What my peers think of me.
More stuff from SOS. Qualification: This is feedback from people who, at the time of writing, had known me less than two weeks. Essentially, this is their first impressions of me. I'll list their remarks, then comment as I feel the need.
Student 1: Pos: I'm glad you were added to our flight because your assertiveness is much needed and works well with the other folks in the flight. (Does that even make sense? LOL) You know what I'm trying to say, though.
Student 2: (Blank)
Student 3: Diana comes across as a strong and intelligent person. She consistently has input (question or statement) but not always necessary. Has not really settled into the team. Not sure if it is because she is local and/or started the course late? Strengths: Very assertive, commanding, and vocal (outspoken). Weakness: Assertiveness can be overbearing, comments not always appropriate.
Student 4: Diana is not afraid to step up to a challenge. She takes on leadership opportunities with a smile and puts in place a plan of action. She has demonstrated sound problem solving skills and shows conviction in her ideas. She needs to work on her briefing and communication skills. Briefing - smoother transitions, less rocking back and forth, don't get flustered if you miss a point or forget where you are going with statement...most of the times the audience won't even notice if you don't give them cues. Sometimes I think Diana speaks without thinking...comments like "isn't that more of a female characteristic" when talking about mentoring...I think that rubbed some people the wrong way...other comments here and there that have caught me off guard...stay aware of what you are saying and who you are saying those things to. In some instances it seems like she is looking to see what kind of reaction she will get. Which can be fun to watch.
Student 5: Overall good person. Has taken a high pressure situation of coming here to SOS no-notice and made the best of the situation.
Student 6: Works well in teams. Forthcoming with ideas. Sometimes needs to focus on the task at hand.
Student 7: Diana showed up "late" in our flight (by a day) and there was a danger that she might not blend well with the social structure we had started to establish. She overcame this, recognizing right away that she needed to be more outgoing than we were being. By immediately opening up and setting an example of unapologetic honesty, she helped set the tone for the flight exactly when we needed to begin getting past "Polite." Diana is a sharp problem-solver who isn't afraid to take risks. I haven't seen her operate under pressure yet, but I expect that she keeps her cool well--it seems like it would be hard to throw her off. I doubted her commitment initially because she was taking another class, but she has really pulled her weight in the flight, taking on the tough job of scheduling [Mission Area Leader].
Student 8: Diana seems to be very motivated for the success of the flight. She likes the military and her work. In my opinion she is very capable. I did not like the lack of accountability in ensuring her stand-up slides were completed Monday morning. She covered herself and made the blame fall on others.
Student 9: Diana is a little abrasive at times and people could misconstrue that for being unpolite [sic]. She has a very dominant personality which at times can help get the group moving in the right direction. On the other hand, she can try and dominate the discussions too much at times and needs to solicit other ideas.
Student 10: Knowledgable, hardworking, supportive. Very confident when speaking/leading. Not afraid to make a decision and go with it.
Student 11: Intelligent, however I feel that she may say inappropriate things at the wrong time or during the wrong group situations. Need to have better attention to surroundings.
Student 12: Diana has been a great addition to our flight. She has a great deal of experience and has not been afraid to speak up when she has questions or opinions. At the same time, I think she can be a little off pace with where the rest of the group is going. As an individual she is strong in many areas, but she could benefit others by lending some of that strength and support to them. For example, she is a great runner and could help out some of the others in our flight if she took the time. I know that her situation is a bit different, but it seems as if she has yet to gel with the rest of the group. I do appreciate her honesty and that she jumped right past the "polite" stage.
Student 13: Diana lets her opinions be known which is a good thing. I see her as wanting to be a team player. Sometimes she has a tendency to talk over others or speak before the other person is done talking which makes her seem overbearing.
That's it, except for the flight commander's comments, which I'll tack in at the end.
The interesting question is, what do I see in these comments? There are a couple of themes in them. First, the abrasiveness I mentioned earlier; only one person used this word, but several basically said the same thing. Interestingly enough, most of them seemed to think it was a positive trait.
Second, I'm a strong, confident, can-do task-solver. There appears to be consensus on that. That's cool.
The "Polite" stage comments are in reference to something called "COG's Ladder," which delineate the steps of team growth. The steps are Polite, Why Are We Here?, Bid For Power, Constructive, and Esprit. All teams go through these steps, and can regress when a new member is thrown in. Polite is obvious, referring to everyone being ultra-concerned about how the others perceive them, and no one saying anything chancey; it is characterized by excessive self-consciousness and complete lack of cohesion. Why Are We Here? is the stage where people are establishing their objectives as a team (without an objective, you don't have a team--just a group); it is characterized also by politeness, albeit less than the first stage, but people are more willing to take chances than before. The Bid For Power is the point where the objectives have been established and, well, we're jockeying for position to establish roles. The Constructive Stage, if we make it that far, is the point where we've established roles and are working together as a team. Esprit is where we've had some successes as a team and have subordinated our own needs for those of the team.
Several of my peers responded in one way or another to something I said the first day I was there. Here's what happened; you be the judge.
I'd come in around noon the second day of class, due to being given the opportunity to go attend this class with no notice. The rest of the team had been there and together since Sunday evening, so they were already something of a group. They were starting to know one another, and I was an unknown. Everyone was very much in the polite stage.
