INSEAD Reflection

A635.7.3

• What do you see as some of the major benefits and drawbacks of self-managed teams?
• Would you like to work within such a team?
• What competencies would you need to develop to be an effective external manager of a self-managed work team?

Self Managed Teams (SMT), according to Ethan Berstein, John Bunch, Niko Canner, and Michael Lee (2016) is a group of employees where, “Members share accountability for the work, authority over how goals are met, discretion over resource use, and ownership of information and knowledge related to the work.” These teams typically consist of experienced and highly technical members that can perform a wide range of tasks that were reserved for specialty departments and supervisors in a traditional organizational structure. Brown (2011) notes:

Work teams are assigned a wide range of tasks, including setting work schedules, budgeting, making job assignments, developing performance goals, hiring and selecting team members, assessing job performance of fellow members, purchasing equipment, and controlling quality.

A significant advantage of the SMT is the versatility and capabilities the team provides. The team’s specialty is not nested in one area or field, it has the ability to employ their expertise in various environments and situations. Another advantage of the SMT is that the team is accountable to each other and provides greater ownership with what they do and how they do it. In such teams, roles and responsibilities can and do rotate among its members, which creates a rich developmental (learning environment) and empowering experience. “In self-managed organizations, leadership is distributed among roles, not individuals (people usually hold multiple roles, on various teams). Leadership responsibilities continually shift as the work changes and as teams create and define new roles” (Berstein et al., 2016). Lastly, an important advantage in today’s dynamic environment is have the ability to be agile. SMT are designed to reduce “red tape” that is well known in large organizations.  “Self-management aims to reduce the red tape and endless sign-offs usually needed to make decisions in bureaucracies” Berstein etal., 2016).

Some of the disadvantages is of cohesive groups like SMT is falling into the trap of what Brown (2011) labels as groupthinking, which “refers to “a mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when the members’ striving for unanimity overrides their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action” (p. 268). Another disadvantage would be not having a designated leader of the team to hold others accountable and make decision that prevent the team from moving forward. This reminds me of a saying in the military, “If everyone is in charge, no one is in charge.”

I believe that working in a SMT would be a valuable experience. I enjoy having the ability to have great control of work flow, priorities, and measures of effectiveness. Moreover, a key factor in this environment is being partnered with equally driven, mature, and capable team members with various skills. Thus, I would look forward to not only contributing, but learning new skills from other team members.

Being an external leader/manager of a SMT, I believe greater patience would something I would have to actively manage because I tend to be more of a hands-on leader. I believe it is important to empower others to perform their duties and grow. Thus, exercising patience and focus on shaping the conditions and building their capabilities would be the priority. According to Paul Tesluk (2008), “When self managing teams leaders need to intervene is when teams are experiencing novel events. A disruption in work flow or some kind of emergency that they hadn’t anticipated. That’s where external leaders need to step-in, to help the team make sense of the situation… We like to call it the authority balance beam” (6:05).

References

Bernstein, E., Bunch, J., Canner, N., & Lee, M. (2016). Beyond the Holacracy Hype. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2016/07/beyond-the-holacracy-hype.

Brown, D. Experiential Approach to Organization Development. Pearson Education. Kindle Edition.

Tesluk, P. (2008). Self-managing teams: Debunking the leadership paradox. INSEAD. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBnR00qgGgM. 

EcoSeagate

A635.6.3.RB

1. Do you see value in the EcoSeagate team development process?
2. Why would something like this be necessary in a high-performing organization?
3. Could your organization benefit from a similar activity?

After reading about Seagate Technology’s team development outdoor lab, I was very interested in learning more about the event to in order to see what type of activities the participants completed as well as the scale of such an outdoor lab that involves 200 employees at the expense of $2 million. Bill Watkins, the CEO, began this outdoor lab in an effort to develop and build team work within the company. He accomplishes this with holding this team development in New Zealand in some of the most beautiful and austere terrain where teams of five must work together to negotiate challenging tasks. According to Brown (2011),

The outdoor setting is very different from the normal work environment; the learning exercises are so varied, and so typically foreign to the background of most participants, that no one has a distinct advantage. Thus the outdoor lab puts participants on an equal footing. This seems to encourage discussion of leadership styles, teamwork, and interpersonal relationships.

