The Power Elite (Dec.1st)

When I think of power I think of those people in powerful positions (Presidents, CEOs, etc.) and the decisions they make. In class last Wednesday we talked about how power is fixed within certain institutions, in the positions that people hold. Power in itself was then described as a kind of potential energy ( like the top of a roller coaster), with the capacity to influence. The influence itself is all about behavior (the kinetic energy), or downward slope of the roller coaster.
I found it interesting that the biggest power institutions today are completely different from 200 years ago. Back then family, school, and church were the big three institutions; whereas now government, military, and economic institutions hold more influence. I think that this really proves how times have changed, along with the values of society as a whole. I am not sure that I agree with this change, as so much of the power is now controlled by one overlying body. As power seems to be constantly shifting, who knows what the big three institutions could be in the future.

Truths behind "goates bucks" exercise revealed

Well I for one was able to gain a little insight about this exercise after last class. I now know that while I was running around trying to complete the task at hand, I had missed our on a few key events that took place. First, although this did not effect me personally, was the fact that the bottom group had assigned areas in the basement. I am sorry for the groups that were somewhat secluded from the entire exercise. I probably would have just left if I were in that position.
One major part of the exercise that I had no knowledge of was the fact that anybody could talk with the group purchasing the slogans. I really thought that only the top group could communicate with them, which would have really made the exercise difficult. I guess from the perspective of the top group that it was smart for them to tell the purchasing group they had to go through them. Also, I totally missed when they came to the basement to tell people that they were willing to buy slogans directly from the lower groups. I think I was in the computer lab with my group by this point.
Luckily I went up to the classroom just in time to sell a  few of our slogans and collect what was left of the goat bucks, just before the end of class. I was mad that a lot of the group before me had sold almost of all their slogans before I go the chance to show mine. If I would have known this I definitely would have just had my team write a bunch down and went up to sell them first. I guess I can't really complain though because at the end we all got at least some extra credit, whereas some people had none.

Book Report Segment 5

              In the final three chapters of The Outliers (http://www.amazon.com/Outliers-Story-Success-Malcolm-Gladwell/dp/0316017922) Malcolm Gladwell discusses how we should not shy away from our cultural differences, but instead learn how to use this knowledge to our full advantage. From flying airplanes, to taking math tests, and just school in general, the cultures we come from affect us in many ways. It is when we are able to not only understand, but except these differences that we are able to provide extraordinary opportunities for all. And as Gladwell has pointed out in The Outliers, nobody becomes somebody amazing without having these valuable circumstances.

                Of all the factors thought for leading a plane to crash, cultural differences seemed an unlikely factor to me. For years the Korean Air flights had a terrible reputation for “losses” during international trips. At one point things got so bad, with seventeen times more losses than United Airlines, that outsiders were called in to help find the problem. At the center of the investigation psychologists were called in to listen to transcripts from “lost” international flights. Using a study by Geert Hofstede (http://www.geert-hofstede.com/) researchers figured out that countries such as Greece, Portugal, and Korea have high “uncertainty avoidances”. This means they are most reliant on rules and plans. It turns out these types of countries often times have high Power Distance Index (PDI) levels, with a deep respect for authority. This is attributed to the high loss of Korean flights because many times first officers knew of bad situations, and did not confront pilots for fear of disrespecting their authority. Also, a similar situation persisted when pilots were trying to communicate with Air Traffic Control. In one particular example a plane crashed because the Korean officer was too polite to tell Air Control they should reroute because they were low on fuel. I couldn’t believe that anyone would be disinclined to speak up in a situation like this. Any American I know would have insisted upon a closer landing site even if it was inconvenient to other flights. But it is just eh culture that the Koreans are emerged in. They were however able to learn from this and teach pilots and first officers fluent English, along with an American (low PDI) alternative identity to go with it. Today, Korean Air is one of the safest airlines in the world.

                While the airline example of cultural differences seemed negative at first, they were able to learn from them to make Korean Air safe today. Some parts of Korean and other Asian cultures have lessons that even other countries, including the United States, can learn from. When it comes to mathematics, Asian cultures have always excelled well above Western counterparts. This is due to two cultural advantages. First, countries like China and Korea have logical counting systems, unlike the English number system which is highly irregular. The average Chinese four year old can count to forty, whereas the average American four year old counts only to fifteen. As a result, by age five American kids are already a year behind Asian kids in most basic math skills. Because of the clumsy Western linguistic structure, basic math rules become arbitrary and complicated. In Asia, there is a pattern for doing all math problems, no memorizing, and people actually enjoy math. I was very shocked when I read about how logical the Asian counting system was compared to ours. Instead of saying twenty-one, they say two-tens-one, which makes doing basic addition quicker and easier, and a patter is created.

