Conceptual Blocks

Team,

As I mentioned in my email also, let's use this blog today to discuss any conceptual blocks that you come up with. General topics are:

• How do we get our mission statement approved prior to Tuesday?

• How do we overcome the time factor and accomplish all of the tasks by 12/4?

• What other "out of the box" ideas do we have to make the project easier to accomplish?

Thanks,
Scott

I took Scott Allen's advice from the other night and have gone back and reread the syllabus from start to finish. He says that there are clues in there and we are not picking up on them. I am going to reread the syllabus again later today, but one clue that I did find was, on the very last page about 1/2 way down......"The only thing that is set in stone is that the Boler faculty......will gather on your final evening (12/4) for your final presentation". The use of "only thing" tells me this might be a clue here, I need to relate that back to the entire syllabus, but wanted to throw it out here on the blog board for now.

Do we have options for the mission statement? We could throw together a simple survey with like 2 or 3 options and have the class vote and the majority choice will be chosen. This would remove the need for a lengthy conversation on tuesday.

I re-read the syllabus and I'm having trouble finding any clues that jump out at me. I think Scott has mentioned that we need to do all 54 tasks so I dont think his trick is that we never asked him if we needed them all and that we had the chance to reduce that. One thing I did notice is that the syllabus is that he says we need to come up with a way to prove we accomplished the tasks. Maybe we could simplify this section down to the same way we are proving that we read the book?

It seems that we may all have a bit of complacency because the end of the semester is near and we want to be done with our classes. We have compressed the tasks in some cases by making assumptions about how they must be done. Now that a general direction has been established, we are too committed to our current approach...or at least that's what Professor Allen seems to be suggesting. At this point, it's easy to feel that constancy will eventually "get the job done." It's a good exercise to re-read the syllabus to understand what our essential obligations are.

As for approving the mission statement, my opinion is that we post a few options on this blog and do a vote. The one with the most votes will be approved. We should keep in mind the mission and vision of JCU as we develop the mission statement.

In order to get all tasks done by 12/4, we all need to focus next week on Tues. and Sat. Students with a light load can volunteer to take on additional work if necessary. If we are still behind, Scott Moore and/or group leaders should assign tasks to group members.

I think we are all clearly stuck with CONSTANCY as we are looking at ths class as we have others we have experienced. Our COMMITTMENT has potentially led us down a path of an increased workload. I think the clue SJA is hinting at is just that, we need to tep back and look at the class with fresh eyes. I agree with Jesse that he seems to have said each item is necessary, but we have not specifically asked him to dismiss or reduce items from the list. Example, all of the interviews... if all of the tasks are only for support of our recommendations to the client, do we realy need 7 CEOS, the general, etc? Can we reduce the number of interviews? Do we need them at all if we have legitimate supporting research behind us? Are the answers we even get back from a Fortune 500 company or the military even applicable to what we are looking to impliment here at JCU?! I am still OPTIMISTIC that we can get it together and figure out the missing link, but IMAGINATION and constant COLLABORATION with out client is the key to success.

I feel that as a class we may be suffering from complicity as it is the thanksgiving holiday and we all want to spend time with our families. I also feel that we are suffering from compression because we are not looking at ways to combine tasks. I think we need more clarity. Who would have even thought that debating for 90 min could have been shortened? We need to be flexible and continue to use teamwork. We need to look for ways to make our lives easier. I think we are so focused on the end result we are not looking at ways to do it efficiently. We are now beginning to deal with time stress as if is only 2 weeks away. I am confident that we will pull this out. If anyone need help with their tasks please ask me.

I believe that we are all stuck in our own conceptual blocks of CONSTANCY and COMPLACENCY, which is holding us back from truly seeing what we can break down and combine. We need to find the MOTIVATION to move forward with a new mindset. I think that each of us should reread the syllabus before Tuesday, to look for more clear cut paths that we can go down. If we are able to have the mission statement approved by Dean Schuele on Monday, it would be continuing the strong PARTNERSHIP that we are currently employing with the Boler school core team. We need to be DESCRIPTIVE with what we are trying to accomplish. This way, approval will be more likely and there will be no surprises come 12/4. Having this approved ASAP is critical for everyone developing the deliverables for the binder.

I know that we have a lot of reading to do already but I strongly encourage everyone to read this article entitled "Promoting Ethical Practices within Institutions of Higher Education" (http://businesscommunication.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/31ABC07.pdf) as it directly relates to what we are doing.

If you do not have time to read the entire article, this one particular paragraph stood out to me. It again focuses on the positive rather than the negative by stating that ethical behavior is expected. "Students and faculty should be encouraged to participate in academic integrity initiatives in the classroom and within the community where they live (Couch & Dodd, 2005). Universities should promote ongoing dialogue among student groups for the purpose of increasing understanding of professional codes of ethics in academia, which includes technology enhanced plagiarism and other forms of academic dishonesty that have increased significantly in the past thirty years. According to Couch and Dodd (2005), academic dishonesty can be reduced by establishing honor codes that send a message to students that ethical behavior is expected. The university is responsible for promoting ethical standards for their students that will guide them in their personal and professional lives. Ethical principles for college/university students should be included in student orientation programs. Universities should not assume that students come to universities understanding ethical principles and how they are applied in academia."

We are all clearly still suffering from conceptual blocks related to commitment, constancy, and compression. I hate to admit it, but I fear that some of us are suffering from complacency and stress relating to work overload, unpleasant expectations, and lack of control. I know that it is end of the semester and with the holidays right around the corner, it is easy to lose interest or get distracted. Yet, I urge us all to remain optimistic. Perhaps if we can get past some of these conceptual blocks, this entire assignment will be completed faster.

I think we are getting better about addressing questions with Scott Allen through Scott Moore but I feel like we must be missing some of the bigger, more important questions that we should have already asked by now. I don't think that we are all using [/u]supportive communication[u] yet. It is hard to read the syllabus and not make assumptions. Yet the key to this project is to not assume ANYTHING. The syllabus says that Scott has a lot of resources, "However, he is a resource as well -just not consistently. He has a lot of connections." (pg. 1) There has to be a better way to use him and our time with him in class.

I would also like to bring out what he says on page one "In addition to the list on page 2-3 of this document, you will need to, as a group:
take the midterm (25% of your grade) - content above
create an agenda (and design all activities) for the evening of December 4 from 6:30-9:00 p.m. You will
need to prove somehow that you have completed everything on the list and identified a solid solution for
the business school (rooted in the research you conducted). This is a sales presentation on a number of
levels.
design a system for running the class and tackling the tasks - it’s in your hands."
I would tend to argue that Scott Allen has done a wonderful job of pulling us together and leading us. Yet, I am not sure that we have really created an agenda and designed all activities. What does this even really mean when he says "design all activities." Did he not design all activities by giving us a syllabus with a task list? If we are supposed to design all activities can we change things on the syllabus? Should we have an agenda that plans/planned out all of the weeks leading up to the end of the semester? Also it says to create an agenda and design all activities for the evening of Dec 4 but it does not say that we have to present on Dec 4th. This is not, in fact, even the end of the semester. We still have another week. Why can't we present then? Further, it is the Board of Director's meeting on campus during Dec 4, making it difficult to secure a room for the event. We have not sent out invitations to the Committee (the Client(s)) yet but I fear that they might be busy during this day/time with the Board of Directors (I am not sure though).
Have we really designed a SYSTEM for running the class and tackling the tasks? If so, we definately have not perfected it to the point that it is a system.
Although these are not our 54 tasks, we should work on them because it is listed under the things that we must do.

