Organizational Developmental: A trip to Boston pt 1

From an organizational developmental perspective, it was a nightmare, just terrible. The whole thing was simply a catastrophe. The client’s needs were met during an out of town excursion however the environment in which we all found ourselves in was way below our expectations. For example, the public area we had interviews which was reserved on the last day was no longer roped off not reserved in the early morning. Leaving us scrambling for tables and staff to clean the area that now being used for breakfast by different individuals and families.

These were the same areas that were being used to facilitate the applicants to fulfill the client’s employment needs. Now imagine having applicants entering the lobbying and being directed to an area where there are not but families eating breakfast. You as an applicant would wonder what is going on? Is this so type of a scam? How legit and on point is this organization if they cannot get an area to together for my interview and maintain it?

The event was successful and that was mainly due to my team’s never say die attitude. However, this hiring event (sorry I cannot disclose too many details) was still marred by the unprofessionalism of an external organization. Simply put the organization we paid and put our faith in simply had to be prodded at every turn to perform up to the basic standards in which we contracted them by. If it was not the area being unreserved it was not enough coffee and water for the staff and candidates. The other issues were rooms and hallways littered by other guests from the night or two nights before. We even had issues getting meals for our team, or even is a timely (up to 45 minutes to get a burger and thirty for the check) and clean manner (dirty silverware/dishes).

The organization hosting the event was simply not up to par. When dealing with clients and/or trying to meet their (staffing) needs is already stressful as is, for all the stakeholders involved. But to add the third-party organization enlisted (paid) to assist in the endeavor as part of the stress is not something an OD professional and/or event planner is clearly counting on to be. Although the next event can be scheduled elsewhere possibly eliminating this problem, what are so other solutions or actions that can be taken beforehand or during an issue like this?

Organizational Development-Toys R Us

When it comes to Toys r us going out of business I am happy, and I am sad, now coming from someone with a Masters in OD (Organizational Development) that must sound fairly “simple” and I admit it is. I am sad because a big part of my childhood and Americana is gone from the retail landscape. I still remember begging my mom to take 25 minutes into the suburbs to get the newest Universal Monsters action figures and playset. It was a place of wonder and imagination, in fact I still have one of those figures still.

But over the years a lot of the wonder and imagination Toys R US created faded, not because kids got involved in video games and the toy industry suffered. No, they sold video games at various Toys R US locations, and at any location you could find various adults spending their paychecks on not only video games but action (the collector’s type) figures as well.  The problems were more than that from expensive prices, lack of sales and advertisement, to even a lack of energy within the stores. Now these are off the top of my head, and I would not get into the condition of the packaging of anything I bought at (or nearly bought) Toys R US. Most of the items looked like they were used as footballs by store staff and with the attitudes they exhibited they truly must have.

I could say only there were only few other big chains that had as many disgruntled employees as Toys R US, but only a few. So, I am fairly happy that they have gone out of business because the company that went out of business in 2018 was destroying my recollections of the company that gave me and a lot of other children hours of fun with the products they sold years ago. Going by a model like Amazon the company could have rebounded if they would have made their stores “must see locations of wonder” they would have gotten bodies into their stores, along with their dollars. But none of that happened the company seemly filed bankruptcy and went about business as usual, then they had to close, duh.

I was not pleased with Toys R US when it closed but I was still happy. Much like that always-failing ex that you hear stories about how bad they are doing after you dumped them, you wonder where it all went wrong, or maybe it was always there and no one saw it coming. With Toys R US the “writing was on the wall” and the chain could not have ended their time in the retail marker any sooner. My hope is that all those employees can find jobs doing something that pays the bills or that they love to do. Meanwhile I also hope this opens up customers to those smaller online and mom and pop stores that did not get noticed before, with the shadows of the combined might of Toys R US, Walmart, Target and Amazon looming over them. With at least one of these mammoths gone there can be a chance for the little guys (smaller stores) to break through and take Toys R US’s place in the hearts of Americana.

