Leadership's Fear of Change; The Impact of COVID-19 on the workplace.

I was reading a NY Times article about how Covid-19 is changing every aspect of our lives. It's changing how we work, socialize, commute and even sleep. Despite living with COVID-19 for over 22 months now, some companies, managers, and leadership are still trying to go back to pre-covid workflow and staffing levels. In this case, I am not talking about any political affiliation but more of an unwillingness to accept a changing work environment.

When covid hit, most mitigation measures were temporary and thus reactionary. However, as lockdowns, social distancing, remote work, learning, and vaccines became part of life, resistance to change became a prevalent theme both in the political world and in the work/life world. But why are workplaces so resistant to change, especially in education? Metathesiophobia is the psychological definition of fear of changing circumstances, routines, or objects. People can fear change on many different levels. A person might fear a shift in cup color at their favorite coffee shop on a micro-level. A person might fear a change of job, relationship, or world outcome on a macro level. Some of the symptoms of methathesiophobia are

• Heart palpitations

• Rapid breathing,

• shaking/trembling

• Sweating

• Nausea or gastrointestinal distress

• inability to form words

• dry mouth

• thoughts of death

• Choking

• Feeling of dread.

  But can an entire organization have Methathesiophobia? Why would an organization fear change? Is the fear of change healthy or unhealthy for an organization?

Why would an organization fear change? Is the fear of change healthy or unhealthy for an organization?

Let's first answer the question, can an entire organization fear change. The answer is yes. An organizational-wide fear of change comes from leadership and the culture the leaders instill. There is a saying that an organization promotes leaders to the level of their incompetence. This statement is a bit harsh, but it is accurate to state that some leaders are not qualified. Why do some leaders get put in these positions, and other forward thinkers are left behind? The answer is that it is harder to change than it is to keep the status quo.

But the status quo is comfortable because every person in the organization knows what to expect. The monotony is comforting. However, everything changes. Nature is not monotonous and forces itself to change. Evolution is the ever-changing response to the environment. The status quo doesn't respond or adapt to a changing climate; it spends more energy resisting it. Spending more money and energy resisting change is unhealthy for an organization.

The status quo is unhealthy for an organization as it forces it not to respond to a changing environment or marketplace. The leadership's personality and decision-making contribute to an organization's fear of change. If the leadership is risk-averse in its decision-making, growth will also be stagnant. Organizations are either growing or shrinking on a continuum. The rate of growth or shrink might slow down, but there is never a point where the rate is right in the middle. That intermediate state is so finite that a small decision from anyone in the organization would tip the balance one way or the other on the continuum.

But what is the role of leadership? The role of leadership is to make decisions in response to current or forecasted changes within the environment and marketplace to continue the organization's long-term growth. The organization might move up and down the growth rate continuum. Still, leadership's overall directive is to keep the organization moving towards overall long-term growth.

What drives decision-making? 

Decision-making is the process of weighing the risk-reward benefit of a choice. Sometimes the options carry more reward than risk, in which the decision-making process would be easy on which to choose. However, often the margin between risk and reward is much smaller. Thus the person making the decision must utilize other outside factors when deciding on a choice. These external factors add more weight to the risk or reward benefit analysis. Examples of outside factors might be input from other people, experience with similar decisions, review of the mission statement or strategic plan, or directive from a higher authority. Good decision-makers tend to make decisions with outcomes that have the favorable benefit to whichever entity they represent (themselves or their organizations).

Fear in Decision Making

Fear comes into play in decision-making because it forces a person to focus more on the risks rather than the reward of choice. Fear is an evolutionary survival mechanism, such as when our ancestors feared a saber tooth tiger. The issue is when fear is inconsistent with the amount of risk. Joe Pierre says that this often happens when the stakes are unknown. When the risks are unknown, our brains have to fill in the gaps. Fear leads to an overestimation of risk. Fear leads us to overestimate the odds of an improbable outcome.

So how do we mitigate fear in decision-making? Jocko Wilnik often states that one has to detach from their emotions to make a clear decision; this would also include fear. Detaching is good in concept, but people often find it hard to detach, especially when a situation has many emotions. But what we can do is gather as many resources as possible to do a risk and reward assessment. The circumstances of the situation dictate the speed of the evaluation. Let's take a small example of a coffee shop changing the color of its paper cups.

A CEO might initially say no to the color change, fearing that customers might not like the cup. The CEO then thinks that those customers might take their business to a competitor, and thus the sales numbers might go down for 1-2 quarters. Stocks would drop, and finally, the board of trustees would remove them as CEO. The fear of change led the CEO to outweigh the risks and negate the rewards of a cosmetic change to their cups. But what about those customers who are bored with the same cup? The CEO needs more information to make an informed decision. The CEO surveys the executive council asking formal and informal options. The CEO then asks the marketing department to analyze and conduct focus groups to gauge public opinion on the change. The CEO then does a financial analysis to see if the cup color will affect the profit margin due to increased or decreased production costs. This choice doesn't require a lot of speed in the decision-making process, and thus the CEO has time to gather more information. Once the CEO collects the data, they can assess the risk vs. reward with the emotion of fear mitigated by more data. Once they make the assessment, the leader must then align the decision with the company's mission and value statements.

An Organization's Mission

Jack Welsh said a mission statement is the driving force of all a company's decision-making and policy. Let us ask this question: how many CEOs, managers, and supervisors know their company's mission statement? What drives the decision-making if the upper administration has no sense of the mission statement? Is it the strategic plan? Is it individual agendas? Budgets? Stock performance? A Board of Trustees? Fear is a human emotion. Leaders cannot take emotions out of the decision-making process unless you release the decision-making to a computer algorithm. So how do we deal with and mitigate fear in decision-making to have the best outcome possible?