                Not only is the Asian language attributed to high math scores, but the agriculture is linked as well. In Asian countries rice accounts for the majority of the agriculture. Unlike western cultures whose farming is mechanically oriented, rice farming requires people to become smarter to increase their yields. They also must work hard than any other kind of farmer. But the work is meaningful, and complex, and autonomous in nature. As we learned in class earlier all of these are factors for being satisfied, with a clear relationship between effort and reward. As the Chinese proverb goes, “No one can rise before dawn 360 days a year and fail to make his family rich.” Now I wouldn’t want the lifestyle of a rice farmer for a week, let alone a year, but this is defiantly one part of the Asian culture Americans can definitely learn from.

                As it turns out, some schools in American have tried to provide children with opportunities using the same hard-working culture of Asian countries. The KIPP Academy, the Knowledge is Power Program, is well known for successfully taking poverty stricken children and providing them with an opportunity, in exchange for hard work on their part. A regular school day at KIPP runs from 7:45 am to 5pm, which is 50 to 60% more learning time than a typical public school. The kids also attend school from 9 am to 1 pm on Saturdays. They even spend three extra weeks in July attending KIPP from 8 am to 2 pm, their “summer hours”. I know that given the choice any average American student would not even set foot in a classroom on a Saturday (kind of similar to how we hope our colleges classes are cancelled), let alone give up their summer vacation. But for a child born in to the poverty lifestyle, who would otherwise have no other opportunity for success, being accepted into KIPP is a dream come true. And with a lot of hard working hours (similar to a lawyer or a doctors daily schedule), success will almost certainly follow. Just form reading the KIPP chapter, I was thinking how similar the schedule and workload is to mine, being in college while having a part-time job. Only these are seventh graders, with a lot of mental endurance and motivation I might add. When I was in seventh grade I was more worried with social events and sports than actual school work. These kids spend four to five houses a night on school work. That’s equal to my college workload now. In the end, these final chapters prove that we can learn from our cultural differences, if at the very least, to provide opportunities that otherwise would have never existed. And any society can grow from these opportunities, in to a better place.

Managers Shape the Future

Last Mondays activity during class was very confusing to me. I don't really know how I feel about the exercise. I was really looking forward to discussing everything in class on Wednesday but since it was cancelled I guess I will comment some on here. I was in the middle group for this exercise. When Dr. Goates gave us our instructions and our office space we all went down together and discussed what we should all be doing. Nobody really seemed to know where to begin with every, we wasted a lot of time not knowing where to go or what to do. When things finally started to come together and we recieved the criteria for the slogans we only had 5 to 10 minutes to get our bottom group people and come up with as many good slogans as possible.

Overall my group had some good slogan ideas. I thought that we did good on time but when we arrived at the classroom many groups had already sold thier slogans. Even though I believe ours were probably better, we got the minimum amount of goats bucks for them because the buyers only had a few bucks left to give away. By the time the class period was over I was left feeling very confused about what had happened in those very quick 75 minutes. I guess I will have to wait until this Monday to find out for sure how my team did and which groups made out the best overall.

Book Report Segment # 4

                In the forth segment of the Outliers (http://www.amazon.com/Outliers-Story-Success-Malcolm-Gladwell/dp/0316017922) by Malcolm Gladwell, we learn how the time period we grow up in and our heritage affect our lives and our chances for success. We follow Joe Flom and other Jewish immigrants growing up in the 1930’s in New York City. Gladwell continues with his theory on how successful people today don’t make it simply by accident or fate.

                Joe Flom was a partner in a very successful law firm in Manhattan. He grew up in the Great Depression with Jewish immigrant parents. Flom worked his way through school and served time in the military before attending Harvard Law School. He was very smart, one of the top students in his class, but was not able to find a job within any of the “old-line” Wall Street law firms. He was however able to partner with a few other men to create their own law firm. Today they employ almost 2,000 attorneys and serve top Fortune 500 customers.

                Flom’s success did not come from opportunities like previous Outliers researched by Gladwell. This surprised me as I wondered how someone like Flom was able to succeed. Actually, it was Flom’s disadvantages, come to find out, that led him to being very advantageous. His first disadvantage was that he was Jewish in a time when so called “white-shoe” law firms were very particular about who they employed. If you were not the same background, religion, and social class as them, you joined a small, second-rate law firm in the city. This turned out to be an advantage to many young Jewish lawyers because old-line firms did not do litigation, as it was rare for corporations to sue one another in those days. It was the second-rate Jewish lawyers that gained this experience in corporate takeovers, which would be very beneficial in the years to come, as there was a boom in size and number of them. Flom was able to be in the right career at the right time because of this original disadvantage.

                A second advantage that Flom had was demographic luck. Literally, Flom who was born in 1930 was a part of a time period where there was a demographic trough. Because of the hardship of the Great Depression families simply stopped having children at this point in time. Flom was a part of a small generation in comparison to past and future generations to come as the economy picks up again. This provided Flom with the advantages of an excellent education as far as teacher to student ratios. Also, the job market was open as demands were growing and employees were short. Flom was able to have great success just because of the fact that he was born at a certain time. As stated by Gladwell, “even the most gifted individuals cannot escape the limitations of their generation.”

                The final advantage that happened to effect Flom was on that we recently discusses in class. His parents happened to be Jewish immigrants who worked in the garment industry in New York City. Jews at the time had not been allowed to own land in Europe like other immigrants. Instead they clustered in towns and cities taking on urban trades in professions. When the Jewish immigrants arrived in NYC they were able to use their experience in these trades to create their own work as new entrepreneurs in the city. Unlike their fellow immigrants who worked every day without learning, the Jews gained economic lessons trying to improve upon their businesses day to day. In the garment industry you could see exactly what successful people were doing and how to set up your own job. They had autonomy, complexity, and a connection between effort and reward. As we have learned in class, these three qualities are very important for job satisfaction and creating meaningful work. As a child of Jewish immigrants working in the garment industry, Flom was able to make the connection that if you worked had enough, and used your mind and imagination; you could shape the world to your desires.

                I personally believe that this last disadvantage, or advantage if you look at it from a different point of view, was the most beneficial to Flom. In seeing the way that his parents were able to enjoy working for themselves and being their own boss, he was not afraid to take the initial risk of creating his own law firm when he was not accepted by the big shots of his day. He was able to shape his own future just how his father had with his garment industry. Only this time, because of the added factor of time and the demographic trough, Flom was able to become a very successful lawyer of his time period.

Hygiene over Motivators

Based upon the Magic Cable case discussion in class today, I decided to expand on my previous post for hygiene factors being a bigger prediction of job satisfaction than motivators. I think that an average worker such as Gary, the main character in our case study will be more influenced to leave or remain within a company based on hygiene factors, rather than motivators. Gary ultimately leaves his old company to take a job at Magic Cable because of hygiene factors. He was not getting along well with his supervisor at his previous company. Also, the work environment was dusty, noisy, and fast paced, making it harder to deal with working day to day. Ironically enough Gary decides to take a new job at the Magic Cable company, where he will ultimately quit due to a new set of hygiene factors, causing him dissatisfaction at work.

Even though this is only one example, I feel that this kind of thing happens many times throughout all different companies. One company may be perfect for a specific individual, but provide negative hygiene factors for another. I believe that more people are influenced to change companies or careers based on simple hygiene factors than on motivators. I guess when it comes down to it people would rather not be dissatisfied than be satisfied at a job. I think that many people would rather have good working conditions or pay or company policies, than have the opportunity for recognition or added responsibility.

Hygiene Factors

When if comes to the motivator- hygeiine theory of job satisfaction there are two different theories to why people are/are not satisfied with their companies. I feel that hygiene factors are a bigger influence and predictor of job satisfaction today than the motivators are. Because the economy today is not the greatest, I feel that more people will be satisfied with a job that isn't terrible, where they can at least get by on a day to day basis. If anything I feel that higher level job positions will care more about the motivators. These are the type of people who want more stimulating work, responsibility, and achievement. The rest of the population wants their paychecks or just a job to keep them on their feet, and if happen to have a supervisor that they get along with and an okay salary, well then thats fantastic!

Maslows Heirarchy of NEEDS

Last week we talked a little in class about Maslows Heirarchy of Needs. We discussed the difference between growth needs and deficiency needs. I remember learning about this earlier, but I always thought of it was being something that you work towards. When it comes to self-actualization I feel like not many people actually reach this level, or realize it if they have. I believe that most of the time we are just trying to satisfy our own deficiency needs, especially in today's society. I think that more and more the hierarchy is stopping at the esteem level of deficiency needs. A lot of people today are satisfied with their own acceptance and feel adequate about their own self.

Book Report Segment 3: The Trouble with Geniuses

Many of us probably wish that we were natural born geniuses at one point in time or another. We wish that we could quickly and easily master whatever we try. In the next segment of the Outliers (http://www.amazon.com/Outliers-Story-Success-Malcolm-Gladwell/dp/0316017922) Malcolm Gladwell explains why being qualified as a genius does not necessarily make someone more successful in life. We are introduced to Christopher Langan, a man with an IQ of 195 who happens to be working on his own theory of the universe. Later we learn that Langan’s IQ can only get him so far in life, the same fate suffered by other geniuses as well.