Having served in the military, I can attest that such team building events in challenging environments are highly effective in revealing one’s true make-up (characteristics) and forcing the team to work through constant conflict/friction on many levels. In fact, from day one when entering the service, indoctrination begins with breaking down the concept of “self” and identity is built back up with a concept of “team member.” This point is highlighted by Mr. Watkins when he notes, “I learned a lesson a long time ago in the Army. Nobody really wants to die for their god. No one wants to die for their country. Absolutely no one wants to die for money. But people put their lives on the line for the respect of their platoon mates” (Brown, 2011, p. 274). Indeed, the team work and relationships forged in the crucible of adversity is well known used in the military as a training foundation and replicated (relative) by many corporations/businesses for this reason.

I believe that any event that has a purpose to improve team work and/or team development is very necessary; especially in high performance teams. However, achieving the scale that Seagate was able to accomplish is extraordinary and not practical for many organizations or businesses. Nevertheless, team development can occur in many settings or venues (scalable). What is important is ensuring that the event(s) are well planned, resourced, tied into the organization’s values, and support a much large organizational effort (culture). For example, in the video clip, Robert Cooper states that “trust doesn’t mean you’re in an agreement, it comes with a mutual respect.” If the organization values diversity and different perspectives, trust and mutual respect is essential to managing conflict appropriately while creating an environment for healthy dialog.

Although I do not presently belong to an organization, as I alluded to above, any organization/team could positively benefit from team development when given the proper weight of effort and resources. Such exercises force everyone to stretch beyond their comfort zones and be able to deal with conflict head-on in a productive manner. Furthermore, with creative conditions, innovation has the potential to emerge as team members begin to reinforce each other’s weaknesses and support other to achieve the team’s goals/objectives.

References

Brown, D. (2011). Experiential Approach to Organization Development. Pearson Education. Kindle Edition.

Chao, M. (April 25, 2008). Eco Seagate 2008 1/3. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCOfOFMiLtE. 

Video Debrief of Team MA

A635.5.3.RB

After watching the video above, write a well-written reflection blog, discuss how your characteristics would have fit with the makeup and culture of the NeXT startup team. Your reflection should be very specific to the environment that you witness in the video. Make sure that you use your MA results as the basis for your discussion.

This week’s video provided valuable insight to some of Steve Job’s strategic thinking and leadership methods. The video is centered around Steve Job’s efforts to lunch a new start-up NeXT, after leaving Apple. In doing so, eleven personnel decided to leave Apple as well and follow Job’s in his pursuit of creating another high-tech company. During the NeXT’s first retreat, the team mainly collaborated about the company logo, discussed the expected timeline for distribution, and the actual product needed to get NeXT off the ground. However, during the company’s second retreat, the team began to really focus more on problem solving and many of the limitations that are associated with start-ups such as establishing processes, marketing, making deadlines, and shrinking resources (capital).

As I observed Job’s employ his leadership methods during the first and second retreats, it was clear to me that he is a visionary with extreme passion. He is true to his purpose and expects those around him (team) to contribute to the whole with the same purpose as he demonstrates. At certain points during the team’s brain storming session, Job’s behavior (leadership) could have been interpreted as overbearing or controlling. Furthermore, as his team members began to discuss limitations or challenges, Job’s always reminded everyone of the larger picture (vision) in order to provide perspective.

As I watch the team’s interaction with each other (to include Job’s) and how they brainstormed, I began to imagine how or where I would fit in during this process and environment. One of the main considerations was the attributes and characteristics feedback I received as a result of a Management Assessment (MA) profile I took part in with NextStep Research. The feedback validated what I am well aware of, that I am on the opposite spectrum of operating in a start-up team (small organization). My profile results indicated that I am better suited for a large rapid growth company. Moreover, while the NeXT company was in the beginning states of creating a company with its own culture, processes, and directions; my profile revealed that I prefer to work within an existing framework where I have the need to improve systems, processes, and functions of the department/organization.

Another aspect that may have been a point of friction for me is being in a position where Job’s overwhelming need to be in the “weeds” about certain details. I believe that leaders, for the most part, want to know and understand how some things get done. However, as a leader, I believe one of their most important duties is to find the right people to put in the right places to work out and become subject matter experts (SMEs) in their respective field/duties. Thus, I could understand such behavior initially, especially since the company is a start-up and the situation may need a more hands-on approach. However, if this behavior was indicative of normal behavior or an indication of what was to come, I would have significant reservations about remaining with the company.

