Maureen Sullivan's article "The Promise of Appreciative Inquiry in Library Organizations" offered one of the most interesting approaches to organizational development that I have learned about this semester. This approach is extremely innovative and emphasizes the most effective practices and major contributions of staff within participating organizations.
The Appreciative Inquiry approach seems to fit naturally with the goal of libraries to become "third places" for their community members. This approach would be a practical way to discover ways to bridge the gap between library workers' and patrons' perceptions of library services.
The approach can be implemented gradually - it does not have to be done through radical restructuring. Because it can be implemented anywhere at any time, library leaders can start the process by choosing to start with a particular topic. This may help library workers to become more comfortable and accepting of the approach by using it on a trial basis.
The Appreciative Inquiry 4-D process which consists of Discovery, Dream, Design and Destiny stages allows library workers to focus on the positive effects of their work. Staff at all levels of the organization can contribute to the 4-D process.
Personally, I embrace the life-giving approach of Appreciative Inquiry. It allows libraries to maintain best practices and continue to improve them. Libraries have a lot to lose by not trying to implement this approach. While they are continuously focusing on their organizations' problems, they may neglect what is functioning in their organization. This could cause current effective practices to become problems later.
Sunday, April 29, 2007
Saturday, April 7, 2007
Pour Your Heart Into It
In his book, Pour Your Heart Into It, Howard Schultz, the founder of Starbucks, discusses many different topics that I believe are applicable to libraries.
One of Schultz's goals for Starbucks was to create a "third place." This idea was based on both the cafes in Italy that Schultz visited as well as social science research. The third place is used as a way to build a community outside of the home and workplace. This is something libraries should embrace and many have. Schultz believes Starbucks prospers because his stores allow people to escape everyday life.
From the beginning, Schultz believed that it was important to respect his employees. If the employees are satisfied they can create interpersonal relationships with customers, which will keep them coming back. Professional librarians should be treated with respect. Their service is what keeps users coming back. Libraries cannot reward their librarians in the same way as a for-profit company, but they can provide librarians with incentives to do their job well. For example, a library could agree to help a staff member attend a professional conference.
Schultz also values ingenuity at Starbucks. I believe libraries are starting to understand that they must embrace technology and are finding ingenious ways to use it. However, I think librarians need to push farther. Information professionals constantly hear that they are obsolete because of Google. Why not take the initiative to build a better answer to Google? One that would allow users to conduct more accurate searches and would incorporate reference strategies.
As the leader of such a large organization, Schultz discusses how difficult it is to remain the fearless leader and keeper of the company's vision. I believe the same can be true for library leaders. With such a poor economy in Michigan right now, some library directors may feel that their situations are hopeless. However, when you feel as passionately about a company as Howard Schultz does or librarians about their libraries, you need to fight for it. Schultz did not open his first Starbucks store and become a millionaire. He had to ask and beg for money. He had to go without pay for several years before the company turned a profit. While this is exact situation may not be applicable to libraries, his determination is. As Keith Fiels, the Executive Director of the American Library Association, said in his speech at the LISP's 40th anniversary, "Never be afraid to ask." Fiels said this to encourage librarians to ask their legislatures for the funds they need. It may be the only way for librarians to create a third place for their communities, embrace ingenuity and gain the respect and recognition they deserve.
One of Schultz's goals for Starbucks was to create a "third place." This idea was based on both the cafes in Italy that Schultz visited as well as social science research. The third place is used as a way to build a community outside of the home and workplace. This is something libraries should embrace and many have. Schultz believes Starbucks prospers because his stores allow people to escape everyday life.
From the beginning, Schultz believed that it was important to respect his employees. If the employees are satisfied they can create interpersonal relationships with customers, which will keep them coming back. Professional librarians should be treated with respect. Their service is what keeps users coming back. Libraries cannot reward their librarians in the same way as a for-profit company, but they can provide librarians with incentives to do their job well. For example, a library could agree to help a staff member attend a professional conference.
