Press "Enter" to skip to content

About learning diary

Simulation was something new which I was introduced to by Prof. Richard. I was fascinated by this whole idea. This methodology was fun, interactive and provided advances in theory on complex organisational behaviours in a very simple manner. It was kind of role play as what decision we could take if we were in that situation or position of that organisation. Simulation were meant to be taken in groups, and I was part of a large group comprising 5 members. So, each time I took the simulation I had new set of teammates and this also reflected in difference in results. With some I could score 100% but with others I managed to get only 47%. We tried our best to score maximum points but there had been instances where we felt the answer should be morally or ethically right, but it was wrong for some other reasons and how even the correct choices could lead to negative outcomes, if taken at wrong time. It did appreciate us whenever we chose the right move based on the situation which was kind of morale boosting and letting us know that we are thinking in the right direction. Organizational effectiveness can be determined by the leader it has. Though I am not a big cricket fan, but I still watch cricket for him. He is one of the greatest leaders known to this sport. I admire MS. Dhoni for several reasons just to name a few are staying calm under pressure, always focussed, trusting his instinct, team player, gracefully handling failure and his ability to cut through negative energy. Let’s discuss about Leadership vs Management, I am sure we all have read a lot of stories, news about a good leader and bad manager. Now, let’s understand what is the difference between a Leader and a Manager? Whenever we hear these two words, I believe most of us portray a picture of manager who is grumpy and angry always whereas when we hear a Leader, we portray a calm, visionary, focussed and driving new initiative person. I too had an encounter with two such gentlemen back in India while I was working for IMS and Rao IIT. One was leader and the other was a manager. This about my reporting manager in two different companies and how they changed my view. Mr. Pratik Gour is a true leader he always guided us and gave opportunity for showing our skills. He shared lunch with us during breaks, crack few lame jokes, share his passion for cooking and share any new idea about business strategy and ask for our feedback about its implementation on ground level. I initially found a bit weird as I was not comfortable having lunch with my reporting manager and thought he was there to judge us but later I understood that he was bonding with his team and understanding the team dynamics and addressing any issue if prevailed during that time. I still look up to him if I need any guidance on my career path or understanding team dynamics. On the other hand, my reporting manager at Rao IIT was completely opposite. He always spoke about numbers and tried to play politics in the team. He bad mouth every team member on their back rather appreciating for work. He never allowed us to have lunch together and he himself was always in his cabin drawing a line between Manager and employee. He also took credit for our work. I can go on and on about him, but I guess this made me realise the difference between a manager and a leader. This was my definition for a leader and manager. However, I felt I was not the completely right until Prof. Richard gave us some clarity on this. He discussed how managers are an imperative piece of a change program as they know its specialized parts. The leaders may know the explanation for the change in more acuity and how to get individuals encouraged about it yet cannot be without the specialized capabilities of the manager, the pioneer will not be able to implement his idea. From my past encounters, I feel, that pioneers frequently talk about things when all is said in done, however what they may intend to a representative and what the worker necessities to do right then and there, is something they surrender over to the supervisors to choose and convey. The ideology of working in groups was to bring improvement in overall achievement by pooling the aptitudes and abilities of the people in that group. However, in certain group, there is an inclination with respect to members to contribute less to the groups objective than if they were doing likewise assignment themselves. I too had such experiences at work place and negotiation group project. People in the group can likewise be influenced by social loafing which happened in my negotiation group there was one member who did not contribute as per his capability from the beginning. The team dynamic was influenced a lot. His constant efforts to give reason for not attending team meetings, not submitting his group work timely and eventually affected the other people as well. At the end there were on 2 people you pulled off the final project. His less contribution to the group works also influenced other people who were doing their work diligently. While there was a difference of exertion between individuals from a group, people begin to check their own interest dependent on what others are doing as opposed to keeping up a standard of excellence towards accomplishing the objective. This brings down the dimension of fulfillment for the errand in all individuals from the team. For instance, if a spurred colleague more than once feels others are depending on them to do a large portion of the work, they may purposely lessen their remaining task at hand or even quit teaming up with group individuals since they never ag

Other essay:   Impact of machine learning on targeted advertisements

Be First to Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

0 Shares
Share via
Copy link

Spelling error report

The following text will be sent to our editors: