http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericsavitz/2011/12/01/clearwire-ceo-prusch-we-got-our-big-three-in-sprint-deal/
This article talks about how Clearwire got a new multi-part agreement with Sprint saving the company from not being able to make a debt payment. the CEO, Prusch said "this is a significant event, a foundational event, a springboard for a lot of different things to occur." The deal achieved three key objects for Clearwire. 1) it extends the company's deal to provide WiMax service to Sprint. 2) they got a commitment to support its planned rollout of LTE service over the current WiMax footprint, and 3) they got a commitment for additional equity funding. Prush says that this is a sign that "their relationship with Sprint is constructive." This article is a great example of two companies bringing their teams together to make one big team. Prusch goes on to say that this deal will have all great outcomes and that if Clearwire reaches a certain quota, that Sprint is willing to participate in more areas for them. The article doesn't talk a lot about teamwork, but if you read the whole article and think in depth, then you can realize that Clearwire is working hard as a team to get such a good deal, not just one individual can achieve this. It most likely took a lot of planning and cooperation to get the propisition they needed to ask for the deal. You can also see that both companies believe in good teamwork considering that they are joining together to work as even a bigger team.
Since its a brand new article, we don't know the final outcomes of the deal. But we can only hope that it works out as well as Prusch is hoping and believes it to.
-Kylie Merth
Thursday, December 1, 2011
My M&M's
http://www.businessweek.com/innovate/content/dec2009/id20091217_120646.htm
In the fast passed world we currently live in, it is impossible to keep up without being innovative. Mars discovered that one of the best tools in innovation is team work. Dan Michael, the R&D director for Mars and his team knew that they could only create customizeable M&M's if they worked together on this process. They had a great idea that they worked on for the next three years, testing out different printers and products. When they went to the board who thought their product was great but unfortunately the team lacked any market strategy. The Mars company felt that they needed more information in order to know if the product would sell or not. Fortunately, Mars had recently started a program called Pioneer Week where teams of employees were given a budget and 90 days to create a product. Through this program, and their teamwork, the group was able to create the customizeable M&M's which were launched without any out side market research. The Mars company encourages their employees to participate in internal market research for any projects that were in Pioneer Week.
When Mars came up with the program of Pioneer Week they essentially allowed their employees to form self-managed teams. This allows the employees to have a break from their superiors telling them how to run a project and instead run it themselves. Because there are very few guidelines to this project besides the time and budget restrictions, the team members are essentially allowed to do whatever they want to do. This gives the team members a better sense of pride in their work and they know that if they don't work just as a hard as their teammate the project will fall apart. I feel that with the tight time constriction, it is important that the teams put in their best effort on their product design. They can't just go into it thinking that this is just like any other project for their job. In this case there are no extensions and the employees essentially have to work harder than they do in their traditional teams. They have to put in more effort to be able to handle both their company projects and their new inventions to make sure the company is still happy along with their product being created properly.
By simply looking at the product that Michael and his team produced in three short months, it is evident that they had a collective efficacy within the group. Although, I'm sure they might have doubted the project from time to time, overall the team knew that they could get this product out. They knew that it was possible and they would be able to prove their employers wrong about the product being able to sell. As we know with the My M&M's product, they succeeded, but I believe it wouldn't be possible if everyone didn't believe in the product and that it could be produced.
Overall, if Michael and his team didn't have the skills to work in their informal work group along with their formal work group at the same time while putting in more than enough effort, the My M&M's company would probably not exist today. Luckily through their use of communication, focus on the task ahead and use of self managed teams, they were able to produce a revenue generating product.
~ Rebecca Doukas
In the fast passed world we currently live in, it is impossible to keep up without being innovative. Mars discovered that one of the best tools in innovation is team work. Dan Michael, the R&D director for Mars and his team knew that they could only create customizeable M&M's if they worked together on this process. They had a great idea that they worked on for the next three years, testing out different printers and products. When they went to the board who thought their product was great but unfortunately the team lacked any market strategy. The Mars company felt that they needed more information in order to know if the product would sell or not. Fortunately, Mars had recently started a program called Pioneer Week where teams of employees were given a budget and 90 days to create a product. Through this program, and their teamwork, the group was able to create the customizeable M&M's which were launched without any out side market research. The Mars company encourages their employees to participate in internal market research for any projects that were in Pioneer Week.
When Mars came up with the program of Pioneer Week they essentially allowed their employees to form self-managed teams. This allows the employees to have a break from their superiors telling them how to run a project and instead run it themselves. Because there are very few guidelines to this project besides the time and budget restrictions, the team members are essentially allowed to do whatever they want to do. This gives the team members a better sense of pride in their work and they know that if they don't work just as a hard as their teammate the project will fall apart. I feel that with the tight time constriction, it is important that the teams put in their best effort on their product design. They can't just go into it thinking that this is just like any other project for their job. In this case there are no extensions and the employees essentially have to work harder than they do in their traditional teams. They have to put in more effort to be able to handle both their company projects and their new inventions to make sure the company is still happy along with their product being created properly.
By simply looking at the product that Michael and his team produced in three short months, it is evident that they had a collective efficacy within the group. Although, I'm sure they might have doubted the project from time to time, overall the team knew that they could get this product out. They knew that it was possible and they would be able to prove their employers wrong about the product being able to sell. As we know with the My M&M's product, they succeeded, but I believe it wouldn't be possible if everyone didn't believe in the product and that it could be produced.
Overall, if Michael and his team didn't have the skills to work in their informal work group along with their formal work group at the same time while putting in more than enough effort, the My M&M's company would probably not exist today. Luckily through their use of communication, focus on the task ahead and use of self managed teams, they were able to produce a revenue generating product.