Leadership often misses the mark when decision-making fails to observe the organization's mission statement. Leadership might also fear referring to the mission statement because it might require an organization to reevaluate its decision-making process. For example, if a mission statement said that the organization was to "help contribute to a global society," then every decision made within the organization must be in alignment with that goal. There might be less cash flow in this made-up scenario if the company saw reduced profits this year. It has been customary for the company to invest extra cash flow in philanthropy efforts and develop other freeware for the global community. However, with limited profits this year, the company might not meet its philanthropic endeavors' complete or partial needs and thus might have to reduce the contribution. The CEO delivered this news at the annual company golf at the end of the fiscal year. What would the correct decision be in this case? To continue the company golf outing or redirect those funds to the mission statement? Why would the CEO choose not to cancel the golf outing? For fear of employee retribution? Fear of change and not doing the company tradition?

COVID's Example Case.

Let's think about the initial cost of change. Let's tackle a big one, working from home. Before the pandemic, a company might have spent, let's say, 1 million a year for office space. They might have locked in a seven or 10-year lease, which is 7-10 million dollars in future budgets. Most employees were forced or elected to work from home with the pandemic. Studies suggest that employees are more productive when working from home. This increase in productivity is due to several reasons:

• Shorter commute

• Less separation of work and home life

• More contact time with work projects or clients

However, CEOs might see empty buildings as a waste of sunk cost, thus might push for in-person work. How often have you read that companies want to see cars in the parking lot?

So to get the building compliant with CDC recommendations, the company will dip into available cash to alter the space. They will spread desks 6 feet apart, install plexiglass partitions, air filtration, and UV lights. These efforts might cost the business 1-2 million dollars, depending on the company's size. Then, to return to work, your staff has to be vaccinated or show a negative covid test, increasing the COB by installing a screening system for those who are vaxed and unvaxed. Increases in insurance costs and paid time off are just more parts of the pandemic's cost. So, why are we trying to accommodate us going back into the office when the company would avoid all of these extra costs with a change of work model? If the company, at the start of a lease, owes 6 million on a seven-year lease, the cost to install and remove the covid measures might be 3 million (taking an approximate number). Over the life of the lease, they will spend about 10 million (7 years plus the 3 million in renovations) to continue to work from an office space. However, if you break the lease, you might forfeit one or two years' worth of rent. You would be only out 2-3 million in costs over the seven-year lease versus the 10 for rent and renovations, giving you a net savings of 7 million.

Maybe a better question is, why does some leadership want to bring everybody back? What's the driving factor behind the drive for full offices again? Some leadership experts say it's ego, as the administration wants to be seen in their corner offices. Ego drives a lot of business interactions. Look at how many meetings we have to attend that could have been the proverbial email. Suppose the CEO puts ego and emotion aside. What is the reason for bringing people back into the offices when productivity might be more productive in work from the home model? An organizational fear of change?

Many organizations take a "wait and see" approach, delaying decision-making until more data is available. I often hear from leaders that "we don't know how things will change next month" or "we could be right back to where we started next year." So, the natural tendency is to "survive" this next one month or next quarter or next year until we get back to normal. If we are surviving, we are not thriving in this environment. We need to adapt. The model needs to change.

What can we do?

I often get asked, "what can we do when we don't know what to expect?" and my answer is always "plan for both scenarios, and then find a third plan to mitigate both." In the case of working from home, you can't just tell people to come back tomorrow. People have to negotiate child care, transportation, and technology upgrades, to name only a few problems of workplace re-entry. Let's also not forget that we are going through a global trauma, and mental health is vital. Your employees might not feel comfortable returning to work due to a mix of vaccinated and unvaccinated mingling. It would help if you gave people time to get their affairs for a complete workplace reallocation. From what I have experienced, 3-4 months have been the most successful workplace re-entry. Also, ask if those employees need to be in the office to do their job, or can we keep them remote? How about a hybrid flex model?

Also, ask yourself why your employees do not want to come back? What is the incentive for returning to an office environment? The free donuts in the employee lounge are no longer a fringe benefit or incentive. However, free vaccinations, child care, and paid sick time are. As leaders, we need to reevaluate our purpose and reflect on our mission statement. Is it vital to have students cram a 200 seat lecture hall when the teacher reads out of a textbook? Take the money you would spend on building safety and improvements and put it into your employees. Give them new tools to be innovative with their teaching methods or spreadsheets. Offer your employees improvement workshops, free behavioral health, further skills training, and invest in their education.

Dr. Mike Testa

K-12 Education: Testing and Results Worth Cheating For.

“A thing worth having is a thing worth cheating for.” W.C. Fields

I recently watched a Freakonomics video about why cheating happens in the K through 12 system. There is an interesting perspective about why teachers help students cheat on standardized testing. From a student's perspective, there is much incentive to cheat, such as increased opportunities for college, scholarships, and better academic records. However, the economist in the video suggested that there was an incentive for teachers to cheat or at least help the students cheat to increase their test scores. If the students do well on the tests, it reflects positively on the teachers and their school. It is a way for them to show that they are doing a good job and that their students are learning.

How Teachers Cheat.

There are many ways that students can cheat on tests, and some of them are pretty creative. Nevertheless, how would a teacher cheat? The video states that the last 8-10 questions were often filled in correctly in a review of thousands of standardized tests. On a standardized test, these are often the most challenging questions. Students who do not finish the test usually stop around 50-65% of the questions. However, those tests that were higher on average had a commonality: the answers at the end of the test were 100% completed and correct. The video suggests that the teachers were given the answers to the test in advance and filled them in. Instead of the school or district paying the extra cost of sending tests out to a third party for grading, they give the teachers the answer key to grade after proctoring the test. The school is then responsible for reporting the test score.

Why would teachers cheat?

1. Job justification. Higher test scores would then correlate to better job performance. If a teacher has low test scores, there could be questions by the administration. In some districts, test scores drive performance evaluations and end-of-year reviews.

2. Funding. Higher test scores might see increased funding for a particular program or department. On a district or school level, increased test scores in a grade level or a specific department might translate to increased teacher bonuses or compensation. There is no set standard for how schools can evaluate performance, and if the administration values high stake testing, teacher incentives to manipulate test scores could increase.

3. Increased test scores could also show increased funding for the district. In the case of No Child Left Behind, funding was based on high scores on standardized testing, so federal funding was then issued based on the highest performers. It created an inequitable incentive where high-performing schools were getting the funding, and low-performing schools that most likely needed funding were missing out. The incentive was so that low-performing schools would increase pedagogical techniques to vie for the funding. However, as these videos show, an incentive is unpredictable. No child left behind ended up creating competition versus incentive.

So the incentives for teachers to cheat often outweigh the alternative, which is accurate test scores. What skews the data is that the higher test scores due to cheating do not show the ineffective education policy. The policies include reducing faculty, reducing the humanities subjects, and reducing extracurricular activities. These reductions increase focus on standardized testing subject to improving test results. So the focus is now on testing versus holistic education. In the book "Surpassing Shanghai" by Mark Tucker, the author examines countries with the highest performing education systems and compares them to the USA. He found that countries with decentralized curricula prioritized educational funding, and higher teacher wages produced higher-performing students. These findings would jive with the main points of the Freakonomics authors, where incentive was inherent within the teaching profession versus tying incentive to funding. 

What can be done to stop this from happening?

Policymakers can do some things to try and stop teachers from cheating on standardized tests.

 1) Making the test results invalid if there is evidence of cheating. Invalid results would message that cheating is not tolerated and that there are consequences for breaking the rules.

2) Investigate claims of cheating. Administrators can investigate allegations of cheating. Investigations might help deter teachers from cheating if they know there is a chance they could get caught.

3) Increase transparency around the test scoring process. If teachers and administrators know precisely how testing companies calculate the scores, it will be more difficult for them to manipulate the results.

4) Provide more training on test administration and scoring. More teacher training would help to ensure that everyone involved in the process understands how to administer and score the test correctly.

5) Create a more balanced assessment system. If standardized tests are not the only factor used to assess student performance, it will reduce teachers' incentive to cheat.

Conclusion.

While there are no guarantees that these measures would stop all instances of cheating, they could help to deter some teachers from breaking the rules. A broken system is an issue. There is already a teacher shortage, so increasing monetary or merit-based penalties would only drive people away from the teaching profession. Systematic change in supporting teachers and decentralized curricula is a way to emphasize holistic education for the student and not hitting a metric.

Dr. Mike Testa

How to Take a Break from Social Media and 5 Things to Help Refocus Your Social Media Strategy

I am active on social media. TheAudioPod.com owns the username within the most prominent social media platforms. But occasionally, Instagram and Facebook crash the internet implodes. In 2018, I started a new business called Iron Lion Wellness. It was an online personal training platform. When I started my social media campaign, Facebook and Instagram went dark. Fast forward to Oct 4, 2021, about four days into the relaunch of TheAudioPod.com, the same situation happened: Facebook and Instagram went dark. It can be frustrating when social media goes down, especially if you're in the middle of trying to post something meaningful. But outages can also be an excellent opportunity to hit the pause button and assess your social media strategy. This is your chance to make sure that everything you're doing aligns with your goals.

There is an old proverb; "When the fishermen can't go out to sea, they mend their nets." What can you do to clean up your social media during an outage? Outages are a great opportunity to pause and audit your social media accounts. You are not losing any clients or falling behind your competitors. You have a proverbial pit stop to assess your social media strategy and align it with your goals. As we have seen, this happens about once every 2-3 years. But do you have to wait to hit the pause button?

If you need permission to take a break from social media, consider this your official permission slip. Social media crashes are a respite from the likes, dislikes, FOMO, and endless trolling. Take a break and breath. You will be able to get back on the social media hamster wheel soon enough.

1. The Importance of Taking a Break from Social Media

Social media has become an increasingly important part of our lives. We use it to stay in touch with friends and family, to get news and information, and to socialize. However, social media can also hurt our mental health. Being constantly exposed to the positive images and messages people post on social media can create a sense of envy and dissatisfaction with our lives. In addition, social media can be a significant time suck, making it difficult to focus on other important aspects of our lives and business. Constantly scrolling through feeds can lead to feelings of envy, anxiety, and loneliness. In addition, social media can be a significant source of misinformation and fake news. For these reasons, it's important to take a break from social media now and then. By disconnecting from social media, we can give ourselves a chance to recharge and refocus on what is truly important for ourselves or our business.

2. How to Know When it's Time for a Break

As businesses increasingly turn to social media to reach their customers, it is necessary to know when too much social media can be counterproductive. An over-abundance of social media can not only be overwhelming for customers but also make your business appear scattered and inefficient. So how can you tell when it's time to take a break from social media? One key indicator is whether social media is taking up too much time that you can spend on other tasks. If you spend hours scrolling through tweets or posts, it may be time to limit your social media usage. Another indicator is whether social media is negatively affecting your mood or causing you stress. Suppose social media is causing you anxiety or preventing you from enjoying your life outside of work. In that case, it's time to unplug for a while (notice a trend here?). Finally, consider whether social media is helping you achieve your business goals. Suppose social media isn't driving sales or helpings you to build meaningful relationships with customers. In that case, it may be time to focus your attention elsewhere. Social media can be an excellent tool for businesses, but it's essential to know when enough is enough. 

