solved In need of (2) substantive replies of 100 words each

In need of (2) substantive replies of 100 words each to (2) different forum posts. E01322CE01NCOL: Fundamental Leadership Dynamics Topic: Lesson 5 This class will examine the role a leader has in developing an effective team or alternatively how a poor leader can negatively impact team performance. More precisely it will review how great teams are built and sustained as well as the pivotal role that leaders play in this process. Learning Outcomes Determine the role of the leader and how a leader can impact whether a team reaches it’s true potential. Peer replies to further the conversation Student replied to at least two (2) classmates’ posts and each reply includes at least three (3) to four (4) sentences relating the classmate’s post. Responses are substantive and encourage discussion by proposing a different point of view supported by an attribution to a source, personal example, or personal application. All responses include related follow up questions to promote continued discussion. Topic: Lesson 5 LESSON 5 ISSUE FOR DISCUSSION #1: What were the commonalities/differences of the best/worst teams you have been on? Was it the leader or team that made it the best/worst? (In need of a reply of at least 100 words) Forum Post 1: Re: Lesson 5, IFD #1 When I think back over my career, the best and worst teams I’ve ever been on were in the same office and within two years of each other. Part of the reason why this team, which I’ve written about previously, was so awful was there was a colleague who was vindictive, self-centered, and hypocritical. The bigger problem was the leadership team which was both weak and risk adverse. They were unwilling to deal with my colleague but were all too willing to stifle initiatives, specifically mine. Additionally, my leadership at that time was clearly out for themselves and it was apparent to everyone in the office what their priorities were. The management team pushed one initiative (not mine) which was clearly designed to make them look good. The workers in our office universally objected to the project. I had ethical problems with their initiative which I made very clear in an open forum and was essentially told to shut up and do as I was told. I wasn’t going to disobey a direct order, but I felt obligated to speak my mind regardless of the consequences. In the end, the management team got what they wanted. We did as we were told, but the conflict took an already terrible office environment and made it much worse. Whatever good will the workers had for the management was gone. At that point, people were simply following orders to avoid repercussions. Looking at, “The Five Dysfunctions of a Team”, our office had them all. Clearly there was no trust. Collectively amongst the twelve or so workers, there was over 100 years of experience. Our opinions and strong objections were discounted for a project which clearly seemed like a stunt to make our leadership look good. The leadership was unwilling to take a hard line with a problem employee who was actively working to sew discord in the office but they were all too willing to threaten the rest of us with punitive actions if we didn’t support their initiative. This initiative included significant work during off hours or our personal time. Management refused to commit to other initiatives to include those which might have been more impactful for national security. I suspect this was because it would have involved dealing with outside agencies who in some cases would have had conflicts with our projects. The lack of accountability in this case would be a complete lack of introspection on the part of our leaders. They had taken one of the best offices in the agency and within a year, it had become a place people, including me, were desperate to leave. They pointed fingers at their personnel who they said had bad attitudes but never asked why their personnel were so unhappy. The project with 100% disapproval may have been the proverbial last straw but it might not have been such a big deal if things hadn’t been so bad already. The leadership also gave no credit whatsoever to our hard work showing a complete lack of attention to results [1]. It got so back that the only commonality between the management and the workers was the disdain we held for one another. Thankfully, most of the leadership and my problematic colleague all left the office during a summer rotation and new leadership and colleagues arrived. It was almost an 80% turnover, and considering how toxic the work environment had become, this was the best thing that could have happened. There were about four of us who remained in the office during the turnover, and we promised each other that we would do everything in our power to help the inbound colleagues, and create a great office environment. This was an overseas office, so the inbound personnel required significant support their first few weeks in country. The four of us gave freely of our time to help our new colleagues get set up. We even arranged social outings to build camaraderie and set a positive tone from the beginning. The head of the office was new but had heard about how awful things had been and appreciated our efforts. He was fully supportive and an active participant in both our operational activities and our social festivities. Under his tenure, I had the best experiences of my career. About a year into my new bosses’ tenure, I was fortunate in that a unique operational opportunity came up, and a colleague and I were selected to manage the project. This colleague and I had been great friends at the start of the initiative and we traveled all over Oceania together and did great work. My colleague and I were aggressive, worked well together, and absolutely loved what we were doing. We had several colleagues who directly supported us, and