Schultz also values ingenuity at Starbucks. I believe libraries are starting to understand that they must embrace technology and are finding ingenious ways to use it. However, I think librarians need to push farther. Information professionals constantly hear that they are obsolete because of Google. Why not take the initiative to build a better answer to Google? One that would allow users to conduct more accurate searches and would incorporate reference strategies.
As the leader of such a large organization, Schultz discusses how difficult it is to remain the fearless leader and keeper of the company's vision. I believe the same can be true for library leaders. With such a poor economy in Michigan right now, some library directors may feel that their situations are hopeless. However, when you feel as passionately about a company as Howard Schultz does or librarians about their libraries, you need to fight for it. Schultz did not open his first Starbucks store and become a millionaire. He had to ask and beg for money. He had to go without pay for several years before the company turned a profit. While this is exact situation may not be applicable to libraries, his determination is. As Keith Fiels, the Executive Director of the American Library Association, said in his speech at the LISP's 40th anniversary, "Never be afraid to ask." Fiels said this to encourage librarians to ask their legislatures for the funds they need. It may be the only way for librarians to create a third place for their communities, embrace ingenuity and gain the respect and recognition they deserve.
Sunday, March 11, 2007
Group Midterm
The group midterm was one of the most tense and unenjoyable tasks of this class. Usually the case studies provide an opportunity to utilize creativity and to analyze effective solutions in regards to common scenarios. However, given the time constraints and our group culture, this task left me feeling that if this were a professional group, I would consider leaving based on cultural incompatibility. I wanted to revisit this situation while it is still fresh in my mind, however, it is difficult for me to analyze and objectively write about what occurred. I hope to revisit this subject in the next week when I can formulate an unemotional analysis.
Group Culture
To understand the culture of a group, one might think of it as the group's personality. One could also say that the individual personalities of the group members combine to make one distinct individual. There are several aspects of my group's personality that are constructive, but there are others that prevent us from working toward our fullest potential.
One of the most distinctive and important characteristics of my group is the informality of our interpersonal interactions. We do not see the need to conduct our group meetings formally. Because of this, I view the Clipper team as a laid-back individual.
Although my group defined roles in our learning contract at the beginning of the semester, we typically refer to each member as a wild card. We believe that each individual should have the freedom to assume the role that he/she feels most comfortable with based on the task at hand. However, this freedom can sometimes create role confusion in that more than one group member tries to lead the group. Perhaps instituting more formality and explicitly stating who will act as the expert would help clarify this role confusion. At times it can feel that the Clipper team has many alter egos.
Unfortunately, a great deal of tension exists in many of our meetings. Many group members, including myself, feel that they must carefully watch what they say in order to maintain a calm working environment. However, this only creates more tension. In terms of participation, it is difficult to get each member to participate equally. From an outsider's perspective, the Clippers may seem that they are led by a couple individuals with others following behind.
I believe the Clippers are still working toward becoming a team. Some aspects of group culture are present, but much of the group's personality has not been formalized. At this point in the semester, I am uncertain if this group will materialize into a close team. The group understands its goals and accomplishes them, however, it could be achieved in a much more organized and enjoyable manner.
One of the most distinctive and important characteristics of my group is the informality of our interpersonal interactions. We do not see the need to conduct our group meetings formally. Because of this, I view the Clipper team as a laid-back individual.
Although my group defined roles in our learning contract at the beginning of the semester, we typically refer to each member as a wild card. We believe that each individual should have the freedom to assume the role that he/she feels most comfortable with based on the task at hand. However, this freedom can sometimes create role confusion in that more than one group member tries to lead the group. Perhaps instituting more formality and explicitly stating who will act as the expert would help clarify this role confusion. At times it can feel that the Clipper team has many alter egos.
