Last week for me, I found that I had not reflected on enough last week, which is the response that I got from most of my comments on my Learning Journal. However, once reflecting on why that was, I felt that the week had not been a large enough impact to allow for me to truly think into why I could not analyse the situation from every angle. I only stumbled upon this when I recognised how large of a week this turnover had been, and it has completely changed my groups interaction with the simulator and one another.
No one was interested in buying the company's firm, therefore, with just the cash injection we were requiring a decent strategy to get us through. This is where I started to challenge the way that myself and the group had interacted and behaved. Previously our decisions had been so hasty and not discussed in real depth. Today we were looking over every aspect in the simulation to work with our tight budget and minimal sales, which meant full on in depth, no interruption discussion of the simulator. It was brilliant, we knew what each other intended on doing, how it fit into the budget, something which we thought we were doing so successfully once before, which is now an obsolete option compared to the intricate time spent coordinating specific plans. Just as Daudelin explains, "reflection is so natural and familiar" (1996), which is something I can agree with now that I compare the behavior of my team now compared to before. I am not implying that my team were not adequate before, as previously we worked very well together, we all knew the goal, however we all managed our own sector and weren't too aware of one anothers details, which probably lead to our downfall, not being aware at all times.
When assessing the readings, it makes me consider how my group could have been, or what other path we could have taken. As Davenport (2006) explains some workplaces can be chaos, spread sheets, inconsistent data and confusion. To be fair, we had confusion, we had inconsistent data, however we still held it together, and I really value my team for it. We could have approached our way of working with the simulation a very different way, we could have began our work by assisting each other rather than being independent, but we thought we were doing what was best for us and the team, though not the simulation. Had we however, become more hostile at one another, we would have never recognized the error of our ways, and then we would have once again gone bust and under. Therefore I am proud to say that we are still a mature bunch who can hold down a stressful situation without chaos and rationalization instead.
From here on, we know how to work together with the simulation, one of the group members even said: "we should do this from now on". As Baghai (2009) "Growth is Granular", and to be fair, the growing that it has taken to get here has been stimulating and eye opening. To be honest, I have always been able to see the investment that is required to activate the simulation, however I can now understand why your time is required. We are put into these groups to share knowledge, not to be the boss of a department, combined knowledge is key, which I noticed when we collectively talked about situations, and shouted out ideas which could potentially pull our company through. So this reflection, I hope that I have reflected adequately, I truly feel as if I have learnt from this situation to be more aware and less relaxed, to look for every opportunity to thrive with others, as 6 people combined have more knowledge than one.
Daudelin, M. W. (1996). Learning from experience through reflection. Organizational Dynamics, 24(3), 36--48
Baghai, M., Smit, S., & Viguerie, P. (2009). Is your growth strategy flying blind? Harvard Business Review, 87(5), 86---96.
Davenport, T. H. (2006). Competing on analytics. Harvard Business Review, 84(1), 98--107.