3. What to do During Your Social Media Detox

A business social media detox is a great way to break from the constant stream of information and connect with your offline friends and colleagues. Here are some tips on how to make the most of your detox:

• Set some boundaries. Decide how long you want to go without checking social media and stick to your plan. If you are getting anxious or antsy, take a deep breath and remind yourself that you can always check back later.

• Use the time to focus on other aspects of your business. Take this opportunity to catch up on paperwork, return phone calls, or work on that project you've been putting off.

• Connect with people offline. Now is the perfect time to have that coffee date with a colleague or meet up with an old friend for lunch. You may be surprised at how refreshing it is to have a conversation without referencing a tweet or Instagram post!

• Enjoy the silence. One of the best things about disconnecting from social media is that it gives you a chance to clear your head and enjoy peace. Spend some time outside, meditating and reflecting on why you are in the business you are in.

By following these tips, you can make the most of your business social media detox and come back feeling refreshed and rejuvenated.

4. Tips for Staying Connected with Friends and Family Offline

In an increasingly digitized world, it can be easy to forget the importance of face-to-face interactions. However, staying connected with clients and leads offline is essential for many businesses. There are a few simple ways to stay connected with clients and leads offline, such as attending networking events, hosting workshops or meetups, or meeting one-on-one. Attend events that your target clientele would attend and make an effort to connect with people before and after the event. One-on-one interactions are also meaningful; they give you a chance to get to know someone and build rapport. Make sure to exchange business cards (yes, the real paper ones) and follow up after the meeting. By making an effort to connect with clients and leads offline, you'll build strong relationships that will last.

5. Make the Most of Your Time Away from Social Media.

While it may be tempting to delete your accounts or go cold turkey, there are a few things you can do to make the most of your time away from social media:

1. Take inventory of how you use social media and what purposes it serves in your life and business. This will help you to be more mindful about your choices when you return to using social media.

2. Set some boundaries about how and when you will use social media. For example, you might decide to check your accounts only once per day or limit yourself to 30 minutes of total screen time.

3. Use your time away from social media to pursue other activities that make you feel good.

Spend time with loved ones, get outside, pick up a new hobby, or take some time for yourself. By taking these steps, you can ensure that your social media reset is genuinely beneficial for your well-being and business.

Conclusion

It can be tough to unplug from our devices, but it’s worth it. Taking a break from social media can give our brains and bodies the time they need to rest and recharge. And by staying connected with friends, family, and clients offline, we can strengthen our relationships in ways that simply aren’t possible online. So go ahead and take the plunge — your mind (and your loved ones) will thank you for it! How long do you plan on going without social media?

Dr. Mike Testa

The 5 Pillars of Innovation according to Steve Jobs.

On Oct 5th, 2022, it will have been 11 years since Steve Jobs passed away, leaving Apple in the care of Tim Cook. Many factors contribute to a person's success. Some people are born with natural talents, while others have to work harder to achieve the same level of success. In the case of Steve Jobs, his unique approach to innovation was what made him one of the most successful business people in history. He was able to see things in a different light and come up with ideas that no one else had thought of before. In this blog post, we will take a closer look at his approach to innovation and find out why it was so successful.

 When Steve Jobs returned to Apple in 1997, he sparked a revolution that would change the tech industry forever. Under his leadership, Apple released groundbreaking products like the iPod, iPhone, and iPad, which transformed the way we consume music, access information, and communicate with each other. Since Jobs' passing in 2011, many observers have argued that Apple's once-vaunted innovation engine has begun to sputter. While the company has continued to release new products, such as the Apple Watch and AirPods, many argue that these products are incremental rather than revolutionary. Moreover, Apple's hardware advances over the past decade pale compared to the leaps made under Jobs. In short, it seems that since Jobs' death, Apple has focused more on improving and integrating its existing hardware rather than truly innovating.

1. What Jobs meant when he said, "Innovation is not about saying yes to everything."

At first glance, this statement may seem counterintuitive - shouldn't we be encouraging innovation and creativity at all costs? However, upon closer examination, Jobs' assertion makes a lot of sense. Too often, people equate innovation with unrestrained growth and excessive change. However, true innovation is about much more than simply adding new features or making sweeping changes. It's about making intelligent decisions that lead to lasting impact. And sometimes, the best way to achieve that is by saying no to unnecessary change. By being selective and focused in our efforts, we can create something extraordinary that will stand the test of time. That's what Jobs meant when he said, "Innovation is not about saying yes to everything." And it's a philosophy that has served him - and Apple - very well over the years.

2. The importance of challenging the status quo.

It is crucial to challenge the status quo in a constantly changing world. If we never question how things are, we will never know if there is a better way. As Steve Jobs once said, "The people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world are the ones who do." Challenging the status quo doesn't mean abandoning all tradition and structure - instead, it means being open-minded and willing to try new things. It means looking at the world with fresh eyes and seeing opportunities for improvement. So next time you find yourself in a rut, remember to challenge the status quo. You just might be surprised by what you can achieve.