~ Rebecca Doukas
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Opening Day for Shoppers Shows Divide
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/24/business/black-friday-sales-show-divide-between-shoppers.html?_r=1
Black Friday, the day after Thanksgiving, will always be one of the biggest shopping days of the year for stores. It is a day where consumers on a budget feel as though they get good savings and the wealthy don’t care what they pay. Chain stores, like Best Buy and Kohl’s slash prices to attract customers in to purchase their merchandise. High end stores like Neiman Marcus feel that they don’t have to do anything to attract customers. Their consumers will buy anything, regardless of the price.
Teamwork will have to take place between the consumer and the economy. The economy feeds off consumer purchases. So if stores have sales to attract the consumer, they will also purchase things that are not on sale, helping the store and thus stimulating the economy. Without the consumer willing to go out and purchase sales, the economy would stay stagnate. Many people are saying that sales from this Black Friday will be up 3 percent from last year with holiday sales growing 5.2 percent. Consumers are also showing strong spending patterns this year. This has to do with the economy being better from last year. Teamwork between the economy and the consumers is every strong and dependent on each other. Discount and chain stores will offer the best deals because they are the ones who feed off the teamwork of the consumers to increase their revenue. Fancy, high end stores, will have the rich buying at any time, regardless of the economy.
What do you think classmates - Is Black Friday important for our economy? Do you think that consumers and the economy teamwork together or is it not that important for there to be a good relationship there? What are some other big days of the economy that the consumer helps stimulate? Did you work with the economy and go shopping on Black Friday?
-Kristi Rudin
-Kristi Rudin
Friday, November 25, 2011
Leaders Today Are Having a Hard Time Leading
http://www.forbes.com/sites/work-in-progress/2011/11/18/why-arent-leaders-delivering-the-basics/
With the world changing faster than it has ever, leaders are having a tough time keeping up. Rapidly changing technology, global markets, and a diverse workforce is making it harder to lead today. It is almost as if leaders need to develop a new skill to lead employees, but this is the exact opposite of what they need to do. Leaders need to assess themselves to see if they are utilizing the basics of leaderships. In addition to adapting to new leadership traits, using the basics of leadership will help you become more effective. Treating employees with respect, demonstrate integrity, show trust in employees, provide an environment that fosters performance, and give employees autonomy are all ways leaders can become more effective. Whether someone is an effective leader or not can be the difference of whether a business succeeds or fails.
Leaders should show people-orientated leader behaviors. These types of behaviors show concern for employee feelings and treat employees with respect. People-orientated leader behaviors tend to leave employees more satisfied and react with positivity. Effective leaders should show integrity. A leader who demonstrates integrity acts ethically and honestly. Showing integrity gains employees' trust. Showing trust in your employees is also a way for them to gain trust in you. A leader who is achievement-orientated is leading in a way that fosters performance. They set goals for employees and encourage them to reach their goals. An effective leader gives employees autonomy when the situation calls for it. Using laissez-faire decision making is one way to give employees autonomy. This type of decision making occurs when leaders let employees make decisions on their own. The leader provides little to no guidance in the decision. Effective leaders have been linked to the traits of conscientiousness and extraversion of the Big 5 Personality Traits. Conscientiousness are people who are organized, take initiative, and demonstrate persistence. Extraversion is being outgoing, talkative, sociable, and enjoying social situations. Extraverts like interacting with others and show self-confidence.
Do you think people today are having a harder time leading? To be an effective leader today, do you think people need to develop a new skill to keep up with the changing world? Should leaders look back to the basics of leadership to become effective? Will the basics of leadership be enough to stay effective in the changing world?
-Steven Stanek
With the world changing faster than it has ever, leaders are having a tough time keeping up. Rapidly changing technology, global markets, and a diverse workforce is making it harder to lead today. It is almost as if leaders need to develop a new skill to lead employees, but this is the exact opposite of what they need to do. Leaders need to assess themselves to see if they are utilizing the basics of leaderships. In addition to adapting to new leadership traits, using the basics of leadership will help you become more effective. Treating employees with respect, demonstrate integrity, show trust in employees, provide an environment that fosters performance, and give employees autonomy are all ways leaders can become more effective. Whether someone is an effective leader or not can be the difference of whether a business succeeds or fails.
Leaders should show people-orientated leader behaviors. These types of behaviors show concern for employee feelings and treat employees with respect. People-orientated leader behaviors tend to leave employees more satisfied and react with positivity. Effective leaders should show integrity. A leader who demonstrates integrity acts ethically and honestly. Showing integrity gains employees' trust. Showing trust in your employees is also a way for them to gain trust in you. A leader who is achievement-orientated is leading in a way that fosters performance. They set goals for employees and encourage them to reach their goals. An effective leader gives employees autonomy when the situation calls for it. Using laissez-faire decision making is one way to give employees autonomy. This type of decision making occurs when leaders let employees make decisions on their own. The leader provides little to no guidance in the decision. Effective leaders have been linked to the traits of conscientiousness and extraversion of the Big 5 Personality Traits. Conscientiousness are people who are organized, take initiative, and demonstrate persistence. Extraversion is being outgoing, talkative, sociable, and enjoying social situations. Extraverts like interacting with others and show self-confidence.
Do you think people today are having a harder time leading? To be an effective leader today, do you think people need to develop a new skill to keep up with the changing world? Should leaders look back to the basics of leadership to become effective? Will the basics of leadership be enough to stay effective in the changing world?
