A630.2.4.RB_DiazBrian

This week we viewed the video RSA Animate - 21st Century Enlightenment. Why do I think it is titled 21st Century Enlightenment?  The world is constantly evolving, constantly changing.  The climate of relationships among societies, individuals, governments and countries is also in a state of constant evolution.  The thoughts and ideas of the 20th century are no longer applicable to the modern era.  When Matthew Taylor talks about 21st Century Enlightenment I think he is referring to the state of awareness modern people have, their acceptance of change, and how it applies to life as we know it today.  Since the 20th century we have made strides (as noted by Taylor) on issues such as race, gender, and sexuality.  There seems to be more acceptance to these issues in the 21st century.

I have a perfect example.  Back in 1998, before the turn of the century I worked at a restaurant with an openly gay co-worker named Tim.  He was the first gay friend I ever had (knowingly anyway).  He was a really nice guy.  Funny, endearing, and always upbeat.  I never gave much thought to his sexual preference because to me personally it did not matter.  But little did I know how much it did to others.  When you work with someone 8-10 hours a day 5 to 6 days a week you begin to develop a bond.  You get to really know someone and I was fortunate enough to get to know Tim.  We'd catch a beer after work every once and a while and he really opened up to me.  I had no idea what it was like to grow up gay and this poor kid had to live in a world of secrecy his whole life.  He lived in fear because of his orientation and the backlash he would get if others knew his secret.  He told me he didn't start living his life as an openly gay man until after high school when he moved away from his town.  I remember one particular evening when I was going to meet some of my friends for some beers after I got out of work.  I invited Tim and he joined us.  I was so embarrassed.  When my friends realized Tim was obviously gay they treated him differently.  Not mean but they did not make him feel welcomed, quite the opposite.  I could read it on Tim's face that he was uncomfortable because of how they were receiving him.  He left early and my one friend say "How can you hang out with a gay guy?"  My response was simple.  "What difference does it make if he's gay.  Does that make him any different just because he's gay?  He is a person that has feelings just like anybody else."  I let them know I didn't think it was cool how they treated him.  Tim later confided in me that he was HIV positive.  I lost touch with him after I moved.  I found out that he had died after I moved to Orlando, after the turn of the century.  It was still very taboo at the time to be out.  Fast forward to 2014 and kids are coming out in middle school.  And what happened to my friends who were anti-gay?  They became parents.  And guess what (because I have asked)?  If they found out that their kids where gay they wouldn't love them any less.  They would accept it.  Funny how times and ideas can change.

What Taylor suggests when he says"to live differently, you have to think differently" is that in order for change to be effectuated, as distinct individuals we have the ability to alter or change our mindset in a positive manner in order to impact society positively as a whole.  My wife has had an estranged relationship with her mother.  Her parents divorced because of her mother's infidelity and this caused great strain in their relationship.  As a parent one of the things you are responsible for is to provide your children with a caring and nurturing environment.  As a result of her mother's decisions my wife's world was turned upside down and it impacted her through into adulthood.  The relationship between her and her mother became that not of mother daughter but of enemy, enemy.  When we became pregnant with our son I recall my wife on many occasions pronounce that her relationship with our son would never be as damaged as her and her mothers.  She vowed to "break the cycle" of negativity.  She made the conscious decision to "live differently and think differently".  She promised to make certain she never hurt our son mentally the way she was.  And she has lived by that vow.  She is an amazing mother.

Taylor quotes Kegan when he says "we need to resist our tendencies to make right or true that which is merely familiar and wrong or false that which is strange".  What does he mean?  I believe what Kegan is referring to at its core is the development of character.  Our character develops at an early age and can be influenced by both people and events in our lives.  Experiences can dictate how we develop our values.  For instance if you grow up in an environment that is cold and void of compassion chances are as you grow up it will be difficult for you to be an empathetic or compassionate.  When I was little my family did not have a lot of extra money.  I played in a youth club soccer league and all of the other children's parents bought them name brand soccer cleats.  Also every one's cleats were black.  My parents could only afford to buy me cleats from Wal-Mart.  And they were white so they stuck out like a sore thumb.  I used to be so embarrassed to be the only kid on the team with different colored cheap shoes.  They were so cheap that the cleats actually started to fall of after a while.  My teammates never made me feel bad about this but my father knew it bothered me.  This led to my first lesson in humility.  My father explained to me why they could only afford $20 shoes and not $60.  If I got the $60 pair of shoes what would the family eat?  He taught me that the shoes didn't make me who I was as a player.  My play spoke for me on the field whether I was wearing $20 shoes or was barefoot.  I learned a valuable lesson.  As I develop into a leadership role with my organization I plan on remaining humble, compassionate, and trustworthy.  My values shall be  a reflection of my character.

As I reflect on the notion of whether or not it would be possible for our society to eschew the elements of pop culture that degrades people I thought of examples of such behavior.

• Rap music that degrades or belittles women and objectifies their existence.
• Hate groups that target others based on ethnicity, sexual orientation, or religion.
• War, and the role of nations and governments.

To curb these types of behavior would take an immense undertaking.  As an optimist I want with every fiber of my being to believe we really could make these changes.  As a realist I understand that the obstacles in the road seem insurmountable.  If we as a global society banded together and focused on teaching our children to have empathy for not only their friends or neighbors but for everyone, black, white, purple, gay, Catholic, Protestant, etc.,we could lay the foundation for a utopian society.  What a wonderful place that would be...

Organizational change efforts require a planned strategy to bring about organizational change.  It typically involves a collaborative approach with an emphasis on ways to improve performance and quality.  It is concerned with the interrelationships of divisions, groups, and subsystems.  It is based on the scientific approach to increase effectiveness.  If individuals cannot adopt these concepts then the destructive behavior will drive out the constructive and collaborative effort that is necessitated for organizational change to be implemented. 

