Egg Mangament of Special "K"

Hi everybody. Looking back to our group activity and comparing the experience our group has gone through I would like to share my thoughts about it.

Step 1. Define your goals and objectives  

This step didn’t create any problems for our group because the goal, the direction we were going to and the time frame was stated very clear,

·     Inventing of a device to protect egg from breaking/cracking falling from 10 feet

·     development of a complete plan in 25 minutes

·        implementation of the obtained plan using available materials

·        presenting the device and its model and performing the experiment. From the begging the goal did not look difficult from the begging.

Step 2. Evaluate your resources compared to objectives  

This stage was kind of disappointing for us, we realized that the paper towels that were on lying on the table as well are not a part of our “inventory” and everything we have for the construction purposes were 9 straws and 2 feet of masking tape. We also realized that there weren’t people with any painting talents or architectural abilities, or even people who were acquitted with the matter-shortly we didn’t have professionals for the required task; However, our precious strength was Competitive spirit, Enthusiasm, and Creativity.

Step 3. Develop premises and several alternative strategies

We jumped into this step very fast and possibly didn’t spend enough time and attention to previous two stages which might work in our disadvantage.

The stage of invention didn’t seem difficult for the members of our group and we created a few possible setups for the future device. However, the problem was that we didn’t accurately estimated materials we possessed and their actual sizes. 

Step 4. Analyze alternatives and make a tactical plan  

This stage was not completed by our team as I see it. Even though we had many ideas in our minds we spent too much time to discuss the m instead of focusing on one particular model of th e device and make it excel, think out all the small details and go over all possible unfortunate outcomes and how we can eliminate them.

Step 5. Implement the plan and evaluate results  

What can be said here, the plan didn’t work the way we planned it to work. There were a few reasons for it I believe:

• Lack of concentration of a particular model and spending too much time choosing the right design
• Lack of consideration of possible weak sides and work towards their elimination

 

As I see largely this exercise was targeting to show us how it feels to work as a team in a situation closely resembled reality, limited resources, time, people. It was a challenging assignment on usage creativity, group work, and ability to plan properly, distribute responsibilities among all group members effectively and make some conclusions based upon group’s performance.

Even though we haven’t achieved the goal, overall experience was very fulfilling and enjoyable as well as cognitive for all of us.

Just a few out of many or how different we all are...

Talking here as a Russian person who came to the US a few years ago I still have relatively fresh look at cultural differences between America and Russia, where I'm originally from. But what I found interesting is that I had to take some time to think about all the cultural distinctions that astonished me the first time I got to the States. Apparently I assimilated faster than I thought I would.
       The main dissimilarities that influence many other discrepancies take root from different mentalities of highly individualistic and personalized approach of western civilization in the US and a long time historical collectivism and socialism that influences mind set of generations. What also brought my attention is that Russian and American people think in different categories, in Russia people don’t look at the future more than 5 years ahead meanwhile in the US people plan their lives ahead and try to follow it. This phenomenon also comes from different economical and political stability in the countries which influence people’s way of thinking about the future.

From the parenting point of view our cultures differ too, which I found very curious. The Russian fathers generally care less about children and the opposite is true for the American fathers. This can be a result of maturity also because Russian couples on average have kids earlier than American couples. The woman in Russia usually the ones who want children in the first place and they are very caring mothers no matter if their kid is 5, 25 or 50 years old, which can be annoying sometimes. Whereas American women does not seem to be so much into having children, even though they might like them. They concern more about their careers and themselves first and think about kids later (individualism what can you do). I personally think closer to American way who have children later, build their carriers first, and take equal responsibilities for rising their children.

One last interesting thing I would like to mention here as well is stereotypes....yes, old fashioned stereotypes who in our modern, progressed and technological advanced world still rule people's opinion about features that each culture has when there is a lack of awareness. And stereotypes by American people about Russian are not an exception. Some of them are funny and harmless and some are kind of nasty and unpleasant for me as the Russian person. I bet many people would understand what I’m trying to say here so let me stick just to the funny ones. The stereotypical understanding is that Russia is a faraway, snowy country, where one must wear a fur coat and valenki (felt boots), people do nothing but drink vodka and play balalaikas, while bears are leaving their forest homes to go walking down village streets. This stereotype is still popular and it makes me laugh every time I hear it. However, it also reminds me that I myself also should not make opinions about a culture based on stereotypes and common believes because there is so much more to it that for a manager who wants to expand internationally it can be critical.

Not mentioned Theory Z or “Japanese Management”

      Concerns about the competitiveness of U. S. companies led some to examine Japanese management practices for clues to the success enjoyed by many of their industries. This led to many articles and books purporting to explain the success of Japanese companies. It was in this atmosphere that Theory Z was introduced into the management lexicon.

Theory Z is humanistic approach to management approach by William Ouchi. 

The key features of Japanese industrial organizations, according to Ouchi are as follows:

• Offer lifetime employment (at least for their core workers).
• Insist on mandatory retirement of core workers at age 55.
• Employ a large number of temporary employees mostly women.
• There is a high degree of mutual trust and loyalty between management and employees.
• Career paths are non-specialized with life-long job rotation as a central feature of career development.
• Decision making is shared at all levels.
• Performance appraisal is long term (i.e. the first appraisal takes place 10 years after joining the company).
• There is a strong sense of collective responsibility for the success of the organization.
• And cooperation effort rather than individual achievement is encourage.

Although Ouchi recognizes that many of the features of Japanese management could not be translated into Western industrial society, he believes that certain features could be applied in a Western context. The move from the present hierarchical type of organization to a Theory Z type organization is a process which:

·         Lifelong employment prospects

·         Shared forms of decision-making

·         Relationship between boss and subordinate based on mutual respect

Ironically, "Japanese Management" and Theory Z itself were based on Dr. W. Edwards Deming's famous "14 points". Deming, an American scholar whose management and motivation theories were rejected in the United States, went on to help lay the foundation of Japanese organizational development during their expansion in the world economy in the 1980s.

http://www.businessballs.com/mcgregor.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_Z

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._Edwards_Deming

http://www.hci.com.au/hcisite2/articles/deming.htm

Continuing the Topic of Great Managers. Lee Iacocca the man who saved Chrysler.

Lido Anthony "Lee" Iacocca (born October 15, 1924) is an American businessman known for his revival of the Chrysler Corporation in the 1980s, serving as President and CEO from 1978 and additionally as chairman from 1979, until his retirement at the end of 1992. Lee is one of the most famous business people in the world.

Lee says there is one word that describes a good manager, and it is DECISIVENESS. You have to think on your feet. Lee Iacocca brought in many new in management.

At Ford Motor Company

Joining Ford as an engineering trainee in 1946, Iacocca soon entered the fast pace of sales. In 1960, at age thirty-six, he sped into the vice presidency and general managership of the company's most important unit, Ford Division. In 1964, with others on his staff, he launched the Ford Mustang, which, thanks to brilliant styling and marketing, introduced a new wave of sports cars, set a first-year sales record for any model, gave its name to a generation, and landed its creator's picture on the covers of Time and Newsweek.
In 1960 Iacocca was named Ford's vice president of the car and truck group; in 1967, executive vice president; and in 1970, president. Pocketing an annual salary and bonus of $977,000, the flashy executive also earned a reputation as one of the greatest salesmen in U.S. history. Of Iacocca, it has been said that he was always selling, whether products, ideas—or himself.

From Ford to Chrysler

Iacocca was let go from Ford Motor Company in June 1978 by Chairman Henry Ford II for reasons Ford never revealed. Though bitter at being dismissed from Ford, Iacocca was not out of the car business for long. Five months after his dismissal, Iacocca was named president of Chrysler (becoming chairman in 1979) and began transforming the number three automaker from a sluggish moneymaker into a highly profitable business.
How was Chrysler turned around? By downsizing (to make smaller) expenses to a much lower break-even point; by winning approval of $1.5 billion in federal loan guarantees; by selling off profitable units such as the tank division; and by introducing timely products. In addition, Chrysler welcomed, for the first time in U.S. corporate history, a union president to a board of directors. In 1984 the company posted profits of $2.4 billion (higher than in the previous sixty years combined), and in 1985 it bought Gulf-stream Aerospace Corporation for $637 million and E. F. Hutton Credit Corporation for $125 million.
In the early 1980s Chrysler issued the K-car and what would later become its best seller—the minivan. Just as the Mustang reestablished the sports car for Ford, the minivan would be loved by the young family in need of room and efficiency and revitalize Chrysler. In 1983 Chrysler paid the government back its loans and Iacocca became a star, a symbol of success and the achievement of the American dream.
Along with spearheading Chrysler's rise, Iacocca took leadership roles in many noteworthy causes, most notably the chairmanship of the President's Statue of Liberty-Ellis Island Centennial Commission, which was set up to raise funds for and to oversee restoration of the two monuments in New York City. While Iacocca gained a worldwide reputation through business leadership, television commercials, and association with the Statue of Liberty, he gained much additional exposure through his 1984 autobiography (a book written by someone about their life). Iacocca: An Autobiography, the best-selling nonfiction hardcover book in history, had two million copies in print by July 1985.

                 Lee Iacocca’s “Nine Cs of Leadership”

1. Curiosity
2. Creativity
3. Communication
4. Character
5. Courage
6. Conviction
7. Charisma
8. Competence
9. Common Sense

If you are interested to read more about 9 C's by Lee or just interested to read some more about Lee, here is where (interestingly enough he also has a blog):


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Iacocca

http://leeiacocca.blogspot.com/

http://www.northeasternconsulting.com/mainsite/casestudies/files/block_0/Leadership_Briefs09.pdf

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/l/lee_iacocca.html
http://www.examiner.com/business-in-national/lee-iacocca-the-man-who-saved-chrysler-and-made-300-million-for-the-government