Unfortunately, a great deal of tension exists in many of our meetings. Many group members, including myself, feel that they must carefully watch what they say in order to maintain a calm working environment. However, this only creates more tension. In terms of participation, it is difficult to get each member to participate equally. From an outsider's perspective, the Clippers may seem that they are led by a couple individuals with others following behind.
I believe the Clippers are still working toward becoming a team. Some aspects of group culture are present, but much of the group's personality has not been formalized. At this point in the semester, I am uncertain if this group will materialize into a close team. The group understands its goals and accomplishes them, however, it could be achieved in a much more organized and enjoyable manner.
Sunday, February 25, 2007
My Cognitive Style
I found my scores on the cognitive style assessment very interesting. In the following post, I will discuss my analysis of my scores.
On the extrovert/introvert continuum, I scored very high on the extrovert category. This is consistent with how I view myself. I love meeting new people and can usually have a conversation with almost anyone. However, the few points I scored on the introvert side probably reflect my tendency to be uncomfortable with people who lack self-confidence. When people are awkward being themselves, it makes me feel uncomfortable.
As for generating information, I scored evenly between sensing and intuition. I find value in both of these dimensions of information generation. I tend to be logical and very detail oriented. I like to base many of my decisions on facts. However, over the past few years, I have worked on developing my creative side which is why this is reflected in my intuitive score. I think creativity is very closely tied to innovation.
Very close to my score on sensing and intuition is my score on thinking vs. feeling. Although I did not fall directly in the center, I was very close, leaning only slightly to the thinking side of the continuum. I tend to draw upon both my analysis of a situation and previous personal experience when making decisions. I believe personal experience has a lot of merit in the work place, but it will not dictate exactly how a situation will unfold. Analysis is still an important component.
I was also not surprised to see that I fell more on the judgemental side than the perceptive side of the continuum. I tend to make judgements rather quickly instead of waiting to take everything in. I believe this is the reason that I tend to interpret things slightly differently than others. Once I hear something I start making a series of judgements that lead me to a decision which is different than the one that I may have come to if I had waited to take everything in. While I appreciate the fact that I can think quickly and start making connections, I think to improve the way I work in groups I need to learn to slow down and let others catch up.
I look forward to making more connections regarding my cognitive style in the future.
On the extrovert/introvert continuum, I scored very high on the extrovert category. This is consistent with how I view myself. I love meeting new people and can usually have a conversation with almost anyone. However, the few points I scored on the introvert side probably reflect my tendency to be uncomfortable with people who lack self-confidence. When people are awkward being themselves, it makes me feel uncomfortable.
As for generating information, I scored evenly between sensing and intuition. I find value in both of these dimensions of information generation. I tend to be logical and very detail oriented. I like to base many of my decisions on facts. However, over the past few years, I have worked on developing my creative side which is why this is reflected in my intuitive score. I think creativity is very closely tied to innovation.
Very close to my score on sensing and intuition is my score on thinking vs. feeling. Although I did not fall directly in the center, I was very close, leaning only slightly to the thinking side of the continuum. I tend to draw upon both my analysis of a situation and previous personal experience when making decisions. I believe personal experience has a lot of merit in the work place, but it will not dictate exactly how a situation will unfold. Analysis is still an important component.
I was also not surprised to see that I fell more on the judgemental side than the perceptive side of the continuum. I tend to make judgements rather quickly instead of waiting to take everything in. I believe this is the reason that I tend to interpret things slightly differently than others. Once I hear something I start making a series of judgements that lead me to a decision which is different than the one that I may have come to if I had waited to take everything in. While I appreciate the fact that I can think quickly and start making connections, I think to improve the way I work in groups I need to learn to slow down and let others catch up.
I look forward to making more connections regarding my cognitive style in the future.
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Group Trust
As an employee, being able to trust management is a key component of job satisfaction and success. When employees become wary of management, can they ever believe in that organization again? Right now, the automotive industry has made drastic employee cuts in Michigan. How can the remaining employees carry out their job responsibilities effectively and work together in this type of distrusting environment? Many feel that the wealth of management is not being shared fairly among the companies' many workers.
I believe it will take a great deal of time for Michigan workers to begin to trust this industry enough to aspire to join it again. While cutting jobs will temporarily ease financial burdens, what these companies have ultimately lost is much more costly. The have sacrificed the morale of the very people who believed in these companies and who, through innovation and collaboration, could have potentially helped them move forward.
One way to measure organizational satisfaction is by designing assessments. Our group was given the task of creating a method for evaluating our satisfaction with our colleagues as well as our product. We decided that having a rating system as well as an open-ended comment area allowed us to both quantify our success and draw upon specific examples to cite successfulness as well as failure. In order for these types of results to be helpful, team members must be honest. Their answers should not differ whether the survey is anonymous or not. While anonymity can sometimes ensure honesty, I think it is best for each team member to take ownership of his or her opinions and observations. We should establish a safe space so that team members feel comfortable openly expressing their individual group observations. It is only through this type of interpersonal communication that a group can begin to become a team. It can also foster the type of collaboration and innovation that could possibly save an entire industry.
I believe it will take a great deal of time for Michigan workers to begin to trust this industry enough to aspire to join it again. While cutting jobs will temporarily ease financial burdens, what these companies have ultimately lost is much more costly. The have sacrificed the morale of the very people who believed in these companies and who, through innovation and collaboration, could have potentially helped them move forward.
One way to measure organizational satisfaction is by designing assessments. Our group was given the task of creating a method for evaluating our satisfaction with our colleagues as well as our product. We decided that having a rating system as well as an open-ended comment area allowed us to both quantify our success and draw upon specific examples to cite successfulness as well as failure. In order for these types of results to be helpful, team members must be honest. Their answers should not differ whether the survey is anonymous or not. While anonymity can sometimes ensure honesty, I think it is best for each team member to take ownership of his or her opinions and observations. We should establish a safe space so that team members feel comfortable openly expressing their individual group observations. It is only through this type of interpersonal communication that a group can begin to become a team. It can also foster the type of collaboration and innovation that could possibly save an entire industry.
Log Goals and Mission
This term log will explore many different topics. These will include, but are not limited to, leadership, group dynamics, communication and course material analysis. At this time, I find it difficult to commit to any one particular theme. My mission to to reflect, analyze and understand how my group and I work within teams and to apply these findings to future experiences.
Monday, February 5, 2007
The Bake-Off
While reading Malcolm Gladwell's "The Bake-Off," I recognized many different points that will be important for me to consider while working in teams. Some of them will also help me to become a better individual member. In this post, I will discuss the aspects of Gladwell's article that I found to be the most critical to team performance.
One of these points is that technical skill should not be the only component considered when building a successful team. When we did our interviews to submit to the class employers, our team may have put too much emphasis on the experiences we had. In light of reading Gladwell’s article, I believe we should have explored how each individual functions in a group environment. For example, we could have asked a potential member to describe his or her worst group experience.
In addition, Gladwell touches on the innate thought that more expertise is the best way to solve a problem. Too much expertise means that there may be tension between group members that will create chaos. Many times "we tend to overestimate the importance of expertise and underestimate the problem of friction" (Gladwell, 2005). I thought that this was one of the most important points Gladwell made in this piece. When building teams, the possible friction between members should be considered. How the members relate to one another will be important for the group to succeed.
Another interesting point that Gladwell explores, although not to a significant extent, is the question "Where do ideas come from?" While Gladwell does not provide a definitive answer on whether they are products of teams, committees or individuals it is still an interesting idea to explore. Ideas and innovations are the reason many organizations emphasize the importance of working in groups. Exploring their origins can be beneficial to recognizing how to continue being a productive group member. Learning to make connections between different ideas is a great way to improve group productivity.
Participation within the group is also critical. As one of the Dream Team members commented, "How much true input can any one person have when you are lost in a crowd" (Gladwell, 2005). Extra chaos and confusion diminish the value of additional expertise. Clear procedures can help clarify confusion, but groups may find it difficult to determine one way to operate. Some sort of group consensus will increase productivity.
These are just a few of the points that I found useful in Gladwell’s article. I believe they will help me improve the way I think about teams and the way I analyze my individual participation.
One of these points is that technical skill should not be the only component considered when building a successful team. When we did our interviews to submit to the class employers, our team may have put too much emphasis on the experiences we had. In light of reading Gladwell’s article, I believe we should have explored how each individual functions in a group environment. For example, we could have asked a potential member to describe his or her worst group experience.
In addition, Gladwell touches on the innate thought that more expertise is the best way to solve a problem. Too much expertise means that there may be tension between group members that will create chaos. Many times "we tend to overestimate the importance of expertise and underestimate the problem of friction" (Gladwell, 2005). I thought that this was one of the most important points Gladwell made in this piece. When building teams, the possible friction between members should be considered. How the members relate to one another will be important for the group to succeed.
Another interesting point that Gladwell explores, although not to a significant extent, is the question "Where do ideas come from?" While Gladwell does not provide a definitive answer on whether they are products of teams, committees or individuals it is still an interesting idea to explore. Ideas and innovations are the reason many organizations emphasize the importance of working in groups. Exploring their origins can be beneficial to recognizing how to continue being a productive group member. Learning to make connections between different ideas is a great way to improve group productivity.
Participation within the group is also critical. As one of the Dream Team members commented, "How much true input can any one person have when you are lost in a crowd" (Gladwell, 2005). Extra chaos and confusion diminish the value of additional expertise. Clear procedures can help clarify confusion, but groups may find it difficult to determine one way to operate. Some sort of group consensus will increase productivity.
These are just a few of the points that I found useful in Gladwell’s article. I believe they will help me improve the way I think about teams and the way I analyze my individual participation.
Monday, January 29, 2007
More Bloody Meetings
The movie, More Bloody Meetings, helped to prepare me to meet my group. I found myself referring to the techniques in order to help diffuse the tension that was immediately present in my group. In this post, I will discuss how I used one of the techniques effectively in order to be a more cooperative group member.
One of the most important strategies was to "unite the group." This was important to keep in mind because if we were each trying to only represent our own needs, our group goal was lost. By allowing everyone in the group to share their thoughts, we were able to decrease the amount of tension. For example, at the beginning of the semester, one of our group members was very vocal about not wanting to work in groups. This was an issue that another group member brought up to that group member and s/he took offense. Because each group member shared his/her concerns, we were able to successfully move our group forward.
Normally, I may not have brought up this issue. I would rather have dealt with it in what ever form it took during our group assignments. Because another group member opened the discussion, I felt that I could express my opinion on this issue. I hope that our group will be able to start fresh knowing that we were able to address these types of issues.
I believe that finding ways to continue to successfully unite our group will be important in the upcoming weeks. I will return to the techniques described in More Bloody Meetings so that my built-up frustration does not negatively effect the dynamics of my group.
One of the most important strategies was to "unite the group." This was important to keep in mind because if we were each trying to only represent our own needs, our group goal was lost. By allowing everyone in the group to share their thoughts, we were able to decrease the amount of tension. For example, at the beginning of the semester, one of our group members was very vocal about not wanting to work in groups. This was an issue that another group member brought up to that group member and s/he took offense. Because each group member shared his/her concerns, we were able to successfully move our group forward.
Normally, I may not have brought up this issue. I would rather have dealt with it in what ever form it took during our group assignments. Because another group member opened the discussion, I felt that I could express my opinion on this issue. I hope that our group will be able to start fresh knowing that we were able to address these types of issues.
I believe that finding ways to continue to successfully unite our group will be important in the upcoming weeks. I will return to the techniques described in More Bloody Meetings so that my built-up frustration does not negatively effect the dynamics of my group.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)