3. How Jobs' passion for design drove his innovation.

Anyone who has ever used an iPhone or MacBook knows Apple products have a sleek design and intuitive interface. Many people don't know that the company's co-founder and former CEO, Steve Jobs, was a passionate advocate for good design. His insistence on putting design first led to some of Apple's most groundbreaking innovations. When Jobs returned to Apple in 1997, he made design a top priority, infusing the company with new creative energy. Under his leadership, Apple released iconic products like the iMac G3, iPod, and iPhone. Each of these devices was not only beautifully designed but also easy to use, thanks to Jobs' focus on creating a great user experience. This commitment to design helped make Apple one of the world's most successful and innovative companies.

4. Why collaboration is key to innovation.

 There's no question that innovation is key to success in today's competitive marketplace. But what may be less obvious is that collaboration is often the key to innovation. Take Apple, for example. The company has long been known for its culture of secrecy and individual achievement. However, Apple co-founder Steve Jobs was also a master of collaboration, bringing together diverse teams of people to achieve groundbreaking results. It was Jobs' ability to encourage and harness the power of collaboration that helped make Apple one of the most innovative companies in the world. Collaboration is essential to sparking new ideas and driving growth. By bringing together people with different perspectives and skills, businesses can create an environment where innovation can thrive.

 5. The role intuition played in Jobs' approach to innovation.

Steve Jobs always trusted his intuition when it came to innovation. In an interview with Fast Company, he explained: "I trust in something called 'Preparing the Ground.' You take thousands of tiny steps, and suddenly you're there." Jobs' gut feeling led him to do things others thought were crazy, like getting rid of the floppy disk drive on the first iMacs. But his instincts paid off; the sleek design of the iMac was a hit with consumers. Intuition also played a role in Jobs' decision to focus on designing great user experiences. He believed they would be successful if he and his team could create products people loved using. And once again, he was right. The user-friendly interface of the iPhone and iPad helped Apple become one of the most successful companies in the world. So next time you're second-guessing a gut feeling, remember Steve Jobs and the role intuition played in his approach to innovation.

As you can see, Steve Jobs' passion for design, commitment to collaboration, and intuition drove his unique approach to innovation. By following his example, we can all learn to be more innovative in our work. So next time you feel stuck, remember Jobs' advice: "Think different." You just might come up with the next big thing.

What do you think made Steve Jobs so innovative?

Dr. Mike Testa

Why you Need More Time to Strategize as a Manager.

Recently I read a paper by Henry Mintzberg titled: "The Managers Job: Folklore and Fact." The article describes a manager as having ten different roles. Three of the ten roles involve interpersonal relationships; figurehead, leader, and liaison. The next three involve information roles: monitor, disseminator, and spokesperson. Next, as a decision-maker, the manager fulfills the functions of an entrepreneur, disturbance handler, and resource allocation. Finally, there is the role of the negotiator.

As the paper then goes on to describe how the manager accomplishes these tasks, the hidden takeaway of the article is the time allocation of a typical manager. The paper tries to break the folklore that a manager is a methodical planner and has time for a deep strategic initiative. However, the study finds that most managers are reactive due to changing job pressures throughout the day. The study states a typical manager completes 583 tasks during an 8-hour shift. It also noted that a manager spends half their time on tasks that take less than 9 minutes. Only 10% of their time was dedicated to tasks more than 1 hour long. This point suggests that a manager spends most of their time reacting to environmental change and has less time for long-term planning. Most of the time, the manager was responding to emails. One manager stated they processed 154 emails over 3 hours.

But I have found in my experience that most managers are reactive and have little time for strategy and planning. Managers are often so bogged down in the day-to-day grind that they don't have time to step back and strategize. This fact can lead to a lot of reactive decision-making, which can be detrimental to the organization in the long run.

The big picture

Managers must take time out of their busy schedules to think about the big picture and plan for the future. Otherwise, they'll always be one step behind and playing catch-up. A leader should not be afraid to step away from their busy schedules for a few moments and take the time necessary to think about future strategic initiatives. Without planning, they'll always feel like there's something more pressing that needs attention right now rather than taking care of current issues before moving on to new ones. They need time off the cycle of constant interruption so that when things return into chaos again, it won't necessarily always feel like something else needs attention right now rather than taking care of current issues before moving on to new ones.

If you want to be productive and get a lot of work done, you must block out your calendar for the entire day. Even allocating one day a month to just strategic planning and program evaluation can help a manager stay on their goals and objectives. Some other things you can do is to minimize distractions for the day.

Setting your environment up for success.

One of the best ways to minimize distractions is to create a work environment conducive to productivity. You should have a quiet space with few or no distractions. Stephen King mentions in his book "on writing" to try to do work in a room with a door. The door can be a partition from the distractions from the outside world. Regarding your work environment and ensuring your tools and supplies are within reach. If you can avoid going across the room for a pencil or paper, you can maximize seat time and time on task. To maximize your productivity, you must have a quiet space with few distractions. Even if there is no actual interruption happening right then - hearing someone else flush their toilet might take priority over what needs attention because this could potentially stop us cold wherever we happen to be in a groove.

A great way of creating conducive conditions would entail having all necessary supplies within arm's reach. 

Setting Boundaries

Setting boundaries with family and friends is crucial if you work from home. They need to understand that you're not to be disturbed when you're at work. People have found it hard to set boundaries with family, especially during COVID. You can do this by setting a specific work schedule and telling them when they can contact you. And if they contact you outside of work hours, let them know that you'll get back to them as soon as possible. Treat homework as office work. 

Setting boundaries with family and friends can be complex, but it's important to maintain a work-life balance. Setting these boundaries is tricky because people feel like there isn't anything else going on in their life outside.