We were covering task-oriented and maintenance behaviors, as they apply to team behaviors. "Task-oriented" behaviors are problem-solving behaviors, and very analytical. They are, as they seem to be, focused on the task at hand, without regard for feelings. "Maintenance" behaviors, on the other hand, are geared toward the emotional cohesion of the team; they seek to improve or patch up relationships among members, to assuage hurt feelings and include those who are stand-offish (examples from the book: reconciling disagreements; reducing tension; getting people to explore differences; facilitating participation of others; suggesting procedures that permit sharing remarks; helping keep communications channels open; being friendly, warm and responsive; indicating the acceptance of others' contributions; offering compromises; admitting error). As we listened to the lecture, I was repeatedly struck by the apparent traditional gender gender division in behaviors. No one made a comment about it, and it was as obvious as it could be to me. So I raised my hand and said, "Is it just me, or are the maintenance behaviors traditionally female characteristics?"
And BAM! We were out of the polite stage. Just like that. From the reaction, you'd have thought I'd just said that any man who engages in maintenance behavior is a sissy and any woman who is task-oriented is butch. Wow. They all seem to have overlooked my observation that these are traditional gender characteristics. (I will, however, stand by the observation that they are still very culturally entrenched in our society.) I got the politically correct response from all directions, as you might imagine; no less than five of my peers spoke up, denying that they'd made that connection at all or that there was any truth to it.
Me? I just sat there and grinned. Why did I say it? First, I was honestly curious if I was the only person who'd made this connection. Second, I suspected no one else was willing to say it because it isn't PC to acknowledge gender roles.* Third, I was more curious than ever to see what sort of response it would get (Student 4 was on the money).
* People seem to think denying the existence of gender roles in our culture will make them go away. Or something. That's ostrich logic, if you ask me. Incidentally--I'm not sure gender roles are such a bad thing, necessarily. I'm impressed by those who cross gender lines in their behaviors, by men who are compassionate and thoughtful and women who can solve analytical problems. However, these things are not the norm. Or...maybe I'm just a redneck. That's always a possibility.
No less than five students responded to that one remark.
The comment about blaming others bugs me, because considering the incident in question, I'm not sure what I was supposed to do instead. I don't believe in taking the hit for someone else's goof; my idea of teamwork is to take personal responsibility for my own actions, and for my teammates to do the same. Without this, trust cannot be established. So the comment about my stand-up slides not being done (accountability, Student 8) was because I'd done them (evidenced by the fact that I had a copy of it to hand to the flight commander for his records), and someone had overwritten them on the master. I didn't know about it until I was standing in front of the flight commander and group about to brief my slide, and realized at that moment that it wasn't updated anymore. I reacted with, "Where's my slide? That isn't the updated one." Then I said, "Forget it. We can work it out later. I'll wing it." The remark that I blame others bugs me because I addressed the problem with the person who made it immediately after the briefing, so I could figure out what happened so it wouldn't happen again, and he apparently ignored me, dinging me for "blaming others" when something goes wrong (interestingly enough, he was the person who was to blame, but refused to take responsibility--but that's neither here nor there). So...I'm confused about what I should have done that I didn't do, really. The Flight Commander made a similar comment.
The thing about my briefing abilities is true. I'm not comfortable standing on both feet when I brief, for some reason, but neither foot seems comfortable, either. :) Weird how that happens. I don't have leg problems at any other time in my life. The briefing info was good input.
Also, the "interrupts others" was solid. This is something my family does--my extended family on both sides. I learned it with my mother's milk. Moreover, in my family, if you don't talk loud, you probably won't be able to finish a sentence, because everyone interrupts. I recognize this for a social no-no, and find it rude when others do it to me, but I'll be darned if I can completely overcome it, short of having an electrical current shot through my body each time I open my mouth while someone else is talking. I've worked on it for years, and have overcome my loudness and interruption problem in many settings through the force of sheer will, but I have to concentrate on being polite to do it. Obviously, there are times that I'm excited or in a hurry when I lose that focus and revert to this behavior.
Seriously...this is a problem and any suggestions anyone might have about how to overcome it are welcome.
Flight commander: Strengths: Tough and not afraid of being int he spotlight or failing. Showed great tenacity on the Flick field shaking off the collision and continuing to play. You hardly ever appear flustered, and contribute meaningful comments during team event. Weaknesses: Your intensity in dealing with situations can be disquieting to some. Your criticism, although usually on the mark in breifings and after team events, comes across more harshly than you probably intend for it to because of this. This flight would benefit from a calming influence to optimize their performance. Sometimes, you have a tendency to blame others or the environment for things going wrong. When leader of Proj X task, team could not complete the task due to lack of cohesion and consensus on the plan. There are opportunities for some situational leadership for you by displaying more "support" behaviors (not going back to "polite" stage, but offering encouragement, etc).
In all fairness, he qualified this with "It's just what I see, but I don't have a crystal ball." The collision in question (on the flick field) occurred because Student 8 saw me going for a pass and figured he'd have a better chance of catching it, so he went for it, too. We collided, head on, midair, of course. If you'd like an idea of what this feels like, run full force into a brick wall. I got whiplash from it, and by the time I got to the chiropractor four days later, my feet were misaligned by two inches. If you know anything about chiropractor diagnosis techniques, this means I was pretty jacked up.
Then there was my failure to solve the Proj X task. Oh. Project X. Fun stuff. I heard Hitler came up with this idea to train his officers. You are given a scenario with a time limit, and you have to fulfil the requirements with your team. Say, they might have two walls, a rope dangling in the middle, a couple of planks about 12 feet long, and rules like "All red surfaces are coated with acid/radioactive." So you have to figure out how to get yourself and your team across (with the equipment, usually) in 15 minutes. Reading the problem is part of the 15 minutes. It's fun stuff. The goal is to teach you problem solving and leadership skills.
I failed to complete mine because the original plan was ineffective, and had to be revised, by which point we were about 30 seconds short of finishing. I'm not sure where the flight commander got that "lack of cohesion" thing.
Anyhow. That's what people who've known me for two weeks think. And I've been on good behavior. ;)
d