Organizational Development Article: Intervention Round Up-Sensitivity Training

During an Organizational Development class, it was asked about our take on models that seeks to engage stakeholders within a corporate environment and during the class we needed to interact via an online discussion. Every once in a while, we have to pose questions to one another, in this post I have posted the question and my response to that question. I hope the interactions below assist in research, or even understanding the concepts of the different models that engage stakeholders in a positive manner and what from some academic sense future practitioners think of these concepts and the arenas it can be used in.

Sensitivity Training is one of those interventions that is great (like my choice 360 Feedback) if properly used and everyone bought into the use of the intervention. However, I can see it be used in a negative connation to gauge where employees stand on certain organizational issues, or how employees feel about the current structure and policies of an organization only to have management use that information against the employee. In my experience when management asks “how do you feel...” about a certain issue, the current direction of or the leadership in the organization, they are usually mining for data to find the” trouble makers” in a department and make their time with the organization uncomfortable as possible.

With a lot of this depending on the emotional intelligence and egos of those participating how would you ensure that when this intervention is used, that participants do not act negatively in and out of group sessions?  How would you ensure that the original focus of this intervention stays on point for future usage after the OD Practitioner is gone?

http://www.citeman.com/979-sensitivity-training.html

Organizational Development Article: Intervention Round Up-Mentoring

During an Organizational Development class, it was asked about our take on models that seeks to engage stakeholders within a corporate environment and during the class we needed to interact via an online discussion. Every once in a while, we have to pose questions to one another, in this post I have posted the question and my response to that question. I hope the interactions below assist in research, or even understanding the concepts of the different models that engage stakeholders in a positive manner and what from some academic sense future practitioners think of these concepts and the arenas it can be used in.

Mentoring is an interesting intervention because much like other intervention like 360 Feedback (my choice) it can be used in a positive manner or with a negative connation for corrective action purposes. Through my professional experiences I have had great mentors and terrible ones, usually the latter I had to deal with supervisors or management that were busy trying to teach me how to disregard procedures to complete activities in order to raise overall productivity percentages.

However, it made them look good to upper management, this type of mentoring caused issues with the task completion when the completed activities were quality checked or needed to be replicated.
Keeping this in mind, in your experiences with mentoring have you encountered any ineffective mentors that simply stunted your professional development? Were there times in the mentoring process that you received duplicate training for two different individuals to the point it seemed repetitive?

Organizational Development Article: Intervention Round Up-360 Feedback

During an Organizational Development class, it was asked about our take on models that seeks to engage stakeholders within a corporate environment and during the class we needed to interact via an online discussion. Every once in a while, we have to pose questions to one another, in this post I have posted the question and my response to that question. I hope the interactions below assist in research, or even understanding the concepts of the different models that engage stakeholders in a positive manner and what from some academic sense future practitioners think of these concepts and the arenas it can be used in.

Question: The 360 Feedback tool which I think is overused and overcommitted to as a tool to provide feedback. The problem often comes from misperceptions as to what 360 is and how it can be effectively used to advance employee effectiveness.
Not to take a reductionist stance, but in essence evaluation must have a clear and focused context and a process that is consistent and valuable for everyone, not just a supervisor. Also, consider the variance between a transformational 360 feedback session versus a transactional session.

Most of my experiences with 360 Feedback as a process comes from supervisors using the process as a corrective actions tool, emphasizing more of the negative aspects of my performance than including the feedback from myself or my peers.

Most of my coworkers and I would joke that it is called 360 Feedback because the process just runs the employee around in circles (360 degrees) without having any point to it. The only person who could make sense of this process was maybe the supervisor, who had an opportunity created by the one-way feedback session a scape goat.

Usually when I experienced or heard (from other employees) about this one-way feedback process, the purpose it seemed was to find the easiest person to blame for the team not meeting productivity goals. This process was filled, non- transformational sessions that caused more division and chaos than necessary and creates the misperception that the process is not for advancing employee effectiveness as you stated, but to punish.

