Personal Learning Paper #3 -Divanshu Dubey Roll No 26

12 Angry Men: The movie was appropriately timed in terms of learning. A number of issues sprung-up in our minds as we observed the way the members of the group carried themselves. Before getting into specifics I would first like to comment on the role played by Henry Fonda. His character remained resolute in the face of ridicule and criticism from the rest of the group, and displayed true leadership by hanging on to his belief. He acted in a reasonable and balanced manner, always calm, with just one exception in order to cut out an instance of jury members playing tictac-toe. Soon he had formed one, then two and then more allies. He then relied on the group dynamics that rolled on to form a consensus on the decision to be taken by the group. This would be a good trait for managers to emulate in many situations. There were various factors which went into play for various jury members who decided on the guilt of the accused, besides mere evidence. Also, the feeling amongst members regarding their perception of each other based on their backgrounds surfaced during the movie. The fact that some members themselves had doubts surfaced later. This shows that some symptoms of groupthink were prevalent. Also some members seem to be more concerned about other trivial issues & just getting the process over with. They did not show the seriousness that was needed to decide the fate of another mans life. This can also be considered a form of loafing. Now let us move from group dynamics to personal perceptions. A number of jury members were hell bent on deciding the case against the accused strongly guided by their perceptions and not merely on the basis of evidence. A jury member had declared that he too belonged to a similar back-ground as the accused. When the second vote was taken and only one other member voted in support of the protagonist, some assumed wrongly that it was this jury member. One of the members seemed particularly biased because of the socio-economic class of the accused. When he repeated this again & again he was severely ridiculed even by his erstwhile supporters, finally causing him to realise his mistake.

Another jury member had an errant son about the same age and was deeply distressed by his behaviour. This prompted him to perceive all young men to be capable of violence against their fathers. The protagonist challenged him during the course of the discussion which broughtout this fact & finally helped him find peace. For many others the evidence presented in the case just seemed to fit in with the stereotype of a common criminal. But one by one they veered towards too protagonist when presented by sound re-examination of the evidence presented in court. Another interesting observation was the fact that the old man in the jury came up with interesting reasons for a witness to probably have given an unreliable testimony. He was able to identify with the witnesss perceptual process as he was undergoing a similar phase. In due course of the discussion various jury members came forward and expressed their views and opinions which strongly undermined the evidence against the boy. Members who were initially reserved, spoke-up later expressing strong opinions on various matters refusing to cowdown under the pressure of the majority. The primary lesson from this audio visual experience was that we need not always give in to the majority view without applying our minds. This also reminds one of the Asch effect. All it takes is one person with an open mind, a strong conviction & self belief and disastrous decisions by groups can be averted. The clever influencing tactics employed could serve as a practical guide of sorts.

Session 8: The case on IBM was aptly timed, especially in the sense of integration of learning. Similar & related subject were being discussed in operations & marketing. Also, given the propensity of people from IT amongst the participants, this case took new and intense dimensions. The rise of the underdog always makes an interesting read, & this was no exception. But the class discussion was no less exciting. The case very distinctly brought out the roles of various participants in the process of innovation. Although my experience has been in an organisation with fixed hierarchy & structure, innovation is none the less a part of the routine life. Primarily because the environmental dynamics are continuously changing & it is not possible to keep up with these fast moving factors in a very traditional & conventional pace. New innovative & inventive things are done every day to make good the gap between needs & reality. As in IBM innovations are a part of our day to day lives. The innovations range from the basics like learning how to use a tool more effectively, to how to run the entire core competency operation in a different manner. Also there are many ways & means of sharing these innovations across sister organisations. As aptly clear from the case, different people at different levels play the roles of idea generator, sponsor & orchestrator. The organisational benefits that accrue from supporting such a structure over time is tremendous. Innovations may not always be the real big things like the internet in the case of IBM, but even small things like clever improvements in the way we carry out administrative activities go a long way in improving the efficiency of the organisation. A reward mechanism to give adequate recognition to good & effective ideas generators is always a good thing. Innovation not only happens at the so called reservations or R & D centres (as was the experience of many co-participants), but the regular operations guy can get good ideas to. Therefore some came up with the concept of cross-functional teams. One aspect of the text that I do not agree with upon reflection is that concerning the idea of innovating versus operating. At every level we may not have the luxury to separate the two functions. This in turn would imply that only the R& D department is vested with the

responsibility for innovation. But like I said, every person doing anything can at times generate wonderful ideas. The organisations should learn to function as innovation nets or catchment areas which do not let any good idea of innovation be prevented from adding value to the organisation & its processes. The reading on the attributes of idea generators seems to match the general observations as per my experience. The most striking point about such people is that they are never happy with the status quo & are always looking at creative ways to improve. The other attributes are adjustable, particularly when the person is mature. Such a person is capable of finding creative ways to get around the lack of environmental support. The role of idea generator and sponsor tend to blend in. The key take away for me is the leadership style required to manage creative people. This resonates through both the IBM & The Merit Corporation cases. I feel that the ideas to recognise retain & train idea generators & sponsors will be a key attribute of a successful senior manager. Since we are talking of IT and innovation I would like to end my reflections on this session by remembering the idea of the most iconic personality in the field. Microsofts only asset is Human Imagination -Bill Gates

Session 9 & 10: The LEAD questionnaire offered some interesting insights for me as a leader. I discovered that I was low on delegating. This contrary to my previously held believes. I do feel that the act of delegation is often necessary and one cant really manage without it. I feel that I will have to delearn the old habits and train myself to adopt new ones. I will briefly touch upon the readings on What great managers do & The Parables of Leadership. While the stories were a wonderful & easy read they were insightful in the typical way of all oriental stories. One can also draw parallels to stories from Indian Mythology. The articles in a column of a famous daily come to mind. The Sound of the Forest was a story that I could easily relate to. As a leader I have always been taught to discover ways & means to have a feel of the pulse of my men. The unstated factors take precedence over the stated ones. One simply needs to learn the art of reading the signs to listen to the unsaid. The Wisdom of the Mountain was also a very good read but I could relate to The lesson of the Babbling Brook in a special way due to my professional experience. In a way the lessons were similar top some of Sun Tzus teachings from my perspective. The article on What Great Managers Do was again something very close to what I have been practicing so far. Using ones subordinates strengths to get better results for the organisation, meeting various stated & unstated objectives by employing the untapped potential of team members, trying to let every member of the team contribute to the best of his fulfilment & potential were always ends that we desired to achieve in our organisation. After a great learning experience through a lot of exciting activities, the last session of this leg came to an end with a wonderful movie on delegation, which was a major improvement point for me post my lead scores. I hope the following quote encapsulates the lesson I carry forward from this Module. One can choose to go back toward safety or forward toward growth. Growth must be chosen again and again; fear must be overcome again and again.
Abraham Maslow