Synectics

Synectics is a formalized technique of group process design that is focused on creativity. It asks groups to use analogies to get outside of an exitsting pattern of problem solving and process. This requries a facilitator because the nature of this kind of creativity is built on fantacy that deals with a real issue. It starts with asking questions about the problem then using an analogy to to create new ways of looking at something.
Pringles used this process to develope their packaging. They used the analogy of trying to put dried leaves in a bag without crumbling and discovered they could pack their chips while they were still wet in order to prevent them from breaking in the package.
I think this is a very cool way of observing a problem. It can be fun and insightful. It can even get a group into more productive thinking paterns as a whole. This is something great for groups who have run out of creative ideas and needs to generate original ideas on a regular basis. It can be how a marketing team gets together and comes up with new ads. I think I should be used more by groups that are simply in need of a change of pace. It can be a fun way to build your team and create unity among it's members. It gives opportunities to involve diverse members of a group for creativity. In this setting it is really hard to squwash others moral by deflecting ideas because the ideas are about fantacy and are not personal creations of a solution. I can't wait to try it with my classes and groups.

What I learned

This class has taught me that there is more than one way to manage a group and be a leader. I have been  watching closely the people who lead the groups around me and using the things I have learned about being a leader in my classrooms. Leardership and feedback were hte things I was most fascinated with and will use the most in my groups. Gaining proper feedback and asking the right questions to obtain quality information is important and I see it being used in these last posts. There was not really a least favorite thing about the class for me. I suppose I wish I would have taken 100w prior to the class. I know that would have gotten me better grades on my papers. my favorit ething was the online instruction. I like being on my own time and I like blogging and interacting with the class when it is convenient for me.

The Watch

The group observation was diffecult to plan and visualize but was simple in its execution and in the paper. It was useful in many ways. One thing that helped me with the project was that I was taking a few othe rcomm courses during the time. I used a lot of what I was learing in my other classes in my observation and paper. A lot of what I watched had more to do with comm theory that with what we were learing in our book for this class. When It got closer to researching time I found that many of the same authors of the theories I saw were in our book too.
I liked watching another group that was so much like the group I work in. It was fun to see how they could improve and what I could take back to my group for advancement. I think that the biggest struggle was that teh book talked alot about thing that I think happen in more formal groups and less about what can be applies to less formal companies and professional environments that are more laid back. IN a way I think that watching the group made me realize that groups that are less formal can be more prodeuctive they take on the systems of more formal groups and larger organizations. I did see some places however that things could have been more humble and considerate of the "little" people. In the end I used the book to refer to what the group should have been doing in stead of what was happening.
I did like the assingment. It was eye opening to get to write about support for your observations.

Total Quality Management

This is a concept that I really like. So its the idea that you put complete quality into every part to the whole. So for instance a car company like Honda or Toyota costs more than ford or Chrysler because they operate under TQM. So instead of checking for quality at the end of production like an american car, japanese cars are checked for quality at each stage of production and the small parts to the car are of higher quality. This is to save money in the long run on things like recalls and end of the line repair. They have much less to worry about when it comes to finding space and time to take care of entire cars that are not up to standards. This idea can work in organizations and small groups too. If a manager takes care of each step of the process at each step of the way you will have less to fix at the end of a project. Pretty simple really. It's investing more money and time to save time and money in the long run.

Collaboration or Competition

I can tell you right of the bat that competitive conflicts never end well for me or the other party. For instance I every year my brothers, sister and I are stressed with the Christmas tradition of getting my mother and father elaborate gifts. We always have two choices; go in on a group gift that is bigger or get separate gifts that we essentially use to compete for who comes up with the best gift. We always start out trying to work together but we don't always agree on prices and ideas. This is when we often try to pull my younger sister in three different directions in an effort to win the battle of best idea. If that does not work we all go our separate ways. When we work together our gifts are always better and more thoughtful. When we work in competition to get the gifts done we end up spending more money on things that are just not as good and get put in a closet by the next year. Our best collaborative gift so far was going into sears portrait studio and getting my mom a huge picture of us kids. We were able to give that to my Dad also and my grandparents. It was really cheap and it ended up being really fun.

An Expert Opinion

I am partial to the Symposium style of problem presentation. I like this style because I find the masses to be quite stupid and self centered at times. A symposium is a way to not only discuss a problem and it's possible solutions, but it is a way to educate those whom the issue concerns. In light of the recent presidential election I have developed an awareness of how uneducated we are because of how our human nature leads us to our information. I think when it comes to making a decision about a problem that likely effects many people in different ways, those people who are effected need to have as much information as possible. Needless to say I think this information needs to be based on fact and come from very credible sources on the issue and presented in a way that is planned and easy for the stakeholders to understand. This can be a great way to get insight to long and short term theories on the results of problems and implementation of solutions. Because a symposium is planned and presented by experts, and has no interruption from heated stakeholders, it is a great form of problem analysis. When an audience knows its an audience, they are more liekely to listen to information instead of prepare their own refutes and ill planned announcements.

perceptual barriers

Perceptual barriers are the hardest to explain and the most common barrier in my opinion. It spans so many things in our brains. It can keep us from seeing things because of how we live our lives, where we work, what we know and what state of mind we are in. I have picked up a lot of cross word puzzles in my day, but i never finish in one sit down. When I get stumped I walk away and come back to find I am better than before. These perceptual barriers have been studied on a pretty deep level. Malcom Gladwell wrote a book about it. In one of the chapters he talks about a study that was done on how certain words can change our perception of people. Two groups of students were each told to look at a different set of words before they were sent into a frustrating situation. The first group of students were shown a list of words like; happy, creative, fun loving, sunshine, motivation, ect. This group responded mildly and with forgiveness to the frustrating setting. The second group was shown a list like; anger, racism, political bias, jerks, crappy, and so on. this group responded to the frustrating situation by yelling, getting angry, calling people names and storming out. the words were enough to alter the perception of the two groups. Just goes to show that we need to leave our baggage at the door if we want to see everything possible in new situations.