He also says, "The professor can be a bit busy, scatter-brained, and aloof` at times. You need to work through that to accomplish
your goal. What does this mean? How are we supposed to work through that? Besides his grammatically sloppy writing of the syllabus, he does not seem scatter-brained. In fact, Scott Allen is never "scatter-brained." This does not make sense.
Lastly, I would like to point out, "Your professor tends to use a pacesetting/democratic/affiliative/coaching styles all bundled together (at times to a fault). There is a lot of optimism and “atta boys/girls” but not always a lot of direction until he sees that you really need some help. His primary mode of confrontation is avoidance/accommodation but has been know to escalate when he feels he being taken advantage of. At times he can be a bit obtuse and “high level” - he wants you to make the connections and struggles when working with STJs who struggle to do so. For the context of this class, the professor has brainstormed many important tasks he wants done. However, when it comes to “how” it is done, that is really up to you. My best guess would be that he is an ENTJ (fairly mid­zoned on E/I and T/F)." This must mean something. I am not really sure what, but he is telling us this for a reason. What does he mean when he says, "However, when it comes to “how” it is done, that is really up to you. My best guess would be that he is an ENTJ (fairly mid­zoned on E/I and T/F)." We should look into this. (7)

I'm with Tabitha on this and that is something I did not pick up......why did Scott Allen insert his MBTI profile of ENTJ? I went back to my assessment report, and personally I am an ISTJ. Also, using the MBTI results that Neil had collected earlier, I see that in the entire cohort, we only have 4 N's, the remaining 18 of us are S's. So, for this facet, the majority of us do not think like Scott Allen does. Looking at the assessment report, an S is:

Concrete - Can interpret things literally.
Experiential - May sometimes get stuck on details at the expense of larger considerations.
Traditional - In other words, not unconventional, different or new
Realistic - In other words, by default, not resourceful or inventive

What does this mean? Well, most of us are probably taking the syllabus very literal, word for word, and getting stuck in the details (i.e. we did 90 minutes of presentation vs. being inventive and asking to reduce it to 60). I think if we challenge our "S" personalities, we might find some things. I don't see any place on the syllabus that says all of the tasks are due 12/4, it just mentions are presentation. Also, why 7 CEO interviews, does 5 give us enough coverage? Thoughts, am I reading it wrong?

P.S. The group taking on task #49, the above gets you a long way towards accomplishing that task.

smoore15jcu wrote:I took Scott Allen's advice from the other night and have gone back and reread the syllabus from start to finish. He says that there are clues in there and we are not picking up on them. I am going to reread the syllabus again later today, but one clue that I did find was, on the very last page about 1/2 way down......"The only thing that is set in stone is that the Boler faculty......will gather on your final evening (12/4) for your final presentation". The use of "only thing" tells me this might be a clue here, I need to relate that back to the entire syllabus, but wanted to throw it out here on the blog board for now.

I take this to mean that the only thing we absolutely have to deliver on Dec 4 are the tasks related to pulling off the presentation. Other than that, the interviews, research paper, etc would be preferable if we finished each and every one by Dec 4, but we do not HAVE to. We have the option of negotiating a later deadline for the finished binder.

I feel like this gives us more freedom to focus on the performance on Dec 4, then use the following week to proofread and pretty-up the binder and turn in the finished binder by Dec 11. I mean, since we've already volunteered to go out of our way and hold class on Dec 11 for the mid-term (which I totally disagree with, but whatever), we might as well make that evening more worthwhile than simply taking an exam that we could've easily taken two weeks earlier.

mark.pelsozy wrote:

smoore15jcu wrote:I took Scott Allen's advice from the other night and have gone back and reread the syllabus from start to finish. He says that there are clues in there and we are not picking up on them. I am going to reread the syllabus again later today, but one clue that I did find was, on the very last page about 1/2 way down......"The only thing that is set in stone is that the Boler faculty......will gather on your final evening (12/4) for your final presentation". The use of "only thing" tells me this might be a clue here, I need to relate that back to the entire syllabus, but wanted to throw it out here on the blog board for now.

