Finger trap---> Vision.

Just when I think I know it all, Feinberg comes out with some new idea that, for some reason, would never occur to me no matter how painfully obvious it seems. How is there really so much to leadership? I used to think it was all just common sense but it is amazing how much goes right past me. Tonight with the finger trap activity, I thought "Oh here we go, do we really need to drag it out?" I thought the point was obvious from the get-go, simply that all it takes is one weak link to bring down the whole organization or something like that. Wrong! The point was vision: have it, see it, make others believe in it. So I was a little off. Just how off I was became clear to me when we watched the Covey clip. I don't know if I was even lucky enough to graze the tip of the iceberg with my premature assumptions of what direction the lecture was headed in. I knew the Covey stuff was important on Monday (I wrote it down the first time), but I didn't see how real these guidelines are, to me they were just another abstract theory.

Here is what I wrote down in class on Monday from the short clip that watched on Covey's four steps to effective leadership that apply to everyone in an organization:
1. Know the goals
2. Be passionate about the goals
3. Spend time on the goals
4. Understand how to achieve the goals (know your role)

First you must communicate what the important goals of the organization are (you can't have too many goals), the leaders must be clear and then they must overcommunicate what those goals are. The top priorities of the organization are often widely undercommunicated. Once people know the goals they must then be passionate about them (create ownership, involvement, and commitment). Finally, once the members of the organization know and are passionate about the goal, they must understand their roles in achieving the goal (what they need to reach it) and then use their time accordingly. Do their actions work toward achieving the goal? Are their actions relevant to the big picture of the vision for the organization?

This section on organizational goals relates back to what we discussed on organizational values. In this age of market saturation and extreme competition, I think that organizational values have become increasingly important in distinguishing one company from the next. The textbook provides empirical evidence that companies with clearly defined values and direction perform better than those who don't have such a clearly set path or vision. Companies exert more effort to express their values as a part of their image to the public. When I think of where I currently work or companies that I hope to work for in the future, they all try to communicate some sort of message to their employees and to the public. Just looking at some of their websites, it is clear to me what they stand for:

http://www.arcadiagroup.co.uk/careers/working/index.html

http://www.arcadiagroup.co.uk/responsibilities/index.html

http://www.monsoon.co.uk/page/culture

http://www.monsoon.co.uk/pcat/cultureandcommitment

http://www.gapinc.com/public/Careers/car_culture.shtml

http://www.gapinc.com/public/SocialResponsibility/socialres.shtml

Although each company uses some of the same words, each one communicates a separate and distinct message to set itself apart from the others. The focus differs tremendously--for example, Arcadia is commercial-driven whereas Monsoon is people-driven. It is good to know what an organization's values are, especially when looking for employment. As we mentioned in class, you either need to find a company whose values reflect your own, or change your values to reflect the companies. Either way researching company values is a critical step to take before even considering an interview.