Reflection on the MEGA Simulation Activities - Case Study Example

Self Reflection Executive Summary This paper is focused on the self reflection on the MEGA simulation activities. The process of reflection has been discussed in the light of several theories and models. It covers the learning process and how reflection is a vital part of it. Moreover, the activities performed in the event and the issued faced during the activities has enabled me to learn a lot from them. This learning process has been described in details along with how the team members solved the issues. The paper contains three mentionable incidents and the major lessons learnt from them. This as a result has allowed me to understand the key necessities for being a successful manager and lead to organizational success. Table of Contents Introduction 4 Critical Incidents Analysis 4 Incident 1 4 Incident 2 5 Incident 3 7 Conclusion 8 Reference List 10 Introduction Self reflection is an imperative stage of effective learning. The MEGA simulation has a lot of knowledge to offer, which can be best learnt from self reflection of the activities performed by me and other team members. Reflection allows us to get a clear insight of the any incident and therefore is a vital part of the learning process. Reid (1993) described reflection to be a reviewing process of a particular practice in order to analyze and evaluate the experience. The success of the learning process can be determined by the individual’s ability to utilize the information in practice. The self reflection has been carried out following the Gibb’s theory of reflection and Kolb’s learning cycle. The Schon’s learning society has been avoided because it mostly discusses about the learning process of the changing society which is irrelevant in this context of study. Critical Incidents Analysis During the evened of MEGA simulation I came across several memorable and mentionable incidents and issues. Some of them are mentioned below. Incident 1 The team I was put into consisted of members from different countries and had different native language and they did not good in communicating in English language. This as a result created a barrier to communication among us. 1.1. A proper communication among the team members is imperative to the effective functioning of a team. This can be discussed by the Shannon-Weaver communication model. It suggests that transfer of information or a message from a sender to a receiver often faces certain barriers which are called ‘noise’. One of them is language barrier (Chandler and Munday, 2011). My team members belonged to different countries and therefore had different native languages. Members from same countries communicated in their native tongue which as a result created a challenge for me, as I was completely ignorant about their language. Moreover, their English communication was also weak, which made it difficult for me to communicate with them. However, we solved this issue to a great extent by deciding to communicate in English. The members who lacked fluency in English language, tried to compensate by non verbal communication. Finally, the communication problem was solved by the joint effort of our team. This incident allowed me to learn the importance of team work and interpersonal communication. 1.2. According to Boud, Keogh and Walker (1985) reflection process should be implemented after a particular incident and not simultaneously. This allows the individual to give sufficient time to the reflection process. They mentioned that the reflection process can be termed as “return to experience”. This suggests that the individual while reflecting recreate the respective incidents in his mind and try to derive useful information from them. Following this theory I decided to note down how we overcame the communicational barrier after we were done for the day. This helped me to have a clear idea of hoe organizational communication is important in determining its success. 1.3. According to Kolb’s Learning cycle the process of learning is only complete when an individual is able to implement the gathered knowledge in real life practice. The communication problem due to the cultural differences in the MEGA simulation event was a new situation that I was exposed to. Moreover, working as a team to achieve a common goal was also a new experience for me. This acted as a “concrete experience” for me. This stage is followed by the concrete experience, when the individual tries to review the new experience that he was exposed to. I closely reflected upon the newly gathered experience and tried to get a clear insight of the situation. This allowed me to understand the reason behind this issue. I realized that since English is not the native language of all the group members, so their communicational skills in this language are quite weak. This acted as a communicational barrier for us. Incident 2 The second incident was that our team performed poorly in the 7th week. Due to this the team’s rank went down and we felt severe pressure on us. Moreover, there were some disagreements and disputes in the team regarding decision making. 2.1. Our team performed poorly in an activity which as a result degraded our position in terms of rank. This is was a result of poor decision making by our team. Later I was able to underpin the sole reason behind our poor performance. According to the theories of team building and team management by Tuckman (1965), the team activities can be divided in to four distinct phases, Forming, Storming, Norming, and Performing. The forming stage is initial strep of team building where different tasks are assigned to different members based on individual skills and abilities. Our team failed to perform because we did not follow this stage. We were unaware of the individual skills of the team members and the tasks were improperly allocated to the random individuals irrespective of their skills. The next stage is the storming, where the individuals engage in brain storming activities and try to find out the solution for the problem at hand. In this stage different ideas collide together which often leads to disputes. Next there comes the Norming stage, where the team members streamline their ideas to a single point and focus on a particular decision. Finally at the Performing stage the team performs the activities allocated to them and proceed towards the directions decided at the Norming stage. During the storming stage our team members became aggressive and failed to pin down on a single decision, therefore, we never arrived at the Norming stage of our team work. Due to the failure of the norming stage, there was a lack of singularity in idea generation. This as a result gave rise to several different ideas and each member decided to follow their own idea, thereby leading to poor performance of the team. This incident was followed by another dispute in the team where the members faced severe pressure of performance. 