A631.1.5.RB - EcoSeagate

In a well written blog, reflect on the following questions:

• Do you see value in the EcoSeagate team development process?
• Why would something like this be necessary in a high-performing organization?
• Could your organization benefit from a similar activity?

Team-building activities are a way to provide high-impact learning, increase team skills and communications, and improve morale and productivity (Magloff). Seagate Technology PLC is the world’s largest hard drive manufacturer. When CEO Bill Watkins joined the company, he could see that something needed to change. Seagate holds an annual team building event for a week called "Eco Seagate" where participants (~ 200 employees) learn adventure racing skills and compete in one-day races.

Some of the things I took from the videos (Chao, 2008):

"This week's not about who you are, but who you can become."
"Trust does not mean we are in agreement."
"A lot of us come from a lot of different backgrounds. We have all these cultures, different people; what's fundamental is learning to listen to each other, learning to appreciate the other person's view."
"One of the things that commitment requires is clarity."
"You are better than you think you are. You are better as a team than you think you are."

There is a plethora of value in the Seagate team development process. Teamwork is advantageous most of the time, as long as the people within the team are dedicated to adding quality opinions, care and product to the end goal.

According to researcher Bruce Tuckman, in both group dynamics and the four stages of team development he popularized (forming, storming, norming, performing), leaders must retain the motivation of team members in order to successfully overcome the challenges of the storming and norming stages (Molnau). Team building allows for team members to appreciate the multifaceted talents of individuals regardless of position within a company; the best person at a task may very well be a lower-level employee!

Seagate highlights in their videos that everyone is responsible for success; trust, commitment and respect for each other is the difference between a high-performance team and a group of people forced to work together. 

As I discuss in another blog post, High Performance Teams are:

• Self-Directed
• Encompass a Shared Vision
• Time-Oriented
• Deliberately Communicative
• Involve Everyone
• Reviews Quality
• Care About Member and Team Growth (Denning, 2011).

This looks like an experience that could not only be beneficial to getting to know how people operate but also in developing team work skills. It is not only beneficial to entry-level employees, but leaders within the company as able to gain insight from things they may have never considered.

The activities Seagate engaged in occurred in Queenstown, New Zealand in the dramatic Southern Alps, one of New Zealand’s most scenic regions. They backpacked, rappelled, whitewater rafted and biked throughout the scenery throughout the week of their stay, leading back to a very nice hotel for wrap-up every night. It seems like a pretty ideal team-building experience.

Watkins, while on one such trek, became emotional about the physical exhaustion he was experiencing, whining and complaining about the weather. A lady alongside him had been listening to him for a while, then stopped Watkins and told him, “Bill, right now, you can be cold and wet and miserable, or you can just be cold and wet.” Watkins noted that this statement changed his outlook towards life forever. 

We do not go whitewater rafting or rappelling (I would love that), but my department, as part of our Fall Housing and Residence Life Training, goes on a two-day trip to a small camp in the nearby Bradshaw Mountains. We do activities involving a Ropes Challenge Course, a climbing wall, hiking and some games. Though I absolutely hate the idea of sleeping in a camp made for prepubescent teens laden with spider webs (I always sleep in the van and long for that first shower at home), I appreciate the ability to get out of the office with the team and show how carefree I can be! I tend to take a lot of pictures at events like these, and it is great to capture this bonding period before we head into a year of chaos - which simply comes with working in higher education!

What Watkins and I have in common is a passionate apathy for the outdoors, and an epiphany. My reaction for facing discomfort is impacting everyone around me. It is clear I hate being outside, but I joke about it and move forward. Humor and happiness can get us through life's challenges, and that attitude spreads to others. I actually commend Watkins on going through the training with the team; my director does not and certainly does not sleep outdoors with us! I have learned how to make the best out of the experience - having fun and learning about people takes my mind off of the bug bites, the heat and the freezing long night in the car - and to realize that if the trip is the worse experience of my year, that is still a darn good year!