-Steven Stanek
Thursday, October 27, 2011
HP's new ideas
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-10-27/hp-s-whitman-focuses-on-hardware-while-lane-leads-software.html
This article is discusses the recent changes in Hewlett-Packard. Just a few months ago HP announced that they were going to stop producing PC's. I found this to be very shocking seeing as PC's is HP's number one business. Then in this article I found out HP is no longer doing that. They have decided to bring two employees up to new positions when CEO Leo Apotheker stepped down. HP brought in Meg Whitman to be Co. CEO and Ray Lane to be Executive Chairman. Between the two of them they have split up the work; Whitman taking charge of computer hardware and corporate functions while Lane takes care of software and technology services. Because HP would lose about $2.5 billion if they cut out PC's it has become necessary that Lane and Whitman can handle the PC aspect of the business. Because they are splitting up the work and trying to keep this company from losing money they must work together as a flawless team. Although they must have coworkers beneath them to help out with the work, it is pertinent that they work together and make sure their work matches up so that they can keep HP a float. Whitman was only willing to take over the position as long as Lane took over being Executive Chairman. I feel that this is great that she looked at how much work she needed to do and realized that she would need someone's help. She knows how much help working as a team can be and that the end product will be better than if she were to do it on her own. It is hard though to be able to work as a team properly especially in the beginning. I feel that the two is doing a great job of this so far, they check in with each other daily to make sure they're on the same page and they even have weekly meetings to go over everything that they are doing.
Now that it seems HP has their PC operations back up and under control the topic of tablets comes up. HP had a tablet PC but got rid of it shortly after even though it was a great success. One might question whether they will bring back the tablet. I have to question whether this is too much for the team to handle. If they needed two people to handle just the PC division and Lane is only devoting 30% of his time to the team then how can they expect to add another product. Would it be better to add another teammate or would the team become too big and too much to handle. Or should HP expect Lane to devote more than just a mere 30% of his time. How can a team work effectively if one of the key members isn't putting their all in it?
~Rebecca Doukas
This article is discusses the recent changes in Hewlett-Packard. Just a few months ago HP announced that they were going to stop producing PC's. I found this to be very shocking seeing as PC's is HP's number one business. Then in this article I found out HP is no longer doing that. They have decided to bring two employees up to new positions when CEO Leo Apotheker stepped down. HP brought in Meg Whitman to be Co. CEO and Ray Lane to be Executive Chairman. Between the two of them they have split up the work; Whitman taking charge of computer hardware and corporate functions while Lane takes care of software and technology services. Because HP would lose about $2.5 billion if they cut out PC's it has become necessary that Lane and Whitman can handle the PC aspect of the business. Because they are splitting up the work and trying to keep this company from losing money they must work together as a flawless team. Although they must have coworkers beneath them to help out with the work, it is pertinent that they work together and make sure their work matches up so that they can keep HP a float. Whitman was only willing to take over the position as long as Lane took over being Executive Chairman. I feel that this is great that she looked at how much work she needed to do and realized that she would need someone's help. She knows how much help working as a team can be and that the end product will be better than if she were to do it on her own. It is hard though to be able to work as a team properly especially in the beginning. I feel that the two is doing a great job of this so far, they check in with each other daily to make sure they're on the same page and they even have weekly meetings to go over everything that they are doing.
Now that it seems HP has their PC operations back up and under control the topic of tablets comes up. HP had a tablet PC but got rid of it shortly after even though it was a great success. One might question whether they will bring back the tablet. I have to question whether this is too much for the team to handle. If they needed two people to handle just the PC division and Lane is only devoting 30% of his time to the team then how can they expect to add another product. Would it be better to add another teammate or would the team become too big and too much to handle. Or should HP expect Lane to devote more than just a mere 30% of his time. How can a team work effectively if one of the key members isn't putting their all in it?
~Rebecca Doukas
Blackberry Owners Flock to iPhone 4s in Record Numbers
http://www.forbes.com/sites/mobiledia/2011/10/27/blackberry-owners-flock-to-iphone-4s-in-record-numbers/
This article tells us how BlackBerry owners are trading in their phones at record numbers in for the iPhone 4s which highlights RIM's (Research in Motion's service) struggles and Apple's expected success through the 4s.
Blackberry users all over the world have been left without Internet and instant messaging capabilities for days as RIM struggled to fix some problems they were having. This was causing BlackBerry users to contemplate whether switching on to another smartphone or not. During service outage of Blackberry, the Apple iPhone 4s was released which may have been a trigger for BlackBerry users to increase the number of trade-ins. Cazelle launched a national television ad
campaign that informed views of a buy-back program for old electronics, such as their older smartphones, which was probably another reason people were more likely to trade their phones.
RIM is currently offering no phones that have nearly enough demand as its competitors like the new iPhone 4s or the new Motorola Droid Bionic. The newest BlackBerry has performed poorly, so customers aren't running to buy the BlackBerry Torch when there's better phones on the market.
What does Blackberry need to work on related team roles and related terms to catch up with the other competitors? How high do you think BlackBerry and RIM value their teamwork during this devastating time? Do you think they could improve their teamwork to help the company out? If so, how?
-Kylie Merth
This article tells us how BlackBerry owners are trading in their phones at record numbers in for the iPhone 4s which highlights RIM's (Research in Motion's service) struggles and Apple's expected success through the 4s.
Blackberry users all over the world have been left without Internet and instant messaging capabilities for days as RIM struggled to fix some problems they were having. This was causing BlackBerry users to contemplate whether switching on to another smartphone or not. During service outage of Blackberry, the Apple iPhone 4s was released which may have been a trigger for BlackBerry users to increase the number of trade-ins. Cazelle launched a national television ad
campaign that informed views of a buy-back program for old electronics, such as their older smartphones, which was probably another reason people were more likely to trade their phones.
RIM is currently offering no phones that have nearly enough demand as its competitors like the new iPhone 4s or the new Motorola Droid Bionic. The newest BlackBerry has performed poorly, so customers aren't running to buy the BlackBerry Torch when there's better phones on the market.
What does Blackberry need to work on related team roles and related terms to catch up with the other competitors? How high do you think BlackBerry and RIM value their teamwork during this devastating time? Do you think they could improve their teamwork to help the company out? If so, how?