Another important factor, as revealed by the MA profile, I have a low desire for personal risk. The start-up environment at first seemed intriguing to me because of its dynamic nature, however, at the end of the day and going back to working more effectively in a framework, dealing with the minute details from everything to logos, bank accounts, office space, etc. is far from interesting to me. Furthermore, having jumped off the Apple ship to begin the start-up endeavor would be well outside of my comfort zone.

The factors I believe that would have played to my strengths in the NeXT brainstorming (start-up) environment, according to the MA profile, is that I very aggressive with internal goals and that I am highly motivated by challenges and to excel. Furthermore, that I have a strong desire to solve problems and prefer operating in a fluid environment. With such characteristics, as I alluded to above, the start-up environment at first provides a formidable challenge suited to my strengths. While assessing the situation holistically, I believe that if or when my internal goals have sifted as a result of the mundane issues associated with a start-up; taking my time and effort away from my purpose, my desire to remain would wane. Thus, overall I believe that my attributes and characteristics would prevent me from flourishing in the NeXT (start-up) environment.

References

EverySteveJobsVideo. (2014). Entrepreneurs. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNeXlJW70KQ.

Management Assessment Profile. (2017). NextSteps Research. 

Build a Tower, Build a Team

A635.4.3.RB

·        Do you agree with Tom Wujec's analysis of why kindergartners perform better on the Spaghetti Challenge than MBA students?

·        Can you think of any other reasons why kids might perform better?

·        In your view, why do CEOs with an executive assistant perform better than a group of CEOs alone?

·        If you were asked to facilitate a process intervention workshop, how could you relate the video to process intervention skills?

·        What can you take away from this exercise to immediately use in your career?

Tom Wujec’s marshmallow exercise provides a valuable example of getting to the root of collaboration by identifying “hidden assumptions” (5:40). In other words, everyone works within certain boundaries and assumptions that when presented with a simple task with others, these boundaries and assumptions rise to the surface. Thus, Mr. Wujec’s analysis of why kindergartners perform better than MBA students made perfect sense in that children have not undergone the level of conditioning as the majority of adults which directly shape boundaries and hidden assumptions. Indeed, a child’s free spirit and creativity remain intact as they collaborate freely using prototypes (see, do learning), while through the course of life experience, culture, social environments, and education, adult MBA students have developed both boundaries and hidden assumptions. According to Tom Wujec (2010), “Business students are trained to find the single right plan and then they execute on it” (2:35).

Another important point Mr. Wujec notes is that groups of CEOs do well in general with this exercise, yet when there is an executive admin on the team, the group of CEOs perform much better. Mr. Wujec concludes that this because, “They have special skills of facilitation, they manage the process” (4:07). Wujec (2010) continues, “Any team who manages and pays close attention to work will significantly improve the team’s performance” (4:14). Having been in positions where I relied heavily on an assistant, I completely agree with Mr. Wujec’s observation that those with the ability to facilitate and understand processes, they provide a valuable resource to focus and guide progress exponentially.

If I were to lead a process intervention workshop, I believe using this video would be a great tool to discuss many of the points Mr. Wujec highlighted like:

· Barriers & assumptions: How they are formed and affect our ability to collaborate.

· Jockeying for position: As demonstrated in the video, kindergartners did not waste their time on this, instead they focused on collaboration, design, and learned from prototypes which provided instant feedback.

· Building trust: In a team environment, each member plays an important role. Support and encourage each other by embracing the process.

· Communication: Collaboration requires constant communications and feedback, progress is the key.

I believe this exercise has reinforced what I have learned from my background in social science and military service. That supporting each other and providing constructive communication and feedback is essential for a team to produce extraordinary results. That depending on the team, the environment, and constraints, we must adapt our approach to collaboration to ensure the team has the best opportunity to succeed.

References

Wujec, T. (2010). Build a tower, build a team. Ted2010. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/tom_wujec_build_a_tower#t-242718. 

50 Reasons Not to Change/The Tribes We Lead

A635.3.3.RB

After viewing the above presentations, reflect on the following questions in a well-written post on your Reflection Blog.

• How do you react when you hear colleagues using some of the excuses listed in the 50 Reasons Not to Change graphic?
• Do you ever use any of these excuses yourself?
• How can you overcome the thinking that creates those responses to change efforts?
• Do you agree with Seth Godin’s concept that change is driven by tribes?
• What can you take away from this exercise to immediately use in your career?

At some level, everyone has a natural resistant to change. Fears of the unknow has the ability to test even the most steadfast individuals. Typically, we find (or create) excuses to resist such change, especially when we have little reason to alter the status quo. In fact, Dr. Daryl Watkins (n.d) provides such examples in his 50 Reasons not to Change presentation; excuses like:

·       The boss will never buy it.

·       It needs further investigations.

·       Our competitors are not doing it.

·       It’s too much trouble to change.

·       Our company is different.

In an environment where the status quo provides stability or even predictability, affecting change and challenging the status que provides a major challenge for leaders and managers. According to Mark Murphy (2014):

Ironically, getting employees to accept change is easier when the situation is dire (like in a turnaround situation where change feels urgent and necessary). But when employees get comfortable because everything in the organization is good, they get complacent with the status quo. That’s when you hear protests to change that sound like this: “But we’re already doing great, there’s no need to change.”

There have been many occasions during my time as a leader in military service when others have voiced their resistance to change and may have even used some of Dr. Watkins’ excused verbatim. Already knowing that resistance was inevitable, I would attempt to identify and understand the root cause of the resistance. For example, is someone (or others) resistance for the sake of being resistant? Are those resistant seeing something that I do not see? What level are the problem-solving skills of the resistant? Who stands to benefit if no change is made (path of least resistance) and for how long (short term/long term)? Thus, anticipating resistance and underlying causes, I would be able to better prepare my angle and argument for leading such changes.

I believe it is important for leaders to continuously seek opportunities to improve an organization through active leadership and to leverage driving forces to effectively convey new concepts and ideas. According to Brown (2011), “driving forces, put pressure on the organization to change” (p. 129). Thus, leaders must be in-tune with many factors that exist in a dynamic environment and be agile enough to exploit emergent behaviors. With this in mind, this is why it is important for me to prevent the nature urge to allow negative thoughts or excuses to occupy my thought process. As many leaders in the military learn, it’s important to expect the best, but plan for the worst. Through the planning processes, leaders must account for the most likely course of enemy action and the most dangerous course of enemy action.

Seth Godin (2009) provides a compelling argument that tribes have the ability and power to affect change through connecting others with ideas. In fact, Godin (2009) states, “And it turns out that its tribes, not money, not factories that can change our world. Than can change politics, that can align large number of people, not because you force them to do something against their will, but because they wanted to connect.” Thus, but making such (tribal) connections, a movement is created by identifying true believers and leading the movement. I believe that Godin’s argument that tribes drive change is accurate. History has shown that when large organized groups (tribes) directly challenge the status quo, significant change has resulted. Take for example notable event like the Boston Tea party, which eventually lead to the Revolutionary War or the Civil War. Although these are clearly extreme examples, smaller and still notable movement have altered significant changes in our world and in our societies.

I believe it is important for leaders/managers understand how resistance to change affects our organization’s ability to be agile and flexible in a dynamic environment. Thus, reflecting on this exercise, I also believe that trying to identify and understand the root causes of resistance is key. Doing so will better prepare a leader to convey their thoughts, ideas, and concepts. Furthermore, keeping Seth Godin’s (2009) lessons in mind about leading movements by connecting others (tribes), we as leaders have the ability to increase our effectiveness by leveraging these tribes.

References

Brown, D.(2011) Experiential Approach to Organization Development. Pearson Education. Kindle Edition.

Godin, S. (2009). The tribes we lead. Ted. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/seth_godin_on_the_tribes_we_lead#t-739764.

Murphy, M. (2014). The Status Quo Will Kill Change Management Efforts. Forbes. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/markmurphy/2014/12/18/the-status-quo-will-kill-change-management-efforts/#72b5772d520d.

Watkins, D. (n.d.). 50 Reasons Not to Change! Prezi Presentation. Retrieved from https://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/00/node/55009. 

How Companies Can Make Better Decisions

A635.2.3.RB

After viewing the above video, reflect on the following questions in a well-written post on your Reflection Blog.