 Lewis Terman, psychology professor at Stanford University conducted a research project on hidden child geniuses, dubbed his “termites”. The termites were selected from California schools based on their tested IQ levels. Terman spent an extensive amount of time watching over the kids and eventually wrote a series of books on the Genetic Study of Genius (http://www.birkittsbooks.com/si/110205014.html). For a while he truly believed the “termites” he had discovered were destined to be the future elites of the United States. However Terman was very wrong on his prognosis, as he did not understand what a real outlier was.

The relationship between success and IQ only works up to a certain point. Once a person reaches an IQ of 120, adding more knowledge does not translate to any real world advantage. An example was provided of the last twenty five Americans to win the Nobel Prize, along with their accompanying graduate schools. The list includes many good school (Holy Cross and Gettysburg), not just Ivy Leagues as expected. Past the point of a graduate school level, 120 IQ, other factors start to matter more in predicting an individual’s success. Factors such as creativity and drive were lacking in many of the “termites” described earlier, as Terman would eventually discover. In fact, very few of them actually became nationally know figures. Meanwhile, two students rejected as “termites” because of lower IQ scores went on to become Nobel laureates. Terman concluded his results with a statement that, “intellect and achievement are far from perfectly correlated.”

One factor that can provide success in the real world is “practical intelligence”.  Psychologist Robert Sternberg describes this as knowing what to say to whom, when to say it, and how to say it for maximum effect. It is the knowledge that helps you read situations correctly and get what you want. And this kind of intelligence happens to be separate from analytical ability that is measured in IQ tests. This idea of being social savvy is knowledge, the set of skills that have to be learned. And whether or not one attains these social skills is due to their family culture. In a study of third graders conducted by sociologist Annette Lareau, it was discovered that two distinct parenting philosophies existed among the different social classes.

Wealthy parents were found to be heavily involved in their children’s free time. Intensive scheduling and daily questioning were a part of these kids’s everyday life. Meanwhile middle class parents talked and reasoned constantly with their kids, not just issuing commands. These kids were expected to negotiate and question the authority of adult figures. “Concerted cultivation” is the term given to this type of parenting. It is found to have enormous advantages in teaching kid’s entitlement and how to act on their own behalf in order to gain advantages. And finally, the poor parents left it up to the teachers to educate their children. These types of parents simply let their children grow up on their own.  It is the wealthy and poor children who grew up with a sense of distance, distrust, and constraint towards authority figures. And this is the type of family situation that Christopher Langan grew up in. With a poor home life and an angry drunken stepfather it was no wonder that Langan developed distrust in authority and an urge to be independent.

Upon reading this much of the Outliers, I have realized how hard it is to be an outlier. Christopher Langdan was quoted saying, "I don't think there is anyone smarter than me out there, nobody with better powers of comprehension." Just moments later he admits his own defeat in saying, "I have not persuaded mainstream publishers as I should have (referring to his theories)." At the same time other people out there have been able to accomplish this with help along the way. It is this assistance or "push" that Chris never had. And as Gladwell explains quite well, it is not an excuse, but a fact of life. Chris Langan had to make his way alone. And nobody ever makes it alone.

Top 10 Tech Company Office Spaces

One thing that I was personally really interested in learning more about from our discussion on corporate culture was office spaces and how their designs effect a companies culture. I think we can all agree that technology is probably one of the biggest job markets in today's economy. The following articles provides a look in to the office spaces of the top 10 tech companies today.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/adel-zakout/new-wave-corporate-cultur_b_991216.html

It is very interesting to know that these companies have designed new work spaces to help shape their own corporate cultures. For example, as a part of Microsoft's new strategy to open doors of office spaces, new areas such as a "collaborative space" are being introduced in a number of Microsoft locations. The aim is to get workers who need to work together out of their offices and talking. I feel like office spaces like this will attract a lot of younger and new employees into a job setting where their ideas will be heard. I know that I would rather be working in this kind of an environment, as opposed to the dreaded office cubicles.

One additional thought that I had when looking through the different office spaces was that our college campus (probably most college campuses) could really learn from these examples. I feel that offering students a more innovative and collaborative workspace would encourage them to seek out additional educational opportunities. I know that I would personally spend a lot more time on campus if the college of business looked more like a Google or Facebook work space.

How May I Help You?

As it pertains to Walmart and the article that we discussed in class today, I feel whether the workers are wearing the "smock" or blue polo's or even a neon blue Walmart unitard one factor will always be present - team unity. Yes, some employees may feel degraded being forced to wear one uniform over another. The big picture that I think Walmart is enforcing is the culture of customer service. If Walmart employees were allowed to wear whatever they wanted to work there would be no way for customers to seek out help. I agree that the type of dress code that Walmart enforces leads people to think a certain way about the company or being a part of the organization. I think that the key to the Walmart dress code and their culture is that whatever uniform their general employees are wearing, they are all going to be dressed identical as a way of expressing team unity. Also, with their smocks Walmart also influences employees to care about customer service, since that is clearly what they will (and should) be representing. After all, when you apply for a job as a general Walmart team associate you should be expecting to provide customer service as part of a team.

