Dear Diary,
There I go again being the contrary one!
It is not easy but I am committed to being true to myself, regardless. I spent too many years trying to be someone I am not just to please other people.
Now I am at the point where I will work with you
but I am not going to work AGAINST me to do it.
Case and point, my entire department had a Collection Evaluation Report due. I was reminded of it the day before I left for my Africa vacation. Doh! And my student worker who had all the data we'd gathered the weeks prior was out sick. So I was scrambling trying to re-create her data and figure out how to write an Evaluation Report, my first one, EVER! Ugh...umm...okay...no problem!
I did what I always do. Kicked it into gear and got it done. I did it from home and sent it as a PDF since I don't have Word loaded. Which was not the preferred format, as my managers very gently informed me. Can't really edit a PDF. But it was done. OK. Well, I sent the report to my managers and failed to copy a coworker. He/she (Gender non-specific to protect the identity) and I were working on 2 separate ones to be combined later. Our work was divided since we were rarely in the office at the same time due to vacations. JULY...what can I say? (Gender disguised because the only point for this entry to to showcase the need to consider individual work styles. The actual discourse, specific situation is simply provided here as a way to illustrate that point!)
Anywho, when my co-worker returned and I was gone, they, too, were informed at the last minute that the report was due. And too, scrambled and did their best. My co-worker was not pleased to learn that our reports were in completely different formats and apparently my format was the preferred format. So my co-worker was shall we say a bit perturbed with me and said as much.
I was taken aback, because I am not sure why the other report was somehow my fault? In our meeting the co-worker clearly expressed their frustration with this entire assignment/project, saying, "Felicia must have gotten some instructions that I did not...etc..." Well that is absolutely false and I said so after the meeting.
Today we discussed it again while finalizing our combined report. We had attended a meeting with our Director wherein we had re-visited our Work Styles, especially the DOMINANT style that comes out when we are under PRESSURE!
My co-worker explained that they understands how I need to work (independently). Even in a group setting, I need to get my thoughts out and then join them with other people's. Like I typed my report and then was able to meet and discuss what I came up with.
BUT that is NOT how my co-worker works. He/she said they know I may see it as "Banter" but that helps him/her formulate their thoughts, etc...
All that to say...So if we are both in a time crunch and he/she need to collaborate with me to get the best results, WHILE, I on the other hand require the exact opposite to achieve my best ... whose work style takes precedence?
Does TEAM-work only work in 1 direction? From those who need to work independently always sacrificing for the good of the others who think better with other people? Or are the latter ever required to sacrifice their needs for the benefit of one of the team?
Hmmmm?????? Maybe when we have part two of the ARL Institute we can pose that a scenario for the group to solve.
Luckily my co-worker and I have a great working relationship and we discussed it and gained some level of understanding. I think this was like our managers explained, "A new experience, having two of us here simultaneously. With at least 1 of the few members of the team gone for at least a week at a time, makes for a less than cohesive group and detracts from the flow of information."
We got it done though and that is what matters. I have faced obstacles in all of the rotations I have been in and plan to encounter many more in this last year. Even still this is by far the BEST-EST job I've ever had. This finally feels like a career.
Additionally, today we met with our Director to recap our experience at the ARL OMLS Institute we attended at Purdue a while back. It was great fun to recall all the insights garnered. For me I was reminded that I tend to be the "lone" dissenting voice in the group. But that my obstinance can actually be useful in avoiding "Group-Think." I was told that had someone spoken out the "Going to Abilene, TX" story might have ended differently.
When everything seems to be going swimmingly well - the team is focused on the goal, the team is making good progress and decisions are made by consensus - your team may be prone to "Group-think."
Group-think is a subtle shift from effective decision making to conformity and an unwillingness to "rock the boat." As a result, the team makes low quality decisions. Groupthink can have a tendency to supress individuality.
In 1974, Professor Jerry Harvey of George Washington University developed a parable from a real-life experience to describe the issues surrounding how individuals reach agreement, or, more specifically, believe they have reached agreement.
The Parable of the Abilene Paradox: Four adults are sitting on a porch in 104-degree heat in the small town of Coleman, Texas, some 53 miles from Abilene. They are engaging in as little motion as possible, drinking lemonade, watching the fan spin lazily, and occasionally playing the odd game of dominoes. The characters are a married couple and the wife’s parents.
At some point, the wife’s father suggests they drive to Abilene to eat at a cafeteria there. The son-in-law thinks this is a crazy idea but doesn’t see any need to upset the apple cart, so he goes along with it, as do the two women.
They get in their unair-conditioned Buick and drive through a dust storm to Abilene. They eat a mediocre lunch at the cafeteria and return to Coleman exhausted, hot, and generally unhappy with the experience.
It is not until they return home that it is revealed that none of them really wanted to go to Abilene–they were just going along because they thought the others were eager to go. Naturally, everyone sees this miss in communication as someone else’s problem!
http://www.arl.org/diversity/leading/issue8/abilene.html
*
*
We remembered how amazed we were at the accuracy of the D.I.S.C. tool used. D.I.S.C. PERSONALITY PROFILES are research based and designed to help you understanding behavioral styles and personality types. The D.I.S.C. model, developed by William Moulton Marston and influence by Carl Jung, profiles four primary behavioral styles, each with a distinct and predictable pattern of observable behavior. Applied in corporate, business and personal situations "DISC" can lead to understanding, better communication and heightened positive attitude. This online disc profile report is designed to provide targeted strategies and insights for interpersonal success through effective communication, understanding and tolerance.
The DISC model is the four quadrant behavioral model based on the work of William Moulton Marston Ph.D. (1893 - 1947) to examine the behavior of individuals in their environment or within a specific situation. DISC looks at behavioral styles and behavioral preferences.
It was Marston’s 1928 “Emotions of Normal People”, which introduced DISC theory to the public. He defined four categories of human behavioral styles, types or temperament, now know as "D" for Dominance-Drive-Direct,
"I" for Influence (Marston chose the term inducement,
"S" for Steadiness or Stability (Marston used submission) and
"C" for Compliant, Conscientious, or Cautious, (Marston used compliance).
http://www.onlinediscpersonalityprofile.com/?gclid=CP3s_tuEsYYCFUc0IgodoTTcVQ
