matter what it is good or bad, learning through experience seems much valuable and an easy way to change information into knowledge or wisdom. Don’t think about it, Feel it.
Overall, the reading was interesting but I don’t really know if the role of an administrator or an executive in the reading is appropriate for our team activities because, as I mentioned, I do not think we have subordinates in my team so the theory of three types of skills can be applied to our team but the development method may not be effective. I suggested that unsuccessful experience is possibly a good opportunity to develop conceptual skill but obviously nobody wants to fail so I need to come up with more critical way. Due to heaps of assignments and no sleep last night, I don’t really know if I am writing this journal logically but really hope that what I argued here made sense to you
Katz, R. L. (1955). Skills of an effective administrator. Harvard Business Review, 33(1), 33--42.