Learning is a very individual process, meaning that people from different backgrounds, cultures, upbringings, and political affiliations see and process life differently. One individual learning concept that interests me is suicide bombers. The mentality of these suicide bombers is bred through growing up in a collectivist culture. Because they are bred to believe that their lives are not as important as the majority, they are willing to sacrifice them for something they believe to be the greater good. I understand this mentality because it relates to how I feel about my family; these people are willing to sacrifice everything for others, and although I have been raised in an individualist culture, we still believe in protecting our own. 

Another individual learning concept I find interesting is terrorism. One big thing that comes to mind for this topic is the COVID-19 pandemic. There is currently a woman in the United States that fled from Beijing because she is claiming she has proof that the virus was made in a Wuhan lab. For the sake of this example, let’s say this is true and that it actually was made there, which is an example of global terrorism. Leading back to the topic of individual learning, it is important to understand the way officials were raised within China. To be clear, this analysis has nothing to do with the civilians because I believe them to be completely innocent in the matter. As the officials are communist, what they want is for everyone else to be within the same governing body. The officials’ individual learning experience has been all about making China number one and creating a world of communism. 

The next individual learning concept I want to talk about is the idea of saving face. This concept has much to do with the cultural background of the individual. In my life, the idea of saving face is unique to my culture, and since we care about competition and individual gains, it is likely that I will try to save face at the cost of others’ faces. In Chinese culture, they believe in avoiding disagreements and do not often challenge face with one another. Instead, they give face in support of others’ face. This is a good representation of the idea of individual thinking because it shows how different people interact with each other based on how they were raised based on the culture around them. 

The last concept about individual learning is the images of self. I have been raised to be confident, kind, helpful, and understanding, and this has a drastic effect on how I view the world. I would never cause harm to another person unless forced to in threat of my own or someone else’s life, I would never make fun of people, at least to their face. I always try to help people when I can, especially those close to me. This relates to individual learning in that it has everything to do with the culture, background, and upbringing that I have experienced in my life. 

Reference

Moran, R. T., Abramson, N. R., & Moran, S. V. (2014). Managing Cultural Differences (9th ed.). Oxford: Routledge.

During the first lessons of Organizational Leadership 410, I have learned a lot of leadership skills and evaluating topics such as diversity in the workplace.  Differences within groups, differences between groups, and talent observations all lead to establishing diversity in the workplace.  Organizations that establish and maintain deep rooted diversity bring strong leadership teams to the front line as well as deliver operational excellence.

Evaluating differences within groups leads to drawing attention to areas that have key strengths and improvement options available.  These areas within groups often have opportunities to add diversity to bring the best of each employee to the forefront.  Challenging team members through different levels of education, gender, and backgrounds can bring a team to the next level of management.  Acceptance of the way it always has been will deliver the results you always have got, not drive improvement.

Differences between groups can be just as beneficial through additional diversity in the business.  Allowing these individuals to communicate and share ideas between groups can improve company performance and improve the financial outcome.  Often, I have found using the cross functional team approach brings a lot of team members, from different backgrounds together for the common goal and objective completion.  “Organizations establish workforce diversity programs to promote the hiring, inclusion, and promotion of diverse employees and to ensure that differences are accepted and respected in the workplace” (Daft, 2008, p333).    These goals and objectives through cross functional teams often bring greater success than using department teams because of idea sharing and challenging team members through discussions.

Diversity and inclusion will continue to be a key topic of businesses to maintain a successful outcome in years to come.  Regardless of gender, race, religion, education, or age it is critical to establish a diverse workforce across all departments including management staff to bring operational excellence.

References

Richard, D. (2008) The Leadership Experience, Fourth Edition Retrieved from https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Leadership_Experience/JJ_HuV1KlyQC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=example+of+diversity+in+workplace&pg=PA333&printsec=frontcover

As a sales professional, your primary focus is to push your company’s products/services to your prospects and clients.  The importance of being on the road and meeting clients face-to-face is to continue to build your network which is a huge part of a successful salesperson sales strategy.  But what if we are not able to meet clients face-to-face and communicate our services?  When COVID-19 hit, many industries began to see the cancelation of face-to-face meetings, conferences, and networking events.  These cancelations impacted the way sales professionals networked within their industry.  How are sales professionals able to communicate to their clients? Additionally, with offices being closed, individuals are reluctant to meet with you face-to-face during these unprecedented times.

