Month: July 2021

It’s been quite the experience taking the theories from papers, assignments, and whatnot, and applying them to a real-life situation; it’s a great feeling to actually be a positive impact to an organization using what you’ve learned. I was even more pleasantly surprised by the experience – perhaps you all can related – of accidentally using methods and theories from OD, finding that, even if I can’t rattle all the specifics off on demand, they’ve somehow burrowed their way into my mind to be used when it counts.

It’s been a pleasure working with the students with whom I’ve had some sort of connection with – through group projects, discussion groups, or what have you – and a few of the professors I’ve been able to chat with along the way. I hope to connect with all of you in the future, and best of luck to everyone.

CV Here:  https://app.enhancv.com/share/49311072?utm_medium=growth&utm_campaign=share-resume&utm_source=dynamic

 

AlejandroJGutierrezResume (9) (1)

 

 

 

I’ve learned a few things from the OD approach and applying it to real-world projects, as well as using it as a lens to view the work of others and their organizations.

I think the most important thing I’ve seen is the power of buy-in, and being wary of “fake” buy-in. From my startup and account management days, I’ve long known that many people will say “we should work together!” without actually following through on anything. People will tell each other “that’s a great business idea,” but then never buy the product or put in any energy to support their entrepreneur friends. People will want to make changes, then fall short of doing so. It’s not because people are evil or malicious, it’s simply that you’re not asking the right questions, and building the structure you need, to get the results you’re looking for.
Hence, my biggest take-away is that you need to have a confident vision and make sure the people you need with you are buckled in for the ride. More recently, after a long, fruitless search to actually get a project going – and having MANY promising opportunities and empty verbal or written commitments along the way – I’ve seen this firsthand. It’s quite hard to become a priority to someone, or champion a cause that is a priority to an organization – especially on an authentic level that goes beyond lip service.

As an example I see in pop culture, DEI practitioners know exactly what I’m talking about, for example – the recent national unrest has led to a new focus on DEI, but a few key components beg some questions:

• This is nothing new, so why do we suddenly care? What does it say about what input we are willing to take seriously that we only now care?
• Why are we still focusing the conversation on entities that are NOT the people the conversation is meant to reach and help? (e.g. having policy and press statements, but not talking to individual employees or stakeholders who fit the demographics organizations “want” to reach – the classic “NFL / Google” syndrome)
• The overall focus on optics over results, e.g. creating hyper-visible roles for more black people rather than addressing why the talent pipeline is inequitable and doing something about that
• The semantic creation of “diversity” as an umbrella term, rather than addressing and understanding unique needs of various communities
• A widespread lack of understanding of the actual benefits of a diverse and equitable workplace, and instead placing the burden entirely on some sort of moral imperative

 

 

—————

In the past, I did marketing consulting with startup companies. Many of them were very excited about launching an app or a product, but none of them really ever considered the questions that actually mattered:

• People said they think this product is cool, but will someone actually buy this product?
• Rather than care about downloads, is your app going to become one of the ten apps or so that people actually use every day or at least several times a week? If not, you’re largely wasting your time.

 

I’ve felt some parallels between this marketing consulting approach and OD projects; a sponsor may think you have a great idea, and want the changes you can bring. They may want everything to do with your work and commit fully. However, if you can’t make it a priority for them, something that’s going to be near their top of mind, you have a high chance of ending up in project purgatory – especially during the work from home era. If the proper level of buy-in isn’t created, the moment of commitment will be the highest level of motivation that the sponsor has – and it’s only downhill from there. This is not unlike all of us in our personal lives as we seek to make healthy habits that don’t stick – you get a little emotional boost from planning to meditate every day, but when day 6 rolls around you will find your motivation has dwindled. That’s because it’s not about the motivation, it’s about the habits, perceptions, mindset, and systems created to reach the goal.

 

Buy-in isn’t so different.

I have been heavily influenced over time (and led to study OD) by a few factors.
For one, I am a very analytical person who likes to recognize larger themes and connect them (this is in line with my Strengthsfinder evaluation as a “strategist”), as well as a person who is constantly driven for change and improvement. While this is not always linear and not always inherently good, I do subscribe to a growth mindset and try to cultivate it in all things.
For another, I am a huge closet nerd and have always been fascinated with neuroscience, sociology, behavioral economics, personal growth, and the future of work and leisure management. I am an avid consumer of the content of the likes of Richard Thaler, Dan Ariely, Adam Grant, and the Freakonomics crew (Stephen Dubner and Steven Levitt), TED talks, design podcasts and work, books on marketing, decision making, cognitive biases, and achievement, books on fulfillment (like Designing Your Life by Burnett and Evans) and habits (like the work of Nir Eyal, BJ Fogg, and James Clear) and neurological processes (The Social Animal by David Brooks). I originally worked with startups and marketing, finding those areas fascinating, but eventually realized that what I enjoyed about them was the empowerment of startups and the creative process of marketing.

In a nutshell, I am of the opinion that we (Americans, but also others – and probably more so in many cases, as supported by anecdotal experience but also work like that of the Geert Hofstede institute) spend so much time working, and so much time (hypothetically) in leisure, but fail to examine these activities from a standpoint of personal fulfillment and alignment with goals. Especially as it pertains to work, the Human Capital revolution is upon us (accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic) and we are at a crossroads where we can choose to run with the current research and modern world, understanding that profit and human happiness are not mutually exclusive – or we can take a step backward, choosing instead outdated views of how people, culture, and business work.

I am also very passionate about equity and the gradual eradication of racism and the like, and the new focus on DEI (or DIBs) as a vehicle for the above change – placing value on the individual, with their individual success being a part of the organization, and their unique characteristics and perspective forming a competitive edge rather than a burden – allows for a way to integrate that passion as well.

 

• I believe that the only constant is flux, and it is equally important to hold to known truths as it is to question those truths and explore alternative ways of doing things or looking at things. Empowered employees, in line with Bion’s work, can overcome the obstacles and conflicts inherent in perpetual growth.
• The only real change comes from within, and cannot be forced. To this end, all levels of an organization deserve a voice.
• We are less in control of our raw willpower and outcomes than we want to think, so a solid process is crucial for success, and especially repeated success.
• I believe that, in the case of DEI, “diversity” has become a largely umbrella and toothless term, seeking to manipulate the output of a system rather than impact meaningful change on the input. Equitable systems and opportunities must be put into place to achieve downstream change, and each demographic group must be treated according to their individual considerations, strengths, and needs.
• OD, and consulting in general, should serve the purpose of the client and allow the client to get closer to their chosen goals and level of achievement, in accordance with their culture and values.

I see Lewin’s work present in the current movement for DEI movements – employees need to feel involved, invested, and “seen” in order to do their best work and commit to an organization. Zappo’s is famous for engineering a unique “buy-in” strategy where they actually pay their employees to quit at any time; thereby, just by showing up an employee is making the choice to work and so feels better about being there. In modern DEI theory, employees perform better when they feel like they are valued and seen in their unique identity, as opposed to minorities having to hide certain aspects of themselves to fit into the predominant straight white male business culture.

I also am fascinated by MacGregor’s X and Y theories, and I think the convergence of those two mindsets sets the stage for the conflict I mentioned above. Especially in a post-COVID-19 world where human capital is key as the battle for top talent intensifies (as lower-level work further separates from higher-level work, not completely unrelated to the largely remote capabilities of the latter), the X and Y forms of human nature and management are coming to a head, and a tolerance for working for X type employers is waning. Y type, I believe, is a lot more suited for a world where self-discovery, problem-solving, empowerment, etc. are increasingly important in a more complex world with more and more resources available to the intrinsically motivated.