After partaking in the exercises during the day, Seagate employees would gather in the evening hours and discuss the days activities. They would then share what they learned in regards to leadership, interpersonal styles and how to improve their team work back on the job. It also looked like they had some decent speakers from within the company. I believe my department would greatly benefit by adding on this conclusive discussion to really hit home about the purpose of the trip.

Team building allows employees to return to the office reinvigorated and with a new set of problem-solving skills (Magloff).

References

Chao, Ming. (2008). Eco Seagate 2008 1/3. YouTube. Accessed at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCOfOFMiLtE

Chao, Ming. (2008). Eco Seagate 2008 2/3. YouTube. Accessed at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Etwuap-_Azk

Denning, S. (2011). The Leader’s Guide to Storytelling: Mastering the Art and Discipline of Business Narrative (Revised and updated edition). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons/Jossey-Bass

Molnau, Daniela. High-performance Teams: Understanding Team Cohesiveness. i Six Sigma. Accessed at http://www.isixsigma.com/implementation/teams/high-performance-teams-understanding-team-cohesiveness/

Magloff, Lisa. (n/d). What Are the Benefits of Team Building? The Chronicle of Higher Education. Accessed at http://smallbusiness.chron.com/benefits-team-building-1979.html

KUMAR, ABHASH.  5 lessons by Bill Watkins, CEO, Imergy Power & Ex-CEO Seagate

A630.9.4.RB - Hiring and Recruiting

After viewing the above video, reflect on the following questions in a well-written post on your Reflection Blog.

• Does Schmidt's description of the Google Culture make sense to you?
• Is this a reasonable way to view the work that most people are doing in your workplace?
• As a leader, does it take courage to have and to implement this point of view?
• Could this approach backfire?
• What can you take away from this exercise to immediately use in your career?

Once you have reflected upon these questions, list any other questions or insights that have come to you as a result of this exercise.

Schmidt's description does make a lot of sense. They pride their culture on hiring employees into the company who are smart but also possess the a drive to work hard, alone and with others. They are excited about what they do. Google runs on its culture, not on one particular figurehead.

One of the things Schmidt mentioned that stuck out for me was hiring people who are compatible with other people. I know from personal experiences when sitting in on the interview process we look for the type of people who will fit in with our department. Are they open-minded and flexible? Do they take criticism well? Are they emotionally stable and self-conscious?  Schmidt notes that the team, no matter the level, should be involved in the hiring process, and I could not agree more. In fact, I believe all involved should have equal weight in the hiring decision (after basic interview training). I can say from experience that when a hire is forced by a biased, weighted party, it can throw a work environment way off. For example, a past supervisor was hired by a friend of his, who s/he directly supervised. There was a hiring committee, but the person threw all of their

power behind this wo/man, vouching for his/her experience and professionalism. Instead, the person was a volcano of emotions, and shared their feeling of inadequacy through intimidation and manipulation of supervisees and coworkers. The ultimate micromanager, the person would assign their overflow work without instruction or a desired goal, hover above the victim, misjudge their direction, then take the work back to do themselves, leaving a long list of criticisms behind them. All of the communication occurring happened between the two friends, and was never communicated to anyone else. When "the boss" was challenged or questioned, no matter how polite or concerned communication was made, they would bark at how uninformed the person was (without clarification) or lie. After a few months, it was clear to everyone involved that the person was overwhelmed and unwilling to utilize their resources effectively. They were put in a position they were not prepared to have, to supervise people who had more experience than they did. The only thing they had was the right degree.

In terms of my own leadership, I have learned tons through trudging through such a failure in leadership. I will never entertain the act of looking over shoulders. There are reasonable ways to view the work that most people are doing in the workplace.  One-on-ones, staff meetings and email check-ins are great ways to see where people are in a process. However, if a leader has trust from their emerging leaders, the information will come to them without asking. I have worked to build relationships before the assignment of work. Yes, this could backfire, if I let my relationship interfere with getting work done. However, only I can be blamed if that occurred; it is my job to inspire and celebrate my team for their contributions. Brown notes, “the success of future organizations [...] depends on how effectively the needs of the individual members can be integrated with the vision and goals of the organization” (Brown, 2011, p. 224). I want to know what my supervisees need to be successful, and I want to help them get there. It actually infuriates me that supervisees is not in my computer's dictionary - I do not "employ" or sign checks - so if is difficult for me to see people I have a higher title than as anything less than coworkers. The influence of my power is preferably not through a title. It is through an amicable passion to help students, our "customers".