I found this to be one of the more difficult exercises I have completed to date.  It challenged my critical thinking skills more so than any other assignment I have had to date.  I must have watched this video ten times!  The main concept I will take away from this exercise is that I have the power to make change... to make a difference.  If I practice what I preach it may have an infectious effect on those I might lead and that type of result can be beneficial to organizational development.

Some questions I have  as a result of this exercise are:

• How can I prepare to stay ahead of the curve as it relates to organizational development?  Is it possible to be in a leadership role and not lose touch with your team members?
• If I could make a change in my organization today what would it be?
• How could I create a  harmonious environment within my organization that other companies would want to emulate?  What more could be done to increase productivity?

A630.1.4.RB_DiazBrian

As I reflect on the two main organizations I have worked for, I am reminded of the only constant in organizational development.  That constant is change.  Brown (2011) noted "Although many organizations have been able to to keep pace with the changes in information technology, fewer firms have been able to adapt to changing social and cultural conditions.  In a dynamic environment, change is unavoidable." (p. 6). 

At this point in my career I have not professionally been in a parallel situation to the scenario that played out in the YouTube video, A Tale of Power and Vision.  However, along the way in my professional career I have met pessimists, pragmatists, visionaries, power players and crowds within an organization.  In my previous line of work as a paralegal I discovered that the organization I worked for was very anti-change.  Their mentality was that they had remained "successful" for "X" amount of years because they had always stayed "true" to their roots.  Coming out of college I wondered why some of their systems were not more modern.  For instance most law firms have moved to a paperless system.  All files are digitized.  While this practice is expensive up front, in the long run you save money on such expenditures as paper (lots and lots of paper), ink, numerous copiers, filing cabinets, folders, etc.  Not to mention the number of man hours employees spent each week hunting for files.  I could look for a single file for days!  Searching for files on a daily basis equated to a lot of wasted labor that could have been directed towards other important tasks.  It did not take me long to learn that this organization's mentality was that "if it is not broke, don't fix it".  More surprising to me was the impact this mentality had on the staff that had been there for years, and the direct affect the organization's lack of vision had on them.

I got to be close friends with one of my co-workers at the firm.  He had been with the company nearly 10 years.  He was the epitome of a pessimist.  "Dave" hated working for the firm,  Hated it!  His outlook on things was always very bleak and he never had anything good to say about the company.  Even though he'd been with the company for a number of years he was always worried that he was going to be fired or that the company was looking to get rid of him.  His attitude was not a healthy one and there were no positive aspects of his feelings towards the organization.  I recall asking Dave "If you are so unhappy hear why don't you get another job?"  He would reply "What if I leave and the job I go to doesn't work out for me?"  He had no hope for the future and was afraid to make a change.  I think he became an unfortunate victim of the culture of this organization.  Then there was "Jeremy" who was also a paralegal.  Jeremy was the epitome of a pragmatist.  He also did not like working for the firm, had been there a few years, but was content with the way things were.  Even though he made it very clear to me he didn't like the way things were.  Jeremy had a little bit more ambition than Dave but was happy in the present and was content with the way things were.  He had a very practical approach to working for the firm.  I did not consider this organization to be "normal" so I don't believe that Jeremy's (or Dave's) attitude was either necessary or healthy.  The only positive aspect of Jeremy's pragmatism was that he did believe he could have a better future.  Not with this particular organization but in other interests that he had.  The negative effect of his pragmatism was that he was content with the matter of fact manner in which he was "programmed" to approached his job.  I feel it stifled his creativity and kept him from pursuing his true love (music).

Working at Embry Riddle for less than a year I have seen several examples of how this organization is committed  to change.  They are constantly trying to improve their processes.  The perspective they take is that there is always an opportunity to improve and perfect upon existing practices.  Embry Riddle embraces technology and is committed to providing a superior level of education.  For example we recently had our monthly departmental meeting.  We were informed at this meeting that a new committee had been formed specifically tasked with innovating new procedures that would benefit the Worldwide Campus.  Their goal is to improve the manner in which we serve the university and its students.  These individuals are visionaries.  The creation of this committee can only enhance and benefit the university.  The positive aspect of these visionaries is that they could improve the efficiency, productivity, competitiveness, and overall quality of service we provide.  The negative aspects of these visionaries could be the time it takes for these changes to be implemented, whether or not they can agree, poor team communication, poor team participation, or misaligned goals.

Power players (or leadership) are responsible for having the vision to lead organizations into the future.  Their vision should inspire others.  When I leave my meetings with our leadership teams I can say that I am inspired.  The message that is received by myself and the the rest of my team members (or crowd) is reflected in our desire to achieve common goals.  I feel that the power players in my organization are well aware of the need for us to constantly change.  Brown (2011) wrote "The most important lesson managers need to learn is that there are only two kinds of organizations - those that are changing, and those that are going out of business." (p. 17).  Power players impact their organizations by offering a glimpse of what can be achieved with a planned, organization wide, collaborative approach, that is performance oriented, and has a humanistic, systematic approach.  If the crowd believes in the power players and in change, great accomplishments can be attained.  The negative consequences of the power players is that they could instill fear either with their vision or with their trustworthiness.  If the crowd does not believe in a vision it can not be accomplished.  An organization that strives to be successful and ahead of the curve should look to the future as an opportunity to become better.  To serve those that are a part of the organization and to serve those that make it a success.  Organizations alone should not be the only visionaries.  As individuals, we should always strive to make our futures better for ourselves and those in it. 

Brown, D. (2011). An Experiential Approach to Organization Development. (8th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc.