Organizational Transformation in Practice - Essay Example

?Organizational Transformation in Practice Evaluation and Reflection upon a Personal Experience of Change in the Workplace : Instructor’s name: Date of submission: Description My organization was offering an insurance program through its employees who spend time on a variety of tasks such as find contacting data to reach new customers, contact them, arrange meetings, and offer these services. These advisors were responsible of the method of offering the service and responsible to explain everything well and make each individual customer aware of this service before let the customer sign any papers for a contract. The unresolved issue with these advisors was that many customers stuck with a long-term contract after signing for the service without enough acknowledgement and details about the effect or the commitment that the customer has to make or be involved in. The company performance had been inevitably great for many years, being able to reach its annual target. But I soon learnt that since the recession, the management recognized that the performance of the company was not fulfilling its requirements in the sense that it’s targets weren’t being repeatedly achieved as before, leading their employees to then work under pressure, categorized between two units within two managers, and this involved me as a unit manager. The issue was generated by the employees’ new approach with their selling techniques due to the newly enforced pressure by the general manager. In the course of the weekly meetings with the general manager, I was faced with a range of disagreements. An overwhelming problem was the frustration accumulating due to the lack of communication. The customers entitlements to the long-term contract were mislead, making them unaware of the policies commitments. I was mentally prepared to engage in negotiations because the other unit manager had been already aware and uncooperative with the required work role. I am always proud of my performance as I did my best to satisfy myself before satisfying my manager, and I do not take well to the management when they insult work which was performed in good faith. I sat in my office, gathering my thoughts as to what I would do first I thought, “No idea, I feel sick to my stomach” I later learned my physical reaction to the situation was due to my inability to keep my internal focus on my internal locus of control. At that time I was working and going to college full time and I learned in one of my Diploma degree classes that a person’s perception of the source of his or her fate is termed locus of control. Some people with an internal locus of control think they can control their destiny or what may or may not happen in their environment. This is what I liked when things were going well. But others controlled by an external locus of control are those controlled by something outside of him or her, which is where I aimed my focus at when things weren’t well? Situations got stressed, passive and defensive due to externals being placed with a stressor; this influenced the stress having a real effect on me. I flashed through my mind other situations in which I’d have felt useless or unsure of my performance. Now I wonder, why was I thinking of myself in this way? What really made the negotiation process more challenging was how I felt about myself; I was worrying if I requested a meeting for negotiation with the other unit manager he would resort in being uncooperative with a very negative behavior. In the beginning I did not send any e-mail to the other unit manager, as I had not gotten a plan. I waited, and as he stayed silent, I thought I would feel more confident by taking control. I approached him in the method that I would appreciate being approached by. With the sound that our mutual issue was getting bigger and what could we do to solve this problem? Therefore I proposed an agenda to let him give input to form the agenda for a meeting to negotiate our problems. I gathered that a more structured method would be of assistance to avoid any arguments, in order to remain focused on the overall target. I needed an effective plan to avoid involving our boss to resolve our issue. At this time in the negotiation process I was worried and expected what would happen next. Despite this, our roles appeared to be officiated, I wondered what might change. Negotiations were always unpredictable. Each of us was assigned a role and with them came responsibilities. The social status could be seen throughout the behavior and looking at this negotiation, this was a point in which I became aware of my individual social status, anxiety and consciousness flood through me, making me weary. Will I lose my position if my negotiation went so bad? If I was unsuccessful in this negotiation would our boss get involved, would I have been embarrassed if every one were to find out that I was incapable to handle a task? I think that in negotiations, often the results come out fifty-fifty, you either lose or win. Ultimately, the wait was dragging itself out and I had enough of waiting, I emailed the other manager an anticipated scheme, a telephonic discussion as well as a cooperative solution for our issue. Throughout this, there was still a voice in the back of my mind, asking what if a variety of scenarios were to happen. My letter pronounced my capability of being flexible and open-minded to accept previous disagreements. I found myself gaining confidence and losing the previous anxiousness, which had overwhelmed me. My main intention was to make sure the VP could see my performance in a positive light I was approaching my target so reaching it was more important than anything else. My motivation was a mock negotiation for a module during my Diploma degree. I recognized from my college classes that people take credit for success and avoid personal responsibility towards others when failure happens. I was trying rapidly to gain credit as all of this was for me. I saw that this was a quality I needed to furthermore work on to more evenly stable in life. This was a characteristic, which could potentially turn into a dilemma in my negotiations unless I improved it. I was pleased and proud of myself to make movement for negotiation with a positive response from the other units’ manager. Feelings From early on, the productiveness in our negotiation was faulting, this gradually began to frustrate. An instinctive feeling was implicating that no one around me was positive nor supporting me towards an agreed solution. The CEO informed me to negotiate with the other unit manager in order to find a resolution for this problem and make those sale advisors aware from their technique of selling. The issue here was, I was not successful at negotiating an issue. But I had to get this mission done quickly. I was getting stressed. In the beginning, I summed the details and most of the statements about the other unit sellers that had been sent by the management as complaining. I was so angry and irritated, due to their careless performances in their selling and their imprudent manager putting the company to shame, infuriating me. I expected the other unit manager to have already acknowledged this, assuming he was waiting for a reaction and provoking an argument. Even prior to the negation starting, annoyance was building within. As time went on, I began to explore the real concept of what negotiation was and how it was to be done successfully, this relieved me. I envisioned negotiation as a familiar scenario of people with power sitting on an eccentric round table with cigarettes and cigars, a lot of screaming and infuriating discussions. Before the meeting of this negotiation I felt nervous, unable to determine any expectations towards what the outcome would be. Suddenly, surprisingly and surpassingly, the other unit manager showed cooperation due to the process of this negotiation. I was not expecting him in this approach due to my feelings based on the previous experience and action. My feeling came back, I was flooded with relief at how positive his response to me. I was anxious from having an argument, which may lead us to for an awful outcome and this also may or probably will involve the VP to our issue. I could remember how I was sick from thinking about this negotiation and him shutting down at my proposals. In fact that is not happened at all. The anxiety of dealing with something unexpected in the negotiation is what will probably keep me away from it in the future. The thing that appalls me is involving the VP in this issue, which may lead him to put more and worse penalties than previously on all the employees. My target was to make sure the possibility of involving the VP is not just low even zero in our case. I felt that we are both as unit managers have the same pressure therefore finding a solution and work the problem out our selves. I also felt more pressure as I first made the first movement and wanted to work this out until I reach my goal and solve this issue. My method was being acceptable with the other unit manager and I felt more confident with his response and released some of the stress I had in the beginning. Due our negotiation I recognized the more he response positively and accept from me is known as “a form of confirmation” the more I could work better and feel that we have the ability to resolve this issue shortly. Additionally, I learned Bales calls this response as positive to positive – a confirmation bias as if I expect from the other unit manager so good response that I will receive the same. On the other hand if I expect from the other unit manager so bad response that I will receive the same. Furthermore I agreed because I felt this is the best for which we achieved and that was not from a special consideration or concession. At later I feel kind of unwise when I realize that I have been with thoughts such as feeling the winner in this situation as well as taking the control of the situation and taking advantage. Evaluation Through the negotiations, my target was to avoid embarrassment and loss of trustworthiness of my position at work, as this can be true but not as I wanted to be. It is simple to experience self-confidence in the work place, but when my self-confidence is examined I would say my self-esteem was the most I had to be worried about for protecting it. I recognized myself in a self-doubt reaction, reflecting back I clearly noticed by confidence had raised and improved but in the long run, I was not completely sure of this. I could evaluate my situation through the strategy I had used that worked productively as I never pictured myself providing the context initially in the negotiation. From the beginning, within the proposed agenda until the end within agreements, I felt the whole progression was very positive and cooperative process at the time that it happened. All the thoughts I had were not real and had not happened at all, conversely the unit manager responded to me during the negotiation. The transition from the beginning to the end, I found to be clearly visible and there was definitely a change. Reflecting upon this, seeing the difference through time makes me realize how much I progressed and made me surprised to see how slickly the negotiations were now running. The scenario or status was so different from what I pictured, as well as how the negative communication followed by this scenario. Moreover, the unit manager accepted and supports the idea of providing particular courses for the sale employees for improving their communication skills and conscious from their faults. Even more, the unit manager and I agreed to make statements of commitment which were vital for our role to build up a working plan to make sure the VP was not involved. I wondered if he received a CEO warning message as like I had. After I achieved what I wanted successfully, I realized this was how I often operated in reality, that past experiences influenced what I knew now, this being called self-awareness. I learned self-awareness as the person capability to distinguish feelings to get and develop feelings in order to deliberation to comprehend emotions and feelings facts and also to control personal feelings in order advance disturbing and logical development (Prilipko, E et al 2011). Some people who have low self-awareness are not able to move forward quickly and success easily. In my case, I lose the main target of focus, but I can get some details from time to time. Despite this I can see myself aware from this, and I do recognize I am slow in my progress as I founded through the people surrounded me, they made me feel they are understanding and acknowledging my feeling and I was I a position to convince them to come up with a satisfying solution of effective communication to the company sellers. After realizing all of what I had about myself I thought to keep concentrating on what I was going to do and keep working on what I felt was required for me to do as duty. I can evaluate my personality through my behavior as I am good at analyzing tasks, I am also reserved from saying things some times, also I can recognize I am more likely curious to know what is going on in my case. Moreover I have a sense of responsibility, organize my ability to my tasks with high attention to detail, my decisions created on my experience and always take my duties seriously. Through this and being aware of my personality I can keep going on the task securely and focus on the goal target to achieve. Sometimes the negotiation event come cross my mind and I remember how I reacted to those actions and what positive outcome I made from the negotiation event with the unit manager to improve the issue that my organization had. Further this, it would be more appropriate to picture the event more accuracy and gather detail form other employees who had contributed. Eventually and as overall, I can state our negotiation goals were focused and I could see how the topics we had to discuss were easily agreeable without conflicts due to the meeting. The unit manager and I were satisfied and optimistic toward the future actions with win-win arrangement plan. In addition my position was strong at the negotiation, and I could realize this from the proposal plan I managed to place that supported me for moving a step for which I enable my colleague the unit manager to input details. In my evaluation I noted I have a problem of accepting all what the other manager had to say. If the negotiation continuing I would be more demanded and I would claim for the past costs without being keen to him as he thought and to stay silent. Nevertheless because I was purely dependant on my postponed viewpoint of the happenings I am confident my reconstructive recollection is effective in bringing all the required specifics together Analysis Due to the real negotiation the unit manager could recognize my status as well as he supported the event with suggestions that I required him for. My personal belief and target within my strategy had supported me, and despite the real event, I had thoughts made up my imagination. As pictured a fake thoughts, I could not change my reaction from the real negotiations, as my behavior was obvious. I had the same reaction weather that event was actual or fake event. The always thought in my mind is how the unit manager was very agreeable with my suggestions due to the negotiation? Was I very precise or insist with the ideas I provided? Was his attitude real or was he acting? Or maybe that was he approaching me with is for taking my focus off the past costs and moves it to the future resolution. The unit manager provided suggestions to find out solutions therefore I agreed to him without doubt and easily. I supported his suggestions by positive response and pleasure in order to move on and improve. I was very agreeable to what he suggested with ideas and I think my honest personality assist me to for clear agreement, my confidence and insistences aid me to face the issue and deal with changes in different times. I also supported his belief due to the event therefore winning the negotiations. Eventually, I asked myself some questions linked with the occur event. I am wonder if he recognized or perceived me agreeing easily to his suggestions to reach whatever what he wanted? What if he did not response to me positively and accepted what I suggested for solutions? I do not think I was ready for to deal with a very negative response. If my question was fact and he was not positive due to the event, I am sure I would have learned more. I feel and believe I failed in something that is not getting the past costs for this issue. However I succeed in these gaining and developing skills for negotiations which for me presented as more valuable than getting the past costs. Conclusion Through all what I have been in, I can see my reaction positively and in my opinion I fell I did great job as well as I learned many things due to the issues I had in this event. In the future I would consider more leadership positions to use, I would be always more open to gain positive optimistic thoughts about others from their behavior thus for supportive consequences rather than a negative result in mind. I can assume that the unit manager had used a method and strategy with a cooperative and positive interaction when we were working due to the negotiation. He was supportive which impressed me in contrast with his previous behavior that sounds very negative. The positive interaction can have very well influence on other employees I am interacting with as research founded. Social psychology stated also stated that if a negotiation responses started negatively, that will be the logical outcome. Also research founded there is something to be mentioned for visualizing the positive outcome the person desire. From my experience I can recognize that a person expectation for a response from the other party can be the furthest thing the other party would think about to say or response with. I think reflecting on my experience from the event I had is a method to understand and gain skills in leadership and behavior. In my future managerial position and leadership I would definitely motivate the employee surrounded me to find and use new and innovative ways for change and improve in any issue they would face. I believe confidence is a part of successful leaders and managers personality, this can be seen as I went and faced the negotiation with high believe in my ability to lead and guide even though I pictured that might be a mock negotiation and went out with a successful outcome with the right preparation. As I did I always look for new ways to try and use to communicate with others and find solutions through. I think this is gained from a strong believe. Action Plan I gain an understanding through the use of Gibbs’ reflective writing, it clarifies the five stages of the case and it shows me what I would do differently if I face this issue again in the future. I think I would be better preparing myself in any future event. For example I remember my preparation way was narrow and I was not open for more option to use apart of providing the manager with an agenda to give input for a meeting for the negotiation. I was not expecting the number of time the unit manager would responses to me due to the event. I can recognize my manager informing me that if I was not positive towards the other unit manager he would not responses positively and cooperated to the situation. Leadership in negotiation event is relatively important manner and can be influenced for a successful outcome through elements such as behavior, belief, value, skills, vision, and identity. Even more it can be influenced by the context of the situation. Confidently and through what I had in this event I can recognize myself with the ability to lead and manage productively in the future. Through this reflection I increased my knowledge and I feel I am prepared well for facing an action in the future. Further to this and from my experience I am reflecting honestly and applying the fact behalf the action even though that I have generated and developed my skills, belief, vision, and identity Conflict Defense mechanism From conflict theory, I noted that, in the situations of conflict in an organization, managers and employees engages in some form of defense mechanism to evade blame and victimization. I also learnt that, employees and managers in an organization run away from the reality in case of any conflict in an organization. In my case, I denied the reality to avoid blame. In reference to the knowledge on the theory, individuals who employ defense mechanism act unconsciously to the reality (Daudelin 2008, p.36). Additionally, employees in most cases, blames the management for downfall in an organization. I denied my contribution in the misfortune which faced our organization. In reference to my experience on the aspects of defense mechanism, the management blames the implementers of the policy in case there is a problem. According to defense mechanism concepts I noted defense mechanism in this case brought about some form of mistrust between the subjects and leaders. In the initial stage, I noted I blamed senior management, policy makers, and insurance sellers for the predicament that affected my organization insurance program. I denied my contribution in the pitfall of the insurance project. Due to defense mechanism aspects I learnt that, withdrawal from the actuality in the organization brought about great loss in our organization. After being assisted by the conflict theory to come up to the reality and intervening in addressing the problem, the solution to the organization quandary was realized. The anxiety which was developed by defense mechanism diminished and a collective solution to the problem was attained. The understanding of the dangers of defense mechanism helped me in the development of my leadership quality. I noted the danger associated with running away from the reality. From this experience, taking the responsibility of once action is extremely imperative. As a leader, I learnt from the theory that I am required take responsibility of my action. From this incidence, I also understood the need for instant action in case of any problem in an organization. In terms of management in the organization, we learnt the importance of taking prompt action in solving a problem. Dysfunctional leadership/management According to my knowledge on leadership theory, dysfunctional leadership in our organization brought about reduction in the organization performance. In reference to the theory, I noted that, fast growing and profitable organizations managers create internal conflicts and unhealthy work practice and ethics which bring about poor performance in an organization (Keganhttp://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/05/07/070507fa_fact_toobin and Lahey, 2007, p.89). By understanding the dysfunctional leadership components, I noted that dysfunctional leadership in our organization was brought about by poor communication within organization, complicated bureaucracy, and limited trust among players in an organization. Additionally, dysfunctional organization was also necessitated by overreliance on external affairs in an organization such as sales and purchasing hence underrating internal challenges in an organization. In reference to leadership theory I was able to understand that, dysfunctional leadership in our organization led to poor performance of the organization insurance project. Through understanding the concepts of dysfunctional leadership, I noted there was very limited communication between senior management, unit managers and the employees in the program. Sellers gave the client wrong information because they were not aware of policies governing the program. There was an exceptionally immense gap between the employees and the management. In regard to this, it was clear form the theory that dysfunctional management brought about unnecessary anxiety and fear among the employees. On the other hand, my understanding of leadership theory helped me recognize the fear I had in approaching vice president and unit manager. The unit manager allowed our negotiation to solve the problem. Through understanding the requirement in leadership theory, the management embraced the communication in decision making process. As a stipulated by the theory, I also acknowledged the significance of communication and interaction in an organization. Through my understanding on leadership theory the embracement of team work in the administration where everybody in the organization will be involved in decision making process is very significant. Containment According to psychoanalytic theory, containment is exceedingly pertinent in my leadership development process. As a result of this my leadership quality developed when I was a small person. The understanding of containment component helped me in thinking and learning. In reference to containment concept the manager of an organization ought to have the capacity to manage and regulate the difficulties and problems experienced in an organization. As a result of this I noted that poor performance in the company insurance program was as a result of insufficient communication. In this case, poor performance triggered the management to think on how they can interact with employees to solve the emerging predicament. My understanding of the concept of containment helped me to enter into a negotiation with unit manager on how to solve the company problem. Due to this, there was frequent dialogue between the unit manager and my selves. The communication triggered our ability to think on the best ways of addressing the problem. We shared what we thought would be the best way of addressing the problem. Finally, we developed a comprehensive model of solving the problem. In the process of thinking and communication, I was in a position to learn that communication and confidence are some of the best ways of solving administration problems. The interaction between all involved plays brought about the required solution to the problem. The understanding of the psychoanalytic theory helped me in realizing the significance of communication in the administration process. The understanding of containment component will had a vast impact to my current and future positions as a leader. The unit managers and other managers also understood the imperative of interaction and appropriate communication in the decision making process as provided for by containment component. By understanding and internalizing containment theory in our organization, there will be change in the management. Employees and managers will embrace communication on their daily activities. Communication will therefore reduce any possibility of loses due to lack of adequate interaction. Transference and counter-transference Transference is a Sigmund Freud construction in his psychoanalysis experience. As a result of my understanding of transference as provided for by Sigmund, I noted that I directed unpleasing emotion to another person in handling my case. In this case, transference assisted me in defining the relationship between myself and my seniors. According to transference, followers are motivated by rational and irrational incentives in their relationship with their leaders. By understanding transference I noted different types of transference which are vital in the management of an organization. Some of them includes, the paternal type of transference is where the leader is protective, understanding and wise. In this case, the follower is allowed to give out his/her own view and have the capacity of questioning the leader. This happened after the down fall of the insurance plan in my organization. The other form of transference is maternal transference where the leader provides unconditional care and support. Followers in this form of transference look for care, support and dependence from the leader. The other common type of transference is sibling transference where the followers do not have leaders. They depend on peers for help and support. In our organization, insurance sellers relied on each other in their plan. Additionally, Freud theory also helped me in understanding the counter transference components which are crucial in leadership development. The fall of the insurance program in my company gave me an understanding on how transference and counter transference work in an organization. Leaders and follower depends on each other for the success of an organization. As a result, the adoption of the most productive form of transference in an organization is exceptionally vital and essential. From my understanding on transference and counter transference I learnt that, mutual interaction between leaders and followers is therefore extremely important and appropriate. Leadership Psychodynamic theory After the downfall in our organization, I noted that senior management used psychodynamic theory in trying to understand the dynamic of leadership and the complexity and influence of the nature of mankind in our organization .From the theory, I learnt that, leadership entails the enhancement and consideration of human activities in an organization (Westen 2008, p. 333). The theory also expounds on interaction between the management the subject in our situation. As reiterated by the theory, I understood that, leadership encompasses an understanding of people and organizational behaviors, developing and enhancing strong and mutual relationship between employees in an organization, developing adequate dedication among people involved in the learning of an organization as well as establishing adopting behaviors that can accelerate the organization efficiency and effectiveness (Bennis and Thomas 2002, p. 39). My knowledge on the theory also helped me in understanding the failure in our organization. In regard to this, leadership in our organization failed to develop hope and confidence to the followers by inspiring them to think and move beyond they personal capability. As stated by psychodynamic theory, for me to be a successful leader I must have the capacity of accepting and accommodating every one idea and opinions. The problem which was brought about by insurance program triggered the development of effective leaders. The managements have the responsibility of understanding the subject ideas and suggestion though interaction. According to the theory, inadequate understanding between the leaders and the followers lead to the downfall of the organization. Through understanding the theory, I observed that, the agents who were responsible of selling the insurance policies gave wrong information to the customer. However, after consultation between unit manager and me, we identified the cause of the problem and decided to advance the agent training. An understanding of the theory of psychodynamic theory will help me in understanding my position in the organization. As indicated by psychodynamic theory, an effective leader should understand his/her subjects in an organization. In regard to this, I am in a position to understand the significant of subject in decision making and implementation process. Successful leaders are exceedingly relevant in an organization. The incorporation of all involved stakeholders in an organization as required by the theory reduces chance of incorrect decision making in an organization. Narcissism By understanding the narcissism theory, I understood the problem which emerged within my personality as a leader and between me and other managers. I also noted the importance of good relationship in our organization to enhance the success of insurance company. (Miller and Rollnick, 2004, p.299). Narcissism helped me in understanding my internal relationship problem. In leadership, narcissist can be taken as a leadership stage. Some of the behaviors developed and manifested by a leader who have poor relationship with the subjects include arrogance, and inability to exchange ideas with the subject (Sternber, 2003, p.154). Additionally, from my understanding on the theory, insurance policy failed because of poor interaction between leaders. In my position as a manager, I had an internal personal problem. To start with, I noted I never acted according to my internal feelings and what is believed was right. This deteriorated my leadership quality. After developing good relationship, my performance as leaders was superb. Through get incite on the requirement of narcissism theory, I developed good internal relationship which helped me to agree with other managers in solving insurance problem which had tarnished the reputation of our organization. I also ensured there is good interaction between senior company administrators and other employees. Initially, this relationship was at a crisscross. As a future leader, I noted that good internal relationship will help me in making firm decision in accordance to what I belief is right. Additionally, the theory will help me in assisting the organization in enhancing good internal relationship for sustainable development. The organization must therefore restructure its management to accommodate other people view to enhance future success of the organization Triangle of conflict According to my knowledge on triangle of conflict, the misunderstanding between the management and policy sellers was brought about by internal emotions. On the other hand, conflict between individuals can be explained in form of a triangle. The conflict theory also helped me in understanding the impact of the previous emotion to my current relationship. From my triangle of conflict knowledge, hidden feeling refers to individual self know feelings (Palmer and Dunford, 2002, 243). I also leant the important of defense aspect in the triangle in preventing the effect of hidden feelings in my relationship. It is unethical for leaders to be influenced by hidden feelings. In the case under study, my decisions were influenced by hidden feelings I had concerning myself and other administers. As I noted, I was uncomfortable with confronting the unit manager because of our previous interactions. On the other hand, I assumed the vice president of the organization would sack the insurance agents for misleading the organization customers. From my understanding on triangle of conflict, I leant the importance of utilizing defense in controlling my past feeling and experiences. From my knowledge, addressing present situation without focusing on past happening would improve my relationship with my subjects. I also trained the managements on the best ways of addressing future occurrences Good interaction in an organization will therefore enhance interactive decision making process. Destructive leadership Understanding Destructive leadership enabled me to understand how leaders in my organization used their position for their own personal gain (Millerand Rollnick 2004, p.300). Senior management in our organization manipulates the organization resources, goals, tasks, motivation and effectiveness for their own personal benefits. Through understanding the concepts of a destructive leadership I understood the consequences of destructive leaders in an organization. Out of my understanding on destructive leadership component, poor performance in insurance program was a result of leaders personal. Leaders initiated a program without consulting other stakeholders for their own personal benefit. Destructive leaders in this case led to reduction in performance in our organization. However, poor performance in our organization led to the change in the structure of leaders. Due to my knowledge on destructive leader I learnt to embrace my subject in my daily activity as a leader. As a result, I embraced the characteristic of a constructive leader. Personal change Emotional intelligence Emotional intelligence theory helped me in understanding personality and behavioral aspect in my organization. In reference to emotional intelligence, I noted that, different leaders understand and manage emotions in our organization in different ways. The knowledge helped me to development my personal capability in an organization. After learning emotional intelligence I noted that emotions influences the way I reacted to the situation under study. The development of an avenue for sharing of ideas and emotion which I developed in our organization changed tremendously the organization performance. The theory also helped me in developing the characteristic of taking risks where needs arise. On the other hand, it enabled me to develop personal confidence in sharing my ideas and opinion with other people in the organization (Lichtenstein 2000, p.128). From my knowledge on the theory, high level of emotions among employees in our organization significantly influenced my personal and organizational transformation (Beer and Nohria 2000, p.133). Through emotional intelligence, I developed the confidence in expressing my idea to the administration. I also understood the significance of my contribution in the organization. Emotional intelligence which I acquired in my interaction with unit manager helped me in the development of the leadership characteristic of firmness Resilience According to my knowledge on psychologists’ resilience I was able to cope with stress in my leadership position. Coping helps me in going back to the normal way of reasoning and thinking. Resilience is therefore more of a process than a character. The knowledge on resilience also helped me to use current shortfall for future development (Schwandt 2005, p.176). As a successful leader, resilience taught me how I should not be demoralized by present losses in an organization but rather utilize the fall for future progress. I therefore took the failure in my organization as an opportunity to enhance future development. According to my experience on the theory, the failed initiative of introducing insurance policies in our organization should be a learning experience for future development. As a leader, I learnt the important of consultation before initiating any plan. The failure of the insurance plan and incorporation of my understanding on resilience concepts also necessitates changes in my organization management. There was frequent consultation in decision making process. As a result, the organization is embarking on productive policies which are well understood by all involved stakeholders in the organization. References Beer, M. and Nohria, N.,2000, "Cracking the code of change." Harvard Business Review 78, 4, 133–141. Bennis, W. and Thomas, R, 2002, "Crucibles of Leadership." Harvard Business Review, 90,56, 39–45. Daudelin, M., 2008 "Learning from experience through reflection." International Journal of Management & Information Systems – Second Quarter 2011 Volume 15, Number 2 Kegan, R. and Lahey, L., 2007, “How the Way We Talk Can Change the Way We Work: Seven Languages for Transformation”, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Lichtenstein, B. 2000, "Self-organized transitions: a pattern amid the chaos of transformative change," Academy of Management Executive,45, 128-141. Miller, W. R, and Rollnick, S.,2004, "Taking oneself into change: motivational interviewing, stages of change, and therapeutic process," Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy: An International Quarterly, 18,4, 299-308. Palmer, I., and Dunford., R, 2002, "Who says change can be managed? Positions, perspectives and problematics," Strategic Change, 11, 243-251. Prilipko, E. Antelo, A. Henderson, R. 2011. Rainbow Of Followers‘ Attributes In A Leadership Process Psychotherapy: An International Quarterly, 18, 4, 299-308. Schwandt, D. 2005, "When managers become philosophers: integrating learning with sense-making" Academy of Management Learning and Education, 4, 2, 176-192. Sternberg, R. 2003, ‘A Broad View of Intelligence: The Theory of Successful Intelligence.’ Consulting Psychology Journal, 55, 139–154. Westen, D. 2008 The scientific legacy of Sigmund Freud: toward a psychodynamically informed psychological science. Psychological Bulletin 23,89, 333–371. Appendix The reflective cycle (Gibbs 1988) Source: Oxford Brooks University. (2009). About Gibbs’ Reflective Cycle. Read More