Anderson and Burnett Articles: Response

I found both of these articles relative to my profession. Anderson makes valid points regarding collaborative challenges that take place in the workplace. He discusses the challenge of organizing group v. individual responsibilities and offers four guidelines to help teams out. These include: 1) encouraging debate and diverse ideas; 2) efficiency; 3) detailed guidance and 4) project schedules. In my current job, I relate most to guidelines 1 and 4 above. Working for a corporation, I've come to realize the value of a project manager. I have taken part of projects that included individuals from various points of the organization. The project manager is responsible for keeping the project organized, scheduling regular meetings, ensuring that objectives are established and met. There are a lot of variables to juggle and it's not always a pleasant job. One must be very persistent because individuals seldom focus on their own agendas rather than the groups. With regards to encouraging debate and diverse ideas, I agree with Anderson's comments on inviting others to speak and listening with interest and respect. I personally have been in situations where I am afraid to speak up and share my thought. Likewise, I see many others that struggle with this. People are afraid to sound stupid or say the wrong thing. What I've learned is that there really is no wrong answers. Your idea may not be chosen but they are all worth tossing around. Everyone has a different perspective on the subject that makes a valid point or may inspire a new idea.

Burnett on the other hand, does a nice job of distinguishing between the types of conflict that arises out of collaboration. At one point or another, we have probably been part of affective, procedural and substantive conflict. I have seen all three at work but obviously the goal is to have substantive conflict. Substantive conflict allows colleagues to disagree about the subject but in a constructive manner. Generally each party has their view/beliefs but works together to find a middle ground. Substantive conflict happen quite often in corporations and while it is productive in its end result, the problem I find is that it can generate meeting after meeting. I have been to involved in projects where multiple meetings are required in order to work through the disagreements before a solution is reached. Perhaps that is the corporate way. Furthermore, Burnett makes a good point about competitive v. cooperative context. While competition is a motivational force in itself, is usually creates more problems than are necessary because no one wants to lose. The idea of a collaborative context where ideas can be challenged but respected all the same, is much more professional and productive.