Reply with a response to each of the four entry submissions.
Q1.Action Research and Organizational Development Videos
Chad Roberts posted Jan 13, 2019 9:21 AM
Class,
After searching the web, I found the David Couper Consulting Agency which is a consulting company that seems to apply similar concepts that align with techniques used in an action resource module. Their process includes team assessments as well as individual assessments to assist with a better understanding of their client’s needs. By better understanding these needs, they able to build a foundation for the organization based off the strengths gathered from the employees. Some of the methods used to gather information during their initiative is 360-degree feedback tools, PSQ’s and other surveys.
So, it’s to my understanding that this agency enters a contract and starts their process by focusing on the organizations structure and the roles of each member. Through communication they are able to identify any areas of concern that enables team members to justify their thoughts on issues throughout the work center. This opens key communication aspects which are driving factors that lead to or have otherwise compromised the company goals and has ultimately led to the OD initiative. The David Couper Consulting Agency appears as a reputable firm that incorporates the whole team concept when it comes to solving organizational difficulties.
https://davidcouperconsulting.com/organizational-d…
Q2.Gurus of Large Group Interventions
Curtis Arens posted Jan 22, 2019 11:04 AM
Hello Class,
I watched multiple videos covering open space and future search. I found them all difficult to watch as they were boring. Marvin Weisbord was a little more animated in his videos than Sandra but he would get off topic on little tangents at times. Janoff and Weisbord seemed to tell anecdotal stories instead of talking about their process works and how to implement it. Harrison Owen, I liked better as he seemed to have more confidence during the videos I watched. Owen had some of the same issues with anecdotal stories but seemed to discuss his process and how it works then providing the example. He also tried to inject some humor to keep the audience interested.
The first video I watched was by Sandra Janoff and I thought was poorly done. She was attempting to give a real-world example of future search and how it was implemented to help with child fighters in Sudan. She spent most the time talking about how she felt during this example and not how it works or how to implement it. She also started out with saying she had no idea how to begin. If the so-called expert claims not to know how to do the process they are credited for then they lose credibility. Sandra Janoff was very passive and boring in her speech and body actions. This made me want to sleep during her videos. Watching her overall speech, I am really surprised she is successful.
The second video I watch was by Marvin Weisbord. Marvin Weisbord was a little more animated in his videos than Sandra but he would get off topic on little tangents at times. Janoff and Weisbord seemed to tell anecdotal stories instead of talking about their process works and how to implement it.
The final video I watched was Harrison Owen “Dancing with Shiva (or Sandy, or Katrina): Harrison Owen at TEDxNavesink”. I really liked this video as it was not too short at 15min and not too long that you normally just stop watching from boredom. He explained his method of Open Space decently. Owen had some of the same issues with anecdotal stories but seemed to discuss his process and how it works then providing the example. He also tried to inject some humor to keep the audience interested.
He has a couple of statements at the end that I really like.
“Human systems, like ALL systems are fundamentally self-organizing! “
“Organizing a self-organizing system is not only an oxymoron – It’s stupid.”
I completely agree. There are many times at work within the military that teams are put together and to get a project completed and leadership does not care who is in charge or how it is done, long as it gets done. In these situations, we always come together and self-organized to complete the project.
Cheers,
Curtis
Q3.Job Design and Job Crafting Surveys
Howard Chase posted Jan 21, 2019 8:06 PM
Greetings Classmates,
I know for each of us we’ll have to take a couple of surveys one being Job Design and the other Job Crafting. Reading our guidance, we have to show our outcome for each, and this is how it broke down for me.
Again, noting score that is under 9 is considered to be an area of improvement. Which for me was The Autonomy category. This was low on my end due to the amount of people I oversee and are so many others that are involved in needing information from me. This is something that is never in my control.
My completed results from taking the first survey are as follows:
Skill Variety — Total the scores for questions 1, 6, 11: 12
Task Identity — Total the scores for questions 2, 7, 12: 11
Task Significant — Total the scores for questions 3, 8, 13: 11
Autonomy — Total the scores for questions 4, 9, 14: 8
Feedback About Results — Total the scores for questions 5, 10, 15: 10
The job crafting survey was a little challenging at first to understand, but after going over the material a couple times I figure it out. Or, I at least made sense of it for me to answer the 21 questions.
Breaking down the four categories:
Increasing Structural Job, I was 21
Decreasing Hindering Job Demands I was 17
Increasing Social Job resources, I was 18
Increasing Challenging Job Demands I was 18
According to the discussion scoring range 1-5. My results from the survey overall is an 18.5. If I did it right. There is plenty of room for improvement across all areas. However, like Hannah Fuentes I found the survey to be quite confusing. When I tried to go to the link it was asking me to download it. I tried and it did not work as well as I thought it would.
Well Classmates over to you for discussion and better understanding. Thanks for your input.
Q4.Appreciative Inquiry-Initial Post-Hannah Fuentes
Hannah Fuentes posted Jan 20, 2019 9:47 AM
Classmates,
Today we will explore the Appreciative Inquiry process and provide a list of questions that I recommend for an interview or coworkers.
After doing some research, I found three question that I believe to be great for an individual to ponder on before asking. For this discussion, the question is geared towards the workplace, however, there are questions that can be specific to other aspects, such as; relationships, goals and growth as an individual. Whether the topic is for work or non-work, according to Steenbarger, the meaning of Appreciative inquiry “has two important elements: becoming mindful of the questions we ask and directing those questions toward strengths and positive outcomes.” (2015) I choose the following questions for my coworkers because of the questions are positive and stay consistent on the topic of the interviewee. The purpose of an Appreciative Inquiry is to evaluate and highlight positive areas of employee performance and establish goal-setting to maximizing strengths and using those to shore up weaknesses.
1. Tell me about the best times that you have had with your organization. Looking at your entire experience, recall a time when you felt most alive, most involved, or most excited about your involvement. What made it an exciting experience? Who was involved? Describe the event in detail.
2. What do you think is the core value of your organization? What is it that, if it did not exist, would make your organization totally different than it currently is?
3. If you had three wishes for your organization, what would they be?
Regards,
Hannah
References