One day, my supervisees will be supervisors.
Do I want them to become "bosses", the people workers go home and
loathe seeing the next day, or leaders, who give their employees respect?

Most people work to work - not twiddle their fingers and surf Facebook. There are companies that block social media sites from their offices, and it is such an unnecessary process of control. The look of productivity is diverse. For example, my supervisees always note how I have no less than 10 website tabs open at any given time. I enjoy listening to music, audiobooks and TED talks as I work. Occasionally I find a meme fitting for a one-on-one! These things help me get through the day, but are also symbolic of my passion of learning and teaching. I do not want one of my workers to end up at a job where they do not feel comfortable being who they are, and they same way we study for class should be the way we work: progressively (not at the last minute), comfortably (not looking over our shoulder for the teacher/boss), and with resources Not as many people are as motivated and possess this drive to actually be part of something greater. These kinds of people punch in at 8 and out at 5. Google prides itself on hiring talent and letting these people take on their own direction, with management taking the sideline. The people are focused on their own mission, with management helping them focus on their mission.

In seeing years of experience passed by for someone who had one additional accolade, it is upsetting that theory can beat out practice; I see this as purposely blocking certain types of people out of the workplace. Requirements based on academic accolades disenfranchise older and minority workers, who (at times) come with experiences that enhance diverse thought. Schmidt explains this when he talks about Google; not everyone who works there was a Ivy League valedictorian with perfect SAT scores. Passion and dedication to the mission statement and a appreciation for the people there, the culture of fun with innovation, is what makes it such a highly-sought place to work. Employees at all levels share a vision and engage in the organization, which allows for individuals to be more effective and contributes to improving the entire organization (Brown, 2011, p. 223). As much as I appreciate academic qualifications, particularly in higher education, a person with years of endless book-reading and courses under their belt, without application to the real world, cannot know what those in the field understand in practice through trial and error. For instance, in journalism and event planning, two fields I have experience in, I never felt the need to have a Bachelor's to do my jobs. I could have done either with a decent high school education. If a degree is the only thing keeping a person from being hired, they should be hired; on-the-job training teaches much more than a person can learn from a book.

Particularly in leadership positions, a person with no real-world skills has one way of speaking to people - the academic way - and not everyone who necessary for business success carries the collegiate colloquialisms. A bookworm without real-world couth may find it appropriate to "speak down" to such assets to draw the line between "managers" and "the little people". This was the situation of my past supervisor. Their actions made the department and related departments shift away from each other and many people jumped ship. 

Why do things like this occur? Because someone getting what they wanted, temporarily overshadowed the permanent need for drive and passion to be fostered and maintained within all people affected. In terms of Schmidt's suggestion that five interviews take place before making a hiring decision, I felt the number seemed high; but in reflection of my experience with poor hires, I found his conversation regarding the appropriate number of interviews understandable. Perhaps one or two interviews is not enough; it is so easy for someone to deceive strangers in such short evaluation intervals! Given that interviewees know the typical questions asked, it is not difficult to feign an acceptable attitude. I find out more about people through the out-of the box aspects of the process: the conversations during meals, the questions asked, how they talk to people within the process they may not see as most impactful in the hiring decision (secretaries,students, janitors, etc.)

Another great reason to focus more on experience is that employees with experience get that work is usually self-driven, not encouraged through grades and professorial encouragement. Schmidt wanted to empower employees to do work independently, and education (even through graduate courses) seems to support success under a constantly involved supervisor more so than lone creation. I want to work with people who are always looking to do more with what they have, and are willing to build themselves up as much as others around them!

References

Brown, D. (2011). An experiential approach to organizational development. (8th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Schmidt, E. (2011). Eric Schmidt on business culture, technology, and social issues | McKinsey & Company. McKinsey & Company. Accessed at http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/strategy/eric_schmidt_on_business_culture_technology_and_social_issues