As for dress codes being an enforcer of corporate culture, I feel that the uniform helps employees feel unified for a common purpose (with any service that is being provided). I have personally experienced this in many of the past retail jobs that I have had. The summer before my freshman year of college, for example, I worked for Home Depot and wore and orange apron as a part of the companies dress policy. Whenever I got to work and dawned the orange apron I felt like quite the handy women, even though I was only a cashier and had little experience in the home improvement department. The point was that I felt like I belonged with the culture of the Home Depot organization, and was able to learn a lot in order to provide the best customer service.

Machines 'make better decisions than humans do'

While trying to do some research on what leads to bad decision making, I came across this interesting and distracting article about how machines 'make better decisions than humans do'.

http://www.macworld.co.uk/digitallifestyle/news/index.cfm?newsid=3311863&pagtype=allchandate

The article basically starts with the thought that there may be a day when automation takes over human decision making in business. As we recently discussed decision making in class, I thought it would be neat to blog about the idea that machines may one day be used to make the decisions that business leaders make today.

Well the article starts off with what I think is a good point about how managers often rely on gut instincts, experience, relationships, and even financial incentives when it comes to decision making. They include a U.K study where of the 350 largest firms, pay for executives rose 700% since 2002. Of course the firms values only rose 21% and workers pay increased by only 27% in this time period. I feel that this same result would be true for the U.S as well. Ethical or not, it is part of our instincts to make decisions that will benefit ourselves. And I think that the prisoners dilemma theory has taught us all that some people are more willing to compete than others are.

The article continues with some discussion on how humans have a cognitive basis for decision making rather than using a more rational view. Even in hiring, machines have an edge. Talent management software is capable of using statistical assessments, developed by psychologists, to determine which hires would stay with a company longer and be more productive. I feel like this relates to an availability heuristic of decision making as we discussed in class, where frequency and probability are used to make decisions. This would be better as it reduces the chances for biases within the decision making process.

I am not saying that we will have to worry about any I-Robot situations anytime soon, but I do think that it could be possible that some of the new technologies of the future could be tailored toward replacing human decision making in the business field. And while the article focuses on positive benefits of these 'machines', it does state the negatives of more job destruction and increased social divisions.

Representative Heuristic of Decision Making

After discussing decision making in class I found that the representative heuristic was one that could be the most deceiving. Basing ones decision off of the stereotypes of similar occurrences I feel is a more naive instinct. Even in class we were able to consider many biases involving the representative heuristic. There are so many ways that an occurrence or decision outcome could change, that I feel the representative heuristic falls short of the other two. Misconception of chance and the independence of multiple random events I feel is the most common bias within this heuristic. You always hear of people being addicted to gambling, for example and how many of these individuals become deep in debt. I think this is also where the saying "quit while you are still ahead" comes in to play. Just because you made out good under one circumstance, does not mean that the next time you can expect the exact same result.

I feel that in making a decision, the representative heuristic should be looked at as a last resort to the availability and anchoring/adjustment heuristics. Have an actual probability for basing your decision off is in my opinion the better more frequent way for making decisions. The anchoring and adjustment heuristic was probably one that I was least familiar with but this also seems like a good way to make a decision. The example with guessing the lollipops in a jar, and how all the guesses average out to about the right answer was sort of hard to wrap your head around. But if this is almost always true, I think it would be neat to experiment with this.

Book Report Segment #2

We have all heard the saying “practice makes perfect,” in the next segment of the Outliers (http://www.amazon.com/Outliers-Story-Success-Malcolm-Gladwell/dp/0316017922) Malcolm Gladwell demonstrates how important practice is to achieving success. The 10,000 hour rule, as he discusses, is the expert’s number to achieve true expertise within a field. If like myself, you find It hard to fathom practicing something for this amount of time, it would ultimately amount to around 10 years for someone to achieve this level. If any of you have reached this level of practicing a certain subject, then well congratulations to you, because you are no doubt an expert in that topic. Anyways, Malcolm’s prime example for this rule is Bill Joy, Java creator.