-Kylie Merth
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
CSI activity
Throughout the CSI activity, different members of our group took on a variety of roles. I feel that at one time or another each of us took on a few of the same role. We were all contributors at one point or another when we would pick out certain bits of information and helped rule out certain characters based on the descriptions. We were all critics as well when we determined whether a certain reasoning for letting a character go was actually worthy or not. In order to be able to get our ideas and information out there we all had to be communicators throughout the entire exercise. Steve in particular took on the consul role because he was the one that took our answer up to the professor and then gave us the professor’s feedback. I feel that I most played the communicator, and contributor roles. I felt that my main task I completed was going back into the texts and finding the information to verify that it was really there.
I feel that if we had a strong contractor role then we would have noticed the three different copies of the text. We were more focused on getting the task done the fastest (so we wouldn’t have to write this blog post) and so we just handed each member a piece of paper to read and when we were finished we started to rule out certain characters based on the text. When some of my teammates said different (what I thought were minor) bits of information and I couldn’t remember reading them I figured I had just read a little too fast and missed the parts. If we had someone to collect all the points together and help discover that the parts were different then we would have had the correct reasoning for why certain people were dismissed.
I feel that our group is in between the norming and performing stages. It took us quite some time to warm up to each other and want to talk. Once we figured out that we had to talk at the end of class to go over what we were doing for our blog and other team projects we started to warm up and ask each other questions about other individual group projects. We still did have problems working together during in class activities to come up with the answer fast and creatively. I have noticed over the past two exercises that we have done a better job of voicing our opinion and getting down to business. I feel that the incentive of being exempt from different assignments helped greatly. Al though we should want to work together just in general I think that the incentive gave us the right kick to make us talk more and come up with more ideas instead of just sitting and looking at each other and only speaking up when we’re positive we have the right answer.
~Rebecca Doukas
CSI - Normal
Throughout the CSI-Normal in class exercise, I saw that each individual of my team was taking on different roles that fell under the three team roles: social roles, task roles, and boundary-spaning roles. Starting with the tasks roles, i saw contributor roles, completer roles, and critic roles. Each group member that had an information sheet would be a contributor, being the ones with the information and bringing what they knew to the table for everyone to hear. The completer roles were done by the two members of our team that were writing down the information as to why we were clearing possible suspects, which helped our team stay on track with where we were in the case and what still needed to get done. They were transforming our ideas of who should no longer be a suspect into action, by crossing them off the list. The critic role was played when a team member would read something off of their sheet that the other members didn't agree with (because this piece of information wasn't on their sheet).
Falling under the social roles, I saw the cooperator role being performed within our team. I saw this role when one team member would suggest a reason as to why i suspect should be crossed of the list, and the rest of the team would agree.
The last role I saw present was the coordinator role, which falls under the boundary-spanning roles. I saw this when a team member would check with Dr. Sheep that we had the right to conclusion as to who had committed the crime.
I played the roles of the contributor, critic, and cooperator. I started out with a fact sheet, so I was able to go over that and bring the key factors from the sheet to the table and share with everyone., which would help us figure out who should be crossed off and who should be suspected. I played the critic role because at one point I didn't agree with what another member had said until they explained and showed it to me on their information sheet. When another team member would point out a good reason as to why a suspect should be crossed of the list, I agreed with them which would make me a cooperator.
I believe that all the roles listed above were important to our team's success but the contributor, cooperator, and coordinator roles were the most helpful to our team's success as to solving the mystery. The contributor role was what brought the ideas and information to the table to help us figure out why suspects should or should not be suspected. The cooperator role was most helpful because it meant that when our team made a strong decision, we all backed it up and agreed, instead of starting a disagreement over it. and The coordinator role was important because it connected us to Dr. Sheep so that we knew whether we had solved the mystery correctly or not.
I think that our team is at the performing stage. We are all aware that we are working together and have the same goals to reach in the end, whether we are working a seperate small tasks throughout or not. We work together quickly and finish our work well. We make sure that we are paying attention and taking the time to make sure the job is finished thoroughly.
-Kylie Merth
Falling under the social roles, I saw the cooperator role being performed within our team. I saw this role when one team member would suggest a reason as to why i suspect should be crossed of the list, and the rest of the team would agree.
The last role I saw present was the coordinator role, which falls under the boundary-spanning roles. I saw this when a team member would check with Dr. Sheep that we had the right to conclusion as to who had committed the crime.
I played the roles of the contributor, critic, and cooperator. I started out with a fact sheet, so I was able to go over that and bring the key factors from the sheet to the table and share with everyone., which would help us figure out who should be crossed off and who should be suspected. I played the critic role because at one point I didn't agree with what another member had said until they explained and showed it to me on their information sheet. When another team member would point out a good reason as to why a suspect should be crossed of the list, I agreed with them which would make me a cooperator.
I believe that all the roles listed above were important to our team's success but the contributor, cooperator, and coordinator roles were the most helpful to our team's success as to solving the mystery. The contributor role was what brought the ideas and information to the table to help us figure out why suspects should or should not be suspected. The cooperator role was most helpful because it meant that when our team made a strong decision, we all backed it up and agreed, instead of starting a disagreement over it. and The coordinator role was important because it connected us to Dr. Sheep so that we knew whether we had solved the mystery correctly or not.
I think that our team is at the performing stage. We are all aware that we are working together and have the same goals to reach in the end, whether we are working a seperate small tasks throughout or not. We work together quickly and finish our work well. We make sure that we are paying attention and taking the time to make sure the job is finished thoroughly.