The lack of face-to-face interaction also impacted internal communication within organizations. But how does working from home impact relationships within an organization?  What challenges do employees face regarding communication? People can utilize Skype, Zoom, Microsoft Teams, or Google Talk to arrange a video meeting.  But not having the ability to interact with people in the office face-to-face caused a challenge with communication.  It is more difficult to build relationships and camaraderie through a computer screen.  The so-called water cooler chats between employees talking about the latest office gossip is nonexistent. The lack of personal communication can lead to poor relationships within the workplace.

Another aspect that employees are facing is the lack of culture within an organization. Having the ability to not be able to attend company work events will also negatively impact the employee’s ability to build upon those existing relationships while trying to form new relationships. We see companies starting to implement things like virtual happy hours to improve communication and company culture, but as we can see there is no substitute for personal interaction.

In my past, I worked for a company that we played basketball every Thursday night.  Every employee regardless of ability was invited to play.  Afterwards, employees typically stuck around and shared a few drinks.  We often heard from people not affiliated with the company that this was a great way to build interoffice relationships.  But what people on the outside did not realize is that this weekly activity-built office camaraderie, strong interpersonal relationships, and teamwork. We can see how important these relationships are to an organization and the lengths companies go to grow these relationships.

Telecommuting can cause communication challenges within an organization. So how do employees overcome the communication challenges they face when telecommuting? The distinct challenges such as time zones, cultural differences to the sheer unfamiliarity of using web-based tools to communicate created obstacles that every virtual team must work through.  But are these challenges going away?  Despite these challenges are people going to be called back into their office any time soon.  I believe it is in the better interest of the companies to implement measures to ensure that virtual teams have the training and tools they need to communicate effectively. This implementation would greatly enhance the ability to communicate both in a regional environment and globally. Additionally, we hear terms such as real time awareness when it comes to virtual teams.  But we know that email is not an effective tool when it come to real time communication. Web based product such as team chats have given the ability to team to communicate in real time regardless of where they are located globally.  These types of platforms hold each member of the team accountable and enabled team members to continue to collaborate in person rather than via email.

It’s time to focus on communication.  It’s time to embrace the challenge that companies face with communications and lack of face-to-face interactions in this virtual word and start to utilize new technologies. In today’s world, companies have an advantage to open their open positions to candidates across the globe. Virtual teams in today’s workplace are essential to the success of the organizations.  Time to embrace change in the virtual world!

References:

Blrt Team. 2016, May 11.  In Better Living with Blrt. Retrieved from

https://www.blrt.com/blog/the-advantages-and-disadvantages-of-telecommuting/

Healy, R. 2012, November 1. 5 challenges of telecommuting and how to overcome them. Retrieved from

https://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/outside-voices-careers/2012/11/01/5-challenges-of-telecommuting-and-how-to-overcome-them

Tyler Wansack

OLEAD 410 Blog #1

Pennsylvania State University

Global leadership is “an extraordinary capacity to unify a global workforce around a single purposeful vision, through demonstration of personal mastery, thinking globally, anticipating opportunity and using shared leadership networks” (Greenberg, 2003). Global leadership is something that is difficult to become successful at. For some, being a leader within a profession they understand well is easy. It also helps being in an area of the world where you understand the culture and the diversity that comes with being a leader in that region. It’s a big step from there to become a good global leader because everywhere around the world there are many different points of views, cultural differences, and different types of interpretations when conveying messages.

The company I am using as an example of good global leadership is General Electric. Their Chairmen and CEO Jeffrey Immelt has developed the proper mindset and approach to becoming a great global leader for this organization. GE has their products made within a technology factory not only for a single region but for the entire world. For this company to be successful they needed to incorporate other global leaders and employ global workers to help better understand the culture and diversity of that region. By making decisions to incorporate global diversity into their company has helped them build relationships that impact not only United States citizens but also many other countries citizens.