As a young boy, Bill was always seeking knowledge and answers to his many questions. He was very bright, no doubt (he received a perfect score on the math section of the SAT). It was the opportunities he was presented with, however that made all of the difference in his success. The key to Bill’s development was his attendance at the University of Michigan. At the time of his arrival, the institution was one of the first in the world to switch to a time-sharing computer system. This new system allowed him to spend many hours working at the computer (more than on his classes), instead of waiting for a turn with the operator and computer cards. It was because of this opportunity that he was able to practice more code than anyone else at this time, and was therefore proficient (with 10,00 hours or practice) by his second year.

When I think about anything I have ever tried to achieve, I know that I have never come close to reaching the 10,000 hour mark. I haven’t even stuck with the same hobby for 10 years. As a kid I was always trying new things, not sticking with the same sports and clubs. It is even discussed in the Outliers how it is almost impossible to reach this level on your own by the time you are a young adult. You need parents to encourage you to keep practicing and support you. Being a part of a mid-sized family, I know my parents did not have the time to make sure I was practicing every day, let alone helping me achieve the 10,000 hours. They were busy enough trying to get us kids to eat, clean, and do school work. Also, you cannot be poor or from a poor family. Even as a middle class family I had to get a job in high school to pay for things myself. Between a job and school work there was no time for me to practice something every day with a high concentration. Finally, most of us need to be presented with a special program or opportunity to achieve our 10,000 hours. Well if I was ever presented with something like this, than it was certainly a missed opportunity.

I think that the moral to this segment is that even though you may be smart, it is your practice and dedication to something that really makes you great. And it is hard to achieve this level of greatness on your own. You can’t just look at a person and tell whether they will go far in life. You need to know their situation to judge their chances for being and outlier. And what sets them apart from the rest of us “is not their extraordinary talent, but extraordinary opportunities.”

Make Your Pie and Eat It Too

I don't know about you but if I spent time baking a delicious, lets go with pumpkin (tis the season), I would not want to eat it all by myself. That would be very sad indeed. Id much rather share my pie with others so they can taste how well I did! Okay, so maybe pies were not the best example, I am sure that some things most of us would rather not sure.. money, personal possessions.

When it comes to distributive and integrative negotiations, I believe that the later is clearly the better option. Throughout our readings the point was made that negotiations are about more than just a gain. A lot of times a bond is formed in negotiating, one that can hold more value than a single distributive negotiation that goes in ones favor. With integrative negotiation, there is more value exchanged between the two parties, including kind of partnership. Once again, I personally would rather do my negotiating with someone whom I know well. I would continue negotiating with this person as long as I knew that we were both benefiting from a mutual and respectable relationship. Back to my delicious pumpkin pie again, I would rather split it up between myself and someone for whom I have a mutual bond with. And in doing so, I would expect that when they bake their own pies in the future, I would receive the same considerations.

Negative Negotiating

When my partner and I received the negotiating activity we did not do a lot of counter offering and quickly settled on an okay price per unit for my company - GTechnica (which turned out to be a more significant price per unit for him - AccelMedia). I feel that if either of us were more driven or had an incentive, we may have accomplished our negotiating easier and more effectively. Or maybe we would have been so involved that we would not have been able to reach and agreement for the sale. Either way I know that I would have had a better outcome in my negotiating for GTechnica had I read the article Secrets of Power Negotiating (http://www.amazon.com/Secrets-Power-Negotiating-Roger-Dawson/dp/1564144984) beforehand.

The first mistake that I made with my negotiation was starting with a low demand. Now, thanks to the reading, I know that asking for more than you expect heightens the value of your offer. Also, this gives a higher, more broad ZOPA for the negotiation. Another bad idea on my part of the negotiating was sharing my break even price with my partner. Additionally, I did not even ask him what his maximum sales price per unit would be. I hindsight, simply put, I wish I would have done less talking about my side of the "one shot deal" and more questioning him on his side. Finally, I have already decided that the next time I am in a negotiating situation I will be employing the various tips from Dawson's Secrets of Power Negotiating article to see just how good of a deal I can achieve.

The Prisoners Dilemna and Personality

As we were discussing the prisoners dilemma in class this past Monday, I was considering how much the theory to this game deals with the individuals personalities. For example, the point was brought up that some people would not want to rat out a friend in this kind of situation, and that they would not talk for a lesser sentence. I think that this not only shows the individuals loyalty but also a more generous side to their personality. After all, they know the consequence should their partner turn them in. Now that I think of it, I believe that for a prisoner not to compete they must be very daring. If they cooperate and their friend decides not to they are really getting the bad end of the deal.

Well as you all know we soon discussed how competing with the other prisoner would be the rational thing to do. I don't know whether or not it was specifically stated in class, but it seems to me that competing would lead many to believe these people have a more greedy personality. Maybe the prisoner just wants to give it all or nothing in an already bad situation. On the other hand, maybe he figures that if worse comes to worse and he doesn't "win" he is at least screwing over his partner who also tried competing.

