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