I hope to be able to use resources such as my schoolwork, textbooks and the interactions with you and my fellow classmates to find ways to enlighten and teach organizational management in the future on the proper way to use the 360 Feedback process.

Organizational Development Article: Intervention Round Up

During an Organizational Development class, it was asked about our take on models that seeks to engage stakeholders within a corporate environment and during the class we needed to interact via an online discussion. Every once in a while, we have to pose questions to one another, in this post I have posted the question and my response to that question. I hope the interactions below assist in research, or even understanding the concepts of the different model that engage stakeholders in a positive manner and what from some academic sense future practitioners think of these concepts and the arenas it can be used in.

Question: I especially liked how you included self-concept or self-delusion of oneself. It is important to understand how we are viewed by others, especially if there are conflicts within a group/team/department. As you mentioned too often, I have too, 360-degree feedback is used incorrectly, and the focus is only on the negative versus the positive aspects. In this module, reading on 'Positive Organizational Scholarship and Appreciative Inquiry' it explains by focusing on the positive you can correct negative behavior without all the negative connotations.
Do you believe the 360 Degree Feedback can tied with POS or AI? Or that there would be benefits of realigning it so that it can be used more frequently as a way to improve an employee’s development?

Actually, I would use neither with the 360 Feedback. Unfortunately, it has been my experience that the individuals implementing the Feedback have no training whatsoever in the process and that is why it is done incorrectly, adding something extra to me is asking for more trouble.
For example, with Positive Organizational Scholarship (POS) I can see management telling the individual how to be motivated as it benefits the organization not the individual leading to all types of conflict. With Appreciative Inquiry, again I also see organizational management taking control of this process in a negative manner and telling the individual employee again what should motivate them also that it is beneficial to them (management) or the organization but not upon the professional development of the employee.

It has been my experience that many individuals in management have no idea about these concepts and would rather practice aspects of each that would benefit their agenda. I would hate to take the chance and subject employees with management that can add extra ways to torment their employees due to my additional training, even I would hate me! I would rather keep it simple with one concept (the 360 Feedback intervention) train the management on how to properly use it and monitor them excessively to make sure the entire concept is being practiced and the training of how to use the 360-feedback process is permanent.

Organizational Clarity: The front end where the customers "see"

The challenges of any local business are the front end where the customers (external stakeholders) "see" what your organization is all about. The issue is usually covered in training manuals everywhere, by the old standard of "greeting the customer in the first thirty seconds" they enter. Not only to acknowledge their presence but also to alleviate the stress of further interaction. However, after that initial interaction, the front line of the organization must be alert or aware of the time between the greeting and the time the customer is being engaged in regards the product or service offered by the organization that they are entertaining the notion of using, purchasing.

Sites like Yelp are great sources of examples of where organizations have failed to bridge that gap for their customers. Where the time from the representative says "hello" and to being waited on was so long that the organization loses a customer or a sale because of this gap alone. Whether that wait is 15 minutes to an hour it is important, to engage the customer until all interactions between the customer and the organization are positively completed. I have had some experiences in which a representative of an organization has had greeted me and dealt with other customers that came in after me or had me wait on "the side" to fulfill my request and take an extraordinary amount of time UNTIL I spoke up about my original request.

In either instance, I must confess as a customer, and as a student of organizational development, I detailed the situation, where the organization went wrong, gave them solutions to their problems through either their website and yelp. Of course, I usually do not go back or re-engage the organization to reinforce to them the seriousness of their issues. Most of the time organizations serious about their customers do their best to make the necessary changes, reach out and make things right with the customer.

But there are times that organizations do not take the commentary and data regarding these interactions to heart and simply ignore it, because "business is good..." However, the problems remain and a chorus of customer complaints get louder and multiply, that is when an organization suffers. Sometimes it can all be solved with a little due diligence or some simple engagement that keeps the customer feeling that they are still the number one focus of the organization.