Response to Rob Tegelberg’s 7.1 blog post

Rob Tegelberg’s post 7.1 can be found at this link: https://create.twu.ca/robtegelberg/2018/11/12/post-7-1-conflict-and-cooperation/

I thoroughly enjoyed reading about the culture of your school and the presence of God in all that your staff does in the school. I felt a sense of joy in reading through your post, as well as a feeling disappointment in my own organization. I also felt somewhat in disbelief as if it almost sounds to good too be true. It seems as though at some point, my school has been left behind and has been led astray. Although I do not believe it is the work of one leader or person, it has been an uphill battle for many years. In your post, you wrote “in all things we work for Christ”(Tegelberg, 2018). I believe this has been somewhat lost in my school. Even though we are a Catholic school with a very similar Mission to your school, we have many people on our team who gossip, back-stab our say hurtful things towards other people. This is not how Christ would want us to work together.

Lepsinger (2010), writes “relationship quality is based on perceptions and past experience. Good ones involve factors such as credibility, respect, trust, caring about the other person’s needs, following through on commitments, and “walking the talk” (Lepsinger, 2010, p. 144). It is clear to me, as well as inspirational, that the staff in your school don’t just affirm their commitment to the MVV, however they truly ‘walk the talk’ in all that they do.

When you write, “during my intermediate meetings, negotiating roles for various activities is not a chore, but a joy, where each member understands the gifts and talents of the other teammates, and we each step up to fill tasks and roles that suit us” (Tegelberg, 2018), I am truly inspired. How did your staff arrive at this? In my school, we have many staff members who are extremely gifted and talented in different ways, who could make amazing contributions to the school through their unique gifts and talents. Although it would be beneficial for the environment of our school, people refuse to partake. There are many tasks within a school that require unique gifts and talents of individuals, many hands and many creative people working in collaboration. In my experience, people want nothing to do with his and it always the same 5 or 6 staff members exhausting themselves to complete tasks. The culture consistently revolves around self-centered question as suggested by Myatt (2015), what’s in it for me? (Tegelberg, 2018). I look forward to reading your response as well as other classmates on this matter.

In response to your third discussion question and perhaps it is the ‘coach in me,’ but I like to look at new members of our team from a similar point of view as a new teammate joining a sports team. This person must’ve had some or most of the skills that would benefit the individual as a part of the team, or else they wouldn’t have been hired. Once they are hired, expectations need to be clearly defined and set and then modelled by other staff members. Ulrich and Smallwood (2013) suggest that leaders cannot be held accountable and cannot hold others accountable if the set objectives are not clear. This relates back Lepsinger (2010) when he discusses “walking the talk.” In terms of coaching this new team member, Ulrich and Smallwood (2013) suggest a relationship between the content and the process (Ulrich & Smallwood, 2013). Although the authors apply this specifically to leaders, it has stuck with me as something that could apply to all new employees. Just like a coach who is coaching an athlete, they have goals or practice, trying your best, improving, trusting relationships, respect, passion, meaning and desire, among many other things. (Ulrich & Smallwood, 2013, p. 129). This coaching mentality, although it may not be easy, can be applied to new staff members. Ulrich & Smallwood suggest “focus on the future, not the past” (p. 129). People are going to make mistakes. Even in an environment where there is effective communication, clearly defined roles and a common goal, “they won’t change the fact that we will make mistakes and fail to meet our co-workers’ expectations” (Galbraith, 2014, p. 131). The coach or even the best player on a team will still make mistakes. “The working environment should be safe where honest mistakes are forgiven” (Zeeman, 2010).

Ulrich & Smallwood (2013) discuss these as coaching guidelines in leadership, which can be applied to coaching in general.

Focus on the future, not the past. Build a trusting relationship in which the individual knows that you care about him or her as a person. Recognize, discover, and build on the passion, meaning, and desires of the individual. Listen for understanding. Ask probing questions that bring deeper issues to the surface. Respect and build on the strengths of the individual, but do not hesitate to label and address the weaknesses. Be candid without being punishing. Use data from many sources (e.g., 360-degree feedback or observation) to help the individual recognize unintended consequences. Find the right physical setting in which to coach. Use time wisely. Build sustainability into the coaching engagement by follow-up and accountability. Be very sensitive to unique qualities (e.g., gender, religious orientation, global experience, or personal history) of the individual and be open to talk about these sensitive areas. When leaders use coaches to help sustain their behaviors, their chosen behaviors will be more likely to endure over time.

(p. 129).

References

Galbraith, J. R. (2014). Designing organizations: Strategy, structure, and process at the business unit and enterprise levels. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Hughes, R. L., Beatty, K., & Dinwoodie, D. L. (2014). Becoming a strategic leader: Your role in your organization’s enduring success.  San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Lepsinger, R. (2010). Closing the execution gap: How great leaders and their companies get results. John Wiley & Sons.

Ulrich, D., & Smallwood, N. (2013). Leadership sustainability: Seven disciplines to achieve the changes great leaders know they must make. USA: McGraw Hill Education.

Zeeman, A. (2017). Senge’s Five Disciplines of Learning Organizations. Retrieved from ToolsHero: https://www.toolshero.com/management/five-disciplines-learning-organizations/