I'm thinking about some of the stuff we talked about in class yesterday about team leadership, and I'm trying to apply it to some of the work environments I've been in.
The Department of Student Life is kind of a weird place. They try to have this "flat hierarchy". They've been talking about it since I started last fall. As far as I can tell, it doesn't work. From what I can see, the professional staff members (which includes the Director, Associate Director, Assistant Directors, and a Coordinator (and does NOT include graduate students, support staff, or student staff)) are the ones who make decisions. I don't know that I would call them a leadership team though. Some of Bensimon and Neumann's 8 thinking roles are present, but I don't think they're effective. One of the Assistant Directors is definitely a critic, but not in a good way. I think he's at a point where he just doesn't like his job or the people he works with, and just looks for the negative in everything. Another AD might be more of the emotional monitor, but that's the only thing she ever talks about, so I get the sense that others have learned to just tune her out.
So, I feel like DSL is a fake team. I still don't know how decisions get made. Apparently, the professional staff makes decisions together, but they feel like they have to make EVERY decision together. Which means that even the smallest decisions have to be approved by every member of the professional staff. Even something as small as a small, one-day leadership workshop. But if they can't come to agreement, a decision just doesn't get made.
Now, comparing this to my experience with the Blue Chip staff.... Granted, I was an undergraduate, and I only attended the Blue Chip staff meetings, so I didn't see how everything in that department happened. But, it had a very different feel. Lots of things were happening; lots of new ideas, lots of programs, etc. Even as a student staff member, I felt that I could make decisions on how I was doing things, and didn't necessarily need permission. Even in the Blue Chip staff meetings, we talked about lots of issues as far as budget, curriculum, and all that jazz. We would talk about the issues, try to come up with solutions, and we usually got it all figured out within a few minutes. Unless it was something larger, like starting a new program fee for Blue Chip. That conversation might have lasted the entire meeting time. The Director of the Center for Student Invovlement and Leadership was also a member of this team, but I never got the sense that the other staff members were looking for the "right" answer to please him (and I see that a lot at Student Life). In class, someone brought up the idea of an environment of risk-taking, and how that makes taking risks less risky. Well, I think that's the kind of environment we had in Blue Chip.
Something else that I was thinking about in class is whether or not it matters what decision is made, if all of the members feel that their voice was heard and considered. I imagine that it might be similar to something I remember from a psychology class. I can't remember what class, or even what the topic was, but I remember the example being something about starting a car. "If your car always starts, then when it doesn't start, you'll flip out, and you'll try it another couple of times, and then give up. If your car never starts, you won't even bother trying. But, if your car is a little testy, and usually starts, but sometimes might take a few tries, then when it doesn't start, you'll be more likely to try it until it does start". So, applying this example to group decision making, I would imagine that as long as you're in favor of whatever decision is made most of the time, that on the occasion when you're not happy with the decision, it won't affect how you feel about the team. But, if you're almost always in favor of the decision, and this one time you're not, you'll probably be a little upset for a bit. What happens though, when you're never happy with the decisions that are made? Is that when you buy a new car?
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment