Personal Learning Paper - 2

Submitted By : Tej Pratap (13364), Section D

Session 5: Interpersonal Negotiation The activity on negotiation was revealing. During the negotiation process, both the participants were willing to listen to ideas of each other and focussed more on the problem. However, after the activity, I felt taken aback and surprised over the fact that how can we miss such a minor point (use of pulp and skin) and how it could have changed the course of entire negotiation process. The major learning from this session were: Firstly, in a negotiation, preparation is most important thing - I should know what I need (what I need for sure, what is good to have, what are the things for which I am ok if I dont get them) What is much more important than why in negotiations. Secondly, it is important that the decisions we reach are stable, implementable and wise. Thirdly, I understood the difference between a negotiation (where we care about repeated interactions) and a bargain (where we dont care about repeated transactions/interactions), which I had never thought about before. Fourthly, I was able to see the negotiation process in a more rational way and was able to appreciate when people yield, avoid, compromise, compete or work towards mutual problem solving. The reading, Six Habits of merely Effective Negotiators, substantially reinforced the learning in the class. For example, in the activity, it would have been better if we

had focussed on the differences in needs (rather than common ground), as suggested in the reading. Similarly, through the reading and the activity, I learnt that during negotiation, its important to solve the other partys problem to solve yours. Moreover, relationship, social contract and the interest of parties is also important. Last but not the least; I should avoid self serving role bias and partisan perceptions during negotiations. During my 9 months at a consulting firm, I was working on a project with a client in UK. After initial proof of concept, the client was adamant on getting the final product delivered within three months. This was very difficult considering the resources and efforts required for the project. At the same time, we wanted to maintain a long lasting relationship with the client since it was an energy giant and prospects of further revenue streams were very high. On the negotiation table, I and a colleague of mine realised that the client requirement needs only one part of the product to be functional within three months, while our team can deliver the rest of the services even after three months. The client also realized that there are resource constraints and therefore, readily agreed to pay some amount upfront to reduce the resource crunch. Therefore, understanding what we wanted and understanding the difference in needs (we needed resource, client had money; client needed only one part of product) led to a successful negotiation and a long lasting relationship with the client which would not have been possible if we had stuck to our own stands. As a consultant in future, Ill have to negotiate within the firm for resources; Ill

have to negotiate with the client for contract amounts; Ill have to negotiate within the team for task assignments etc. It is therefore important that I actually practice the learning from this session. I have decided to keep a sheet mentioning what and why I want from the negotiation process before starting the talk. I have also decided to focus on other parties problem during negotiation and to focus on long term implications of the negotiation decisions. Session 6: Power and Influence As a part of the GMC team, I learnt how we tend to downplay our mistakes by assigning external reasons to them, while we tend to exaggerate the mistakes done by others. This, along with recollection of similar past experience, brought a sorry and humble feeling in me. I also felt disappointed when our good feedback towards Skylab 2 was not reciprocated with a good feedback, showing how in real world, we expect reciprocation of our own feelings towards someone. Major learning from this session was: Firstly, I learnt that while exercising power, I must realize that the other party also has sources of power through their tasks, position etc. There always is interdependence between both of us. Therefore, I can only exert power as long as the other party is willing to accept and cooperate. Secondly, in any working relationship, there are a set of formal and informal Contracts I my relationships with other party are good, even the informal contracts will get done. Therefore, it is important that I build and not break the relationships. Paying attention to the feelings of other party is important in this regard. Thirdly, I got a

new insight from the job characteristic model As a manager, to make any task successful, I must ensure Skill Variety, Task Identity, Task Significance, Autonomy and Feedback for the executive. The reading, Leadership and Power Base Development, also gave insights to manage positional and personal power and strategies of influence for organization effectiveness. While working for 9 months in a consulting firm, I had to manage and mentor around six subordinates. Being a fresher, it was important for me to make sure I do not hurt any ego and at the same time get the best output out of them. I tried to build a good and friendly rapport first, giving them complete responsibility and autonomy over their own pieces of tasks and provided only relevant and constructive feedback. I also had several out of office informal interactions with them and tried to learn about the firm culture from them, strengthening the mutually beneficial relationship. This helped a lot in getting good output while building a long lasting relationship. Some of those members are still in touch. As a future implication, I have decided that in any group (study group or as a manager of a team), Ill make sure that good relationships are formed apart from the basic tasks that happen. Secondly, as a manager, Ill make sure that the executive understands the significance of the task, Ill give them complete autonomy and will not nag them with continuous questions or suggestions. Ill also make sure that the delegated tasks add to their skills and have relevance for them.

Session 7 and 8: Interpersonal Awareness/Transactional Analysis During the discussion, I was thrilled to know that such distinct ego states exist inside me, and for most of the part I was able to relate my own personal experiences/interactions with these ego states. The major learning from this session was: First, to be fully functional, I need to balance all three ego states in me - the parent, the adult and the child. In any situation, I should use the relevant data from all three ego states to determine the best response, putting more focus on the adult ego state. Secondly, while interacting, I must realize that the other person also has these three ego states. Therefore, I should determine it and respond/interact appropriately. Third learning was with regards to psychological positions that people take during various transactions how to identify them, and how to modify my own psychological position in case I am not satisfied. Fourthly, I found it interesting how various managerial styles can be associated with the ego states and life positions of the individual and therefore, how I can improve upon my own managerial style. This session has lot of practical significance in life. For example, my mother tells me almost every day on phone You are living alone, take care of yourself. Eat and sleep well. (NP) If I use CP response You shouldnt keep reminding me all the time it would be a crossed interaction, and therefore lead to a conflict. I therefore use an adult response most of the times Ok mom, you too take care. Similar transactions happen

with friends and classmates too and knowledge of TA will help a lot in those transactions. This session has long term future implications too for me. As a manager of the team at work, Ill make sure I give genuine positive strokes to subordinates very often and avoid any crossed transactions with them. Ill also make sure that I take all my decisions based on reasoning (following adult ego state). During interactions, Ill try to identify the ego state of other colleagues and will respond to them appropriately. Lastly, the instrument, exploring your personality, revealed unknown things about my personality to me. It helped me to determine that my natural child ego state is most prominent, but well balanced by the adult ego state. Still, I can focus more on improving the adult ego state in me. This has led me to decide that from now onwards, I will try to be more rational and take more fact based decisions, rather than simply taking chances/gut based decisions in situations. Session 9: Developing People The tower building activity was insightful yet interesting. I felt intrigued and inquisitive. Throughout the activity, the only thoughts that came to my mind wereWhat would have I done if I was the HOD or SM or the executive in the activity. Major learning from this session was: First, performance of any employee is a function of motivation, ability and leadership support. Second, it is good to get the best people in the team, it is important to believe that I can help them achieve their potential, it is important to

provide them the required environment. But the most important thing to develop a subordinate is to treat them in a way I want them to be. For Example, Dr Shekhawat provided all facilities to the best of the minds, but never treated them as a fully specialist doctor which led to discontent in the team. Third learning was, I shouldnt anchor my expectations/Goals based on any assumptions (like the students in the activity did by anchoring their goals based on the average that the instructor gave). Fourth leaning was: Encouragement, Precise Instructions, Feedback, and Nontransfer of anxiety, team bonding and understanding, attitude towards work are some of the important factors for good performance of the team. The reading, Narcissistic Leaders The incredible pros, the inevitable cons, gave learning on how the productivity of leaders can be utilized while avoiding the dangers and traps of being a narcissist leader. As the coordinator of counselling services at IIT Kanpur, I had to manage a team of 11 assistant coordinators who were one year junior to me. While assigning the tasks, I always made sure they felt fully responsible for the task and perceive that I believe that they will be able to perform that task successfully. I provided all the support that was required but never interfered with their way of execution as long as the results were there and as long as they did not violate the policies of the team. I provided minimal but specific and constructive feedback. Any pressure from external groups was never transferred to the team, unless a discussion was required, and I tried to handle them on my own. This led to some very fruitful results being generated solely by team members.

While working on projects in teams, I will make sure that subordinates feel that I have full faith on them and Ill give them constructive feedback only when it is required. While setting goals, Ill set it based on the discussion with the team rather than anchoring the expectations based on any external stimulus. Ill also make sure that the team bonding is good and the instructions for deliverables are specific and precise. Session 10 and 11: Group Processes Showing the movie Ek Ruka Hua Faisla was probably the most light-hearted way a concept could have been transferred to the class. Entire movie was filled with arguments, insights and comedy punches. But reflecting back, it taught me some of the very basic dynamics which happen every day in my group, but I had failed to realize earlier. The major learning was: First, the tendency to conform to the group can creep in very quickly and I should always avoid that. For example, in the beginning some of the jury members raised their hands only after seeing that most of the others are going for the verdict guilty. Second, I should avoid the tendency to stereotype things and making decisions based on those stereotypes. It is important that we check all the facts thoroughly and make a rational decision based on adult ego state. For example, most of the jurors had a preconceived notion about the kid or poor kids in general while only the protagonist was open to testing the assumptions. Third, it is important to have a problem solving approach testing facts and assumptions (like the protagonist and a few jurors) rather than advocating our own ideas (like several other jurors).