One last point to note when considering personality and the prisoners dilemma is how the game itself could influence anybodies personality to change. After all, this is a tough situation to completely wrap your head around. With all of the possibilities and considerations about your partner, thoughts can easily get mingled. Even the two nicest of people could change in to being very greedy if they feel their chances are good and if the stakes are high enough.

Book Report Segment #1

When we hear the word outlier I am sure that many of us can think of somebody that we know, from high school, sports, etc. Usually when I think of an outlier my mind jumps to a person who is different from most people that I know. In his book, Outliers: The Story of Success (http://www.amazon.com/Outliers-Story-Success-Malcolm-Gladwell/dp/0316017922), Malcolm Gladwell defines an outlier two ways:

1.) Something that is situated away from or classified differently from a main or related body.

2.) A statistical observation that is markedly different in value from the others of the sample.

However you look at it, Malcolm Gladwell holds that successful people exemplify the idea of what it means to be an outlier. The basis for his research and novel is that we must examine the world that surrounds the successful when trying to understand their triumphs. Gladwell argues that we must look beyond the individual, to their culture, family, friends, and towns, in order to understand their true story of success. Usually when I think of a successful person I think of how outgoing they are or how talented they are. I rarely consider how their upbringings led them to their talents and fame. And this is what Gladwell will try to explain in the Outliers.

In the first section of the Outliers, Gladwell goes on to explain how “outliers are beneficiaries of hidden advantages and extraordinary opportunities and cultural legacies, allowing them to learn and work hard and make sense of the real world.” The first example that is brought to the reader’s attention is called the phenomenon of relative age. This particular phenomenon was first discovered by a man name Roger Barnsley, after his wife brought it to his attention.

While viewing an Ontario junior hockey game the couple realized how strange it was that the vast majorities of the boys on the team were born in the months of January, February, or March. After doing some research, the pair soon discovered that the explanation was that the Canada eligibility cutoff for age class hockey was January 1^st. This means that a boy born on January 2^nd could be competing with a boy born December 31^st (almost a full year younger) for a spot on all star teams. At this age the older, more mature and stronger boy would be picked for a better squad with more practices and better coaching, thus setting him up for success while the younger boy is lost.

According to Barnsley, skewed age distributions exist when three things happen: selection, streaming, and differentiated experience. In fact this same phenomenon happens with US baseball and European soccer leagues. After reading this section of the book I was definitely shocked at how unfair these cutoffs could be when it comes to sports, but then Gladwell decided to raise the stakes. The same phenomenon of relative age that exists in sports also exists today in areas of consequence- like education.

I had never put much thought in to how age would make a difference in education. One second grade student should be at around the same education level as another, we are all in the same grade after all. But the Gladwell quickly proves me wrong as it describes how teachers confuse maturity with ability to succeed. Even a small initial advantage of a child born in the beginning of the grade level cutoffs over the child born at the end of the year persists. The phenomenon has become bad enough for some kinder garden parents to consider holding back children born at the end of the year.

One thing that interested me about this phenomenon and how it effects education is how the disadvantages continue on through the collegiate educational levels. In 4-year colleges in the US students belonging to the youngest group in their class are under-represented by 11.6%. And as for the rest of these younger and disadvantaged students, they must work twice as hard to compete with the GPAs of classmates with a big head start (the early cutoff). This also relates to the article we read about employers only looking at GPAs when bringing in graduates for interviews. It should not be fair to compare a student who had a head start from the begging of their education, to one who is trying to catch up while being held back by their continued disadvantage. What happens when there is a false head start in racing sports? Everyone gets a fair restart, and I say that the latecomers deserve a chance to catch up when it comes to education also.

Go Belles Go!

I recently decided to join the girls ultimate Frisbee team here at Ship. While I have played on sports teams before in high school, I was worried about joining this year. Would they already have their team filled pretty much? Would they be accepting of such a late newcomer?

Well after my first practice with the girls I realized that this team was an awesome one which fully employed Tuckmans stages of team development all the time. And I was not the only new girl trying to learn how to flick a Frisbee and hoping it would fly semi-straight! I would say that during my first practice there was a lot of Forming going on. It is early in the season and the first tournament was that weekend. While all of the returning girls were very nice and helpful, it became quite clear what was expected of us and who the team leaders were. All three of the leaders, along with the other returners, were very supportive and helpful of the new girls. They were excited by our interest in the sport and the team, and gave us a lot of help and praise.

As these next few weeks go by I expect that there will be a lot of Storming and Norming going on, as us new girls compete for the open positions, in a friendly manner of course. One thing that I really like about the girls is there lack of conflict, at least from what I have seen so far. The competition is encouraged and friendly, and we all learn from each other a lot. I am excited to see how we all fit together as a team this year, and how well we Perform during these next few months! And as for Adjourning.. well I don't really want to think of that for now, this team is just too much fun and I am excited to be a part of it!

