From Good to Great #3

It was a strange read this past week... The largest point of the chapter focused on the "hedgehog concept". Briefly put, it is the idea that a company can only do great if it does one thing amazingly and not couple things well. As a concept, I can see and agree with it perfectly fine. It makes sense. If I am a prodigy in math, shouldn't I just turn away from all the humanities and focus only on math? The problem I had with this theory/ concept was that the analogy also accidentally backfired. Even if I was a math prodigy, my GPA, SAT scores, resume etc. are all impacted by the other things: Language, History, English etc. So although I am focusing on math, my success is also correlated with the other things I do. The whole reading seemed like more of an idealistic way of thinking. Even our storefront project, where we have video games and computers, needs other things we aren't entirely passionate about (ie. chips, cards, drinks) but we still need it to succeed.
The reading so far makes me wonder if the "good to great" concept is merely just a very idealistic way of looking into things, or rather unrealistic? So far when I use the book's needs for success and apply it to the business'es I know and the storefront project, it is all very unrealistic in terms of trying to reach that standard the book gives us for greatness.

review of the week #3

The week has gone pretty well for our team. We have been doing really well as a group in terms of working together on the new idea of having a gaming/ hobby store. The workload was shared evenly and there was a lot more visible motivation to go through with ideas as more and more group members were thinking of ideas on their own. There was a lot of room for solo inspiration which I thought really bumped up our focus and devotion. But more into the practical side, our group was able to finally break down exactly what we wanted in our inventory and we had a great plan to make profit. We thought up the multiple stages of membership, along with strategizing hours so we have efficiency over quantity in terms of times.
 We also gained some headway on our $200 project. To be honest, Gavin and I were less than ecstatic about the t-shirt idea, but Dan and Dylan seemed to know what they were doing and pulled together a decent argument and plan. They told us about the people they knew and contacted for stencils, along with the pricing of  fabric paint for us to use on the actual t-shirts. I think this project looked pretty bad in the beginning but they showed us pretty convincingly that not only could it be done, it could amass profit. I'm still a bit hesitant on the idea to be frank, but I am being receptive now that I have seen the work and planning being put into it.

The 2nd part of "From Good to Great"...

 The chapter I read concerned and tackled the idea of a leadership team. Which I found that I agreed with but also a tad bit confusing. A leadership team is exactly what it sounds like. A team full of leaders that runs a business. However throughout this section of the book, Mr. Collins mentions the criteria for which these teams should be formed through; they all must be Level 5 leaders (see previous blog).
 The reason why I was confused came down to his statement and my, or our company's, situation. The formulation of a leadership team was supposedly the first thing to do before having any type of strategy going forth. But to find a Level 5 leader, nonetheless a group of Level 5 leaders without a plan? How? He does not mention the means to do that. When thinking about this in an entrepreneurial perspective, one realizes that all start ups are founded by one or a group of people. Many times inexperienced. To expect them all to be a Level 5 leader is hard to ask for. Hiring a Level 5 leader is out of question since it is a start up without, according to the statement in the chapter, a plan.

School reflection 12/14/15

 A lot of things happened this past week. We decided to scrap the idea of a Brookline Souvenir Shop in favor of a gaming store. I felt a bit irritated to be honest, as I thought this idea, while good, was a bit unoriginal and plain. However I realized at this point feasibility was more important than artsy so I digress.
 I thought this time around the group was a bit more engaged. There was an air of nostalgia towards the store as we had to dig into our middle school selves to find what we had liked back then. We then created our store's inventory and equipment through that knowledge.
 To be honest, there isn't much to talk about this week. The scrapping of our old ideas and the coming of the new. The buying of plain shirts and painting them in a stylish manner (although I do feel lost on this matter as my teammates did not communicate their intentions). We made major steps in the right direction, however the results and events were not there so I have little to say about the week.

Quite interesting... The studies done to "prove" or rather somewhat substantiate a business' success directly correlates with the projects of our class. The results were revolved around not technology, mergers, nor even the switch in management. Apparently the results all pointed towards the one word "discipline". Do I agree? Most definitely so. I have often wondered why at certain times projects go awry. Effort plays an integral role in these projects of ours, but more often than not not the major problem. It was when I read that word "discipline" I realized that the defining factor of any project we have done revolved around that word. I reflect now on the times where the teachers and adults we worked with gave us definitive roles; the times where our projects ran smoothly. The minds and ideas of the students are not questioned, I guess in this class, it is what we do to discipline ourselves to set our minds to the task and also organize the plans of the future.
There also came the idea of "Level 5 Leadership." Reading about how this "level 5 leader" led to success made me take an inward glance at myself. The descriptions of a level 5 leader making those do or die decisions through the normal and casual routine of leadership made me a bit content. I thought for sure that sounded like me, though the do or die decisions haven't come up that much, I thought I remained fairly consistent. However the mention that one must also be very humble and have little to no gain had me taken aback... No personal gain? Is that possible for a man (not yet) in the business world? Is it not the golden goal for everyone in a business to be as successful as possible? Although I agree with the fact that one man should not run off with the money and should live and die with his company, the very fact that a part of a definition of a great leader meant no personal gain astounds me... Quite an interesting read so far; many times I feel like I'm looking at a clown mirror, changing my appearance in slights for a greater me.