A631.9.2.RB - Video Debrief of Team MA

Several attributes stood out in the video that Steve Jobs demonstrated leading the NeXT Team. These corresponded to the results of my MA and debrief. Achievement characteristics include stretch goals including the use of metrics to track progress. Leaders can summarize statistics on new products, customer base, competitors and milestones. For example, Jobs emphasis was on higher education with a simulation focus with a revolutionary impact on the PC market. Though it didn’t find a market, the NeXT "cube" PC had great industrial design and showed an incredible amount of creativity and innovation. Unfortunately, Jobs was very assertive and aggressive (including overinflated ego) which contributed to the downfall of the NeXT plan. Jobs was an entrepreneur (risk taker) both personal and business as he used most of his own financial resources to finance operations at NeXT. Jobs demonstrated a drive for goal setting, a desire for the challenge to his team along with being ambitious. Innovation is the balance of three attributes: problem-solving, process creativity and inventiveness which are essential in a leadership team. On the downside, Jobs need for recognition by the computer industry, business world and public customer base was overinflated with his ego. I scored similar in these MA areas: achievement, risk, innovation and recognition. (Labreque, 2014) And by coincidence, after taking the MBTI assessment a week ago, Steve Jobs is an example including natural born leadership of famous people with ENTJ (Extravert, iNtuitive, Thinking and Judging) personality traits which just happened to be my category too. During the brainstorming session with the NeXT Team, he demonstrated most of the characteristics of ENTJs. ENTJs thrive on challenges, possibilities, opportunities, challenges and want to be the ones driving and leading the path. They are "take charge" people. ENTJs have an incredible amount of personal power along with being domineering, forceful and decisive. ENTJs have little if any patience especially with inefficiencies. Other attributes include: self-confidence, assertive, creative, innovative, strategic thinkers, dominant personalities, a natural tendency to marshall and direct, are often "larger than life" in describing their projects, ideas and proposals (story-telling etc), are decisive and are not the one to be messed with. (The Myers-Briggs Foundation, 2014) (HumanMetrics, 2014) References Steve Jobs Brainstorms with NeXT Team: Entrepreneurs (2012). [On-Line] Available https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loQhufxiorM&feature=youtu.be HumanMetrics (2014). [On-Line] Available http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes2.asp The Myers-Briggs Foundation (2014). [On-Line] Available http://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/mbti-basics/home.htm Labreque, Tom (2014). Management Assessment Profile (Candidate: Gregory Rutbell). Alexandria, Virginia: NextSteps Research.

A631.8.4.RB - Reflective Analysis

I completed the Humanmetrics Jung Typology Test TM on Sunday, December 14, 2014. My personality type according to Jung's and Briggs Myer's is ENTJ: Extravert (11%), iNtuitive (50%), Thinking (50%) and Judging (33%). Based on the results, I have: slight preference of Extraversion over Introversion, moderate preference of Intuition over Sensing, moderate preference of Thinking over Feeling and moderate preference of Judging over Perceiving. ENTJs: have a natural tendency to marshall and direct, are often "larger than life" in describing their projects, ideas and proposals (story-telling etc), are decisive and are not the one to be trifled with. (HumanMetrics, 2014) ENTJs are natural born leaders. They live in a world of numerous possibilities and challenges and want to be the ones responsible and leading the way. They have a drive and passion for leadership to grasp the details, tasks and develop a plan. They can absorb an incredible amount of information and can make quick and decisive judgments based on this. They are "take charge" people. ENTJs have a tremendous amount of personal power and are very forceful, decisive individuals. ENTJs do not like mistakes and have little patience with inefficiency. ENTJs are career-focused and fit into the corporate world naturally. ENTJs love to interact with people and as extroverts are energized and stimulated primarily externally. Other qualities include: self-confidence, assertive, creative, innovative, strategic thinkers and dominant personalities. (The Myers-Briggs Foundation, 2014) Who are some examples including leadership of famous people with ENTJ personality traits? Adolph Hitler, Bill Gates, Carl Sagan, Donald Trump, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harrison Ford, Jack Welch, Joseph Stalin, Julius Caesar, Margaret Thatcher, Oskar Schindler, Richard Nixon, Sean Connery, Warren Buffet and Winston Churchill. These are examples of political, business management and entertainment. It is important to emphasize that several of these examples demonstrated leadership of the wrong kind (Hitler and Stalin). (The Myers-Briggs Foundation, 2014) How can MBTI be useful to develop leadership capacity and capability? The MBTI is unique and different from other psychological and personality instruments tests. It sorts for preferences and does not measure traits, knowledge, skills, abilities or character. For example, it can identify critical leadership skills and improvement opportunities including: conceptual, critical thinking, research, creativity, reflection and experience. The best reason to choose MBTI and discover know yourself is that research and hundreds of studies over the last 40 years have proven MBTI to be both valid and reliable. In other words, it measures what it says it does (valid) and produces the same results when given several times (reliable).Develop a plan from MBTI results with the help of a mentor coach. (Quenk, 2009) References HumanMetrics (2014). [On-Line] Available http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes2.asp Quenk, Naomi L. (2009). Essentials of Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Assessment (2nd ed.). Hoboken New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. The Myers-Briggs Foundation (2014). [On-Line] Available http://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/mbti-basics/home.htm

A631.7.4.RB - Future of OD

Together, MSLD 630 and MSLD 631 provide an overview of Organizational Development (OD). The courses present an OD view of managing change and organizational transformation. In this final chapter of your textbook, Brown presents two opposing ideas: OD is viewed by some as a rapidly changing field keeping up with the times and by others as a fad that will become irrelevant. Given what you have learned over the past two courses, what do you see as the future of the OD discipline? What do I see as the future of OD discipline? Based on what I have learned over the past two courses and my 20 plus years experience with high powered players in the defense and commercial aerospace industry, I see OD as a rapidly changing field keeping up with the times. For example, Lockheed Martin and Boeing are both big OD users practitioners along with being business industry leaders. Lockheed Martin uses an OD process is known as LM21 Operating Excellence (Lockheed Martin 21st Century) for process, lean manufacturing and six sigma. LM trains and certifies black belts and master black belts in process tools: teams, facilitation, problem-solving, lean manufacturing, six sigma, root cause analysis, value stream mapping, etc. These "process experts and consultants" lead, coach and mentor teams in these tools for productivity, quality, supply chain constraints, bottlenecks and inefficiencies. The Pentagon, Department of Defense and American taxpayer focus is on "affordability" and "producibility" process improvements which in turn lower the cost of the product and service. (Lockheed Martin, 2014) Boeing uses an OD process known as "Working Together" promoting one team working together. This is also a strategy in the vision. There are many self-directed and high-performance employee-involvement teams (EIT's) in engineering, supply chain, manufacturing etc that focus on productivity, quality and supply chain issues. Additional tools and processes include: lean manufacturing, kaizen, value stream mapping, root cause analysis, etc. Today airline customers are faced with cost and operating issues and want an affordable high quality product and service. Customer orders and build assembly rates are expanding due to the customer need for new aircraft over the next twenty years. In addition, competition especially from European Airbus is stiff. The Boeing and Airbus rivalry is the biggest in the business world. (Boeing, 2014) I am actively involved in both the LM21 and "Working Together" philosophies since 2002. I was a certified LM21 Black Belt during my career at Lockheed Martin. Presently, I am working on kaizen certification. The OD tools and processes that I use and apply focus on change from the operating environment both internal and external. Build rates are growing and expanding. New programs such as the 777X are being introduced. New plants and facilities are being built. New and advanced technologies such as composite wing are being introduced. Customer requirements are changing. Teams are being introduced in all organizational areas to become high-performance and self-directed. To survive in the 21st century there is a motto: "Nothing endures but change." References Boeing (2014). [On-Line] Available http://www.boeing.com/boeing/ Lockheed Martin (2014). [On-Line] Available http://www.lockheedmartin.com/