The Challenger (race cars and space shuttles)

As soon as Dr. Goates told us that the Carter Racing statistics were actually taken from the Challenger Space Shuttle disaster of 1986 I knew that I would write about it in my blog post tonight. I have been thinking a lot about the decision making process and in particular the decision to race or not race.. to launch or not to launch.

I feel that when people get involved in making a good decision they get so caught up in various courses of action and their outcomes, that a lot of times the most important solution to the problem could be forgotten. I believe that inaction gets skipped over because we feel the need to prove ourselves and to succeed. When you think of a person who does not do a lot the words lazy, coward, etc. come to mind. I don't think that these are always true because inaction can sometimes produce the best end result when it comes to decision making.

A lot of us in class today said that the Carter team should definitely race. We brought up good points about how the team had come so far already and how if you want to win you have to take risks, but if not racing will allow the team the most stability and better them in the long run, they should not be ridiculed for their inaction. When I think of the 1986 Challenger, I think about how the decision for inaction could have saved the lives of many smart individuals during that time. Like Dr. Goates said, if we have the knowledge to understand the probability of a positive or negative outcome of action, some of the top scientists of the time must have known what could result. While I am sure that those on board the Challenger knew of the risks they were taking, I feel that the mission itself could have been pushed back at least to prevent such a negative outcome to occur. Either way, I think it is a good idea to consider inaction when choosing the best decision for a positive outcome.

Spaghetti and Gumdrops

I wanted to blog a little bit about how my team (team #1) completed the in class activity on Tuesday, and why I feel that this was a valuable assignment.

First of all, I don't know how many other teams choose who they were going to work with this semester, but my team knew that we would be working together from the start. When we first received the assignment and our materials we spent about 10 minutes planning. I think that this helped us out a lot in the end. We were able to test the materials (spaghetti and gumdrops) and even draw a sketch of what our base would look like. Together, we collaborated on how to build the tallest spaghetti tower, while keeping a strong base that was able to hold all of the books. Another factor that helped us complete our design in the remaining time was the fact they we sort of knew each other and the roles that we played in the group. We were able to split up the construction of our tower and even had time to build a spaghetti man and make our base stronger at the end of the time period. I was really happy with the way that our spaghetti tower turned out!

I also feel like this activity helped us to get a feel for how well we will work together for our bigger group project. Now we know what our personalities are and how we can each contribute to the group. I am excited to take what I learned during Tuesdays class and apply it to our bigger assignment!

Save your GPAs!

After reading about how low grades in college can affect a graduates job search, I realized the unfair disadvantages of my generation in a competitive job market. Both of my parents found their jobs straight out of high school, with nothing to show besides a diploma and their own personalities. They did not have to spend the first decade of their adult lives in debt up, just to receive an average job to start their family. Now a days not only do college students have to pay and outrageous amount of money to get jobs, they also need to be well above the majority of their classmates. If the smartest kids from my high school are lucky just to get in to college, it should come as a shock that many of them will have to be the smartest of the successful just to land a job.
If what is stated in this article is true, then I feel there are not enough organizations within many collegiate institutions to help those with average gpa's to stand out. I feel that just one or two classes that really may not be a persons strong suit, could potentially have devastating effects on their futures. Lastly, I do not think that employers realize the stress and pressure trying to succeed at the top of a college class, especially within a college of business. I feel that we are still at a point where many top executives did not even attend a college setting similar to what students experience today.

For better or for worse, this article was a wake up call for me to do my personal best to succeed and be involved throughout the rest of my college career!

My Personal OCEAN

Hey guys! My first blog post (which I am hoping will turn out okay) will be based on my personality test results.
The first of our two online personality assessments was the Big 5 Personality Test. I am going to try to post a link to my results if anybody is interested in checking them out. When I first found out my results for this test I was surprised to see a lot of what I expected my personality to be rated as. One category that surprised me was that according to the test I am a more close-minded, conventional individual. I actually have always thought of myself as being very open to new things and ideas. And thinking back to when I was taking the actual test I don't remember many questions about openness. Therefore, I have a feeling that I may have answered neutral, which may account for my close-minded result. One last result that I found interesting was how I am exactly in the middle of being an introverted versus extroverted individual. I have always wondered which of these two categories I fit into best, but a lot of how I act around others depends heavily on the situation and my particular attitude for that day. I have enjoyed taking the time to think about my personality after viewing these results, and I am excited to take the second assessment and see how the two compare!

My Big 5 Personality Test Results:
I'm a O24-C79-E48-A69-N18 Big Five!!