our management to their credit, gave us the top cover we needed to pursue our project. The team dynamic could not have been better. My colleague and I trusted each other with our lives, our support personnel were deeply involved and the trust was complete. We had an open line of communication from top to bottom and often times would field questions, to include criticisms during meetings with our boss. The good news was that we always had answers for what we were doing but appreciated the guidance which in many cases, provided us with a fresh and welcome perspective which we put into practice. The work we were engaged in did involve risk, and had things gone bad, it could have reflected poorly on or leadership. Thankfully our management, particularly the head of our office, trusted us and had the strategic vision to recognize the value of our work and the courage to commit to it completely. In the end, our office got national recognition for the work. I can’t think of something that would reflect more positively on a leader than his or her office getting national recognition for an initiative that was envisioned and implemented under their watch. From a work perspective, it was the greatest thing I’d ever been a part of. What made the national award so awesome was that there were nine people for our office listed as participants. I never cared about recognition but the validation of our efforts did mean a lot to me. More importantly, our team shared something special, and while we’ve all moved on from the international assignment, we will always have a certain bond. A group of ordinary people came together, and joined together as a team, and we did something extraordinary. In the end, both my leadership and colleagues were very important in both the bad office environment and the great office. While I’d traditionally liked to work alone, I quickly realized that my colleague and I were far better together than we ever were alone. Our support personnel were critical to our successes. They were the best I’d ever worked with and gave us everything we ever asked for. Also, our leadership was everything. Their willingness to accept risks, support us, and sometimes even provide top cover made all the difference in the world. There’s no way we could have achieved what we did with the first leadership team. But my second leadership team saw something that needed to be dealt with and allowed my team to take it on. I will forever be grateful to them for their trust. Sources 1. The Five Dysfunctions of a Team, Jossey-Bass, Patrick Lencioni, 2002 LESSON 5 ISSUE FOR DISCUSSION #2: What do you consider to be the role of the leader in initial and sustained team success? (In need of a reply of at least 100 words) Forum Post 2: Re: Lesson 5, IFD #2 I often quip that success isn’t an accident. Teams, initiatives, and groups don’t accidentally get lucky and achieve success. Rather, it is through hard work, collaboration, and leadership that teams succeed. Conversely, have you seen those teams/groups that often have an excuse for why things just didn’t work out? I had one boss that used to say, “we don’t have to achieve our goals as long as we can explain what out of our control thing happened to prevent us from achieving our goals.” I’m sure you can imagine what I thought of that as a Marine officer. The role of the leader is to set goals achieve them (or not in some cases), then recalibrate the team when the goal has been met or not. Additionally, the Hooper reading captures what creates highly functioning team: 1. Team members trust one another 2. Teams members engage in unfiltered conflict around ideas 3. Team members commit to decisions and plans of action 4. Team members hold one another accountable for delivering against those plans 5. Team member focus on the achievement of collective results. The five stated characteristics likely surprise no one. Yet, consider how hard it is to find yourself in a team that operates with these attributes. I was part of an ad hoc matrixed working group this spring. The appointed leader was new to the organization and rarely took a “stand” on anything. It was a lot of “that sounds nice” and “good idea!”. While being new does allow some latitude, the simple fact that no conflict occurred, no commitments to decisions, thus no accountability or achievement. It was a group in name only. Thus, the leader plays an integral role in encouraging and fostering the five characteristics. I was recently the CO of a group of Marines that included a number of admin clerks. They were advised to cc me on every email they sent so I could know what was going on. After 2 hours of this, I walked out of my office, hopped up on a desk and told the Marines to put their arms out. I then did a trust fall into their arms. I turned and said, “I trust you all, you don’t need to cc me on every email you send. Go and do great things.” Additional Resource: https://youtu.be/2nR3reKPE5Y ******Greetings, I’m sending my week 5 announcement early as I want to give some guidance on the reading for next week. For week 5 we will be discussing team building and the role of the leader in a team’s initial and sustained success. There are two readings and a video clip from the movie “Miracle”…..I’m getting motivated just typing this as I think about the 1980 U.S. Olympic Hockey team defeating those pesky Soviets! For the Lencioni piece, you only need to read pages 185-220 (the section titled “The Model”). When you pull up the reading you will notice the highlighted sections to the left of the actual reading do not match the pages within the reading. The highlighted section on the left indicates it is pages 197-232 but the pages within the actual article are 187-220……look in the Table of Contents of the article for “The Model”. My apologies if I’ve thoroughly confused anyone. I’m excited to read your posts/responses. ******