-Kylie Merth
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
Magic Mirror: GM Brings OnStar to Non-GM Cars
The safety and informative service, OnStar, that comes as a standard on most new GM model cars has been the driving point for GM for years. OnStar is a device that is mounted inside the mirror of a car in which vehicle owners pay a subscription that gets them emergency road service, track a car if it is stolen or to determine when and where an accident happened to get medical attention to the scene as quick as possible. Since it first came out in 1996, it has been convincing consumers to purchase GM vehicles over the competition. That was the catch for OnStar – it only came on GM vehicles.
Recently, GM came out with OnStar FMV (For My Vehicle) and is selling the OnStar mirror at places like Best Buy. Consumers just need to purchase the mirror and it can be installed on about any vehicle, letting other car brands use the OnStar technology. This was a smart move for GM to do, working with other companies to offer OnStar to the masses. GM had to create product development teams to find a way that the technology of GM and OnStar would work reliability on other car brands. These teams had to work together to create a product that consumers would want and that would better benefit GM. Now, since GM has offered the product to the public, those product development teams are done with their task and the group most likely broke up. This is the most common team type when companies are trying to create new ideas to introduce to the consumer. It may take a long time to reach a conclusion, but once it is found, there is no reason to keep the teams intact, so they break up or move to other assignments.
When making this agreement to make OnStar available to other vehicles, I am sure that there was a lot of conflict, intrapersonal and interpersonal, happening at GM. Since OnStar has been a staple for only GM vehicles for the past years, it had to be hard to get that open up to all vehicles. It makes the OnStar not as inclusive anymore. The business leaders had to think about what it would do for them and their company to open up OnStar to anyone. This internal conflict is known as interpersonal conflict. The conflict that could have come up with stockholders and other members of the public is known as intrapersonal conflict.
Do you think that GM is doing the right thing for their business offering OnStar to other vehicles? How high would you value teamwork in creating a project like this? What other ways could conflict arise with this new development? Do you think that some level of conflict is necessary to create a successful business idea?
--Kristi Rudin
CSI - Normal
CSI – Normal
The Team Role Typology wheel has three different roles within it: task roles, social roles or boundary-spanning roles. Each broad role is broken down into smaller, more specific roles that my team members and I fall under. I saw my team falling under the contributor, completer, critic, coordinator and the cooperator roles. The three group members that had the information sheets from the case all were contributors. We had information about the case to bring to the team and showing other team members were we got the information. The completer role was done by two team members. They had to write down the information why we cleared the suspects and then cross them off our suspect list sheet. This helped the team stay on track and to see what needed to be done still. The critic role was to keep us all on top of the mystery. Sometimes one of us group members would read a clue, but take it differently than most would. It was the critic’s role to explain that it wasn’t what that meant and to help us get back on track. All the team members had a part in the cooperator role. Since none of us have ever solved a murder case, we all relied on each other to learn what we could from the case. We all come from different backgrounds, so that helped us pick out different things from the clues. The role of the coordinator was to get the information and suspect list to Dr. Sheep for review and then bring the results back to the team.
I found myself playing the role of the completer, cooperator and contributor. I started out with a fact sheet, so I was able to read over that, pick out the important points and then share that with my group, which would makes me a contributor. From those facts, we were able to have a discussion over the suspect list on who to eliminate. After reading the fact sheet, I began to be a completer. I took the suspect list and started to mark off the men as we eliminated them. This helped our team remember who has already been eliminated and who was left yet. I also had a role as the cooperator. I don’t have much knowledge on solving mysteries, so I relied on my team members to assist me when I needed it.
I think that all the roles that were shown and mentioned earlier were all important to our team and this case. Without them, we would have lagged in some way. It would have been nice to have a calibrator type on our team. The calibrator would have read all the different sheets and picked up on the differences, which is one thing that our team didn’t discover.
I feel that our group is at the performing stage. We all realize that we want to reach the same goals as each other in class and we strive to reach them. We work together quickly to get our work done, but then we make sure that we are doing it with quality too. We are still learning from each other, but I think that is a never changing process.
--Krisit Rudin
Sunday, October 23, 2011
CSI: Normal
During the CSI: Normal activity each individual in our team played one or more of the roles that fit under the task roles, social roles, or boundary-spanning roles. Of the ten different roles, I saw the members of my team taking on the contributor role because members were sharing information that they had on their sheet that was not on other member's sheets, the completer role because after we had decided on a reason why to convict a particular person it needed to be written down on paper, the critic because when a team member shared a piece of information with someone that was not on their sheet, they stopped and asked where they got that piece of information from, the cooperator role becasue when a member came up with a reason to convict someone based on a piece of evidence the other members agreed, the consul role because a team member had asked Professor Sheep various questions and shared them with the team, and the coordinator role because we had to check with Professor Sheep to see if we were correct on charging the right person with the murder.
I played the roles of the cooperator, consul, and coordinator. I did not receive my own piece of paper with the evidence on it so I was sharing it with a team member. The other members had finished reading before I did and were already stating reasons on why we should convict a certain person and I agreed with them when they pointed out the evidence. I played the consul role because I had asked Professor Sheep a question and returned to my team to share the answer with them. I also played the coordinator role because I had went to Professor Sheep with our sheet to see if we had convicted the right person.
I believe the contributor, the completer, and the coordinator roles were the most helpful in our team's success in solving the mystery. The contributor role is what allowed each member share information on their sheet that was not on the other sheets of the other members in the group. The completer role helped organize all of the ideas or reasons why to convict someone that were just thrown out there by writing them down on the sheet of paper. The coordinator role is what connected us to Professor Sheep and let us know whether we were right or not on our conviction.
I believe our group is in the norming stage. I feel that we are all committed to each other as a group and achieving the group's goal of getting the assignment completed. We have not had an assignment that we were not able to complete so we are ready for whatever the next assignment is that is given to us. We all respect each other as a group member and when completing assignments we offer our thoughts on a question and ask what the other members in the group think. Also, we have gotten to know each other more than when we had first started the class.
