A500.4.3.RB_WilsonGregory

I find it fascinating the realization that her assumptions bring to mind. That making my own choice, a “right” that we have self-appointed to ourselves here in America, can actually lead to stress and poor decision making. It’s interesting the study that she makes, showing that American kids performed better when they had the right to choose, but that Asian-American kids performed best when they were told their mother’s chose for them. The balance for Americans, then, seems to be that the ability to chose helps us to feel empowered and obligated to perform well, but too many options can be overwhelming leading to uncertainty, poor performance and/or regret.

I have to agree with her entirely. When I was in the military, being appointed assignments would give me premise to complain, but I performed. When I left the military, I had to start making my own decisions about everything, which added a certain pressure and stress to life. I had to perform harder, or with more intent and focus, than ever before. I felt obligated to ensure that my decisions yielded the best results. Many of my peers made bad decisions, and were better off probably staying in the service, as their performance was better having fewer choices and options. They no longer had a community to help them make choices, nor were they used to the pressure of having to decide.

I agree with Dr. Iyengar in her first two assumptions. I do, however, have a hard time entirely grasping the third. Is she stating that sometimes it’s best not make a decision at all, after properly understanding the full implications and repercussions of a choice? I agree with her in the sense that choice is a matter of perception, as depicted by her experiment with the finger nail polish at the end of the lecture. I also agree with her that there are assumptions made in choice making.

Some impacts this could have on leadership are to the leader and the subordinate. So the leader, perhaps in leadership, our choices fall into one of the three assumptions. That we have to choice, that more options are best, and that we must make our own choices. When in reality, perhaps making those choices on our own are adding stresses and poor decisions. Perhaps too many options is not a good thing.

Lastly, as we work with our subordinates, perhaps giving them too many options is a poor choice by the leader. Also, letting the subordinate feel empowered to make their own decision, may lead to them perform better than if everything were assigned to them. With these two points alone, if applied, a leader could see an improvement in performance and workplace environment.

A500.3.3.RB_WilsonGregory

            The key difference between seeing the discipline of organizational leadership as a system of thinking versus seeing organizational leadership as a body of information are based on a matter of depth and understanding. Depth has to do with complexity, and understanding has to do with having a working knowledge of functionality. For example, someone could point out that a car has an engine but may not necessarily understand how the engine works. Even if they have a general idea of how the engine works, they would not understand it in depth the way an engineer or mechanic would. So the key difference between viewing the discipline of organizational leadership as a system versus seeing it as a body of content is that a system has depth, inner workings with complexities, while a body of content is a list of facts, bullet points and surface data to grasp basic concepts.  

           Having this understanding certainly will affect the way I approach this course. If I view this course as a body of content, I will only graze on the information as a body of content. I will search for basic concepts, and may be able to only rattle off basic facts and bullet points about the course. My way of thinking would not impacted nor change, my ability to critically think would not be practiced or its’ appreciation grow. Viewing this course as a system, however, requires me to think, look for connections within the concepts themselves, and for connections on how the content can be applied in my life. This is a core difference. Studying a system requires taking information and facts, and thinking deeply into them. Understanding them with depth, seeing and working through the complexities and challenges. With this being the case, I now look forward to seeing this system in its’ entirety. 

A500.2.3.RB - Tell Your Story

Two standards that are most important in my life are rather or not something is effective, and rather or not it is beneficial to me. In other words, in terms of effectiveness, will this course of action yield a level of success that I am comfortable with, with the least amount of effort required? In terms of being beneficial to me, even if my critical thinking or actions are to help someone else, I often ask, “in what ways can this benefit me?”.

For example, I manage an educational program that uses part time teachers, and a contracted aid. The financing party of this educational program is a multi-million dollar and full-staffed non-profit. When planning to develop the program and devising working plans, I take a moment and filter my thoughts and plans through those two standards; is this an effective way to think or work given the staffing and limitations present? How will thinking or moving in this direction benefit me (or the program)? It is likened to chess, wanting to capture the most amount of enemy pieces with the fewest amount of moves possible.

I believed I acquired these standards out of necessity. Though I am the youngest of seven children, due to age gaps, I was raised almost like an only child. The difference is that my parents were often busy taking care of my older siblings, leaving me mostly to take care of my own social and familial needs. Having limited resources and limited access to my parents, I had to plan my request and actions wisely as to be most effective. The standard of “does it benefit me” was one that I believe I acquired during my time in the military. At the age of 18, new to structure, organization, and a re-enforcing of the idea of being one of many and nearly forgotten, I quickly learned that no one had my best interest at heart. With this underlying truth as a pillar in my newly entered adulthood, having my own best interest at heart became a staple in all of my decision making.

Over the years, I can still identify these standards as I think and in my decision making. They have changed, however. My need to be effective no longer comes at the expense of inconveniencing others. My desire to make decisions that benefit myself is secondary to aiding someone else. While these two standards are still most important, I have learned to make them secondary, at times, for the sake of someone else’s well-being.

A500.1.5.RB_WilsonGregory

I am very intrigued by the definition of intellectual perseverance. There seems to be three parts to this definition, and each has enough depth to stand independent of the other. The definition in its’ entirety is, “(1) Having a consciousness of the need to use intellectual insights and truths in spite of difficulties, obstacles, and frustrations; (2) firm adherence to rational principles despite the irrational opposition of others; (3) a sense of the need to struggle with confusion and unsettled questions over an extended period of time to achieve deeper understanding or insight. I want to take moment and just reflect on my failure to have intellectual perseverance.

                                                        

As I read the definition, I am immediately reminded of times I’ve made emotional decisions. Difficulties, obstacles and frustrations all have a way of making me feel I must respond immediately and with decisive action. Unfortunately, such rash action without much thought often leads me to make poor decisions. When others act irrational, it almost seems as though a, “act irrational” pass has been given! How dare they act so foolish and outrageous, I am going to do the exact same thing! Instead, time to struggle and wrestle with the unsettled questions such as, why are they acting to irrational, should be taken until a deeper understanding or insight can be had.

I can recall spending a summer working as a junior leader for a team of salesmen. One of the senior leaders pulled me to the side one evening after a long shift, and she shared with me how talented she thought I was, but also how she felt I was wanting to steal the spotlight from others. She found me to be acting out of my role, and encouraged me to stay humble and to enjoy my time as a junior leader. My initial response was shock. I could not believe she had based an entire sit down discussion on an accusation that I didn’t feel was grounded in any truth. I wanted to be the superstar? Insane. The shock, that night as I tried to sleep, quickly turned to anger. I felt that I had been attacked, and I had every intention the following morning to rebuke her publically the next morning. I clearly had no concept of intellectual perseverance. I took the matters into my own hands without thinking them through, and my public explosion the following morning only seemed to give her fuel to validate her claims.

Was my anger and action justified? In hindsight, I wish I had sat and thought everything through. I wish I had possessed intellectual perseverance of thinking through my frustration, not letting what I believed to be irrational behavior trigger my own, and to struggle through the anger and emotion until I had a deeper insight of her own perspective.

How can this definition, combined with my own experience of lacking the contents of it, help me in my studies? There will be frustrations, I am sure. There will be obstacles. Team exercises will forward challenges and some irrational behavior, I bet. Confusion, questions about content and people and times of not understanding are beyond the horizon. Intellectual perseverance will not only help me to process things in a metacognitive manner, but also give me a reminder that thinking through issues during a time of difficulty is what being a critical thinker and a leader is about.

My concept of being a good leader is someone who is consistent in making the best decision possible for the greater good, with little to no self-consideration. Being able to do that requires what I now know to be intellectual perseverance.