All entries for March 2014
March 14, 2014
In this reflective piece of blog I want to talk upon the aspect of different types of decision-making, which can be done depending upon the personality of the leader or a manager. Extrovert is one of the personality traits, which can be found in an individual. Extrovert is a person who actually says whatever ideas comes in his mind in the way to reinforce them and communicate them further without any hitch and this type of personality also prefers face-to-face communications to brainstorm ideas and take feedback on the concerned issues. Other personality type can be the introvert character. In this type of personality trait the personality keeps the ideas with him or her majorly tries to communicate with writing to the group meetings. Introvert personality likes to build the ideas in isolation and after a lot of consultation. The sensor is another personality trait that basically likes to focus on the each and every detail and likes to learn through the experience rather than consulting theories and whatever he or she says is out experience. The user of intuition personality type prefers to look at things from a global perspective. Whatever he or she says which is a decision is out of logic and can be an extension of some theory. The thinkers use mere logics in decision-making. They like to use rationality in decisions and they can be thick skinned sometimes. They also can get indulged in conflicts while making some decisions. Feeler can be a personality where emotions and feelings are involved while making some decisions and he or she is quite sensitive as a personality. They sometimes take things personally and the use of logic will also prevail while serving their feelings in communication process. The other aspect of their personality can be they might avoid making some decisions, which they might fear will make them unpopular. So the above mentioned types of personalities plays a very important role in making decisions.
March 08, 2014
Below are a few examples of what businesses around the World are doing considering the corporate social responsibility as their prime issue.
Making ‘green’ fashionable: The Body Shop
The Body Shop forged a reputation as a responsible business long before it became fashionable. They were one of the first companies to publish a full report on their CSR initiatives thanks to founder Anita Roddick’s passionate beliefs of environmental protection, animal rights, community trade and human rights. The company has gone so far as to start The Body Shop Foundation, which supports fellow pioneers who would normally struggle to get funding.
Over 20 years ago the company set up a fair trade programme, well before the term ‘Fair Trade’ started to become popular on supermarket shelves. Of course, The Body Shop is famous for its anti-animal testing stance. Whilst this makes testing their products more difficult, especially in markets such as the USA and Japan, their position has created a loyal customer base. The results? From opening her first store in 1976, 30 years later Annit Roddick’s empire was taken over by L’Oreal for £652m, where it has continued to make annual profits of over £40m.
Putting the fun into CSR: Walt Disney
Moving beyond making cartoons, today the Walt Disney Company additionally owns the ESPN and ABC networks, holiday resorts and publishing businesses to name a few. The result is a lot of social and environmental impact, as well as the ability to influence a huge amount of people.
Importantly, Disney recognized that you couldn’t entertain a family on the one hand and then disregard the world and circumstances in which they live. Acting responsibly gives the company credibility and authenticity. Accordingly, they have set themselves strict environmental targets and disclose their figures in the Global Reporting Initiative, which provides a comprehensive set of indicators covering the economic, environmental and ethical impacts of a company’s performance
Setting ambitious financial targets together with environmental performance targets may sound like an oxymoron, but Disney has managed to do this with initiatives such as running Disneyland trains on biodiesel made with cooking oil from the resort’s hotels. They also created the ‘Green standard’ to engage and motivate employees in reducing their environmental impact when working, having meetings, travelling and eating lunch. With more than 60,000 staff, the results are enormous when everyone is pulling in the same direction.
A clear example of financially benefiting from reducing environmental impact is made with this simply statistic: a 10% reduction in the corporation’s electricity use is enough to power the annual consumption of 3 of their theme parks. Whilst their CSR efforts may have taken a great deal of organization, dedication and investment, 2012 was a record year for Disney’s profits.
Haagen-Dazs and honeybees
This might sound odd at first, but honeybees are an important part of the global food chain as they pollinate one-third of all the food we eat! With numbers lower than ever, this is bad news for companies such as Haagen-Dazs and their all-natural ice creams. To raise awareness, they created a website, started a social media campaign and donated a portion of proceedings to research.
As you can see, a campaign like works fantastically from a number of different angles. Not only is it helping society as a whole, in keeping with the company’s CSR goals, it helps to show a human side to consumers, which can’t hurt sales. In fact, research shows consumers are more likely to pay a premium for a product linked to a charity donation.
March 07, 2014
When we played hotel simulation game during the module, I got to learn a lot of things which i want to share in this blog. I was the leader of my group and my job was to buy a specific segment of the hotel and do some decision making. I had a strategy in mind to buy the business hotel. My idea was to provide the customers with the best of facilities by paying their stay so they don't have to face any issues in paying for the room tariff. My revenue will be generated by the occupancy of the room. I distributed the functioning with my team member as I held one person responsible for finance, one for marketing, one for human resource and while making the decision I included the opinion of each member. In the end, my team lost the round but I learned that I played a role of a democratic leader. I considered each member's opinion and involved each one in the decision making process. To conclude, I learned from this simulation game that a good leader always asks for the solutions within the group and he considers each member as important as others.