A631.6.4.RB - Transformational Strategies

General Stanley McChrystal, a West Point graduate, four-star army general and Green Beret, has a fascinating and incredible performance record of achievements including creating a revolution in warfare that integrated intelligence and operations. He is credited with leading the US and international forces in Afghanistan and the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) which in 2003 captured Saddam Husein. McChrystal is respected for his candor. Some of the key points he shares and discusses in the TED.com video include what he learned about leadership over his decades in the military. How do you build a sense of shared purpose among people with many skill sets and ages? By listening and learning and addressing the possibility of failure. Some of his key points include: 1. If your people do everything you taught them to do, and they do those things properly, you led them well. People follow leaders. 2. Leaders can let you fail, and yet not let you be a failure. 3. Leaders build confidence and trust in their people. Those you are leading have to have failth and trust in the leader. Leaders have to build faith, trust and confidence. 4. In failure, the leader must reach out to his force and rebuild trust and confidence. Rebuilt confidence in the force, leader and in the seniors of the leader and the force. 5. A leader must build consensus and a sense of shared purpose with his force. 6. How does a leader stay credible and legitimate when they haven't done what the people their leading are doing? Leaders must be more transparent and willing to listen. 7. Keep your promises and live up to your obligations to subordinates, peers and superiors. Be ready to support them when they need you most. 8. A leader isn't good because he is right. They're good because their willing to learn, and to trust. If you are a leader, the people, you've counted on will help you out. If you're a leader, the people who count on you need you on your feet. What is the Ranger creed? It says "I'll never leave a fallen comrade to fall into the hands of the enemy." It's not a saying or poem. It's a promise. Every Ranger promises every other Ranger, "No matter what happens, no matter what it costs me, if you need me, I'm coming." And every Ranger gets that same promise from every other Ranger. Think about it. It's extraordinarily powerful. It's probably more powerful than marriage vows. And they've lived up to it, which gives it special power. And so the organizational relationship that bonds them is just amazing. I was raised to believe that soldiers were strong and wise and brave and faithful; they didn't lie, cheat, steal or abandon their comrades. (McChrystal, Mar 2011) As Brown states, "Organization transformation is more revolution than evolution." Transformations focus for organizational survival in a competitive environment. In General McChrystal's example, the relative strength of the corporate culture (army and Ranger) is strong culture as the member commitment to values and number of members sharing values are both high. As far as the strategy-culture mix, he managed the change because there was a high need for strategic change (including creating a revolution in warfare that integrated intelligence and operations) with a high need for compatibility of change within existing culture. He shared and implemented the vision. (Brown, 2011) Gallery Furniture in Houston, Texas is a national leader in sales among independent furniture retailers. Gallery Furniture prides itself on furniture delivery the same day a customer purchases. The "today" philosophy includes all aspects of the business from the customer shopping experience to deep-rooted community service commitments. As the housing real estate market expanded over the last thirty years, Gallery Furniture experienced years of profits and business growth. However, the 2007 and 2008 burst impacted sales hard for the furniture retailer. There was a big decline in the customer base and according to Jim "Mattress Mack" McIngvale, owner of Gallery Furniture, "in order to grow during the recession, we had to innovate or else we were going to evaporate." In other words, they had to do something revolutionary. It was this need to innovate and take a larger share of the declining furniture market that caused McIngvale to go looking for a model to change behavior at his 150 employee business. He was looking for a process that would motivate his employees to want to change their behavior and act in ways that give the customers what they're looking for. He did not want to pursue Theory X techniques including directives, yelling and screaming. (Gallery Furniture, 2014) The solution was to use an organizational change model from Influencer Training including six different initiatives to innovate the way they do business: revamping their sales approach, reducing delivery reworks, improving safety and employee wellness and reducing inventory. There were two vital behaviors the sales team needed to adopt: 1. They needed to not change their demeanor from "Can I help you?" to "I'm disappointed you're not going to buy" when a customer was not ready to purchase. 2. Becoming prospectors rather than salespeople the moment a customer wanted to leave and getting the customer's contact information so they could follow up. The change plan included six different sources of influence with the following examples: personal motivation, personal ability, social motivation and structural ability (iPad). The bottom line results was that all six of the influencer initiatives have contributed to tremendous results for Gallery Furniture. (Gallery Furniture, 2014) As Brown states, "Organization transformation is more revolution than evolution." Transformations focus for organizational survival in a competitive environment. In Gallery Furniture example, the relative strength of the corporate culture is moderate culture (stable) as the member commitment to values was average and number of members sharing values is high. As far as the strategy-culture mix, he managed the change because there was a high need for strategic change (including creating a revolution due to the decline in housing market) with a high need for compatibility of change within existing culture. He shared and implemented the vision. (Brown, 2011) References Brown, Donald R. (2011). An Experiential Approach to Organization Development (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc. Gallery Furniture (2014). Retrieved from https://www.vitalsmarts.com/casestudies/gallery-furniture/ McChrystal, Stanley: Listen, learn ... then lead (Mar 2011) (TED Talks: Ideas worth spreading). Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/stanley_mcchrysta

A631.5.4.RB - Leading System Wide Change

"Think different" was an advertising slogan for Apple in 1997. "Here’s to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently. They’re not fond of rules. And they have no respect for the status quo. You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them. About the only thing you can’t do is ignore them. Because they change things. They push the human race forward. And while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius. Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, are the ones who do." (Apple - Think Different, 1997) The one-minute commercial featured black-and-white footage of 17 legendary iconic 20th century personalities. In order of appearance they were: Albert Einstein, Bob Dylan, Martin Luther King, Jr., Richard Branson, John Lennon (with Yoko Ono), Buckminster Fuller, Thomas Edison, Muhammad Ali, Ted Turner, Maria Callas, Mahatma Gandhi, Amelia Earhart, Alfred Hitchcock, Martha Graham, Jim Henson (with Kermit the Frog), Frank Lloyd Wright and Pablo Picasso. The commercial ends with an image of a young girl opening her closed eyes, as if making a wish. The final clip is taken from the All Around The World version of the "Sweet Lullaby" music video, directed by Tarsem Singh; the young girl is Shaan Sahota, Singh's niece. (Apple - Think Different, 1997) Apple's CEO Steve Jobs ordered the creation of a campaign that reflected the philosophy he thought had to be reinforced within the company he once co-founded, but which was struggling at the time he came back: Steve Jobs said the following in an interview for PBS ' 'One Last Thing' documentary, 1994: "When you grow up you tend to get told the world is the way it is and your life is just to live your life inside the world. Try not to bash into the walls too much. Try to have a nice family life, have fun, save a little money." "That’s a very limited life. Life can be much broader once you discover one simple fact, and that is - everything around you that you call life, was made up by people that were no smarter than you. And you can change it, you can influence it, you can build your own things that other people can use." "The minute that you understand that you can poke life and actually something will, you know if you push in, something will pop out the other side, that you can change it, you can mold it. That’s maybe the most important thing. It’s to shake off this erroneous notion that life is there and you’re just gonna live in it, versus embrace it, change it, improve it, make your mark upon it." "I think that’s very important and however you learn that, once you learn it, you’ll want to change life and make it better, cause it’s kind of messed up, in a lot of ways. Once you learn that, you’ll never be the same again." (Think different, 2014) What is required for a leader to be successful? Steve Jobs was a leader determined to "change the world" starting with Apple. Based on the Apple "Think Different" campaign with (17) examples and some research, there are (12) ways to think differently to be successful: 1. Being a revolutionary - not accepting the status quo and challenging old and present ways to do stuff. 2. Being an innovator - developing and implementing creative, new and powerful ways to do stuff. 3. Being a creative - incubating new and powerful ideas. 4. Being a performer - expand boundaries and comfort zones in new ways for enhanced results. 5. Being a seeker - gaining a deeper and better understanding of people and the world. 6. Being a visionary - having an expanded vision of ideas, what is possible and worthwhile. 7. Being an independent - thinking creative and independently. 8. Being wise - gaining a different and expanded perspective. 9. Being a leader - being courageous to discover and present your individual uniqueness. 10. Being a change agent - leading people and teams through change. 11. Being committed - make a commitment to make a difference. 12. Being authentic - discovering who you are and being courageous to bring your true self to the world. (Mackinnon, 2011) References Apple - Think Different (1997) (YouTube). Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmwXdGm89Tk Brown, Donald R. (2011). An Experiential Approach to Organization Development (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc. Mackinnon, Dr. Lauchlan A. K. (April 21, 2011). Think Differently! Stand Out From The Crowd. What Can We Learn About Thinking Differently From Studying Apple’s 1997 ‘Think Different’ Advertising Campaign? Retrieved from http://www.think-differently.org/2011/04/what-can-we-learn-about-thinking/ Think different (2014). Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_different