Jeffery Immelt CEO of GE says “We run the company so that 300,000 people feel the chairman might enter their world at any time. I spend roughly 40% of my time on people issues; so, do our other top leaders.” (Stephen Green, 2014) I like how he spends almost half of his time focusing on people-oriented issues and that these employees feel that the CEO doesn’t put himself on a pedestal. He would rather walk the front lines with the hard-working diverse employees and build personal relationships with as many as he can. That is one trait a global leader should be focused. By placing yourself shoulder to shoulder with the people who keep GE production moving gives the employees a sense of comfort and respect. They realize that this leader does not put himself above others and would rather hear suggestions to help overall better their work environment and provide greater motivation throughout all cultures.

A great global leader can understand the differences within a group and the difference between a group as well. As a company leader you need to know the diversity you are working with within your regional factory by developing cohesion and mutual understanding within your own group allows you to better understand the differences between a group. GE has done this well by making HR more than just something that’s used when needed like most companies. Instead Jeffery explains that they make it a forefront focus, and this helps new coming workers and other leaders from different locations feel incorporated and encouraged to become part of an organization that takes pride in cross cultural environments and good work. Overall, a lot goes into being a good global leader. You need to start with understanding each region’s cultural beliefs and norms and from their you can make the right decisions on how to incorporate individuals from that region into your company. Which will then make a great cross-cultural environment where no one feels alone.

References:

Stephen Green,  . (2014, August 01). In Search of Global Leaders. Retrieved September 21, 2020, from https://hbr.org/2003/08/in-search-of-global-leaders

Goldsmith, M., Greenberg, C.L., Robertson, A., & Hu-Chan, M. (2003). Global leadership: The NEXT GENERATION. New York: Prentice Hall.

Northouse, P. G. (2015). Leadership: Theory and practice. Los Angeles: Sage.

Within the last week, the US Army has taken a step towards modifying their culture by eliminating an event that has been more “shock and awe” than it was beneficial. What has become known as the “shark attack”, an event where recruits are first introduced to their Drill Sergeants.

Recruits spend the first five to six days in a reception company which is led by cadre, recruits receive uniforms, immunizations, and are run through a variety of events that prepare them administratively for basic combat training. Afterward, they are shipped via bus to their new company barracks where they will live and conduct basic training.  Upon arrival they are greeted by their company’s Drill Sergeants, their introduction comes in the form yelling and screaming (instruction) to exit the bus and are continuously fed instructions by Drill Sergeants via portable megaphone.  The distance from the parking lot to the assembly area can be less than 100 meters, but as 200 to 240 stressed recruits all carrying their newly issued belongings in duffel bags, combined with ten to fifteen Drill Sergeants circling, with many zeroing in on the slowest recruit within the herd is a scene resemblant of a “shark attack”.

“People believe that if you learned the language, you could make yourself understood in a foreign culture” the shark attack is an event where recruits must rapidly learn a new language through stress and momentary chaos (Moran, Abramson, & Moran, 2014, p. 35).  “Edward Hall the founder of the intercultural communication field, argued as much as 80 to 90 percent of the message we communicate or receive is nonverbal” this statement rings true during the shark attack (Moran, Abramson, & Moran, 2014, p. 35). As chaos ensues, recruits often merge into a herd and mimic the person next to them, whether its emptying duffel bags, or raising an item of equipment, many are confused, they are no longer listening, and resort to using nonverbal methods to interpret the message.

According to Fisher (2020), “The shark attack was seen as a way to launch trainees into a whole new way of life in which they’d have to obey the Army’s rules and listen closely to and follow instructions. The aim was to first establish psychological dominance – impress upon them at the outset that now that they’re in the Army, the Army’s the boss.”

As organizations across the world have been forced to experience change due to COVID-19, through layoffs, telework, and the determination of essential vs non-essential personnel. Changes due to the virus have altered the organizational culture for all employers. The US Army has had to experience its changes due to the virus. As recruits enter the Army, they come from every part within the United States and converge for three months to conduct basic training, creating an environment that is prime for the spread of a highly contagious virus. Senior Army leaders had to consider continuing an event that has become a rite of passage versus the risks associated with a global pandemic.

