We are working at the Parkland School Division office today to review our new report card format. This year Tomahawk will implement PSD’s new skill-based reporting system.
George Couros presented information to us on PSD’s new blog system. I am excited by the fact that all of the Tomahawk teachers are looking forward to initiating their PSD blogs.
Good things are in store for Tomahawk!
I am particularly intrigued by the connection that exists between resistance to change, dignity and system thinking. Weisbord noted that “solving the big problems of corporate life—costs, markets, quality, customer satisfaction, money-making, fulfilling work—lie in systems improvement, not in problem solving” (p. 288). It seems natural that individuals will resist change if their viewpoint is limited to one aspect of an organization. Weisbord additionally noted that “systems can be improved only to the extent that everyone who works in them understands how they work. Dignity and meaning come from deep engagement” (p. 288).
In the “Three-by-Three Rule,” Weisbord advocates that systemic thinking can be improved by selecting an area that “affects people at more than one level” (p. 314). Having everyone on board with a change initiative and engaging everyone deeply in the process enables individuals at all levels to feel that they have had their voices heard. Including a minimum of three levels in the research that will contribute to my OLP will be essential. Additionally, as Weisbord noted, “getting the right people together is probably 90 percent of 21st Century managing. The other 10 percent is helping them commit to valued purposes and tasks. That means having their own experience” (p. 329).
From the action research perspective of a narrative inquiry, research validity depends on having a collection of narratives from people across the organization (Weisbord, 2004, p. 309). Additionally, success depends on ensuring the dignity of those involved – that they truly feel they are part of the process of change.
References
Weisbord, M. (2004). Productive workplaces revisited: Dignity, meaning and community in the 21st century. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
I am significantly pleased with the progress we are making at Tomahawk. Our teachers were in the school for the past week and they worked diligently to make sure that the classrooms are in amazing shape for our startup. We are always trying to raise the profile of our school and we’ve certainly been purging the old to make way for the new! Great things are in store for our students this year!
I am also pleased to welcome Gabriel Ferzli and Kim Gallant to the staff at Tomahawk. Both of these teachers bring a pleasant eagerness that will be appreciated by all of us, and more so by the students. I am certain the atmosphere for learning will be productive and filled with joy.
We have also reworked a few things at Tomahawk. Our new vision is: Tomahawk School believes in a commitment to learning, community and citizenship. Our assemblies this year will focus on these strands. We are also pleased with our new school motto: “The Grass is Greener Here!” – And it is!
Welcome back everyone!
This article contains a statement for the Master of Arts in Leadership Program at Royal Roads University. The statement examines the concept of motivation and argues that increased intrinsic motivation is necessary to motivate employees.
Well written literature has a profound effect on me. It has the ability to change the way that I perceive the world. A few years ago I enjoyed a book by Dennis Prager (1998) called Happiness is a Serious Problem: A Human Nature Repair Manual. The lesson that I took from this book was that true happiness comes from suffering; it comes through accomplishing something that is the result of hard work. Prager (1998) noted that, “in the personal realm, human dissatisfaction is what makes personal improvement possible, whether it be better emotional ties to others, better personal ethics, or better personal health” (p. 19). I related this concept of happiness to the first Noble Truth of Buddhism: all life is suffering. People are motivated by a desire to end their own suffering more than they are by the rewards offered to end someone else’s suffering.
Graham Jones (2010) noted that “motivation isn’t just a day-to-day drive to achieve goals; it is more complex than that. Leaders must understand its multifaceted nature to achieve success in a healthy way” (p. 20). Osterloh and Frey (2000) examined a motivation matrix that charted intrinsic and extrinsic motivation against tacit and explicit knowledge. They noted that extrinsic motivation has the potential to “crowd out” intrinsic motivation and that “managing motivation, especially balancing intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, is an important and hard-to-imitate competitive advantage” (p. 544). Extrinsic motivators, represented metaphorically as a “carrot-and-stick” are readily available to companies and managers. Intrinsic motivation, however, requires an alignment of an individual’s values with those of his or her company. In other words, when a company’s suffering is owned or shared by an individual, intrinsic motivation increases. Preferably, an employee shares his or her company’s values and is intrinsically motivated. In the field of education, we refer to this as “having the right people on the right bus and then getting their toes all in the right direction.” When the wrong people are on the bus, or when the toes are facing the wrong way – we need to carefully balance our means of motivation.
Kaplan and Norton (2007) indicated that a balanced scorecard system enables companies to acquire “the intangible assets they would need for future growth” (p. 150). A balanced scorecard system provides individuals with ownership of the company’s goals and promotes agreement within the company (Kaplan and Norton, 2007, p. 153; Kaplan, Norton & Rugelsjoen, 2010, p. 119). Employees are able to better understand their company’s performance (end of suffering) through learning and empowerment. Additionally, “leaders need to connect the organization’s vision and values to the employee’s day-to-day work and help them see how the work they do every day connects to the bigger picture” (HRMagazine, 2010, p. 3).
By finding ways to increase the intrinsic motivation of others, a leader can attach individual success to the success of the company. Intrinsic motivation includes strategies that provide ownership and that clear the path for subordinates to succeed. By increasing an individual’s intrinsic motivation, leaders who wish to inspire change can discover and implement ways to tap into their subordinate’s desire to change. Given the pace of change, finding ways to increase intrinsic motivation is essential for success (HrMagazine, 2010; Wong-On-Wing, Guo & Lui, 2010; Jones, 2010; Zhang & Bartol, 2010; Othman, Abdullah & Ahmad, 2009; Pink, 2009; Kaplan & Norton, 2006; Osterloh & Frey, 2000).
References
(2010). Motivation in today’s workplace: The link to performance. HRMagazine, 55(7), 1 – 9. Retrieved from Business Source Premier database.
Jones, G. (2010). Real leadership: The meaning behind motivation. Chief Learning Officer (Sep), 20 – 23. Retrieved from Business Source Premier database.
Kaplan, R., Norton, D., & Rugelsjoen, B. (2010). Managing alliances with the balanced scorecard. Harvard Business Review, 88(1/2), 114 – 120. Retrieved from Business Source Premier database.
Kaplan, R. & Norton, D. (2007). Using the balanced scorecard as a strategic management system. Harvard Business Review, 85(7/8), 150 – 161. Retrieved from Business Source Premier database.
Kaplan, R. & Norton, D. (2006). How to implement a new strategy without disrupting your organization. Harvard Business Review, 84(3), 100 – 109. Retrieved from Business Source Premier database.
Osterloh, M. & Frey, B.S. (2000). Motivation, knowledge transfer, and organizational forms. Organization Science, 11(5), 538 – 550.
Othman, A.K., Abdullah, H.S. & Ahmad, J. (2009). The influence of work motivation on emotional intelligence and team effectiveness. Vision (09722629), 13(4), 1 – 14. Retrieved from Business Source Premier database.
Pink, D. (2009). Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us. New York: Riverhead Books.
Prager, D. (1998). Happiness is a serious problem: A human nature repair manual. New York: ReganBooks.
Wong-On-Wing, B., Guo, L., & Lui, G. (2010). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and participation in budgeting: Antecedents and consequences. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 22(2), 133 – 153. doi: 10.2308/bria.2010.22.2.133.
Zhang, X., & Bartol, K. (2010). Linking empowering leadership and employee creativity: The influence of psychological empowerment, intrinsic motivation, and creative process engagement. Academy of Management Journal, 53(1), 107 – 128. Retrieved from Business Source Premier database.
This post represents a response to one of my colleagues in the Master of Arts in Leadership program at Royal Roads University. My colleague’s statement was on charisma and what happens when people follow someone with ill intent.
My friend, I love this topic! I was inspired to look further into the concept of evil and I was impressed by the amount of literature on the subject. The first article that caught my attention involved social research into Hannah Arendt’s view of morality by George Kateb (2007). I had considered writing an earlier paper on the philosophy of Arendt, so it was interesting to dig deeper into her view of evil. Kateb discussed Arendt’s view of totalitarianism as the worst form of evil that is not forgivable and also not punishable (Kateb, 2007, p. 821). Kateb noted that Arendt provided two concepts of morality needed to combat evil: forgiveness and promise-keeping (p. 851).
The article “The Art of Followership” by Warren Bennis (2010) adds to your argument that “leaders are at the center of the action – the envied if not enviable stars whose lives seem to burn a little brighter than our own” [italics original] (p. 3). Bennis (2010) asked, “what does leadership mean in a world where anonymous bloggers can choose presidents and bring down regimes?” [italics original] (p. 3). Finally, Bennis (2010) discussed the importance of followers who will speak out and “put their jobs on the line” (p. 4). Gandossy and Kanter (2002) made the necessary link to our study of motivation in that “senior and middle managers [are] often rewarded for short term performance” (p. 419). Leaders end up bending the rules.
Neil Baker (2008) determined that more diligence is required of leaders. He noted that “effective whistleblower programs encourage employees who witness company wrongdoing to speak out rather than look the other way” (p. 39). Given the current financial crisis, there is a movement to respond to the corporate evils of fraudulent actions. Baker (2008) stated that the culture of the company is critical for employees to feel safe to speak out when things are not right (p. 43). During my review on the concept, I enjoyed the “good vs. evil” flow of the articles that I surveyed to respond to a colleague’s statement.
The most intriguing and insightful article (of all of the ones on evil that I read) is by Adams and Balfour (2008). In “Expiating Evil: Reflections on the Difficulties of Cultural, Organizational and Individual Reparation,” the authors provide an effective survey of the history and perception of evil and, moreover, on the necessity of making amends for evil. Adams and Balfour noted that what is needed is “deliberative democracy” (Dryzek, 2000 as quoted in Adams and Balfour, 2008), with “multiple and ongoing mediations, conflict resolution, and conferences, aimed at healing the wounds inflicted by those who perpetrate evil without regard for others” (p. 893). The authors noted that evil actions will continue to permeate the 21st Century (p. 881). Leaders will be called on to respond with 21st Century morality. We know that this won’t be our grandparents’ style of “morality.” So, then, what style of morality will it be?
Yours,
Scott
References
Adams, G., & Balfour, D. (2008). Expiating evil: reflections on the difficulties of cultural, organizational and individual reparation. Public Administration, 86(4), 881-893. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9299.2008.00741.x.
Baker, N. (2008). See No Evil, Hear No Evil, SPEAK NO EVIL. (cover story). Internal Auditor, 65(2), 38-43. Retrieved from Business Source Premier database.
Bennis, W. (2010). Art of Followership. Leadership Excellence, 27(1), 3-4. Retrieved from Business Source Premier database.
Eagleton, T. (2010). Of men and monsters. (cover story). (pp. 28-31). New Statesman Ltd. Retrieved from Business Source Premier database.
Gandossy, B., & Kanter, R. (2002). “See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Speak No Evil” —Leaders Must Respond to Employee Concerns About Wrongdoing. Business & Society Review (00453609), 107(4), 415-422. Retrieved from Business Source Premier database.
Kateb, G. (2007). Existential Values in Arendt’s Treatment of Evil and Morality. Social Research, 74(3), 811-854. Retrieved from Business Source Premier database.
I took this picture early one morning. We have the best sunrises across the hills east of Tomahawk School.
I have neglected my blog for quite some time. I will now attend to writing posts more often.
imminentShift on Twitter