Fourth, I learnt several side games that people play while dissenting with your idea like some of the jurors showed indifference, anger or cracked jokes, or said demeaning comments, tried to form dyads and then push their point etc. Fifth, I learnt that in a group each individual has something new to contribute and it is important that the individual puts that Idea within the group, rather than simply reinforcing the groups common knowledge. A pretty similar scene occurs in my study group too, although the side-games are not offensive since we have been working together for two months (and we have to work together in future too). For example, the tendency to go with the group during discussions is seen several times. Stereotyping is pretty common too, for example, Since I hail from a famous engineering institute, I have been stereotyped to be good at Probability and statistics and whenever I say anything about it, the group members generally dont question it even if it appears to be wrong (not checking the assumptions and facts).Also, Most of the times we go with the majority view due to time constraints. For example, while deciding the project topic for a course in this slot, although there were two opinions, without much discussion, we went with the view with which four people were agreeing. Moreover, we tend to ignore one member who generally doesnt contribute to the group, which is also bad. We must try to include them back into the group. The learning from this session has some serious short and long term implications. In short term, I will make sure that our study group doesnt fall into the trap of

several group processes that negatively affect the efficiency of the group. I will make sure that the group rationally discusses all the opinions before making a decision. I will also facilitate the group members who do not contribute much by actively and politely asking their opinions and views about any task or decision. In long term, as a manager, within my team I will avoid stereotyping the members and will push for a curious and inquisitive tendency in the group. I will also try to minimize the side games that group members may play to increase the efficiency of the group.

Session 12 and 13: Group Decision Making The activity led to several feelings, based on the discussion of the group I sometimes felt mistaken, sometimes irritated (when someone was not willing to listen to reasons and was putting un-necessary comments) while sometimes I felt glad and satisfied (when I got convinced based on others reasons or when they got convinced for my reasons). Major learning from this session was: First, when we start with a group, we begin with an urgency to finish the task (based in our past experience etc.). It is good, but I must always make sure that the basic questions what to do, what we want to achieve etc, do not get missed. Moreover, a common understanding of the problem within the group is important before strategy or action is discussed. Second, I should avoid action trap. Due to urgency, sometimes we put action before the strategy. It is important to discuss the strategy and priorities first and

then think about the actions based on that strategy. Thirdly, I should avoid Asch Trap the tendency to conform to the group belief even though the choice is obvious. I will always look at the idea rather than the person, or number of persons who gave that Idea. Fourthly, whenever in a group, I should make sure that focus on task related things doesnt remove the focus on maintenance related things. Fifth, when somebody has a different/minority point of view I should not pursue advocacy for my idea. Rather, I should discuss the ideas rationally with an open mind. The reading, Group Dynamics, gave some very deep and useful insights about formation and dynamics of different type of groups, and how group inefficiencies like groupthink, social loafing, Asch effect, group shift etc. can be avoided. I had similar experiences when I was coordinating the Counselling Services at IIT Kanpur. We had a team of 11 student assistant coordinators who took majority of decisions which were then refined by three professional counsellors. The team believed in decision making by consensus. Although the student team was selected after a rigorous process, several problems of decision making were seen. For example, in the initial days, some members tried to impose their views on other student members by projecting their expertise or enthusiasm. This led to the withdrawal by some other members in the team and they started contributing only when asked or encouraged. As a coordinator, I took a responsibility of reducing this tendency and impart a more discussion based problem solving approach by guiding the initial discussions and prompting people for their views and

concerns. The group learnt this quickly and members started contributing and discussing more freely and rationally after first 10-15 days. After 2-3 months, another problem related to efficient management of group processes arose people sometimes deviated from original agenda to talk about other things and group efficiency started falling down. Again, it was the responsibility of the coordinator to focus on maintenance related issues in addition to task related issues. I decided to put an ending time to meetings (in addition to starting time) - and encouraged the group to focus on the agenda throughout the meeting time. A positive point was, right from the beginning the group never advocated their Ideas and issues were discussed based on reason even if one member of the group had concerns. In future, in any firm, Ill have to be a part of several groups and at the same time Ill have to lead several other groups. I will make sure from now onwards that I focus on the basic questions like What Why and only then discuss the strategy followed by actions. I will also make sure that the minority ideas do not die and are discussed in a rational and open minded way. Personally, I will try to base my views on hard facts and reasons rather than any other factor.