-Steven Stanek
I played the roles of the cooperator, consul, and coordinator. I did not receive my own piece of paper with the evidence on it so I was sharing it with a team member. The other members had finished reading before I did and were already stating reasons on why we should convict a certain person and I agreed with them when they pointed out the evidence. I played the consul role because I had asked Professor Sheep a question and returned to my team to share the answer with them. I also played the coordinator role because I had went to Professor Sheep with our sheet to see if we had convicted the right person.
I believe the contributor, the completer, and the coordinator roles were the most helpful in our team's success in solving the mystery. The contributor role is what allowed each member share information on their sheet that was not on the other sheets of the other members in the group. The completer role helped organize all of the ideas or reasons why to convict someone that were just thrown out there by writing them down on the sheet of paper. The coordinator role is what connected us to Professor Sheep and let us know whether we were right or not on our conviction.
I believe our group is in the norming stage. I feel that we are all committed to each other as a group and achieving the group's goal of getting the assignment completed. We have not had an assignment that we were not able to complete so we are ready for whatever the next assignment is that is given to us. We all respect each other as a group member and when completing assignments we offer our thoughts on a question and ask what the other members in the group think. Also, we have gotten to know each other more than when we had first started the class.
-Steven Stanek
Exit Poor Communicator, Enter Skilled Communicator
http://www.forbes.com/sites/carminegallo/2011/09/26/did-poor-communication-skills-undo-hps-ceo/
I read the article "Did Poor Communication Skills Undo HP's CEO?" The article talks about how Leo Apotheker, HP's former CEO, was most likely fired due to his lack of excellence in communication skills. Apotheker's poor communication skills could have been caused by one or more of the following barriers to effective communication: filtering, selective perception, and information overload just to name a few. Meg Whitman, former CEO of eBay, was hired in his spot. Interviews with HP board members focused on a common theme of comparing Apotheker and Whitman as communicators. HP Chairman Ray Lane said, "The market's a little confused because we're in so many different businesses. This is 90 percent about leadership, communications, and operating execution." I belive communication should make up part of the 90 percent Lane stated. Communication is extremely important in an organizations success. Up to 90% of a manager's time is spent communicating and a manager's performance is directly related to his or her ability to communicate effectively.
As part of being a skilled communicator Whitman is most likely an excellent listener. It is not only important to be able to communicate an idea, but to be able to hear and understand ideas and thoughts of other employees. Whitman is going to need a way to effectively communicate the vision to HP's 320,000 employees and millions of investors. Whitman will need to use all of the types of communication, verbal, written, and nonverbal communication, to articulate the vision. When communicating face-to-face with someone it is important that Whitman uses the right body language for the scenario that she is in. For example looking someone in the eye from the United States is considered to be a sign of trustworthiness or using the right facial expression to portray a particular mood. Although it may be hard for Whitman to talk to all 320,000 employees personally, she should use an information channel that is high in information richness to spread her vision such as a face-to-face conversation, videoconferencing, or telephone conversation. Whitman can use a press release to convey the vision to stockholders and customers or e-mail customers directly. Whether Whitman can effectively communicate the new vision could be the factor on whether she is accepted as the new CEO or rejected by employees and investors.
Was firing Apotheker the right decision? Apotheker could have prevented himself from being released from his job if he had made himself a better communicator. What do you think he could have done to make himself a better communicator? How important do you think communication skills are for a CEO? Was hiring Whitman a good idea for HP in the long run? What is she going to need to do to articulate the new vision? How can Whitman effectively communicate the new vision to all employees, investors, and customers?
-Steven Stanek
I read the article "Did Poor Communication Skills Undo HP's CEO?" The article talks about how Leo Apotheker, HP's former CEO, was most likely fired due to his lack of excellence in communication skills. Apotheker's poor communication skills could have been caused by one or more of the following barriers to effective communication: filtering, selective perception, and information overload just to name a few. Meg Whitman, former CEO of eBay, was hired in his spot. Interviews with HP board members focused on a common theme of comparing Apotheker and Whitman as communicators. HP Chairman Ray Lane said, "The market's a little confused because we're in so many different businesses. This is 90 percent about leadership, communications, and operating execution." I belive communication should make up part of the 90 percent Lane stated. Communication is extremely important in an organizations success. Up to 90% of a manager's time is spent communicating and a manager's performance is directly related to his or her ability to communicate effectively.
As part of being a skilled communicator Whitman is most likely an excellent listener. It is not only important to be able to communicate an idea, but to be able to hear and understand ideas and thoughts of other employees. Whitman is going to need a way to effectively communicate the vision to HP's 320,000 employees and millions of investors. Whitman will need to use all of the types of communication, verbal, written, and nonverbal communication, to articulate the vision. When communicating face-to-face with someone it is important that Whitman uses the right body language for the scenario that she is in. For example looking someone in the eye from the United States is considered to be a sign of trustworthiness or using the right facial expression to portray a particular mood. Although it may be hard for Whitman to talk to all 320,000 employees personally, she should use an information channel that is high in information richness to spread her vision such as a face-to-face conversation, videoconferencing, or telephone conversation. Whitman can use a press release to convey the vision to stockholders and customers or e-mail customers directly. Whether Whitman can effectively communicate the new vision could be the factor on whether she is accepted as the new CEO or rejected by employees and investors.
Was firing Apotheker the right decision? Apotheker could have prevented himself from being released from his job if he had made himself a better communicator. What do you think he could have done to make himself a better communicator? How important do you think communication skills are for a CEO? Was hiring Whitman a good idea for HP in the long run? What is she going to need to do to articulate the new vision? How can Whitman effectively communicate the new vision to all employees, investors, and customers?
-Steven Stanek
Monday, October 3, 2011
Yahoo Has the Eyeballs. Now It Wants a Voice.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/04/technology/yahoo-aims-to-produce-more-original-reporting.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hpw
Yahoo dominates online news, sports, and finance, but if you were to ask someone on the street what the top brand of news was, they wouldn't say Yahoo... hence why Yahoo has eyeballs and not a voice. The whole article is about Yahoo trying to get more of a voice to help their company out-do competition. The fact that they didn't have a voice to begin with, makes me think that there isn't very good teamwork behind their strategies. Jain Singh is a recently new editor in chief of Yahoo, who seems to be making things better at Yahoo, and i believe has been putting teamwork into better effect. One example, is that he has instituted weekly meetings of the editors from each section to talk about coming coverage and special projects, whereas before, separate sections often failed to talk to each other.
Yahoo is now trying to personalize it's site so that topics appear that are more in tune with the taste of each individual user. To do this, you would need plenty of teamwork... everyone has different tastes, and i'm sure each employee differs in their tastes, and would be able to give good input how to personalize the site to fit some individuals tastes.
Yahoo is also trying some different things with social networking related to facebook and an app for the iPad so that users may be more likely to use Yahoo.
Yahoo is best in their sports section and is what has been most helpful at keeping people on Yahoo longer.
I would say before Yahoo realized they needed to find a voice, and before Jai Singh started at Yahoo, teamwork wasn't as strong as they are becoming now. Yahoo can't accomplish what they are trying to do without good teamwork.
Do you think that Yahoo will be able to build their teamwork up enough to succeed? What do you think Yahoo could do to improve their teamwork?
-Kylie Merth
Yahoo dominates online news, sports, and finance, but if you were to ask someone on the street what the top brand of news was, they wouldn't say Yahoo... hence why Yahoo has eyeballs and not a voice. The whole article is about Yahoo trying to get more of a voice to help their company out-do competition. The fact that they didn't have a voice to begin with, makes me think that there isn't very good teamwork behind their strategies. Jain Singh is a recently new editor in chief of Yahoo, who seems to be making things better at Yahoo, and i believe has been putting teamwork into better effect. One example, is that he has instituted weekly meetings of the editors from each section to talk about coming coverage and special projects, whereas before, separate sections often failed to talk to each other.
Yahoo is now trying to personalize it's site so that topics appear that are more in tune with the taste of each individual user. To do this, you would need plenty of teamwork... everyone has different tastes, and i'm sure each employee differs in their tastes, and would be able to give good input how to personalize the site to fit some individuals tastes.
Yahoo is also trying some different things with social networking related to facebook and an app for the iPad so that users may be more likely to use Yahoo.
Yahoo is best in their sports section and is what has been most helpful at keeping people on Yahoo longer.
I would say before Yahoo realized they needed to find a voice, and before Jai Singh started at Yahoo, teamwork wasn't as strong as they are becoming now. Yahoo can't accomplish what they are trying to do without good teamwork.
Do you think that Yahoo will be able to build their teamwork up enough to succeed? What do you think Yahoo could do to improve their teamwork?
-Kylie Merth
Friday, September 30, 2011
Feuds at Morgan Stanley
Here's the article: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/the-feud-at-the-top-of-morgan-stanley-09222011.html
After reading this article, I could clearly see that co-presidents, Kelleher and Taubman are doing a terrible job of using proper teamwork and don't truly understand how important team work is in the business field. In the article it is said that Kelleher and Taubman live on opposite sides of the ocean (one in England and one in New York). This distance starts off their business career rocky. I find that it's quite hard for two people to work together when being so far apart. They are forced to do all their meetings via conference calls and emails. There are plenty of companies that have to do that especially with the increase of outsourcing in the recent years. I know that this can work but I also know how stressful this can be. At my mother's company, any employees at a lower status than she is are outsourced to India. This forces her to always be on crazy conference calls at all hours of the day. She is constantly complaining that she is forced to re-do any outsourced work and the time and effort put into the projects is double what it was before.
Throughout the article there were many instances where co-workers of the co-presidents said that they did not work well together. It was said that they disregarded each other completely and that they had completely different views on how the business should be run. One thought it was important to really push hard on a deal with a company interested in stock while the other thought that was inappropriate. They are said to never be on the same page for remarks during internal presentations. This battle between them has created loss of business and a waist of colleagues time. Many executives see their fighting as a huge problem.
In January the official position for president of the company meaning one of them could be the head and face of the company. Both of these employees are very different and give different views to the company. It is important to look at this when deciding who or even if one of them should be chosen for the position. Kelleher is a Cuban smoking, scotch drinking kind of man that enjoys going out with his employees and being more one on one with them. He was also involved in the secret borrowing of money from the Fed. On the other hand, Taubman is more of your business man that finds a strong line between subordinates and managers. He's the type of manager that will have a problem-solving intellectual conversation with you over the more sports related conversations that Kelleher would have.
I feel that the company needs to make a strong decision now on who will be moved up to the presidential position. In my opinion neither candidate is right for the job. If this company is involved in global affairs than the president of the company must be able to conduct business with employees overseas. There is no way that either of these employees can do this if they are unable to communicate between each other. Unless there is a serious change in their behavior and they figure out how to work as a team, I feel that they should be dropped from the company. What do you think the company should do about these individualistic employees?
-Rebecca Doukas
After reading this article, I could clearly see that co-presidents, Kelleher and Taubman are doing a terrible job of using proper teamwork and don't truly understand how important team work is in the business field. In the article it is said that Kelleher and Taubman live on opposite sides of the ocean (one in England and one in New York). This distance starts off their business career rocky. I find that it's quite hard for two people to work together when being so far apart. They are forced to do all their meetings via conference calls and emails. There are plenty of companies that have to do that especially with the increase of outsourcing in the recent years. I know that this can work but I also know how stressful this can be. At my mother's company, any employees at a lower status than she is are outsourced to India. This forces her to always be on crazy conference calls at all hours of the day. She is constantly complaining that she is forced to re-do any outsourced work and the time and effort put into the projects is double what it was before.