A631.4.4.RB - INSEAD Reflection

According to Paul Tesluk, Associate Professor of Management and Organization at the Robert H. Smith School of Business at the University of Maryland, "Self-managing teams are not as rare a phenomenon as what they used to be. By definition, a self-managing team is a team that has formal responsibility and authority for making their own decisions about how they organize their work and how they decide on how they're going to get their work done." Tesluk also includes that instead of having a formal supervisor with that responsibility, "it's up to the team to decide how they structure themselves and how they go about organizing their work flow and process." Self-managing teams can be found especially in flatter organization structures where teams are focused to be more independent. However, some type of leadership still needs to be in place. This type of leadership is different from that of the traditional team with a leader at the top. Tesluk states, "the leadership style within a self-managing team is far less directive, but more inspirational and visionary." "Here the leader develops team capabilities to be able to make decisions, understands how to best organize and structure team workflow, and figures out how to manage roles and responsibilities." To get to this advanced stage, an element of team formation is required and the importance of finding an effective leader is emphasized. (Self-managing teams: debunking the leadership paradox by INSEAD (YouTube), 2008) Tesluk states leaders have to balance the "authority balance beam act" for self-managing teams. "You have to walk that carefully and delicately, and use careful judgment as to when to intervene and when to back off and allow the team ... even to make some mistakes that they can learn from and continue to develop." He emphasizes self-managing teams are not for every organization. This structure works best in teams that have high levels of knowledge, skills, abilities and expertise within them along with the ability to organize their own work. It would be counterproductive to have a supervisor tell the team how to go about doing things, develop a strategy, manage budgets, analyze performance data, learn from mistakes and improve as a team. The team would be able to do that themselves including developing guiding operating principles of how the team will operate, function and interact. Supervisors must be able to provide the latitude for the team itself to decide about how to best do its work. There would be several examples of when it would be appropriate and required for a supervisor to step in and intervene: emergency situation and major interruption, bottleneck and constraint to workflow such as a production assembly line stoppage. (Self-managing teams: debunking the leadership paradox by INSEAD (YouTube), 2008) In my present position as an industrial engineer at Boeing, I am the "captain" of our self-directed high performance team. Several years ago we started our journey to greatness and matured progressed from formation, development, collaboration and now to self-directed. We are an autonomous, empowered and engaged operating team and have our own team charter with guiding operating principles of how we run and operate as a team. We set our own team goals including metrics, training and back-up process for coverage and have daily team huddles. Our manager is a coach and usually only intervenes gets involved if there is a "people personnel issue" or high level strategic issue. He does not micromanage or control the team. Self-directed means there is less management control and more empowerment. In addition, we mentor other lower level teams and participate in corporate citizenship community events including Books & Backpacks. Our biggest team strength is enhanced performance (team synergy) and being a role model for other teams and leadership. References Brown, Donald R. (2011). An Experiential Approach to Organization Development (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc. Self-managing teams: debunking the leadership paradox by INSEAD (YouTube) (2008). Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBnR00qgGgM

A631.3.4.RB - Feedback and Goals

According to Brown, the combination of goals with feedback on performance has a positive impact on performance. However, providing feedback without proper goals is counterproductive and does not lead to enhanced performance. Timely feedback (after the task activity is completed) between manager leader and employee is important too because all the details, information, facts and data are fresh in everyone's mind and documented. (Brown, 2011) Everyone wants feedback, input and coaching on goals. Employees want to know how they are performing and what improvements such as new work skills, problem-solving, computer skills etc. are necessary in order to become a high performer and team player. Most employees prefer to be coached by a senior level manager leader who is a subject matter expert (SME) in a specific field, e.g., industrial and systems engineering. The preferred process is 1:1 face to face instead of telephone or e-mail feedback. The preferred schedule is weekly, monthly and informally after completing a project assignment. (Deal, 2006) Employers face a huge challenge, opportunity and paradigm shift: to lead a diverse workforce of all ages and backgrounds. For the first time in US history, five different generations populate the workforce. The change will includes five different generations of employees working together on the same team. This will include: Traditionalists (born before 1946), Baby Boomers (1946-1964), Generation X (1965-1976), Millennials (1977-1997) and Generation 2020. As work becomes more complex and technical, skills including data analysis, problem-solving, relationship building and teaming with other workers and teams will be required. Personal and team goals along with collaboration and communication will be required for the diverse workforce including managers leaders providing feedback on goals and performance. everyone is different too with skills, goals and experiences. (Meister & Willyerd, 2010) Leaders managers and sometimes organizations tend to believe that knowledge, skills and abilities are the only factors affecting employees goals and performance. However, there are several additional factors and dynamics that impact and influence employee's performance capacity. These are: management and co-worker support and follow-up, allocation of resources and sometimes luck. Contrary to the common belief and paradigm that the playing field is balanced, it is anything but this due these factors and dynamics. This demonstrates the importance of closed-loop communication between manager leader and employee. It is leaderships role and responsibility to have an open culture for all employees to be a team player and high performer. (Kaplan and Donovan, 2013) From my personal experience, it is important to develop, establish and strengthen trust and respect with your team including manager by developing and building on goals (yearly). This can also include a plan of the tasks to do this and continuous improvement. I use several communication and "connecting" tools to do this. The first is bi-weekly 1:1 coaching meetings with my manager. Our team uses a standard 4-panel chart summary including: goals, status, constraints and schedule in a stop light chart format (green - complete or on schedule, yellow - potential constraints issues, and red - behind schedule). We review projects I am working on including progress to date, constraints and anything I need assistance on. Other issues include teaming within other shifts, training, skills and education. Secondly, our team has daily "Huddles" with team. For example, have a daily 15 minute huddle to exercise stretch, review roles and responsibilities for the day and week, review metrics and share and help each other out for problems, issues and back-up coverage. We share and discuss new ideas and learning experiences from training classes. Third, we use customer feedback surveys to our goals and use both qualitative and quantitative tools for analysis. These communication and "connecting" tools leads to greater engagement, empowerment, performance and customer focus and satisfaction. References Brown, Donald R. (2011). An Experiential Approach to Organization Development (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc. Deal, Jennifer J. (2006). Retiring the Generation Gap: How Employees Young & Old Can Find Common Ground. Hoboken, New Jersey: Jossey-Bass. Kaplan, Mark and Donovan, Mason (2013). The Inclusion Dividend: Why Investing in Diversity & Inclusion Pays Off. Austin, Texas: Bibliomotion. Meister, Jeanne C. and Willyerd, Karie (2010). The 2020 Workplace: How Innovative Companies Attract, Develop, and Keep Tomorrow's Employees Today. New York City: HarperCollins Publishers.

A631.2.5.RB - Cooperation and Competition

Once you have completed and turned in A631.2.4.LT, consider the process that you and your team went through in completing the Learning Team Charter. In a well-written reflection blog, answer the following questions: 1. What behaviors seemed to help your team successfully complete its task? Team 4 submitted and reviewed introductions for each team member for team formation. There was a high level of energy from members demonstrating behaviors including: initiative, perseverance, responsibility, accountability, participation, commitment and trust. The team did not struggle in any areas due to these demonstrated behaviors, e.g., we did not use finger pointing, blaming one another, skepticism etc. Ideas and information were shared freely and openly and learning to ask for help in an open communication forum, assistance and clarification became a norm. We demonstrated proactive and not reactive behaviors. 2. What factors inhibited decision-making or problem-solving? The biggest factor was lack of in person and face to face communication. If there were urgent issues and matters, telephone numbers were provided for more direct communication. Other factors were we did not know each other work and schedules which added to the wait and queue time for responses. There was very little conflict if any among team members and issues. 3. How much time was spent on decision-making and problem-solving? Consensus decision making was used for the schedule and assignments. There was minimal wait and queue time once a question issue was submitted on the discussion board and was usually within 24 hours. Other factors were we did not know each other work and schedules which added to the wait and queue time for responses. The rapid decision making process we used enabled us to complete and submit a high quality deliverable ahead of schedule. 4. How was information shared among team members? Differences between team members were value added. Ideas and information were shared freely and openly and learning to ask for help, assistance and clarification became a norm. If there were questions or issues on a posting, follow-up questions and answers clarifications were submitted and with appropriate responses inputs by the responsible party in a timely fashion. Team members gave and requested feedback. Diversity among members added to the quality of the charter deliverable. 5. How did issues of authority or power affect the team? Team 4 identified roles and responsibilities including team leader/facilitator and team members for the assignment. There was a volunteer for team leader/facilitator who posted a preliminary schedule with assignments. All team members provided feedback concurrence and provided feedback on anything that could be improved. We also reviewed sharing the team leader/facilitator role of the different assignments over the term to share responsibility, accountability and authority. The team leader/facilitator roles responsibilities include: assignments, schedule, rough drafts, and the final deliverable. The team leader/facilitator also provided several examples and alternatives to an issue to reduce wait and queue decision making time. 6. How did collaboration and competition influence the outcome? Team 4 demonstrated collaboration, "Working Together" and "synergy" on the assignment. Most of the communication within our team is nonverbal. We understood a shared vision so we didn't need spoken language to communicate. Our team developed a language of our own known as guiding operating principles which was part of our ultimate success. 7. Did team members make process interventions? Yes, if there was a better and improved way to do or state something, everyone was free to speak out. This is based on continuous improvement that if there is a better way to do something, then do it! For example, if someone had an additional input to an idea, then it was posted for team review for consensus decision making. References Brown, Donald R. (2011). An Experiential Approach to Organization Development (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.

A631.1.5.RB - EcoSeagate

In a well written blog, reflect on the following questions: 1. Do you see value in the EcoSeagate team development process? 2. Why would something like this be necessary in a high-performing organization? 3. Could your organization benefit from a similar activity? Seagate Technology is a US designer and manufacturer of hard disk drives (HDD) for data storage and was incorporated in 1978 as Shugart Technology. Seagate is incorporated in Dublin, Ireland and has its main executive office in Cupertino, California. Seagate has approximately 60,000 employees and revenues of $15 billion. The company website is www.seagate.com. It is a public company traded on NASDAQ. Founders include: Alan Shugart, Tom Mitchell, Doug Mahon, Finis Conner and Syed Ifikar. Stephen J. Luczo is Chairman and CEO. Seagate is known for developing the first 5.25 HDD in 1980 and was a dominant supplier in the microcomputer market in the 1980's. Acquisitions include: Control Data Corporation's Imprimis division (Wren product line), Maxor and Samsung HDD business. In 2013, Seagate had produced two billion HDDs. (Seagate, 2014) To develop teaming, teamwork and leadership skills, Seagate selects several hundred employees every year and brings them to New Zealand for a week to enhance and build on their existing physical and mental limits of performance. This yearly process is called "Eco Seagate". Before starting, the employees are broken into small teams and do not know each other. Many speak different languages too. Each team was expected to finish all activities known as the "Eco Challenge". Teaming activities include walking, running, biking, kayaking, mountain climbing etc. in mountainous terrain, flat land, rivers, lakes etc. What is the goal and purpose of doing this? Seagate wants to develop team leaders and bring skills back to the workplace for self-directed and high performance teams instead of just an informal work group. This includes purpose, goals, bonding, problem-solving, passion, commitment, attitude, morale, mutual trust, respect and understanding relationship within the team too. It also includes operating guiding norms and standards for a team based culture. Culture includes values, beliefs, norms and attitudes. (Seagate, 2014) (Eco Seagate 1/3, 2008) (Eco Seagate 2/3, 2008) Unfortunately, as stated in the case study, there are no metrics, measurements or results from this process. How do we know if it is working or not? Value added or non-value added? The answer is we do not know. There is no facts or data to support this. Potential metrics measurements could include: productivity, quality, cost, safety and attitude morale. (Brown, 2011) I see potential value in the process, however, I think there are some missing things. The value in the process is that leadership skills are developed along with self-esteem and self-actualization. First, what is the classroom instruction, preparation and learning prior to the event? You don't just "jump in" and say here I am and start. You have to know what and why you are doing something. Second, what is the follow-up process including metrics measurements to ensure the "Eco Seagate" process is working? Boeing uses a process similar to this at the Leadership Center in St Louis for leadership, management and process programs. It is a blending of classroom theory and hands on applications in a team environment. Activities include: hiking, basketball, volleyball etc. And there are follow-up metrics measurements to ensure the process is working. References Brown, Donald R. (2011). An Experiential Approach to Organization Development (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc. Eco Seagate 1/3 (2008). [On-Line] Available http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCOfOFMiLtE&feature=youtu.be Eco Seagate 2/3 (2008). [On-Line] Available http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Etwuap-_Azk&feature=youtu.be Seagate (2014). [On-Line] Available http://www.seagate.com/internal-hard-drives/nas-drives/nas-hdd/?cmpid=ppc-_-NASHDD-_-G-_-us

A633.9.3.RB - Polyarchy Reflections

Most leadership models have the assumption of oligarchy – leadership is done by a few leaders over many followers. If polyarchy is fast replacing the old oligarchy assumptions does this make these old leadership models redundant? Reflecting on traditional leadership from the perspective of complex adaptive leadership, address the implications and how they will affect you as a leader in the future. What impact will they have on your future strategy? The assumption that leadership is done by a few leaders over many followers (oligarchy) is the wrong assumption and a good example of why you should never assume. This is a classic example of the old and outdated Theory X and scientific management models including command and control, dictatorship, authority and numbers metrics task focus. The only organization that resembles this today is the military. For most organizations today, this is the model and path for failure. The implication is that it doesn't work anymore. It doesn't work and isn't people and process focused. This is also an example of "pull" using old outdated and ineffective techniques. Why? Today's highly competitive business environment, global economy, technology, competition and constant change has changed business forever. Most successful organizations today use some form of a team process, e.g., self-directed and high performance. For example, I use the Hersey and Blanchard Situational Leadership Model and Bruce Tuckman Model in my roles and responsibilities as an Industrial Engineer at Boeing. I am an employee involvement team captain for our team of 15 IE's. This is an example of "pull" and upward communication using team based processes and techniques to achieve business results. The implications of doing this delivering extraordinary business results and customer focus. For example, commercial aerospace is booming and is expected to for the next 20 years. Build rates have increased over the last several years and the relationship between leader and follower is now more important than ever. Competition especially from European Airbus is ferocious too. The impact on my future strategy is continuous improvement to grow and develop as a leader along with having a mentor and coach. References Obolensky, Nick (2010). Complex Adaptive Leadership: Embracing Paradox and Uncertainty. Farnham (Surrey), England: Gower Publishing Limited.

A633.8.3.RB - How Do Coaches Help?

I have had the opportunity to have many coaches in my career and also growing up as a teenager. I played little league baseball for several years and learned how to play baseball. I was a member of the track and field team in junior high school and was a star shot putter because of several great coaches. I was in Boy Scouts for many years and several coaches enabled me to earn skill and merit badges. Although I was a scout for five years, my deepest regret is that I did not stick with it and become an eagle scout. I played football for several years in high school and was a two way starter and superstar tackle on the team because of good coaches. I also played tidbit football too. I had several college visits for potential football scholarships to Georgia Tech and Penn State, however, these did not materialize. I was a member of a church for many years and the pastor and sunday school teacher were my coaches including baptism. In college, I was on the powerlifting team for four years and had a good coach who enabled me to win several prestigious awards, trophies and plaques. I was a member of Junior Achievement (JA) for several years and had several excellent coaches from IBM. This prepped me for business along with setting up and running a company. And I had several good college advisors colleges (and professors) who coached me in my academic career and graduating with honors. Several honorable mention coaches I have had the opportunity to meet are Joe Paterno and John Wooden. Wooden's Pyramid of Success and wisdom including: be true to yourself, make each day your masterpiece, drink deeply from good books including the Good Book, make friendship a fine art and help others are so powerful and challenging (and so applicable for life too). And both were both from my alma maters too. In a summary these coaches prepared me for life, taught me skills, and were role models examples including character. Skills included teamwork, communication, physical and mental fitness, problem-solving, lead by example and commitment to excellence. And also be servant leader as in the Boy Scout motto "do a good deed daily" assuming you will receive nothing in return and also the powerful strategy "be prepared". In my professional career, I have had several good coaches too. It took me four years to get my lean six sigma black belt certifications from Lockheed Martin and The University of Texas at Austin. This included projects (project management), mentoring lower level green and black belts, training and tests. My coaches provided me with examples, direction and exposing me and my abilities to leadership for project management positions. Back in McDonnell Douglas days, I was selected for a section manager training program which was a two year program including classroom theory, four rotational assignments and outside projects and education. This was a great program as it exposed my to management and leadership. I was fortunate enough to have a great coach who pushed me with stretch goals, assignments and opportunities. Now in my mid career at Boeing, I have a great coach exposing me to new projects, assignments and opportunities including being a mentor to lower level teams. From an organization, leadership and strategy perspective, coaching enables achieving goals and objectives. References Obolensky, Nick (2010). Complex Adaptive Leadership: Embracing Paradox and Uncertainty. Farnham (Surrey), England: Gower Publishing Limited.