2.2. According to Earnshaw and Cooper (2001) the stress involved in workplace performance often leads performance degradation of the employees. This theory was justified for our situation. Due to work stress, we were severely burnt out and our performance started to deteriorate. He also stated that stress free employees are more efficient and productive. Following this theory I decided to convince my team to focus at the current tasks rather than repent for the past failure. The team members realized that their stress level was reflected at the overall performance of the team and all of us decided to focus on the immediate objectives. This as a result allowed us to perform well in the next activities. 2.3. Based on the theory of cognitive dissonance, an individual tries to pacify his dissonance level caused out of poor decision by shifting the source of the mental dispute (Argyle, 1994). This theory perfectly explains the dispute in the group after the poor performance. The members of the team started to blame each other for the team’s failure. The members were trying to reduce their dissonance level by shifting the reason of the discomfort to another individual. Incident 3 Finally my overall performance with the team was quite satisfactory as I offered full engagement in the activities. Moreover, I also ensured that my attendance is consistent and my contribution is relevant for the success of the team. 3.1. The last distinguishable incident was my contribution as a team member. Following the previous activities of the team I improved my performance and increased my engagement in the given activities. According to the theory of reflection proposed by Gibbs (1988), the process of reflection is broken down in to six phases Description, Feelings, Evaluation, Analysis, Conclusion and Action plan. The description is the initial phase where an individual gathers information about the activities or incidents that has occurred. This stage is followed by the Feelings stage where he provides his opinion about the incidents. The next stage is the evaluation stage where he makes a judgement about the experience in terms of good or bad. This is followed by the Analysis stage, where the individual tries to find out the reasons that led to that particular activity or incident. The next stage is the conclusion where he underpins the alternative approached that could have averted the situations or improved the end results. The final stage is the action plan where he decides on the future actions if the same incident is repeated again. Following these stages I have decided to improve my performance in the near future. I have evaluated every incident based on its end result and the team’s performance. The activities where we have performed poorly have been clearly assessed to find out the reason of failure. After I was able to pin point the reason. I tried to find out the alternative actions that could be implemented to avoid the end result. After I indentified the end result I designed an action plan for each of those incidents so that whenever they are repeated again, I can take the alternative action plan so that the undesirable end results can be avoided 3.2. Based on the Porter’s generic strategies discussed by Dess and Davis (1984) the activities of a team or organization can be accessed on the grounds of strategies employed to achieve competitive advantage. We decided that out team will follow the strategy of cost leadership to achieve competitive advantage. This was achieved by increasing the resource efficiency and reducing the time taken. This as a result allowed us to score higher pints in our activities. 3.3. Our team’s success was largely dependent on the leadership style employed. The individual who was appointed as the leader held the entire team together and ensured that all the members are progressing towards the desired direction. The leadership styles can be broadly categorized in to two types, Autocratic leadership and democratic leadership. I have learned that the importance of leadership is also important in the success of a team. However, the choice of leader in most of the cases causes disputes, as every one wishes to be the leader. In our group we decided to choose our leader based on experiences and seniority. One of the members has past professional experiences so we decided to make him the leader of the team. We all realized from his behaviour that he possessed good leadership skills, which increased the motivational level of the team. I decided to observe his activities and learn from them. In order to be a successful manager, an individual needs to have good leadership qualities that will help him to manage his subordinates. The type of leadership style followed by a manager largely determines the organizational performance. It has been observed that the motivated employees are more productive and efficient and the type of leadership style is the primary determinant of employee motivation level. Thus it can be stated that incorporating the right leadership style will motivate the employees thereby increasing the organizational performance level (Armstrong, 2008). Conclusion From the MEGA simulation activities I have learned that in order to be a successful manager one must have a set of skills and abilities which are imperative to organizational success. The most important skills are the ability to develop good leadership skills, because the organizational performance is mostly dependent on the motivational level of the employees. Thus if a leader is able to motivate his subordinates then he will be able to effectively improve the overall performance of the firm. Moreover, the importance of organizational communication cannot be ignored as it is one of the primary determinants of organizational success. The manager needs to facilitate a seamless flow of information across the hierarchical ladder. The process of reflection is a cyclic in nature, where an individual keeps on improving himself by observing, analyzing and implementing the gathered knowledge in real life. Thus reflection is an important factor of self development that ensures sustainable performance and gradual improvement. Reference List Argyle, M., 1994. The psychology of interpersonal behavior. 5th ed. London: Penguin Books. Armstrong, M., 2008. Strategic Human Resource management. A Guide to Action. 4th ed. London: Kogan Page Ltd. Boud, D., Keogh, R. and Walker, D., 1985. Reflection: Turning Experience into Learning. London: Kogan Pages Chandler, D. and Munday, R., 2011. A Dictionary of Media and Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dess, G. G., and Davis, P. S., 1984. Porters generic strategies as determinants of strategic group membership and organizational performance. Academy of Management journal, 27(3), pp. 467-488. Earnshaw, J. and Cooper, C., 2001. Stress and employer liability. London: CIPD. Gibbs, G., 1988. Learning by Doing: a guide to teaching and learning methods. London: Further Education Unit. Reid, B., 1993. But We’re Doing it Already! Exploring a Response to the Concept of Reflective Practice in Order to Improve its Facilitation, Nurse Education Today. 13, pp- 305-309. Tuckman, B. W., 1965. Developmental Sequence in Small Groups. Psychological Bulletin. P.63. Vince, R., 1998. Behind and Beyond Kolbs Learning Cycle. Journal of Management Education. 22(3), pp. 304-319. Read More