• Marcia Blenko argues that decision effectiveness correlates positively with employee engagement and organizational performance. How do you think that employee engagement relates to decision effectiveness?
• What are some impediments to good decision making?
• Blenko suggests that there are four elements of good decisions: quality, speed, yield, and effort. In your opinion, is there anything missing from this list?
• What can you take away from this exercise to immediately use in your career?

Decision making in today’s dynamic business environment is essential to an organization’s success and competitiveness. Companies that understand this concept design and structure their organizations to exploit the constant changing environment and the needs of their customers. Perhaps one of the most important aspects of making effective and timely decisions is the contribution and engagement of the company’s employees. While executives make important decisions that chart the course of their organization, the employee that work day-in and day-out within the environment and with customers have a valuable perspective on the terrain that has the potential for the decision makers to make more quality decisions. In fact, in an organization where decisions are timely and effective, this allows for better employee influence and activity. According to Marccia Blenko (2010), “Interestingly we also saw a high correlation between decision effectiveness and employee engagement. Which I guess shouldn’t be surprising that companies where it’s easier to make decisions and get things done are more simulating places for employees to work.” Indeed, making effective decisions not only improves employee engagement, but overall performance and profits. Marcia Blenco, Michael Mankins, and Paul Roger (2010) highlight the following findings from their research, “We found that decision effectiveness and financial results correlated at a 95% confidence level or higher for every country, industry, and company size in our sample.” I believe that when an organization has established a decision-making process that supports their industry and environment, this ensures better quality information flow and participation by all employees. Thus, they feel empowered and feel that they contribute to the organizations progress.

There are many impediment to effective decision making. In fact, Blenko (2010) notes that organizations today have become more complicated as a result of restructuring and trying new things, which has caused confusion about how decisions are made. These well-intended restructuring events have in essence, had the opposite effects. Blenko et al. (2010) have identified the four following elements that are associated with making good decisions:

1.     Decision Quality: whether decisions proved to be right more often than not.

2.     Speed: whether decisions were made faster or slower than competitors.

3.     Yield: how well decisions were translated into action.

4.     Effort: The time, trouble, and expense required for each key decision.

I believe that the above elements are vital to making effective decisions, I would also add some form of feedback system. Though we can concentrate on each of the four elements in-depth, it is important to evaluate or examine critical decision after the fact. In other words, reviewing the situation, context, decision(s) holistically in an after action review manner and used in an management program.

Making effective decision is not only an important aspect in business, but in everyday situations as well. When making important decisions, I believe that using the four elements could increase the quality of one’s critical thinking as it forces one to see the decision being made as more of a process than automatically addressing an issue. Being able to view decisions at an in-depth level (without over thinking) could prove to be beneficial for both an individual and an organization.

References

Blenko, M. (2010). How Companies Can Make Better Decisions, Faster. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbxpg6D4Hk8.

Blenko, M., Mankins, M., & Rogers, P. (2010). The Decision-Driven Organization. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2010/06/the-decision-driven-organization. 

21^st Century Enlightenment

A635.1.3.RB

After viewing the above video, reflect on the following questions in a well-written post on your Reflection Blog. Do not simply list and answer the prompts. Instead, write your blog, incorporating your thoughts into your reflection. Make certain to incorporate your own experiences into your reflection.

• Why do you think the talk is titled 21st Century Enlightenment?
• What does Matthew Taylor mean when he says "to live differently, you have to think differently"?
• At one point in the video (4:10), Taylor argues that we need "to resist our tendencies to make right or true that which is merely familiar and wrong or false that which is only strange". What is he talking about? Can you think of an example within your company or your life that supports this point?
• Taylor argues that our society should eschew elements of pop culture that degrade people and that we should spend more time looking into what develops empathetic citizens. Would this be possible?
• At the end of the video, Taylor talks about atomizing people from collaborative environments and the destructive effect on their growth. What are the implications of these comments for organizational change efforts?
• What can you take away from this exercise to immediately use in your career?

