Mindful and Mindless communication techniques are two different styles of communication when relating to one another. Mindful communication is “a mental and relational activity that is both purposeful and strategic.”(345) Mindless communication on the other hand is what I refer to as “lazy” superficial conversation. I refer to mindless conversation as lazy because you don’t have to put forth much energy or thought process when communicating. Likewise your attention span and listening skills are equally lazy because there really is no interest to think. I also include mindless conversation into another category, the one where you don’t know someone very well and the situation is uncomfortable. Mindless communication also comes into play when trying to avoid awkward silence while still trying to build some sort of social connection.
Mindful communication is a strength and a skill because it forces you to identify and communicate with others on a deeper level. I don’t mean intimately, but going beyond the superficial surface. Mindful conversation forces people to get to know one another better, have a clearer understanding of the organization around them, and thus places you into a better position to be respected as a person who generally has concern for others and not just themselves. Mindful communication takes work and dedication to really become proficient, it doesn’t happen overnight.
I believe that some of the best supervisors and leaders in the organization that I work at are those that take the time to know the people that work for them on a deeper level. For example, I had a supervisor early in my career that recognized my weaknesses and took the time to work with me to make me one of the highest producers on the team. The supervisor got to know me and worked on taking me out of my comfort zone, when he did this it forced me to overcome some of my challenges. In return I became a more effective worker and the organization benefited from my work. If the supervisor had not taken the time to develop a relationship with me and communicate with me regarding my challenges and needs, I may not be with the organization today. Instead he motivated me, challenged me, and made me a better employee. Today, I am a supervisor and I look back on my experience with him and try to use mindful communication to work with others in the organization.
Saturday, July 5, 2008
Friday, July 4, 2008
Ch. 10: Learning Basic Skills
Learning basic skills in the job market today is essential. Unfortunately, the way the school system is designed currently, elementary and high school students are still being taught using old teaching methods rather than capitalizing on emphasizing education surrounding the modalities of learning (visual, auditory, and kinesthetic). Technology is slowly being infused into the classroom, but not at the rapid pace of technology changing in the work force. Along with the basic abilities required of learning; reading, writing, mathematics, communication, and listening, students are also expected to have some knowledge of the learning areas described in the book (resources, interpersonal, information, systems, and technology). Many students graduating from high school are ill equipped to meet the needs of the workforce today. Many companies have recognized the gap basic coupled with the necessity to hire new people. The solution for many organizations is to include job training to employees to build on some of the core skills required to do basic functions of the job.
For example, the Granite Rock Company in Santa Cruz emphasizes family and employee personal growth. The company believes that if the employees are receiving personal benefit by learning how to read, take a math course, or other courses offered internally by the company, the employee in return can help their child with their homework, or become better qualified for other jobs in the company. The benefit to the employee and Granite Rock are high because the employee learns new skills, and Granite Rock retains a better employee worth promoting in the company. In the end, Granite Rock maintains a highly motivated workforce, a family atmosphere, skilled employees, and low turn-over rates.
For example, the Granite Rock Company in Santa Cruz emphasizes family and employee personal growth. The company believes that if the employees are receiving personal benefit by learning how to read, take a math course, or other courses offered internally by the company, the employee in return can help their child with their homework, or become better qualified for other jobs in the company. The benefit to the employee and Granite Rock are high because the employee learns new skills, and Granite Rock retains a better employee worth promoting in the company. In the end, Granite Rock maintains a highly motivated workforce, a family atmosphere, skilled employees, and low turn-over rates.
Thursday, July 3, 2008
Democracy & Dialogue
Democracy in organizations occurs in may different ways. The democracy models explain five different forms of democracy that can occur in government as well as in an organization. The democracy models include; Procedural, Competitive, Participatory, Deliberative, and Dialogic. Depending on what organization you are working in not all of the models of democracy will fit well with every organizations goal at the time. For example, if a private company is looking to put a new innovative product on the market to beat out their competitors, then procedural democracy may not be an effective process. The company is likely to strive for a creative brainstorming process rather than a rules based structured atmosphere. The best models in this case may then be participatory and deliberative. The participatory model allows for engaged discussions and “greater commitment to outcome” (buy-in). The deliberative model allows for a collaborative process encouraging self expression, analysis, openness, and an exchange of differing ideas.