A633.7.3.RB - Leader Follower Relationship

Complete the exercise at the beginning of Chapter 10 and use the scoring table at the end to assess your responses. Reflect on what this assessment means in terms of you as a leader and your relationship to your followers. • Has your thinking changed over the course of the past six weeks, if so; why, and, if not; why? • What is the significance of this in the context of your future leadership goals and objectives? I completed the assessment exercise "A Quick Test To Open Your Mind - Where Are You On The Map" at the beginning of Chapter 10 (Obolensky). It is based off my Industrial Engineering team at Boeing on 737 Program. There are several recurrent themes of emphasis and include: change, new systems, challenging targets, highly skilled team and performance. I will provide a self-reflection on this blended integrated with theory. For example, the 737 Program has seen huge changes over the last three years. We have increased monthly build rate schedule from 35, to 38 and are at 42/month and will hit 47 next year. On top of this, the new 737 MAX will be introduced early 2015 on the assembly line. The MAX has new and improved engines, wings, cockpit and interiors and will dominate the single-aisle market for the next ten years although Airbus is a huge competitor. Wow. Talk about change. Maybe radical change too. This has required a totally new approach to business including systems, skills and teaming. Other programs including the 777X and 787 Dreamliner are experiencing and explosion in growth too. And this is a huge opportunity too as far as business and career growth development. The days of the Lone Ranger and John Wayne "The Duke" are over. The single hero has been replaced the team approach. Why? None of us is as smart as all of us. Synergy, And business results. The "situational leadership" model developed by Hersey and Blanchard is a good teaming and leadership model integrating leadership style, skills, attitude and follower readiness. And a leader Boeing uses a similar process known as "situational leadership" model originally developed by Hersey and Blanchard. Situational leadership is leadership based on the specific situation at hand. Their research also indicates that the followers readiness level needs to be adaptable and flexible too. A leader wants to develop and nurture the passion and commitment of their team so they will be self-directed and high-performance instead of being dependent on others for direction, coaching and input. Situational leadership applied with "Bruce Tuckman's four stages of team development" forming, storming, norming, and performing can produce great results. (Hersey, Blanchard & Johnson, 2013) In summary, the philosophy and application of "Working Together" along with guiding operating principles and performing as "One Boeing" is an enabler for: change, new systems, challenging targets, highly skilled team and performance. This is one of the best industry business and teaming models I have had the opportunity to work with and apply. And the best thing is that it has worked in the past and will in the future based on the teaming culture. (Boeing, 2014) References Boeing (2014). [On-Line] Available http://www.boeing.com/boeing/ Hersey, Paul H., Blanchard, Kenneth H. and Johnson, Dewey E. (2013). Management of Organizational Behavior: Leading Human Resources (10th ed.). New York: Pearson Education, Inc. Obolensky, Nick (2010). Complex Adaptive Leadership: Embracing Paradox and Uncertainty. Farnham (Surrey), England: Gower Publishing Limited.

A633.6.5.RB - Circle of Leadership

Considering all of readings in this module and the learning exercises regarding upward and downward leadership; reflect on the diagram (figure 9.5; p.152) "the vicious circle for leaders". Does this happen in your organization? What are the effects on the organization? Create a new circle that would promote strong followership and even leadership at the lower levels of the organization. A leader's actions including listening with feedback will determine at some level the follower maturity level. There are additional strategies to move followers from Level 1 to Level 5: be proactive and not reactive, promoting initiative, perseverance and action on the followers part, closed-loop communication between the leader and follower with active dialogue and participation and problem-solving which could identify additional areas such as training and cross-training for the follower. The important concept for the leader is to start the follower where the observed behavior is and use this for all followers. Mature incrementally step by step through Level 5. This enhances knowledge, skills and abilities and builds self-confidence so the follower believes in himself/herself. And this takes time and patience on both leader and follower. Some followers learn and apply knowledge faster than others. Everyone is different. The opposite side of all this is the follower's actions and behavior will identify the type of leadership approach that should be used. For example, if a follower continually coordinates with the leader the he/she lacks self-confidence and will probably need additional training and hands-on approach. The follower's actions and behavior drives this and results in a vicious cycle of leadership. (Obolensky, 2010) This happens some at Boeing, however, there are standard processes in place to avoid this including: skills matrix, skills training and competencies and proficiency levels, cross-training, and team leaders to provide direction. There is lots of training including hand-on available too. In addition, supervisors and managers receive training from DDI (Development Dimensions International) on leadership models and situational leadership similar Level 5. What are some of the results of the vicious cycle of leadership? The big hitters include: productivity, quality and teaming. I would use a new circle that would promote strong followership and even leadership at the lower levels of the organization. This model was originally developed by Benjamin Franklin and is very basic and simple and best of all it works! It promotes engagement, empowerment and ownership for the follower and leadership on the leader's part as far as providing resources and coaching. and it requires both to be proactive. It' s called employee involvement and organizational learning which enable business results. (Franklin, 2014) References Franklin, Benjamin (2014). [On-Line] Available http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/21262-tell-me-and-i-forget-teach-me-and-i-may Obolensky, Nick (2010). Complex Adaptive Leadership: Embracing Paradox and Uncertainty. Farnham (Surrey), England: Gower Publishing Limited.

A633.5.3.RB - Reflections on Chaos _RutbellGreg

• Play the chaos game with a group of people (see Complex Adaptive Leadership (Obolensky, 2010) Chapter 6, or watch the above video. • Create a reflection blog on what this exercise meant to you and how it impacts your understanding of chaos theory, include the implications that this has on strategy. Complexity is a big leadership issue among organizations. It impacts a challenge (and opportunity) for most decision makers who execute the organizational mission and vision in highly complex conditions. As the global economy changes and extends its scope, more groups of people are carrying out different kinds of tasks, activities and responsibilities in organizations. With the degree of complexity in the workplace, many decision makers are finding it difficult to reach a successful degree of leadership in such a way to achieve organizational goals and objectives. Nick Obolensky, researcher and author of Complex Adaptive Leadership believes that leadership should not be something only practiced by nominated leaders but instead have leaders at all levels. (Obolensky, 2010) Although most decision makers know that leadership has changed, they still use old assumptions (paradigms) that are outdated in rapidly changing times. According to Obolensky and his research, there are several reasons that hinder leaders from managing complexity: 1. fear and fear based on the assumption that that "you have to be doing something" because it leaves the perception that if you are not doing something, then what are you doing? This actually gives the opposite result because decision makers tend to manage (and sometimes try to control) everything and everyone. It is based on a wrong assumption but it's still there. 2. Most business schools and philosophies follow the "cause and effect principle" and provides decision makers with the inability to understand and handle deal with complexity. Business students learn if you do this, you get that. This goes back to our mindset and mental models ways of thinking (paradigms) which is based on the foundation of deterministic science and models. Sometimes this is the way to go but we need a different approach including "letting go" of old outdated ways of thinking. 3. Lack of education and application in the new complexity science that is applicable in the world and global economy. If managers and decision makers have this tool they will be able to let go a lot more and apply new knowledge in complexity science. (Obolensky, 2010) What is needed in place of traditional leadership? The question is "What are the enablers to complete a highly complex task?" The tools and processes are: 1. clear individual objective 2. a few simple rules 3. continuous feedback 4. discretion and freedom of action 5. skill/will of participants 6. underlying purpose 7. clear boundary 8. a tolerance of the players for certainty and ambiguity (Obolensky, 2010) The conclusion and learning point is: the more complex things are, the less traditional leadership one needs. Too much control can be interference especially in an organization that can lead itself. Obolensky states that leaders should not underestimate the power of their colleagues including creativity and innovation when taking a different role to leadership. The next generation of leaders must be able to listen and promote two-way communication, ask questions and have the courage to say they don't know. This type of thinking should be the foundation in business education and requires a paradigm shift from traditional ways. (Obolensky, 2010) In the video, they all laughed when they were asked "What would have happened if we had put one of you in charge?" They laughed because they knew they would never have achieved the task if someone had tried to lead or manage the process. Unfortunately, many leaders try to just do that - over control and micromanage their organizations and get frustrated, because complexity does not work like that! It was a highly complex exercise which was done quickly without a leader. If there was a leader, it probably would not succeed. The 8 principles and effective facilitation enabled the team to succeed. The principles can be applied to organizations. I saw coordinated behaviors without control. Too much directed thinking with decision makers and organizations as machines and robots causes us all to be blind to our own abilities with creativity and innovation. The people demonstrated teamwork, working together and synergy. Managers egos are also part of the problem too which blocks creativity. Sometimes we need to forget the rules, processes and standard operating procedures. Free your mind from restrictions and paradigms and allow free thought with others. The results are ideas and synergy. A facilitator is needed to set the direction, instructions, goals and create harmony. (Obolensky, 2008) Additional research and application including Daniel H. Pink documented in his New York Times bestseller "Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us" provides a paradigm-busting look at what truly motivates us and how we can use that knowledge to work smarter and live better. The secret to high performance and satisfaction - at work, at school, at home - is the deeply human need to direct our own lives, to learn and create new things, and do better by ourselves, our organization in which we work and our world. Drawing on four decades of research, Pink identifies the mismatch between what science knows and what business does - and how that affects every aspect of life. He identifies three elements of true motivation for 21st century business and leadership success: autonomy, mastery and purpose. (Pink, 2009) The conclusion and learning point is: the more complex things are, the less traditional leadership one needs. Too much control can be interference especially in an organization that can lead itself. Facilitation is needed to set direction, instructions and create harmony. People and teams are a wealth of knowledge of creativity with ideas and need autonomy, mastery and purpose. References Obolensky, Nick (2010). Complex Adaptive Leadership: Embracing Paradox and Uncertainty. Farnham (Surrey), England: Gower Publishing Limited. Obolensky, Nick (2008). Who needs leaders? Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41QKeKQ2O3E Pink, Daniel H. (2009). Drive: The Surprising Truth About what Motivates Us. New York, New York: Penguin Group.

A633.4.3.RB - Changing Dynamics of Leadership_RutbellGreg

Reflecting on the opening exercise at the beginning of Chapter 4 of the of Obolensky text and other readings, why do you think the shift in leadership is occurring and do you think this is indicative of what is happening in your organization. List three reasons that support or refute this position. If so, how would leadership dynamics have to be altered to accommodate and promote these types of changes? What are the implications on strategy? Of 100 percent of the solutions that actually make specific changes happen on the ground to get positive results, what percentage of solutions do you think originally come from/are first thought of at the top? (Obolensky, 2010) I think approximately 50% of solutions at Boeing originally come from/are first thought of at the top? My analysis, research and summary is included in my reflection blog. Boeing executive leadership develops top-down: mission, vision, strategies, core competencies and values (culture). These are known as the "what's" and management leadership core. At the bottom-up, the workforce develops: ideas, work flow, processes and production processes. These are known as the "how's" and technical core. Organizations that successfully adapt management leadership changes are large in size, centralized, structured and use complex adaptive systems in response to changes in government, the economy, financial, legal and world events in the environment. (Daft, 2013) For example, Jim McNerney, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of Boeing, has built the strategic position as the world's largest and most profitable aerospace company on a 20 year vision that was introduced in 1996 after the mergers and acquisitions of: McDonnell Douglas, Rockwell International and Hughes Aircraft Company. He has successfully led the integration of these several different cultures and strategies becoming a more broad-based aerospace company with mutual strengths and market-leading positions in commercial airplanes, defense, space and homeland national security by the time Boeing reaches the centennial in 2016. He regarded Vision 2016 as an element of strength for the company that would continue to evolve as the competition, markets and other business factors changed. In fact, Vision 2016 has been updated multiple times since its inception to ensure it stayed aligned with what the company needed to do to win in our markets and better serve our customers. We also further described certain vision elements, such as defining "leadership" as being "the strongest, best—and best-integrated—aerospace-based company in the world." (Boeing, 2014) What are some of the tools and processes McNerney has used to succeed? In line with the concept of fostering corporate entrepreneurship, innovative companies recognize that many ideas come from the people who are doing the work, serving the customers, fighting off the competition, and figuring how best to get their jobs done. Thus, companies that want to support innovation implement a variety of mechanisms, systems, and processes that encourage a bottom-up flow of ideas and make sure they get heard and acted upon by top executives. He appoints executive sponsors for ideas to track progress and implementation. It's a way to force management to focus on promising ideas at an early stage and give resources needed to turn them into successful products and services. He holds Town Hall and Roundtable sessions with employees. He walks the assembly lines and talks to mechanics, managers and support teams. He is process focused including Lean+ for improvement events, lean manufacturing, six sigma, and problem-solving. (Daft, 2013) (Grant, 2013) For example, General Electric's "Work-Out" program is a continuous process of identifying and solving problems, learning, ideas, improvements and starts with large-scale off-site meetings to get people talking across functional, hierarchical, and organizational boundaries. Hourly and professional employees come together from many different parts of the organization and partner with customers and suppliers to discuss and solve different problems. The process which includes both a top down and bottoms up approach forces a rapid analysis of ideas, the creation of solutions, and the development of an implementation plan. Work-Out creates a culture where ideas are rapidly transformed into action and positive business results. "Boundarylessness" was developed at General Electric in the late 1980s and early 1990s. It is one of the cultural elements General Electric credits for its phenomenal business success over the last fifteen years. Proponents of boundarylessness believe traditional boundaries between layers of management (vertical boundaries) and divisions between functional areas (horizontal boundaries) have limited the flow of information and ideas among employees. It is also part of complex adaptive system. A boundaryless culture seeks to overcome the limitations imposed by these and other internal corporate divisions. (Daft, 2013) Pratt & Whitney (United Technologies) has a similar process known as "ACE" Achieving Competitive Excellence. The goal is to engage and empower all employees in continuous improvement in productivity and quality of manufactured parts and improving operations at each organization level. The process is based on the foundations of lean manufacturing, kaizen and TQM. ACE is a universal system and can be applied in all types of businesses regardless of the sort and form of ownership. An important element of the program is regular training of all employees. The overall goal is to increase competitiveness. (Pratt & Whitney, 2014) The ability of some companies to adapt is demonstrated by the fact that many have been leaders in their industries for years. Examples aerospace industry and from relatively large diversified companies show that successful firms adapt well to significant change. For example, Boeing and European Airbus have dominated the commercial aerospace industry. General Electric and Pratt & Whitney have dominated designing and building aircraft engines. (Grant, 2013) The Boeing, GE and P&W examples clearly demonstrate a shift in leadership to Level 5. According to Jim Collins, consultant, author, researcher, speaker and professor in his landmark research and analysis documented in "Good to Great" there is a "Level 5" five-level hierarchy of executive capabilities: Level 1 - Highly Capable Individual. Makes productive contributions through talent, knowledge, skills, and good work rules. Level 2 - Contributing Team Member. Contributes individual capabilities to the achievement of group objectives and works effectively with others in a group setting. Level 3 - Competent Manager. Organizes people and resources toward the effective and efficient pursuit of predetermined objectives. Level 4 - Effective Leader. Catalyzes commitment to and vigorous pursuit of a clear and compelling vision, stimulating higher performance standards. Level 5 - Executive. Builds enduring greatness through a paradoxical blend of personal humility and professional will. The visual diagram for this is a pyramid (triangle) with Level 5 at the top and in descending order (Level 5 to 1). Good to Great leaders (Level 5 traits) is the highest level identified in the research. You don't need to move in sequence from Level 1 to 5, however, Level 5 leaders possess all five layers of the pyramid. (Collins, 2001) References Boeing (2014). [On-Line] Available http://www.boeing.com/boeing/ Collins, Jim (2001). Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap...and Others Don't. New York City: HarperCollins Publishers. Daft, Richard L. (2013). Organizational Theory & Design (11th ed.). United States: South-Western, Cengage Learning. Grant, Robert M. (2013). Contemporary Strategy Analysis (8th ed.). The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Obolensky, Nick (2010). Complex Adaptive Leadership: Embracing Paradox and Uncertainty. Farnham (Surrey), England: Gower Publishing Limited. Pratt & Whitney (2014). [On-Line] Available http://www.pw.utc.com/Home