Avoid Multitasking

It's also important to avoid multitasking as much as possible. When you're trying to do too many things at once, it becomes difficult to focus on any one task, and you're more likely to become distracted. If you're having difficulty focusing on a task, it might help to break it down into smaller parts. When you have a smaller goal to achieve, it becomes easier to stay focused and motivated. 

The human brain can only handle so many things at once. When you're trying to do multiple tasks that require different levels of focus and attention, it becomes difficult for the mind to stay focused on just one thing without becoming distracted by another. Ideas pop up along the way--which is why it's essential, not over-think any given situation because this will only make things worse! The best approach? Momentum - keep moving forward towards your goal as if everything were going according to plan (because sometimes life does throw us curveballs) but also know when enough is enough. 

Schedule your breaks

Try to focus on one task at a time and switch tasks only after you've completed the first one. One way to increase your focus is by using the Pomodoro Technique. This technique is a time management strategy that helps you stay focused on a task for 25 minutes, followed by a 5-minute break. You can repeat this cycle up to 4 times, which equals 100 minutes of work.

Another way to increase your focus is to take breaks throughout the day. When working on a task, your brain needs time to rest and recharge. You can do this by taking short breaks every 20 minutes or so. You can get up and move around during these breaks, drink water, or eat something light.

Following these tips can help you be more productive with your time. By setting up your environment for success, setting boundaries, avoiding multitasking, and scheduling your breaks, you can minimize distractions and focus on the task at hand. We hope this information was helpful and encourage you to share it with your followers on social media. What are some of your favorite productivity hacks?

 Dr. Mike Testa

The New Ivory Tower and How it Isolates Student and Community Thinking: Edu-Gentrification

Recently in the New York Times, there was an op-ed article by Nick Burns about how elite universities are out of touch with the current culture of America. The article states that the architecture of the campus has a large part to do with the silolization of the university population. Burns gives a new take on the idea of the ivory tower model of American university education. Geography and architecture have a large part to do with the culture of a university.

Why the Concrete Box Buildings?

All universities from the 1700s tend to look like fortified castle structures, where medieval scribes and scholars would toil in ancient libraries unraveling the mysteries of the universe. Modern universities designed their buildings specifically to stop student protests. In the 70s, it was common for demonstrations to take over a building and interrupt academic activities and classes. You have to look towards the concrete monstrosities of State University to see how the 70s influenced academic architecture.

But with, this article states that the university's geography is more isolated than the surrounding communities. Well manicured lawns, gated portions, large parking lots, and other features that you would see in large universities are often in stark contrast to the surrounding community architecture. As the author points to large state universities developed by the Morrill act, they also point toward elite private universities. Even in universities located within urban environments, a stark contrast exists between the property outside of the university versus within its confines.

I think it's important to consider whether or not universities are indoctrinating students into siloed thinking. The architecture and design of universities can undoubtedly contribute to this. A study by Caroline M. Hoxby of Stanford University found that the social interactions on elite college campuses are more important than the coursework. The study suggests that the architecture of these universities, with their large open spaces, actually discourages interaction between students and faculty. Private universities' design contrasts with many state schools and community colleges, which designs encourage social interaction. Students at large state universities may be more likely to think about things from a broader perspective. In contrast, students at elite private universities may be more likely to think about things in a more limited way.

I can think of a few exceptions, such as NYU, community colleges, and state urban campuses, where the architecture and geography blend in with the surrounding environment like a Frank Lloyd Wright home. But even then, the actual building architecture might starkly contrast with what could surround the building. That's both a function of the building and the nature of the activities. For example, if a building functions as a laboratory, it would be tough to house that much space in a simple two-story dwelling.

But I think a more significant point is what the universities do to the cities, towns, and neighborhoods through gentrification. Some state universities are buying up surrounding communities to put in private dorms, extra laboratories, and other facilities. These purchases both broaden their academic offerings but also to unify campuses. True, a university can contribute to positive urban development by bringing in large student populations who tend to pour extraneous income into the local economy. There is also a catch-22 where state universities are often tax-exempt, so they don't have to pay local taxes. Private universities might be grandfathered into old century-long tax deals with the local governments paying only pennies on the dollar. But, as part of a state university's urban improvement plans, the city might benefit from renewed infrastructure or other urban development as a byproduct of the university estate improvements.

Edu-Gentrification

But there is also a potential downside to state universities and their effects on urban areas. As state universities improve their campuses, they might inadvertently drive up local rents and property values. The increases could lead to long-time residents being pushed out of their homes as new, wealthier residents move in. It's not just the students who are driving up prices; it's also the professors, staff, and other university personnel. This phenomenon is called "edu-gentrification."

Edu-gentrification is a form of gentrification that happens when universities improve their campuses and drive up local rents and property values. Rent increases can push long-time residents out of their homes as new, wealthier residents move in. Edu-gentrification can have many harmful effects, including increasing income inequality and social disharmony. 

The effects of edu-gentrification are visible in many college towns across the United States. In California, for example, the University of California-Berkeley has been criticized for its role in edu-gentrification. As the university has improved its campus, nearby rents have skyrocketed, pricing out long-time residents.

In Boston, Massachusetts, Northeastern University has been accused of similar activities. As the university has added new buildings and facilities, nearby rents have increased, leading to the displacement of residents.

Edu-gentrification is a serious problem that can negatively affect both cities and universities. Universities and cities need to be aware of the issue and take steps to combat it. There are several ways to combat edu-gentrification. One is for universities to be more mindful of the effects of their expansion on the surrounding community. Another is for cities to provide more affordable housing near universities to keep long-time residents from being priced out.