Throughout the article there were many instances where co-workers of the co-presidents said that they did not work well together. It was said that they disregarded each other completely and that they had completely different views on how the business should be run. One thought it was important to really push hard on a deal with a company interested in stock while the other thought that was inappropriate. They are said to never be on the same page for remarks during internal presentations. This battle between them has created loss of business and a waist of colleagues time. Many executives see their fighting as a huge problem.
In January the official position for president of the company meaning one of them could be the head and face of the company. Both of these employees are very different and give different views to the company. It is important to look at this when deciding who or even if one of them should be chosen for the position. Kelleher is a Cuban smoking, scotch drinking kind of man that enjoys going out with his employees and being more one on one with them. He was also involved in the secret borrowing of money from the Fed. On the other hand, Taubman is more of your business man that finds a strong line between subordinates and managers. He's the type of manager that will have a problem-solving intellectual conversation with you over the more sports related conversations that Kelleher would have.
I feel that the company needs to make a strong decision now on who will be moved up to the presidential position. In my opinion neither candidate is right for the job. If this company is involved in global affairs than the president of the company must be able to conduct business with employees overseas. There is no way that either of these employees can do this if they are unable to communicate between each other. Unless there is a serious change in their behavior and they figure out how to work as a team, I feel that they should be dropped from the company. What do you think the company should do about these individualistic employees?
-Rebecca Doukas
Ford - UAW Members Vote to Authorize Strike
http://www.forbes.com/sites/joannmuller/2011/09/09/fords-labor-problem-and-how-to-solve-it/
There is intergroup conflict between the hourly paid, UAW members and Detroit automakers. If the UAW members at Ford plants and the Detroit automakers do not come to an agreement about a new contract the UAW members will authorize a strike. The hourly workers made sacrifices so that Ford did not have to accept bail out money to avoid bankruptcy and now they want to recoup benefits and wages. White-collar workers were resinstated with raises, tuition assistance, and 401(k) matches. Ford white-collar employees pay 25% more of their health care insurance than UAW members and although white-collar employees' 401(k)s were reinstated, the pensions of hourly workers were never touched during the crisis.
Do you think that the UAW members should authorize a strike if there is no agreement on a contract? If there is a strike, what could be the outcomes of this conflict? What can the Detroit automakers do to manage this conflict?
-Steven Stanek
There is intergroup conflict between the hourly paid, UAW members and Detroit automakers. If the UAW members at Ford plants and the Detroit automakers do not come to an agreement about a new contract the UAW members will authorize a strike. The hourly workers made sacrifices so that Ford did not have to accept bail out money to avoid bankruptcy and now they want to recoup benefits and wages. White-collar workers were resinstated with raises, tuition assistance, and 401(k) matches. Ford white-collar employees pay 25% more of their health care insurance than UAW members and although white-collar employees' 401(k)s were reinstated, the pensions of hourly workers were never touched during the crisis.
Do you think that the UAW members should authorize a strike if there is no agreement on a contract? If there is a strike, what could be the outcomes of this conflict? What can the Detroit automakers do to manage this conflict?
-Steven Stanek
Friday, September 16, 2011
Zappos - A Teamwork Environment
Tony Hsieh started the online shoe company, Zappos in 1999. Hsieh has always been a strong supporter of teamwork, especially through Zappos. Even though he is now the CEO of the company, he wants his employees to see him as part of the team. He still has a cubical in the middle of the office for easy access to him and doesn’t make over $40,000 a year. By doing this, he thinks that the employees will still see him as a team player, not a team dictator. One of Zappos’s core values is teamwork and Hsieh makes sure that everyone is aware of Zappos’s 10 core values when they start at his company. He has all of his new employees attend a 4 week class that discusses all of the values, the most important one being teamwork. If an employee going through the 4 week class doesn’t agree with any of the core values, they can then be leave for $2000.
Zappos thinks that teamwork can encourage new ideas that help the company grow. It is also important to Hsieh so his employees can all work together for the good of the company. In the book, Organizational Behavior by Talya Bauer and Berrin Erdogan, it states that a formal work group is made up out of managers and close associates among group members that influence the behavior of individuals in the group. I think that Hsieh was going for this sort of work group with Zappos. He makes sure that he, as a manager, works closely with his employees, or his group members, to influence them to enjoy teamwork and make it work towards the best for the company. Hsieh also wants a high level of cohesion, or the degree of camaraderie, in his work place (Bauer and Erdogan). He gets this by having after work parties and having a high energy work place. Another one of his core values is creative and a little weirdness. This too, works to create a high level of cohesion.
So what do you think classmates…Is Hsieh doing the right thing to create teamwork at Zappos by making himself more available to the workers? Do after work parties really create high levels of cohesion? Could cohesion lead to teamwork? Let me know your thoughts!
--Kristi Rudin
http://www.asianweek.com/2008/12/04/in-his-shoes-zappos-ceo-credits-success-to-having-fun-2/
Monday, September 5, 2011
Team 2 Introduction
The group members of team 2 include:
Kristi Rudin
Becca Doukas
Kylie Merth
Steven Stanek
We have chosen theme 5, "Dream Teams" Fantasy League, as our focus for our blog. We will focus on how teamwork is effective in work organizations. We will discuss on how teamwork has made organizations successful and in some cases unsuccessful.
Kristi Rudin
Becca Doukas
Kylie Merth
Steven Stanek
We have chosen theme 5, "Dream Teams" Fantasy League, as our focus for our blog. We will focus on how teamwork is effective in work organizations. We will discuss on how teamwork has made organizations successful and in some cases unsuccessful.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)