A633.3.3.RB - Complex Adaptive Systems _RutbellGreg

Today, the business world is part of a complex adaptive system. Organizations are complex adaptive systems with interacting parts. In a complex adaptive system, all parts interact with each other according to a set of rules. There is no way to know how organizations will evolve over time. We cannot precisely or accurately state what the future will be or control changes. The world is changing quickly and all organizations must be adaptive to survive. The business world is really part of a complex adaptive system in which you cannot predict the future or control developments in a highly precise way. The key to survival and leadership is being able to adapt responsively as changes happen. In the past, successful business leaders played by the rules, followed best practices, developed models and engaged in reengineering based on the business situation and issue. The goal was to continuously and incrementally improve on those things their businesses were already doing. However, this has all changed. The world is changing so fast with advancements in technology in a volatile world that this approach no longer works. Successful leaders must have clear vision, objectives, operating guiding principles and a willingness to challenge the way things have been done in the past, i.e., status quo. Examples from the technology industry and from relatively large diversified companies show that successful firms adapt well to significant change. Yet, many business leaders recognize that they have to create more adaptive organizations to respond to change. This awareness is just the first step because many managers, executives and business professionals feel their organizations are not very good at dealing with today’s rapid changes. For any company to succeed, it must learn to adapt. (Fulmer, 2000) The ability of some companies to adapt is demonstrated by the fact that many have been leaders in their industries for years. Examples from the oil, aerospace and industrial equipment industries and from relatively large diversified companies show that successful firms adapt well to significant change. For example, ExxonMobil, Chevron and Royal Dutch Shell have led the world's petroleum industry for over a century. Boeing and European Airbus have dominated the commercial aerospace industry. Caterpillar and John Deere have dominated the construction, farming and earth moving equipment industry. (Grant, 2013) Given today’s chaos, confusion and uncertainty, many executives and organizations are afraid to act and are not sure what to do. They tend to fear the risks of changes and a new situation, instead of being focused on its potential outcome business results and rewards. Executives often want to undergo extensive planning with detailed analysis including models and simulations to determine situational responses, but long-term planning is increasingly difficult in a rapidly changing environment and world. While some planning is still necessary, we need to be able to respond to change and adapt. In this new business environment, the first step is to see the world as it really is and recognize what is happening in order to adapt. Develop the foundations of an adaptive organization based on three concepts similar to the sides of a triangle: landscapes, learning and leadership. In other words, provide leadership in a learning organization to adapt the organization to its landscape more effectively. Today, the business environment is like a rugged mountain landscape, which evokes many new forms that must then compete to move up the peaks usually through rough and rugged terrains. This competition can result in many new types of organizations offering different types of products and services. (Fulmer, 2000) To create an adaptive culture in any organization, facilitate individual learning by encouraging people to keep learning and to experiment, and by hiring smart people. Ask, challenge and encourage employees to share what they have learned and to apply their new knowledge in projects, assignments and mentoring others. The present mountainous rugged landscape requires strategic planning, however, the planning process must change because the traditional planning takes too much time and depends too much on future models in a volatile environment that works against predictability and probability. Think of strategic planning as a process of developing a “consistent pattern of decisions and actions” to increase the chances of achieving goals. Use strategic planning to help people understand the current situation and to identify ways to prepare for the future. Planning can facilitate adaptive behavior if you emphasize critical thinking. Assess what your organization needs to do to fit its environment more effectively now and in the future. Engage in active observation and try to understand both competitive behavior and key customer values. Push for faster and rapid improvements based on reducing costs, improving quality, and enhancing creativity and innovation (ideas). Given adaptive systems’ uncertainty, allow space for creativity and learning in organizations. Keep goals simple – incorporate key company values and make sure everyone understands the objectives. Structure the organization for adaptation. Be able to “operate at the leading edge” as the organizing principle. Decentralize, increase the span of control at every level, use temporary structures as much as possible, develop powerful information systems and remember that the structure will continually evolve and change. (Fulmer, 2000) For example, is education a complex adaptive system? Most people think Boeing is associated more with airplanes more than education, but in reality it turns out that Boeing’s educational portfolio and resources is massive. Millions of hours each year of course delivery instruction to approximately 170,000 employees across 45 countries! This makes Boeing a university too! Boeing leadership asks "Why is it, after so much is being invested in STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) education, research and practice, that we still have problems finding qualified people to work in STEM disciples? "The educational system that produces the critical talent for the United States’ future security and prosperity is complex …It is composed of systems nested within subsystems, each operating on multiple temporal scales where observable causality is often hidden… Changes to this system emerge through evolutionary processes and are encumbered by complex physical, behavioral, and social phenomena as well as competing interests. Faced with overwhelming complexity in the learning ecosystem (including shifting economic, political, and business environments), we tend to focus primarily on issues that are relevant to the cultural boundaries within which we operate…" " behaviors are analyzed through the lens of complex adaptive systems to better conceptualize the current educational ecosystem. Therefore, we plan on identifying methods to model the larger system. A deep understanding of this structure (exponential complexity encountered as knowledge is distributed through the organization) is required in order to transcend subcultural boundaries and meld a unified framework. From this might emerge a fresh composite that values different cultural and situational perspectives". Today, there is not a labor shortage but a skills shortage. Skills are needed to fuel creativity, innovation and ideas. If we look at some of the key concepts of a complex adaptive system including emergence, self-similarity and self-organization it doesn't sound like the usual stuff for university or does it? Is education something to be implemented or is it something that just happens? Or is it a complex adaptive system that is needed to support environments where learning by doing takes place and where engagement happens inside and outside the classroom? (Talbert, 2011) References Fulmer, William E. (2000). Shaping the Adaptive Organization: Landscapes, Learning and Leadership in Volatile Times. New York City: AMACOM (American Management Association). Grant, Robert M. (2013). Contemporary Strategy Analysis (8th ed.). The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Obolensky, Nick (2010). Complex Adaptive Leadership: Embracing Paradox and Uncertainty. Farnham (Surrey), England: Gower Publishing Limited. Talbert, Robert (2011). Education as a complex adaptive system? Retrieved http://chronicle.com/blognetwork/castingoutnines/2011/09/27/education-as-a-complex- adaptive-system/

A633.2.3.RB - Butterfly Effect_RutbellGreg

Based on this week's reading, reflect on complexity science and theory in organizations and the butterfly effect (p.66). Identify 2 examples where “small changes yield large results” in your organization. What are the implication of complexity theory for you and your organization and how can you use this to drive improvements. According to Nick Obolensky, the butterfly effect is very important inside complex organizations (many of which thrive on chaos theory) because small incremental changes can yield large results. The butterfly effect may seem to be an unplanned behavior and action, it can be demonstrated by simple systems. For example, a ball placed at the top of a hill could roll into any surrounding lower valley depending on minor differences in its original position. Other variables such as weather conditions including wind, rocks, holes, etc. play into effect too. This is a science physics example that demonstrates that a very small difference in the original state of a physical system can make a big difference to the state at a later time. (Obolensky, 2010) In my present Industrial Engineer position at Boeing Commercial Airplanes 737 Program, I am responsible for process and methods improvements for lean manufacturing including cost reduction, reducing cycle time, improvements, etc. I meet with manufacturing Employee Involvement Teams (EIT) which are self-directed and high-performance teams made up of first line supervisors, team leaders, mechanics, facilitators and leadership who build the airplane. We generate and review ideas of doing things differently to improve the build assembly process and drive change. We usually hear the phrase "that's a great idea" during our coordination team meetings when discussing reviewing new ideas and ways of building the airplane. Unfortunately, we sometimes hear the phrases "we have always done it this way", "that's a stupid idea and won't work" and "we looked at doing it this way before and it didn't work". What are these phrases? They are fallacies and paradigms (a way of looking at an idea and the thought thinking analysis process behind it). There are many great mechanics who are legends at building airplanes but unfortunately for some their wealth and breadth of knowledge, skills and experience can work against them. And unfortunately, I need to say that sometimes I fall into this category too. Why? Sometimes experience can work against you. (Barker, 1993) There are always several doubters and naysayers on the team. What do I do to try and motivate them because they are not fully in agreement or alignment with my or the teams thoughts and ideas on continuous improvement? How do I try and convince (persuade and motivate) them to take action? I use storytelling with a real world Boeing example. For example, I select another Boeing program such as the 777 where they have implemented the idea and use it as a benchmark. And if possible, we go directly to the floor assembly where the work is being done to discuss and review. Or I pick one of Boeing's competitors such European Airbus and one of their programs or another industry such as BMW, Toyota or Honda and use it as an example. I also emphasize that they the mechanics are the subject matter experts (SME's), process owners and are counting on them for their knowledge, expertise and feedback. I am there for technical support and to provide them with the tools to do their jobs. I like to challenge them with "What if..." "Just imagine..." "Just think..." if we could implement the idea on the final assembly line here? What would be the business results? Things would be better productivity, quality, ergonomics and safety. This approach is successful because it engages, empowers and challenges the workforce. The best and most exciting thing about this process is that once a mechanic sees his idea being reviewed and implemented he/she takes ownership and pride in it which in turn enhances attitude and morale. Ownership includes responsibility, accountability and authority. How can this process be improved? Sometimes I need more persistence, patience and focus in trying out a new idea and also in implementation as it is not always successful the first time. Sometimes it takes two or three rounds to implement an idea. Continuous improvement (new ideas) states that there is always a better way of doing something. If you can't do it better, there is someone, somewhere in the world who can and sometimes for lower cost too. Cases in point. Here is an example. What did Toyota and other car manufacturers do to GM, Ford and Chrysler in the 1970's? Another example. Airbus (European consortium) was small and not well known in the 1970's, however, caught up with Boeing and now both companies have an equal share of the global commercial market including the best rivalry competitors in history. You have to be willing change including trying new ideas. The hard part is removing the old paradigms and replacing them with new ones! How do you do this? Be open to change and new ideas. It's all in your attitude and approach to business and ideas. The commercial aerospace industry is very complex and the risks are great. A huge investment is required for land, labor, raw materials, tooling, design and risk sharing business partners. Some raw materials, for example, titanium, is available only in Russia. Designing a new airplane can cost billions of dollars and the break-even point could be years away. The world and global economy are unstable. A major event such as Sept 11 can trigger an industry downfall. Foreign governments can protect their interests such as European Airbus (consortium of England, France, Germany and Spain). Success and failure can come overnight. In my current thinking, what is most important to me? What is most important to my manager and company as an IE and EIT facilitator? I have two important goals and objectives in my position, roles and responsibilities: 1. provide value to my company 2. servant leadership and help others. I was hired and am paid for my knowledge, skills, abilities, creativity and innovation to enhance the 737 Program Final Assembly to develop, implement and improve systems, processes, methods and improvements. The business result of this is to build the world's most advanced manufacturing, assembly and production system. The 737 Program is regarded in the aerospace industry as the world's most advanced and incredible assembly line. In addition, I am responsible to create a culture of teaming and being a role model example to my peers and the workforce. I am also a servant leader and help others at work regardless of title and position. My philosophy of life (and business) is that we are here to serve others. Servant leadership is both a leadership philosophy and set of leadership practices. According to Robert Greenleaf in "The Servant Leader" "The servant-leader is servant first. It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead" (Greenleaf, 2002). Robert Greenleaf recognized that organizations as well as individuals could be servant-leaders. Indeed, he had great faith that servant-leader organizations could change the world. This is my thesis: I help everyone at work who asks for my help and assistance regardless of title and position. (Greenleaf, 2002) There are two big results of my efforts (small changes yield large results). The first is designing, building and implementing a production system that supports production, quality, cost and schedule. The second is culture. Collaboration working together to achieve goals. Examples of culture include: vision, guiding operating principles, values, teamwork, relationships and communication. Together, we are creating the future of flight and commercial aviation. References Barker, Joel A. (1993). Paradigms: Business of Discovering the Future. New York City: HarperCollins. Denning, Stephen (2011). The Leader's Guide to Storytelling - Mastering The Art and Discipline of Business Narrative. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass (John Wiley & Sons, Inc.). Greenleaf, Robert K. (2002). Servant Leadership - A Journey into the Nature of Legitimate Power & Greatness. Mahwah, New Jersey: Paulist Press. Obolensky, Nick (2010). Complex Adaptive Leadership: Embracing Paradox and Uncertainty. Farnham (Surrey), England: Gower Publishing Limited.