Conclusion

In addition to the physical differences between universities and their surrounding areas, there are also cultural differences. University students are often seen as being out of touch with the real world, and there is a perception that they are too obsessed with their studies. The lack of student connection can be traced back to the university design, which creates a sense of isolation. Students lack exposure to the same diversity of people and ideas that they would if they lived in a city. This lack of exposure can lead to a lack of perspective and make it difficult for students to relate to the rest of society. What do you think is the most crucial point about state universities and their effects on urban areas? Let us know in the comments! One way to expand this argument would be to look at how different types of architecture can impact student success. For example, does isolation lead to a lack of engagement with the material? Or does a more open and social campus encourage students to get more involved in their education? 

Dr. Mike Testa

Can High-Performing Employees Learn Good Leadership?

Can High-Performing Employees Learn Good Leadership?

In a recent classroom discussion, a student asked whether high-performing technical employees can learn leadership skills? The discussion focused on how high-performing technical employees advance from the employee pool to management. Let's first define what a high-performing employee is.

The Hartford says that a high-performing employee has the following traits: 

1) Attention to quality in their production

2) Continually looking to improve skillsets

3) Self Directed performance

4) Cool under pressure

 So when you have a high-performing employee, management typically notices and selects them for lower-level management positions. But the high-performing employee might be technically working at a high level, but would the employee have enough people management skills? 

What skillsets does a manager need to be effective? Richard Daft states that middle management needs to increase human and conceptual skills because those skills are typically lacking. The lack comes from the fact that these high-performing employees are focused solely on being technical experts. There is little time to develop human and conceptual skill sets. When they elevate to middle management, technical skillsets must give way to human and conceptual skills. However, what has the possibility of happening is the new manager focus so much on new skillsets that their technical skills drop. As new managers rise through the ranks, they become less engaged with their technical skills, lose proficiency, and become isolated. 

View fullsize

Employee skillset ratios after moving into a management position.

To succeed, mid-level managers must keep their technical skills high while bolstering their human and conceptual skills. The graph should look like this:

Managers who lack interpersonal skills can scaffold them later through continuing education. A good example is Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who bolstered his people skills when his natural tendency was to be a technical manager. 

What employee skillset ratios should be when moving into a management position.

How do you gain human and conceptual skills? 

As an employee moves up the management ladder, the ratio of the technical skills human skills, and conceptual skills change. But the ratios should remain close with an overall increase in human and conceptual skills. Managers who want to increase their human skills will work on communication, coaching, teamwork, and building positive relationships with their employees. Managers can learn soft skills through various corporate training and leadership conferences. As the Daft textbook states, companies would rather spend money on training good employees instead of losing them to other companies. So companies have an incentive to provide learning opportunities to eager managers. 

Corporate management training is often the first type offered to new managers. Companies might offer courses once a year or every two to three years. The benefit of a corporate management training system is that training companies can tailor the curriculum to the company's mission and values. A private or university management training system is often inflexible and agnostic due to the variety of students the training might attract. A corporate training curriculum might offer leadership, effective team communication, project management, conflict resolution, effective time management, emotional intelligence, and unconscious bias training. These topics will increase the conceptual and human skills of an unseasoned manager. 

But, how does a manager continue to grow once the training is over? What is the assessment process for that manager, and what does the corporate mentorship program look like? 

Post-training support is where companies fail recently minted managers. The lack of a mentorship program that pairs experienced and non-experienced managers are often the missing pieces to managers' development. The mid-level manager supervisor usually assesses them on departmental or group performance, and the metrics are very much productivity-driven. However, critical evaluation of leadership and team management might take a minor position on the other metrics when it comes time for the yearly review. A mentorship program with senior-level management can help further develop the manager's human and conceptual skillsets based on the company's mission statement. 

Finally, new managers can seek leadership and conceptual skills through a university degree or professional certifications. An MBA (Master of Business Administration) is a traditional way of gaining management skillsets. If the company lacks a formal training program, these programs are sometimes subsidized. Certifications like PMI (Project Management Institute) offer practical coursework on effectively running and managing special projects. However, certificates target specific skillsets and lack the overall picture of how to be an effective manager. 

More importantly, culture is a crucial part of manager development. The company's culture must be supportive and allow for the growth and envelopment of the new manager. Without that culture, the company will have a difficult time with management turnover and burnout. 

https://whatfix.com/blog/corporate-training-programs/

Leadership is a consistently evolving practice, like meditation, baseball, driving, etc. But it requires practice and the correct mindset. Mindset is cultivated by corporate culture and mission. But the drive for improvement must come from the new manager. Without that drive, then no amount of external influence can help the manager succeed. But external factors can influence and cultivate that drive, thus leading to a more rewarding managerial and leadership experience. Look for the people that inspire and nurture the joy of learning.  

Dr. Mike Testa 

The Vroom-Yetton-Jago Decision-Making Model

I recently came across the Vroom-Yetton-Jago decision-making model. The model is a roadmap for making a decision and how much subordinate involvement should be in the decision-making process. Once the problem is defined, then the decision-maker moves through a sequence of questions to:

1.    Quality Requirement (QR): How important is the technical quality of the decision? 

2.    Commitment Requirement (CR): How necessary is a subordinate commitment to the decision? 

3.    Leader's Information (LI): Do you (the leader) have sufficient information to make a high-quality decision on your own? 

4.    Problem Structure (ST): Is the problem well structured (e.g., defined, apparent, organized, lend itself to a solution, time-limited, etc.)? 

5.    Commitment Probability (CP): If you were to decide by yourself, are your subordinates reasonably sure to be committed to the decision? 