As we look at the US Army as an employer with its own set of values, vision, and mission.  Are there substantial benefits from allowing Drill Sergeants to continue this one event, and how do they align with the organization’s values and culture? The image of a Drill Sergeant yelling in a recruit’s face has been glamorized by movies and has become a bragging right for veterans. As organizations are forced to transform, the Army is no exception. An alternative to the shark attack is still in development, but, leaders like Command Sergeant major Fortenberry who is in charge of the Army’s school of infantry, are considering a replacement for the shark attack version of reception with a newer version that better aligns with the values, attitude, and history that makes up the Army as a culture (Fisher, 2020). Fisher explains “The shark attack, Fortenberry says, “was developed during our draft Army years, were the cornerstones of the event were to establish dominance and authority using intimidation and fear to weed out the weak of heart.”  The replacement to the shark attack is an obstacle like an event that forces teamwork through stress and better aligns with the generations entering the military and the culture that the US Army aims to produce.

References

Fisher, F., (2020). Infantry School ends traditional “shark attack,” adopts new way of instilling

warrior ethos in recruits. Army.mil. Retrieved from https://www.army.mil/article/239135/infantry_school_ends_traditional_shark_attack_adopts_new_way_of_instilling_warrior_ethos_in_recruits

Moran, R.T., Abramson, N.R., & Moran, S.V. (2014). Managing Cultural Differences 9^th edition. Oxford: Routlege.

I’ll admit that I missed the mark on thoroughly describing differences within and differences between for a recent assignment.  I didn’t look deep enough, and I wasn’t sensitive enough to the small nuances that can make a big difference in understanding who people are and why people behave the way they do.  There is a noteworthy difference in individual characteristics from those of group generalizations, and this topic is not only significant to our success as professionals, but it’s personal to people as it recognizes each of us for our uniqueness.

Analyzing differences involves the examination of how people within a group differ among members (differences within) and also how one group of people differs from another group (differences between).  For example, language is a key factor in determining the meaning and success of communication; research shows that “language cannot be understood properly when analyzed devoid of its social underpinnings” (Gefen, Geri & Paravastu, 2007, p. 11).

Diversity speaks to the differences between individuals.  Differences within groups compare a vast array of differences for all individuals in a group, such as height, religious beliefs, gender, eye color, age, meal preferences, smoking preference, sexual preference, social status… name a variable and it will likely count as a difference (Pennsylvania State University, 2020, para. 6).  Differences are what make us unique, that is, our precise differences, but culture is what makes people similar.

Culture speaks to the “differences between groups in terms of trends or averages” (Pennsylvania State University, 2020, para. 7).  When it comes to communication under the lenses of differences between, “results also provide additional explanations why women sense more social presence in business e-mail than men do…cross-gender communications have cross-culture aspects to them” (Gefen & Straub, 1997, as cited by Gefen, Geri & Paravastu, 2007, p. 11).  Certain groups, collectively, do in fact behave differently.  “As sociolinguistics claim, men and women apply language, and communication in general, to such a differing social objectives that cross-gender communications can be sometimes best seen as nothing less than cross-cultural miscommunications among people with differing cultural backgrounds (Tannen,.1994, as cited by Gefen, Geri & Paravastu, 2007, p. 9).

Without considering differences, we’re likely to stereotype.  “The study of culture and the study of stereotyping are fundamentally and inherently linked, as culture is the vehicle through which stereotypic knowledge is transferred within a society and across generations” (Williams & Spencer‐Rodgers, 2010, p. 592).  Collectivist cultures, such as Asian cultures, may stereotype more readily as “a consequence of a greater emphasis on agentic, entitative social groups,” because of “the degree to which they predict prejudice and discrimination” (Williams & Spencer‐Rodgers, 2010, p. 599).  Interestingly, collectivist cultures are also more likely to “incorporate situational and contextual factors,” rather than form opinions based on perceived personality traits (Williams & Spencer‐Rodgers, 2010, p. 596).

People want to be accepted similar to how they conceive themselves, in both deep-level diversity (beliefs, values, attitudes) and surface-level diversity (hair color, weight) (Pennsylvania State University, 2020, para. 5). Without an understanding of differences, missteps will be problematic in a work environment and sweeping generalizations will be made.  “Perceived consensus about the attributes of the ingroup, as well as attributes of outgroups, serves to demarcate ingroup boundaries and facilitate interpersonal relations” (Williams & Spencer‐Rodgers, 2010, p. 592).

Leaders need to unify and recognize that the difference in the mean or averages between groups is not a representation of any individual, it’s simply a representation of a group (Pennsylvania State University, 2020, para. 5).  In general, recognizing differences within is most important, as these differences will always be greater than the differences between groups, even if the decision will affect a large group (Pennsylvania State University, 2020).  Let’s remember that one-size-fits-all strategies in organizations often fail, just as it does with raising children or buying clothing.

References:

Gefen, D., Geri, N., & Paravastu, N. (2007). Vive la différence: The cross-culture differences within us. International Journal of E-Collaboration, 3(3), 1-15. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/10.4018/jec.2007070101

The Pennsylvania State University. (2020). Leadership Global Context: OLEAD 410, Lesson 1: Introduction to leadership in a global context. Retrieved from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/2075490/modules/items/29697147

Treviño, L. K., & Nelson, K. A. (2107) Managing business ethics: Straight talk about how to do it right (7th ed.). Hoboken: Wiley.

Williams, M. J., & Spencer‐Rodgers, J. (2010), Culture and stereotyping processes: integration and new directions. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4, 591-604. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00288.x

Human rights are an important topic that seems to be talked about more often in today’s world than it has in the past thirty or forty years.  Human rights are universal standards for the treatment of all people.  These rights typically include ideas such as dignity, liberty, and freedom from discrimination.   

The most widely recognized set of human rights is the United Nations’ 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was formed after World War II to prevent atrocities from happening to people globally.  It is based on the values of “universality, interdependence and indivisibility, equality and non-discrimination, and that human rights simultaneously entail both rights and obligations” (United Nations, n.d.).  Over 50 nations participated in creating the declaration.  This shows that human rights should be considered as a universal agreement. 

In our country, the laws can come from the federal level, the state level, and the city level.  The Department of Labor, the Department of Justice, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission are the three major departments in the United States that deal with these topics.  Other countries can have their own laws regarding human rights, so it is important to pay attention to those as well.  The Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination in employment based on race, color, religion, sex, and national origin is probably the most well-known one in the United States.  There is also the age discrimination act of 1967, which prohibits discriminating against people over the age of 40 in employment.  Another common one in the workplace is the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, which prohibits discriminating against people with disabilities if they are able to perform the job.   

In recent years, several issues have been brought to the forefront that could be considered human rights issues.  There have been countless protests over these issues, but while it might be causing some change at some levels, is it really going to cause a culture shift?  In a previous class, we went in depth on Dr. Martin Luther King Jr and his messages.  He felt that the United States will not change until it gets away from the capitalist economy.  He felt that as long as profit was the number one goal for people, decency and human rights would always take a back seat.  One of his examples was slavery, which is a good example.  Why pay workers if you can get the same results from free labor?  That decreases your payroll and increases your profit.  No one worried about the fact that slavery and what they did to those slaves is extremely wrong on a human rights level.  Another example that he used was the Vietnam War.  I had never learned this part, which made me curious.  According to King, the Vietnamese people were trying to secede from France at the time, similarly to what the US had done to England before.  He then said that the reason why we fought Vietnam is because it was more profitable for us to side with France.  If this is true, it completely ignores doing the right thing, solely for money.  Also, he notes that the government told the people that the goal was to stop the spread of communism, when in reality, only a very small percentage of the Vietnamese people wanted communism.  I personally think that you can still have a capitalist economy while also paying attention to human rights, but maybe I am being unrealistic. 

Although they seem obvious to some people, like me, human rights still seem to be an issue all over the world.  It just doesn’t make sense to me that people would discriminate or show bias over things like race, nationality, etc.  I feel that each human should be dealt with as their own individual self as a person.  I’m not a religious person, but the term “sins of the father” comes to my head on this topic as well.  If you meet a person and automatically decide that do not like them because you do not like their father, is that fair?  The same thing goes with things like racism.  Just because someone of a different race did something that makes you uncomfortable, is it fair to then hold that against other people of that race?  When you say it out loud like that, the answer seems pretty obvious. 

References 

United Nations. Universal Declaration of Human Rights. United Nations. https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/index.html. 

Pennsylvania State University.  OLEAD 410.  Fall 2020.  Retrieved from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/2075490/modules/items/29697161 

Pennsylvania State University.  OLEAD 410.  Fall 2020.  Retrieved from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/2075490/modules/items/29697162