A633.1.2.RB - Leadership Gap

Chapter 1 of the Obolensky text begins with a reflective exercise. Create a reflection blog that responds to the questions asked in this exercise. Has your own attitude to leaders changed in your life, and if so how? If we take as a starting point the attitude to those in authority/leaders as held by your grandparents, and then look at those attitudes held by your parents, and then by you, and then by the younger generation, is there a changing trend? If so, what is it? Why do you think that this has occurred? Additionally, while we live in a world with more information about leadership and leadership practices why is it that we have an apparent gap in the quality of our leaders and how do you think we can close this gap? The old way of leading by command, control, direction and charisma from superior knowledge and personality is not really applicable anymore because increasingly better educated followers know faster than leaders what is happening and often what needs to be done. The harder leaders try to keep up, the less credibility they get. And in today's business environment, if an organization has employees lacking the knowledge, skills and abilities, it will not last long, "even if Moses himself were in charge." For example, I worked for McDonnell Douglas (former aerospace giant) for 10 years and unfortunately, the downfall and failure was it was lead by command, control and did not have a supportive culture (along with a weak and reactive strategy). The culture was weak and there were many "silos" of so called leaders trying to create their own empires "competing" against other silos and not "working together." In addition, there were labor and union issues. MDC needed to get out of the Dark Ages as to how employees were managed. They were stuck in the "command-and-control era" which was typical of US factory management when supervisors gave orders on high and workers "checked their minds at the gate." After the Boeing merger in 1997, in an effort to shake up the hierachical company culture, Boeing leadership benchmarked successful organizations including Toyota, Nissan, Honda and John Deere. This encouraged employees to take ownership of their jobs and also the company adopted a team-based management model. The secret to success: it all comes down to culture, people and teams. (Obolensky, 2010) Traditional approaches to strategy, for example, standard sequence process flow models, frameworks and diagrams include several assumptions including a stable world and little if no change (all things held constant). The goal is to develop and build a sustained competitive advantage by achieving dominance in either production or services, a market niche, or specific capabilities and resources in processes and methods. However, globalization, world events, technology and the speed of change have combined and integrated a "synergy" and created turbulence in the business environment. Today, sustained competitive advantage comes from four organizational capabilities that promote rapid adaptation and include the ability (with speed) to: 1. read and act on signals of change, 2. experiment rapidly and frequently with products, services, business models and strategies, 3. manage complex and interconnected systems of multiple stakeholders, 4. motivate employees and partners. This sparks creativity, innovation, ideas and enhanced products and services with processes. (Reeves and Deimler, 2011) So many of the world’s problems, and the issues that businesses and people face every day, can seem intractable and unsolvable. Leadership consultants Ronald Heifetz, Alexander Grashow and Marty Linsky propose a new way to lead the charge to change: “Adaptive leadership” calls for shedding outdated approaches and embracing new skills and attitudes to guide organizations in the 21st century. Adaptive leadership combines established ways of managing with new skills and perspectives for dealing with unprecedented challenges. Adaptive leaders: 1. think experimentally to enable discovery and corrective action, 2. harness conflict as an engine of creativity and innovation, 3. respect the organization’s cultural DNA as they challenge the culture to innovate. (Heifetz, Grashow and Linsky, 2009) For example, I am a big sports enthusiast and my sports heroes and teams (organizations) in my life are: 1. the Dallas Cowboys including the former legendary coach Tom Landry and quarterbacks Roger Staubach "Captain America" and Troy Aikman, 2. John Wooden "The Wizard of Westwood" the former legendary college basketball coach at Indiana State University and UCLA and 3. Larry Bird "Mr Basketball" from Indiana State University and the Boston Celtics. What makes these leaders different from sports figures today? The led by example, role models, action, character, integrity, smart, intelligent, and fun passion of the game. Unfortunately, today, so much of sports is wrapped up in money, publicity, ego and performance enhancing drugs. I had the opportunity to hear John Wooden speak several times in Southern California. Wooden created the "Pyramid of Success." In 2009, Wooden was named The Sporting News "Greatest Coach of All Time." (Fellowship of Christian Athletes, 2010) Why is it that we have an apparent gap in the quality of our leaders and how do I think we can close the gap? Unfortunately, there has been an explosion in ethics scandals cases including leadership. For example, Enron, WorldCom etc. Unfortunately, Boeing has also had several ethics cases. Ethics should be embedded in culture and leadership should "talk the talk" and "walk the talk." Ethics courses are also included in many MBA and university college curriculum today. Organizations also have ethics training and some have "ethics codes" in which employees are required to sign. Joel Barker, futurist, author and lecturer, states that the role of leadership is to find, recognize, and secure the future. He states that paradigms (ways of thinking) and mental models, patterns and examples effect the quality of leadership. This includes strategic leadership, innovation and vision. For example, Watching for the Future The Future is where our greatest leverage is outlines how the Swiss, watch makers supreme, did not anticipate the demise of mainsprings and such for the battery and electronics as espoused by the Japanese. This is Paradigm Shift. The irony is that the Swiss were the ones who introduced electronic quartz and let it go. Hopefully we learn from the past, the present is too slim in which to act, it is with the future we must prepare. We all know the rules for success in our business or professions, yet we also know that these rules—paradigms—can change at any time. Managers must allow and be willing to hear from their employees who step outside the box to solve a problem. Managers must facilitate and encourage cross talk means people of diverse backgrounds from diverse opinions sit together and talk. Especially people from different paradigm can be particularly good at helping get past another person's paradigm. By listening to all those screwy ideas, managers gain a special leverage for innovation because many screwy ideas may produce one good idea. Everything in 21st century will be hyphenated. Always be receptive, no one says you have to adopt the idea. Put idea 66 together with 48 and 3 and bingo a hyphenated idea. Managers are in a unique position because they hear all the ideas and can make connections. (Barker, 1993) References Barker, Joel A. (1993). Paradigms: Business of Discovering the Future. New York City: HarperCollins. Fellowship of Christian Athletes (2010). The Greatest Coach Ever: Timeless Wisdom and Insights from John Wooden. Escondido, CA: Christianaudio. Heifetz, Ronald, Grashow, Alexander and Linsky, Marty (2009). The Practice of Adaptive Leadership: Tools and Tactics for Changing Your Organization and the World. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. Obolensky, Nick (2010). Complex Adaptive Leadership: Embracing Paradox and Uncertainty. Farnham (Surrey), England: Gower Publishing Limited. Reeves, Martin and Deimler, Mike (2011). Adaptability: The New Competitive Advantage. Harvard Business Review, Retrieved from: http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.db.erau.edu/ehost/detail/detail?vid=9&sid=84bcad46-a179-4bc4-9295-cf6f3a0b6d9d@sessionmgr4001&hid=4204&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbG12zQ