6.    Goal Congruence (GC): Do subordinates share the organizational goals of solving the problem? 

7.    Subordinate conflict (CO): Is conflict among subordinates over preferred solutions likely? 

8.    Subordinate information (SI): Do subordinates have sufficient information to make a high-quality decision? 

Vroom-Yetton-Jago model demonstrates that most leaders make decisions under a consult or group decision-making style. Autocratic decisions are made only under specific circumstances. The autocratic two decision has the least number of options. Leaders who make the autocratic decision receive information from group members, but then the leader decides independently. The quality requirement is high, and the commitment required is also high. The leader's information is already high when going into the decision-making process. Finally, the leader can decide when the commitment probability is also high. The model also points to circumstances with low goal congruence and low subordinate conflict where a leader can make an A2 decision. But overall A2 decisions again require specific circumstances.

Autocratic one decisions have limited pathways. For example:

1. When the quality requirements are high, but the commitment required is low, and the level of leader information is also high, this can lead to an A1 decision.

2. When the quality requirement is low but the commitment required is low, this can also lead directly to an A1 decision.

3. When the quality requirement is low, and the commitment required is high, there needs to be a high commitment probability for an A1 decision.

Overall, I think this exercise is helpful as an initial strategy step. Finding a real-life example in my experience is a challenging task as most of the managerial decisions of my superiors use the stakeholder model of decision making.

I see two things wrong with this model, and precisely this example. The first thing is that the model based on this pathway eliminated subordinate information from the decision matrix. If you look at the chart, SI is not even factored in. It would only factor in if the commitment probability were low. However, its subordinate information is a critical part of this decision; hence, if the subordinate leader does not have sufficient information, this model does not have a solution except for the leader to make a decision independently. Secondly, this model does not consider the speed of decisions or the team's dynamics (Mindtools, 2022). Also, how does this model work with a tall vs. flat structure? How does it work with decentralized command? 

I found it interesting that four of the five decision-making styles still require the leader to decide on their own. There are various levels of employee participation in the decision, but ultimately the leader makes the decision. It also shows that leadership does need input from their employees but at varying levels. This model does insulate employees from mundane or noncritical decisional information. Using this model could also reduce the number of meetings and allow employees to have more productivity. But again, this is an exercise. I am not sure how you can implement this in music, production, or broadcast. Yet, I see an opportunity in education for senior leadership to have more shared governance. Each of these steps should include another department or another union to gain valuable input into the decision-making process. Something that is often lacking in education. This model has the potential to show that a significant decision is coming and explain the decision-making process. Using parts of this model might build trust and leadership capital between management and employees.

Dr. Mike Testa

Are Internships Educational or a Ruse for Free Labor Practice?

As coordinator of the music technology program, I often get invitations from employers for students to apply for internships. As much as I try to accommodate these requests, usually, I find that these "employers" are frequently just looking for free labor. While I appreciate how an internship has helped me in the past, I think there are very important delineations in 2022 between internships, economics, and unfair labor practices. 

It is important to acknowledge my position; internships are not free labor. Internships are supposed to be for educational purposes and extension of the classroom. An intern should be at a facility to experience the day-to-day operations of how to do a job. Interns should not be roadies, coffee baristas, servers, and janitors. The state of Massachusetts has outlined very specifically what an intern responsibility should be. An internship is for college credit, with the sole purpose of learning. 

"Workers who are not getting school or academic credit

If an intern is not receiving school credits, then the intern must be paid at least minimum wage unless the intern is a "trainee" under state law. This is a narrow exemption. DLS may determine that someone is a "trainee" excluded from the minimum wage laws if the training:

1. It is similar to that which would be given in an educational environment, even though it includes the actual operation of the employer's facilities.

2. It is for the benefit of the intern.

3. It does not displace regular employees, but the intern works under close supervision of existing staff.

4. It provides the employer with no immediate advantage from the activities of the intern, and on occasion, its operations may actually be impeded.

5. It does not entitle the intern to a job at the conclusion of the training period, and

6. It is based on a mutual understanding between the employer and the intern that the trainee is not entitled to wages for the time spent in training.

"

https://www.mass.gov/service-details/volunteers-and-interns

But, internships are not equitable. The fact is an internship is the student paying money to a college for college credits, but the facility hosting the intern is getting free labor. Labor should be an exchange between a worker and an employer. In an internship, the worker pays a third party, the college. The monetary benefits go to the college specifically, and the employer is a second beneficiary. The loser in this entire transaction is the student. Not only does the student have to take time out of their work schedule, which provides them a higher monetary benefit, but they also have to pay the tuition credits. That is a double negative in terms of fiscal responsibility to the student. We can say that the student gains valuable experience from an internship opportunity, but that's only if the student can't afford the opportunity. If the student has the means to afford to pay for college credit and gives up the part-time income for the experience of an internship, then depending on where the internship takes place, it could be a valuable resume builder. However, in my experience with lower socioeconomic status (SES) students, an internship is a luxury they cannot afford, which brings us to the point of equity. If an internship is required to get into a business sector, then we need to evaluate the business sector. Where are the inequity and injustice? As Pierre Schaeffer might say, there's some reciprocal inherited violence within the system to which there's a reproduction of inequity. 

We have to do better period as educators; we have to protect our student's time and educational investment. We have to be the representatives of our students, not perpetuate the cycle. Just because we as educators had to do internships doesn't mean that our students have to. If an internship is the only way a student can gain experience to get into an industry, we have to reevaluate the industry. That's why organizations such as Women's Audio Mission exist. Organizations like these put checks and balances into the system to try to break the cycle. That's why it's up to us as educators to recognize a cycle's potential to perpetuate itself, and we must break it.

 Dr. Mike Testa