March 06, 2014
Today I got a mail from my father telling me I want to share an incident, which occurred in Mahatma Gandhi’s life and we all know how great leader he was and this incident is just a shadow of a personality of a great leader which actually motivated me as how he answered each question he was asked with such simplicity. So the incident goes like this when Gandhi was studying law at the University College of London, there was a professor, whose last name was Peters, who felt animosity for Gandhi, and because Gandhi never lowered his head towards him, their "arguments" were very common.
One day, Mr. Peters was having lunch at the dining room of the University and Gandhi came along with his tray and sat next to the professor. The professor, in his arrogance, said, "Mr. Gandhi: you do not understand... a pig and a bird do not sit together to eat ", to which Gandhi replies, "You do not worry professor, I'll fly away ", and he went and sat at another table.
Mr. Peters, green of rage, decides to take revenge on the next test, but Gandhi responds brilliantly to all questions. Then, Mr. Peters asked him the following question, "Mr. Gandhi, if you are walking down the street and find a package, and within it there is a bag of wisdom and another bag with a lot of money; which one will you take?"
Without hesitating, Gandhi responded, "the one with the money, of course".
Mr. Peters, smiling, said, "I, in your place, would have taken the wisdom,
Don’t you think?"
"Each one take what one doesn't have", responded Gandhi indifferently.
Mr. Peters, already hysteric, writes on the exam sheet the word "idiot" and gives it to Gandhi. Gandhi takes the exam sheet and sits down. A few minutes later, Gandhi goes to the professor and says, "Mr. Peters, you signed the sheet, but you did not give me the grade."
In todays blog i will discuss about how you can and everyone can become leaders.Sometimes this statement confuses us a lot that are the leaders born or can be made. I say leadership traits can be natural also and one can develop these traits also. A leadership basically involves motivating others, taking some responsibility for the team and setting objectives for them. Leadership also asks that a leader should be flexible and should be ready to adapt to goals in the changing situations. So by knowing the traits of leadership one cannot become a leader just by knowing. To become a leader one has to be initiative to act on the available opportunities. One should always take a lead. One should take responsibility for the objectives and priorities he/she has initiated. An individual has to display a “yes I can do “ attitude in various situation where challenge is involved. He/she should try solving problems rather than passing them on to other people. One has to go beyond his/her job description while performing tasks and all actually notices that work. Enthusiasm is very important which should partial throughout the given task. One has to introduce improvement wherever they are necessary which should involve innovation. Continuous improvement should be the role-play in his/her life by learning new skills that will enhance the capability of the work.
The things mentioned above can actually help any individual to develop himself into a leader and can be eligible to lead the team but for all that one has to be a initiator.
March 05, 2014
Today I was reading about a very interesting concept said by John Maxwell about the 5 levels of leadership, which I found it very interesting to share it on my blog. So to startup with level 1 which is Position and it the lowest level of leadership too. People under this are not leaders they are the bosses and people follow you because of your position and they follow you because they have to follow you. They don’t have any other option because they want to get paid. A leader should aspire more to go beyond this level. The second level is Permission, which can be a startup for a leadership. People in this stage want to follow you because a leader beside its position wants to listen and absorb the notions by its subordinates. If you start valuing your people, they will get along with you because they start liking you. The third level is Production; under this a good leader focuses on make things happen. Leader proves the saying actions speak louder than words. They get the results done. They make an impact on an organization. If you want to go higher you simply have to produce ethically. The Fourth level is the People Development and the emphasis lies on the corporate and the personal productivity. Leader on this level invest their time, money, energy into making others grow as leaders. They tend to focus on development of others. It can become a change for an organization, which can give it a brighter future. The final level of the leadership is the Pinnacle and it is very rare if a person reaches this level. In this stage a person requires a very high skills and some naturally embedded leadership ability. A leader under this stage leads so well that it creates a legacy of leadership in the organization. Under this environment everyone in the organization gets benefited. They make leaders and bring success wherever they go.
March 04, 2014
Leadership and management is definitely not the same thing but are co related and are complementary to each other. The major difference which i found by reading couple of articles on the internet is the manager organizes and coordinates the task or a team but a leader always believes more in innovating and motivating. Manager is more over an administrator. Manager always has a short-term view while a leader has a long-term perspective. The very interesting thing, which I read about a leader and a manager was a manager always does the things right but a leader, do the right thing.
Managers have subordinates working under him/her but a leader has followers, what we can understand from this is a manager creates a circle of power, where the manager orders and the subordinates follow and the subordinates has to agree with the manager even if he disagrees because he is the boss but in case of leader he/she creates a circle of influence where the follower agrees with the notion of the leader and wants to work willingly. Leaders like Mahatma Gandhi who always have thinking beyond the problems and followed the vision. He inspired people to actually convert the challenges into the opportunities.