I take this to mean that the only thing we absolutely have to deliver on Dec 4 are the tasks related to pulling off the presentation. Other than that, the interviews, research paper, etc would be preferable if we finished each and every one by Dec 4, but we do not HAVE to. We have the option of negotiating a later deadline for the finished binder.

I feel like this gives us more freedom to focus on the performance on Dec 4, then use the following week to proofread and pretty-up the binder and turn in the finished binder by Dec 11. I mean, since we've already volunteered to go out of our way and hold class on Dec 11 for the mid-term (which I totally disagree with, but whatever), we might as well make that evening more worthwhile than simply taking an exam that we could've easily taken two weeks earlier.

A little further down though it states:

"create an agenda (and design all activities) for the evening of December 4th from 6:30-9:00p.m. You will need to prove somehow that you have completed everything on the list and identified a solid solution for the business school (rooted in the research you conducted). This is a sales presentation on a number of levels."

Not to say that the binder is not negotiable but from my understanding all these tasks are supposed to be in service to the presentation.

I re-read the syllabus as well as our blog entries since Tues and the conceptual blocks I notice relate to imagination and improvement. I like having a mission statement but we still need a solid/specific recommendation - or as the syllabus states, "a solid solution." I too would like to promote supportive communication but also believe it is critical to know when we are moving off track and creating new assignments/work for ourselves rather than tackling the urgent assignment at hand (which Dr. Allen mentioned we were indeed doing on Tues); because our reality is that we have a severe time constraint. On that note...

In terms of brainstorming, I've been thinking about how our broker-dealer handles promoting a culture of reps that embrace ethics and what I realize is this: 1.) The code is repeated repeatedly and 2.) repeated creatively (via various forms throughout the year and at each 'annual compliance' point). Therefore, my idea for a 'solid solution' to add to our punch is: 1.) Propose to the client that they not settle into complacency by only communicating the code upon entry (freshmen/1st year/start of employment) but rather at the start of each school year and 2.) do so via creative methods, such as an interactive online case study module that presents real life scenarios and shows outcome of unethical choices; and tie this "refresher" to financial aid being applied (and some other tie for faculty) or the like to make it a requirement. Utilizing creative repetition rather than one communication will promote an ethical culture because Boler school would be immersed in it rather than 'sprinkled' is the basic message of the idea...
-LP

In other words, I would say our deliverable should help the client get past their *own* conceptual block, which is the compressed (traditional) idea of communicating a policy only upon entry (think of a huge employee handbook you received at a job orientation that was never revisited again unless there was a 'problem') instead of continually/constantly via creative/interactive ways (i.e. online interactive case study model mentioned) to immerse Boler members in ethics messages; which produces more buy-in...
-LP

smoore15jcu wrote:Team,

As I mentioned in my email also, let's use this blog today to discuss any conceptual blocks that you come up with. General topics are:

• How do we get our mission statement approved prior to Tuesday?

• How do we overcome the time factor and accomplish all of the tasks by 12/4?

• What other "out of the box" ideas do we have to make the project easier to accomplish?

Thanks,
Scott

=====
Scott, regarding time factor, my suggestion would be that we 'cut to the chase' at this point and begin posting/submitting ideas for an actual deliverable (exactly what would you recommend) to the client...
-LP

My initial thought was something like a group of students that have the goal of promoting the code of ethics at JCU. I don't think I'm alone when I say cramming a list of do's and do not's down the throats of a bunch of college student is not an effective way to reach them. My understanding of this assignment is that the boler school wants to know how to change the way student's think and act and promote that they begin acting in a more ethical manner that reflects the school. I personally think that students seeing the code of ethics practiced in front of them on a continual basis would be beneficially. I have seen a lot of unethical practices before and so many people let it just slide because it doesn't affect them or they don't want to be seen as a narc. It would personally have an impact on me if for example I saw someone that stood up for someone that was being discriminated against or someone even saying something when they witnessed a petty theft at the coffee shop.

Not sure how it would be really implemented or work, but just a thought.