All 5 entries tagged Leadership Cbe Excellence
No other Warwick Blogs use the tag Leadership Cbe Excellence on entries | View entries tagged Leadership Cbe Excellence at Technorati | There are no images tagged Leadership Cbe Excellence on this blog
February 23, 2014
From taking the Leadership and Excellence course for two weeks, I have seen many different types of leadership within individuals in the class. I saw classmates when had to take a role as a leader, some lead assertively, some lead calmly, and some lead freely (kind of democratic). I tried to understand that each person has different personality, different belief, different skills, and different opinion. Therefore, it is common to have a conflict or argument between leaders and followers within the group. However, from the last leadership exercise, my group leader was kind of assertive and not open- minded, he always says that 'you have to follow me, you have to believe me'. In my opinion, I think in the real world business, there are alot of leader like this, which somehow I think it results in the negative way toward those leaders. As the leader being like this, the employees tend to not respect and feel unlike due to they will feel like they are forced to do or force to believe in the think that different from theirs. Also, as the employees have bad attitude, it will affect working performance and outputs of the organization. It is likely that they are not productive and less effective in their jobs.
Therefore, the company will run either in positive or negative direction, it mainly depends on leaders itself.
February 20, 2014
In this week, we have done many leadership exercises, which I think it was very interesting. However, in my opinion, I think it is very difficult to motivate or engage followers to get the most out of the team. From the first seminar, I have got idea about this topic. In the real world business, I see many companies using financial incentive to motivate their employees. In my view, I think it is effective to use the fianacial incentive rather than recognition or other factors due to it is reality that most of employees will do something for wishing to get something back (especially in term of money). However, I think the incentive cannot be able to encourage someone or followers to really respect or like. Therefore, I think it is the responsibility of the leaders to adapt themselves for making the employees respect them, which I think this point is hard to implement. What I think is that I think it is easy for us to come up with the theory, but in reality it is hard to do.....
February 18, 2014
Today, we started the class with the topic about CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility). In my opinion, I think the CSR creates benefits to image of an organization. For example, if an organization creates one campaign said that if you buy their product, they could be a part to help the society. Thus, this could make the customer feel that they need to buy the product to be an indirect part to help the society or be the part in that campaign.Therefore, the organization could be able to get the benefits in term of sales and also to gain the positive image to toward the customers and also the society.
In my experience, I work on one marketing competition project for Kiehl's (L'oreal). It let us to create the CSR marketing program for their company. We can chose to help the society in any way, such as we can create either help the child charity or help the environment. At that time, I felt like I was one of the company's employee who has to help create the CSR for the company. But at that time, I felt really pround that I could be a part to help the society. Therefore, I think I could understand how the eployee in the company could feel to be a part to help the society. Some people might think that they might feel that of course that the employee wont feel involve in the CSR activities due to they might think that they still dont get more wage or bonus from helping the CSR activity. But from what I felt i think money or incentive not important just to help the society could make them feel happy enough.
February 12, 2014
Today, we started the class with the topic that 'being a leader is not necessary to be liked, but should be able to share objective to team members'. Many people in the class argued that in order to be able to lead people/ members effectively and to encourage them to follow loyalty, it is very necessary that the members should like or please on that leaders. Due to they believe that if the members are pleased to the leader, they are going to follow and do what the leader guide them to do. However, if the members are not liking the leader, they might have conflicts, or being ignore or reject what the leader tell them to do. In my opinion, I think it is not important that the members need to please the leaders, it is just crucial that the members need to respect on the leaders. Thus, in other words, it means that I think respect of followers is more important than being like. Also, I think the followers just remind themselves a job that they need to do.
Another topic that we mentioned is that 'leading is about change and focus in future, but managing is about stability of the present'. But I am confused that why managing cannot focus in future issue?? Due to I think being a manager, he or she also needs to concern about the future plan too. Therefore, I am little bit confused about it...But it makes sense from what Paul said that if the manager is effective enough, they can become a good leader to focus on the future problems.
However, I think this topic is little bit confused, but I will going back to figure out again......
October 26, 2013
Yesterday presentation...three excellence models (Deming, Malcolm Baldrige, and EFQM)
After researched and gave presention about these three models, I think I got tons of knowledge especially about how to be a good leadership in the company and how should I manage and control workers. After the presentation and what Paul said in the class, I could summarize that these three models are the excellence models , which each of them is focusing or processing in different ways, but all of them maintain the same one highest goal which is to satisfy customer. Deming (in Japan) put more focusing on the quality control, while the Malcolm Baldrige and EFQM are devloped from Deming and also focusing quality plus self- assessment. From Paul's opinion that he thinks Deming is the best and most advanced model, I agree with this point. but I also think that EFQM is also not worst because EFQM is developed from Deming which is the originality, so EFQM concept should be more advanced and worldwide and gets updated idea from new generation of people which could be more adaptive in the current organization. However, I could say that every models are good, and adaptive but its also depend on the type of the organization whether it suit to which models and also the organization environemnt. For example, the organization that has to deal with European partnership or customer, it needs the EFQM models.
Besides the presentation, there was also a debate about knowledge of leadership or manager. it said that to be a manager or leader, that person should know everything, and solve every problems, so that person should learn everything that they should know. In my opinion, I think it is true that to be a manager, that person should know everything that occur inside the organization. I think it is not necessary for the manager to go for study on that subject. For example, being a manager in manufacturing company, it is not needed to study engineering, or chemistry. I agree with Paul mentioned that being manager does not need to study everything because we are not going to be a engineer or workers on that area but we are going to be a leader. it is better to learn about leadership and management. And I totally agree what he said that when employees have problems on their field, it is the role of leader to motivate and encourage them to solve their own problems, not go to solve problems for them.