Matthew Taylor’s (n.d.) discussion in the video 21^st Century Enlightenment was very intriguing and forces one to explore self and social awareness. This I believe is one of the reasons this discussion is labeled 21^st Century Enlightenment. In that, the time has arrived where we as human beings and as a society must re-examine who we are, where we’re are going, how we will get there, where there is and why it’s so important. In other words, just like the 18^th century enlightenment, we in the 21^st century must now look critically at all that we have become through the need to evolve as individuals and society and the technologically advances have both aided and morphed our current perceptions, beliefs, and values. This also leads me to believe this is central to Taylor’s (n.d.) statement of, “to live differently, you have to think differently." Indeed, much of our subconscious and conscious thoughts and beliefs directly shape who we are and how we respond to the countless messages we receive in our dynamic environments. This point is eloquently made by to Phil Mancuso (n.d.) as he discusses how such messages affected how is thought and its direct link to how he lived with a fear of public speaking.

All those messages, indelibly programmed into your subconscious combine to create your belief system. They become the filters through which we create our reality…our self-image, acting on them as if they’re true. While they don’t change the world around us, they filter our life experience until we believe them to be true. 

The tendency for mankind to accept change is historically poor. In fact, in many cases where change was immediately applied is when mankind has been on the brink. Nevertheless, there have been innovators and those, at the time considered not normal, have been ahead of their time and revolutionized some aspect of the world and reality that force change and or a different perception. Taylor (n.d.) states "to resist our tendencies to make right or true that which is merely familiar and wrong or false that which is only strange" sheds light on mankind’s resistance to change or attaching a negative connotation to anything different. In fact, there is a quote from Rear Admiral Grace Hopper that comes to mind as read Taylor’s statement. Hopper is quoted as saying, “The most dangerous phrase in the language is “we’ve always done it this way.”” I immediately recalled a situation while I was a new leader of a military organization and many of my senior leaders were preparing their formations for a field exercise and these leaders were following a pattern of preparation that didn’t seem to me as efficient. So I directly asked one of my leaders why things were occurring the way they were, she stated, “because that the way they always have been done here.” Needless to say, in this case, things did not remain the same. Resisting change is easy, accepting change is much more difficult.

There are many societal and cultural behaviors that develop from pop culture and enters societies mainstream. In fact, due to globalization and the technological advances it has brought to the masses, information, news, and Hollywood’s influence is widely available. By and large, society has taken to “up to the second” information (whether true or not is a different story) and its appetite for severe drama in the form of reality tv has grown over the years. I would even venture to say that many who indulge in this form of “fix” tend to perpetuate the need for more exciting new “flavors” that lead to the degrading and marginalizing of others. The source of this I believe is what Taylor was noting as society needing to eschew. I think that Taylor is correct in believing that society at large would have to arrive at a point (brink) to collectively hold such behavior and material as detrimental and thus push away from such pop culture. Yet, I do not believe Taylor full acknowledges at the same time that it is the same society that he believes should eschew, is in fact thirsting for more. I feel that one of the most significant reason much of this material is around or accepted is because it has made it way into people’s lives (society) through the form of entertainment that such antics is not only accepted by many, but also reciprocated. Later when Towards the end of the video, Taylor also mention atomizing people from collaborative environments and the destructive effect on their growth. I believe that everyone has certain rights to think, believe, and act how they wish as long as it does not jeopardize the well-being of another. Limiting or fragmenting any one or groups as a result of this factors has the potential evoke singular actions. Diversity is essential for perspective to evolve and change to occur. On the other hand, I believe it should be handled responsibly. 

I feel that Taylor makes many great points. I too believe that we as human being should continually explore self-awareness and improvement. Moreover, as a result of the evolution and technological advances that have occurred of the past decades, we are destine to make a conscious effort to redirect where we are and where we are going (enlightenment). However, as I noted above, I believe that such drastic changes usually occur when we are on the brink. What event will lead to this, it is difficult to predict. Yet, as a society, I feel that we have more to offer to each other than the increased brash and dramatic behavior that tends to fill out consciousness. That being self-aware and empathic to other is an important aspect that will lead to the best results for all. This is something I believe is essential in any environment, especially in any professional environment.

References

Mancuso, P. (n.d.) Who Do You Think You Are? Your Perception Creates Your Reality. International Chiropractic Pediatric Association. Retrieved from http://www.chiro.org/ChiroAssistant/Articles/Who_Do_You_Think_You_Are.shtml.

Taylor, M. (n.d.) 21^st Century Enlightenment. RSA Animate. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AC7ANGMy0yo.