Likewise, if you are working for a government agency on developing policy for the homeless, then perhaps a participatory approach and a procedural approach would fit better. The participatory model would allow for “engaged informed discussions about societal issues and outcome,” (2), while the procedural process would implement a democratic process and structure toward the development of the policy.
Ideally, the deliberative democracy model encourages openness and the ability of group members to share while the rest of the group listens. The flow of ideas would be encouraged equally for all members, and all information would be considered and analyzed impartially, with no one member dominating the conversation. The article uses the example of a jury utilizing this model. I have seen a few juries argue very loudly and not use this model effectively because emotions and biases have dominated the group, thus the group arrive at a “hung jury.” Overall, deliberative democracy can be quite effective if all members are willing to listen and encourage differences and openness to new ideas.
Likewise, if you are working for a government agency on developing policy for the homeless, then perhaps a participatory approach and a procedural approach would fit better. The participatory model would allow for “engaged informed discussions about societal issues and outcome,” (2), while the procedural process would implement a democratic process and structure toward the development of the policy.
Ideally, the deliberative democracy model encourages openness and the ability of group members to share while the rest of the group listens. The flow of ideas would be encouraged equally for all members, and all information would be considered and analyzed impartially, with no one member dominating the conversation. The article uses the example of a jury utilizing this model. I have seen a few juries argue very loudly and not use this model effectively because emotions and biases have dominated the group, thus the group arrive at a “hung jury.” Overall, deliberative democracy can be quite effective if all members are willing to listen and encourage differences and openness to new ideas.
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Ch.9: Effective Leadership Habits (Habits of Mind)
The qualities and attributes of a good leader has been the subject of study since the Roman Empire. Some believe that good leaders were those that could speak well before a crowd of people and captivate the audience, others believe leaders are those with appealing physical characteristics or athleticism, while some leaders can influence and motivate others through their reputation as a strong leader or a dictator. All these different examples show how leadership can be influential in some capacity. While some would argue that there are some forms of leadership that are better than others, I find that I identify with the “Habits of Mind” as an effective style of leadership. “Habits of Mind are patterned ways of thinking that define how a person approaches issues and conceives alternative ways of resolving or dealing with them.”(281) In other words, I believe this style involves thinking outside the box and being flexible.
Habits of Mind style leadership require operating outside your comfort zone, involving others in decision making, and caring for the needs of the individuals in the organization as well as the vision and mission of the organization. This type of leadership forces a leader to stay proactive in the leadership process and not become stagnant or too comfortable in their ways. Habits of Mind offer three different “aspects of knowledge to being a good leader,” sensing, presencing, and realizing. I particularly like the aspect of “realizing,” because it requires a good leader to “get off the dance floor and watch the show from the balcony above.” (Harvard Business Review-Leadership). A leader that practices “realization” can detach themselves enough from a situation their involved in to look globally and inward in order to make a good decision. Being able to reflect and look outward at a situation allows for clarity, reduction in rash decision making, and creative input. I find that stopping occasionally to reflect on a situation and looking inward has helped me to make better decisions at work. It is easy to overact or make quick decisions without looking at the entire picture, but this isn’t always the best was to handle problems.
Habits of Mind style leadership require operating outside your comfort zone, involving others in decision making, and caring for the needs of the individuals in the organization as well as the vision and mission of the organization. This type of leadership forces a leader to stay proactive in the leadership process and not become stagnant or too comfortable in their ways. Habits of Mind offer three different “aspects of knowledge to being a good leader,” sensing, presencing, and realizing. I particularly like the aspect of “realizing,” because it requires a good leader to “get off the dance floor and watch the show from the balcony above.” (Harvard Business Review-Leadership). A leader that practices “realization” can detach themselves enough from a situation their involved in to look globally and inward in order to make a good decision. Being able to reflect and look outward at a situation allows for clarity, reduction in rash decision making, and creative input. I find that stopping occasionally to reflect on a situation and looking inward has helped me to make better decisions at work. It is easy to overact or make quick decisions without looking at the entire picture, but this isn’t always the best was to handle problems.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)