A631.1.5.RB - Eco Seagate

I feel that the Eco Seagate team developmental process is extremely valuable to any organization. The activities that they use in the program, such as hiking, biking, and white water rafting are some of the hardest and most extreme sports depending on the terrain, with hiking and biking being arguably the most challenging individual sports. They use these individual and team sports and make them all team-oriented so that they must finish and succeed as a team. Essentially, the team is only as strong as the weakest link. This is very true in most all real world applications and team environments, especially in high-performing teams and organizations. The team goals and objectives, along with the reward system, are based around overall team performance. Teamwork, dedication, respect, hard work, perseverance, and relationship building appear to be the most apparent highlights of this program. Any team could benefit from these activities and apply what they learned to their projects and organizational teams.

High-performing organizations and teams need activities like these because they engage in all of these scenarios, just with different variables and tasks. Commitment and trust are two very powerful words that are often associated with high-performing organizations, and these activities build on these traits. They teach team members to trust one another, to commit to succeeding no matter what, no matter how hard it is. Is this not what organizations are looking for? Should this be taught and exercised in these high-performing organizations? I think so, without a doubt. All teams are going to encounter problems where their abilities, skills, and relationships are going to be tested, and what better place to do that then here. At least in this forum failure has no impact on the organization and its people and the organization and team can see what their reaction will be to the stress and challenge. This helps a high-performing learn a lot about themselves, their team members, and how they might perform under different circumstances.

I think any successful and high-performing organization could benefit from this activity, especially mine. Lower level and senior managers within our distribution centers work very closely with one another, and there are various teams that operate at any given time throughout the year, building upon relationships and improving processes. Given the fact that Target puts so much emphasis on relationships, this program would do wonders for the managers in our building. It seems to epitomize relationship building by building new relationships and strengthening those that have already been established. The activities really challenge those involved, much like the senior team does with lower level management. I think it would give them good exposure to crisis management and performing under pressure, stress, and conflict within a team environment. 

A630.9.4.RB - Hiring and Recruiting

Eric’s description of the Google culture makes complete sense to me. There are too many organizations out there searching for the ideal candidate, someone who fits the exact mold that they have created. This could really hinder an organization from hiring incredible people because it forces the organization to hire only people who fit the mold. It also makes sense that he views his organization as one that doesn’t need to be managed. In my experience, good employees will manage themselves and run the day-to-day operations without needing too much guidance or structure. The management team will essentially serve as coaches in the development of the employees rather than supervisors. This does not work in every organization because not every organization recruits and retains employees like Google does. They seem to hire those who are driven and motivated to manage themselves.

It certainly takes courage to implement this culture and point of view, especially in today’s workforce where supervisor and managerial positions are plentiful. This could be for several reasons, but it seems that managers are more active in their employees jobs now, not just from a developmental standpoint but from an operational one. This approach could backfire because employees could become too accustomed to not having anyone watching over them, which could lead to decreased production, lack of engagement on the manager’s part, and some employees not feeling valued because of the lack of a connection between them and a leader. Again, it works for Google because they hire the type that doesn’t mind it and actually thrive in this atmosphere, but for those who need to be managed and engaged often it wouldn’t work.

I think the biggest take-away from this video is learning that not every organization will hire and retain the same types of employees. Some will have a mold that they want their employees to fit into, some won’t. I try to look for diversity and skill set when hiring for our organization, those who want to succeed and have positive outlook on what’s ahead for them. I think Google has had success from this and I will plan to use it when hiring, leading, and retaining my team

A630.8.4.RB - Build a Tower, Build a Team

I think that Tom’s analysis of why kindergarteners perform better than MBA students on the spaghetti challenge is accurate. MBA students tend to be a bit more competitive, more direct, and more opinionated than kindergarteners, all of which would impact the performance of the team. In general, kindergarteners do a very good job of thinking outside of the box, along with using their imagination and creativity. Kindergarteners are also very like-minded and think in the same terms without letting their egos get in the way of the task. I think another reason why kindergarteners might perform better is because they have very good collaboration skills. They tend to get along almost immediately with others of the same age while sharing ideas and working together as a team.

In my opinion, CEOs with an executive assistant perform better than those without one because of the outside perspective brought into the group, and also because it’s a different skillset contributing to the project. Just as CEOs require strong skill sets in business, strategic thinking, and leadership, executive assistants have creative thinking, they effectively multitask, and have strong organizational skills. When these two skill sets are teamed together they are much more effective than those of a CEO alone.

This video teaches that collaboration and communication among team members are perhaps the most important factors in team performance and effectiveness. Kindergarteners are perhaps the epitome of collaboration and communication, which is why they work so well in teams. During process intervention, collaboration and communication make up the backbone of this strategy and allow team members to realize what they need to do better, how to do it, and what the outcome should look like. This takes solid communication and teamwork to be able to go through this process.

The biggest take away from this video, in my opinion, is solidifying the fact that collaboration is increasingly important to organizations, not only teams. Collaboration entails relationship building, communication, teamwork, and putting yourself in the place of others. Kindergarteners seem to do all of these exceptionally well, except for putting themselves in the place of others. Once professionals like MBA students, executives, and managers get over their egos and learnt to truly work with one another to accomplish a goal, the results are much more positive and substantial.