GOOD TO GREAT! CHAPTER 4

Hope you all have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
Please response to this post by January 6th.

1. Please answer and explain the following using facts and details, if necessary:
- Are there any issues/circumstances/situations in our organization that need to be properly addressed? It may be the elephant in the room and no one has bothered to discuss and/or solve it.

2. How can we create a climate where truth is both followed and heard?

3. List and discuss the 4 basic principles in creating a functional culture for people in the work place (as mentioned in the chapter).

4. How have you responded to adversity in the work place in the past? And what is a more effective way one should respond to adversity in the work place according to the book?

Here are my responses:
1. I cannot think of any issues that need to be addressed.
2. The power to have such a climate lies with leadership, not with the rank and file. In order to create this climate, leaders must be willing to listen. Truth cannot be heard if one does not listen.
3. The four mechanisms are:
a. Lead with questions, not answers. In other words, leaders should not assume they have all the answers. They should ask the “workers” what they think and listen/respond accordingly.
b. Engage in dialogue and debate, not coercion. Leaders should not just run a meeting where everyone gets to say what is on their mind, only to be ignored by the leaders who will go ahead and implement their own ideas anyway.
c. Conduct autopsies, without blame. When something obviously did not work, leaders should recognize the truth of why it did not work. Rather than assign blame, leaders should look to themselves first, then try to understand what went wrong and make sure that it is not repeated.
d. Build “red flag” mechanisms. These are designed to make a “safe” place for workers to express their opinions without any reprisal. They are supposed to help with better communication. The idea is to make “information that cannot be ignored and to create a climate where the truth is heard.”
4. In the past, I have responded to adversity by plodding through it, trying to do the best job possible. The book advises to do that, but adds that one should also confront the facts of the adversity.

1.  I'm not aware of any issues/circumstances/situations in our organization that need to be properly addressed.

2.  Leaders must be role models of what truth is, in doing so truth will be followed.  When leaders provide opportunities to receive information and input from the team, truth is heard.

3.  The four best practices that create a climate of truth are :
A.  Lead with questions, not answers.  Leaders should seek valuable input and information from each member of his/her organization by leading discussions/meeting with questions that will allow information can be freely shared without employees feeling they are being manipulated or that there is a right or wrong answer.
B.  Engage in dialogue and debate, not coercion.  Leaders will sometimes call meetings in an effort to get feedback from their staff.  Even after long, chaotic, and heated arguments amongst the attendees the predetermined solutions from the leaders will remain the same.
C.  Conduct autopsies, not blame.  Leaders should be willing and able to responsibility for bad decisions when something does not work and be able to admit that if input from other members of the team had been considered the results may have been different.
D.  Build "red flag" mechanisms.  The "red flag" mechanism is used as a form of communication to share observations, experiences, questions, suggestions, etc. without being penalized for any responses.

4.  When dealing with adversity in the work place,  I tend to focus on the positive impact that I have made or will make on an individual's life.  According to the book people with adversity fell into three categories:  those who were permanently dispirited by the event, those who got their life back to normal, and those who used the experience as a defining event that made them stronger.  The good-to-great companies were like those in the third group, with the hardiness factor.

1. Are there any issues/circumstances/situations in our organization that need to be properly addressed? It may be the elephant in the room and no one has bothered to discuss and/or solve it.
    1.  At this time, I dont' know of any issues/circumstances/situations in our organization that need to be properly addressed.

2. How can we create a climate where truth is both followed and heard?
     2.We have to create a climate where people are not afraid to ell the truth.  Employees must be encouraged to speak up without fear of retaliation.  Those in charge must not be afraid of the squiggly things under    the rocks, as was the case with Pitney Bowes.

3. List and discuss the 4 basic principles in creating a functional culture for people in the work place (as mentioned in the chapter).
    a. Lead with questions, not answers.  If you've got the right people on the bus, you have to be willing to listen to questions from your staff and employees.  Questions must not only be permitted but encouraged.  Do not have just "yes" people on staff.  Good to great leaders encourage serious questions.  
    b. Engage in dialogue and debate, not coercion.  Refuse to begin with the "answer".  It's okay to argue and debate.  According to the author, it is productive.  In most cases, you come out with answers.  For example, Nucor became one of the largest steelmakers.  Their strategy came about after lots of arguing/debating.
    c. Conduct autopsies, without blame.  Mistakes will happen, but do not point fingers.  Determine what caused the problem, accept responsibility and move on.  That is what happened with Philip Morris and Seven-Up.  Learn from the results.
    d. Build “red flag” mechanisms.  Don't ignore obvious problems.  Halcion, Bethlehem Steel and Bank of America had plenty of "intel" or information about possible problem areas but ignored them.  Good to great leaders often build in "red flag" mechanisms so that they may see problems before it's too late.  Communicate, communicate, communicate.

4. How have you responded to adversity in the work place in the past? And what is a more effective way one should respond to adversity in the work place according to the book?
    Over the years, I have been very fortunate to have not experienced a great deal of adversity in the workplace.  That is, perhaps, why I've been able to hang in there so long.   As in any situation, every day will not be all sunshine.  I attempted to deal with each situation by offering my input and my point of view.  In the book, the author suggests the best way to respond to adversity is to meet the situation head-on.  Don't ignore the situation and just hope it works out.  Ask for input from involved employees and respectfully listen to the responses.

1. Are there any issues/circumstances/situations in our organization that need to be properly addressed? It may be the elephant in the room and no one has bothered to discuss and/or solve it.
As, far as I am aware of, there are no “elephants in the room” or issues/circumstances that need to be addressed.

2. How can we create a climate where truth is both followed and heard?
I agree with what Mark stated about the climate lies with the leadership. The leadership needs to instill a culture where all members are able to express opinions, give suggestions, and feel that their input is valuable and heard.

3. List and discuss the 4 basic principles in creating a functional culture for people in the work place (as mentioned in the chapter).
1) Lead with questions, not answers. Leading with questions, and not just trying to give all the “answers,” enables the Good to Great leader to make great use of the members on his/her team. They realize that they do not have all the answers but through careful, probing, questions they can understand the problems and find solutions and different ideas they might otherwise have not been exposed to.
2) Engage in dialogue and debate, not coercion. By allowing their employees an opportunity to engage in open dialogue and debate, they enabled to bring their best ideas to the table and then openly have the opportunity to defend or modify instead of forcing their own vision on the team members through coercion and not “actively” listening to them.
3) Conduct autopsies without blame. This is where you diligently look to discover what went wrong and why, but as a “learning process” and not an opportunity to play the “blame game.” Many times people are quick to take all the credit but want to quickly point a finger when things do not work out. Having this principle in place, goes a long way in establishing a working environment where the truth is both followed and heard as described in question #2.
4) Build “red flag” mechanisms. This principle is based on not just being able to have “information” available, but instead … what do you do with the information you are given and acting upon that information and not just trying to explain it away, or worse, ignore it. Great companies utilize some type of “red flag” mechanism to be able to recognize when action needs to be taken or changes made.

4. How have you responded to adversity in the work place in the past? And what is a more effective way one should respond to adversity in the work place according to the book? The author described three general categories people fall into while, or after, facing diversity: (1) Those permanently dispirited, (2) those who got their life back together, and (3) those who used the experience as a defining event to make them stronger. When faced with adversity in the past, I admit I fell more into the category of “getting my life back together.” Shaking it off and moving on. However, I feel that the ability to use any adverse situation or experience as an opportunity to grow and become stronger would be the better way to respond.