Power and Influence

Today's class on the concepts of power and influence was very eye opening, to me at least. Many of the things we talked about I had never really thought of before, and it was interesting to learn how exactly people or institutions come to gain or use power and influence. To begin, I totally agree with the six sources of power in this country, which used to be family, school, and church, but have now become government, military, and business. I agree that this is where the power exists in society today, as these three things definitely have the largest influences on how we live our daily lives. I was also very interested in the cartoon we watched from Saturday Night Live, about the influence of big business on media outlets. I found that although it was a cartoon, the message it gave was still chilling, as these big companies that own the various media outlets can indeed sway public opinion when they need to, simply because they can control what we read and watch in our spare time. The fact that it was never shown after the original airing reinforces this point, and shows the power these businesses have. The cartoon painted them in an unflattering light, and because they owned the tv station, chose to remove it from airing with any reruns. This is the thought that disturbs me the most, that big businesses have so much influence on public opinions and perceptions, and can simply do what they want with these media resources because they have enough money.

In Class Project

After learning more about the point of the project, I have definitely come to see its worth. Although I was on the National Managers Benevolent League, I can clearly see how others in MRC were manipulated to show how power works. Learning that the small things, like writing names bigger, or omitting first names, are enough to create a false sense of power. Not allowing the lower group to interact with the top group was also a good tactic to assign power to the higher ups, and the structure of MRC as a whole was successful at showing how status creates power. Although the lowest group did the work and had higher numbers of people, because they were told they were the lowest group simply put them in the mindset that the weren't as important as the student assigned to the top group. As a member of the NMBL, we came to realize we held a great deal of power because we had the largest quantity of Goat Bucks. Although we couldn't use them, we knew since we had these that we could use it to our advantage to buy slogans for as low a price as possible. After being utterly confused as to why we were doing this experiment, it was good to finally learn what the point actually was. I also think after gaining all of the information that it was a very successful and entertaining way to learn about how power is distributed within a company.

Monday's Activity

During Monday's activity I was assigned to be part of the National Manager's Benevolent League. We started out with a lump sum of Goat Bucks,  but we couldn't actually use them as bonus. Instead, we had to spend them on slogans, and the cheaper we paid, the higher the commission we received. This is how we earned our bonus. Most of the project involved sitting around waiting for representatives from MRC to buy some slogans from. However, this didn't happen until there was only five minutes of class left, so we ended up being able to buy  many slogans for little cost each. I feel the failure of time management by the members of MRC played into our hands, as the time ticked away people were willing to sell slogans cheap just to get something out of the deal. I don't know exactly what the point of the activity was, and I'm not sure I learned anything new. I am very much looking forward to Monday's class in order to learn what exactly the point of all of this was.

Book Report 4

Book Report 4

            The next section of Moneyball examines how circumstances can force someone into changing their way of life. Michael Lewis chooses to discuss Scott Hatterberg, a talented catcher from the Boston Red Sox. Hatterberg’s throwing shoulder was injured, making him unable to properly throw down to second base in stealing situations. This made him useless as a catcher, but Billy still saw some vale in him. Billy was able to acquire Hatterberg after he was traded from Boston to Colorado and immediately released. Billy knew he wasn’t viable at the catcher’s spot, so he came up with the idea to transition him to first base. Hatterberg and fielding coach Ron Washington weren’t thrilled by this idea, but Billy thought Hatterberg was too good of a hitter to let is injury end his career. Billy chose first base because of the limited throwing, which allowed Hatterberg to stay on the field, and in turn stay in the lineup.

            The transition wasn’t easy, and Hatterberg was slow to learn too field at first base. Hatterberg persisted though, and after each game became more comfortable out at first base. His hitting is what got him his job, and he performed as expected. What no one expected, however, was for Hatterberg to become a solid fielding first baseman. Hatterberg turned out to be a great pick up for Bill, getting on base often and turning into a reliable fielder day in and day out.

The ninth chapter of Moneyball focuses on how Billy Beane was so successful at creating a new team throughout the season through ingenious trading tactics. Billy knew that as the season went on and teams fell out of contention, they had one desire, to cut costs for the rest of the season. Billy used this knowledge to manipulate trades for players he would be unable to acquire at the beginning of the season. Michael Lewis points out that because of Billy’s great trading prowess, the Oakland Athletics have the best record of any team over a four year period after the midseason all-star break.  

Lewis then goes into detail about Billy’s handling of attempting to acquire Ricardo Rincon, a relief pitcher. Billy knows he doesn’t have the highest offer for him, so he tried instead to unload a cheap player to his competition, the San Francisco Giants. By giving them a lesser pitcher, Billy is creating more money to spend, and lessening the Giants’ need for another pitcher.  Billy also unloads an unneeded prospect to the New York Mets for an unimportant prospect, but also the cash needed to finish the Rincon deal.  After all of his calls and marketing, Billy closed the deal and picked up the player he wanted, without any actual cash being spent by the Oakland front office.

            The rest of the chapter further plays out the genius of Billy Beane, making quick trades through multiple teams to pick up players he couldn’t normally afford and unload prospects that didn’t immediately impact his team. This strategy led to a new Oakland team after every all-star break. Although the lack of money in Oakland resulted in them only getting these new players for often a single year, Billy would simply repeated his process the next year to fill any holes on the field. By knowing the needs of other teams, and being a brash negotiator, Billy was able to manipulate his way into picking up talented players for little to no cost.

            This section of the book truly shows the innovative side and genius of Billy Beane. He knew he had limited resources, but he also knew how to counter this and make the most of what he had. He had to be cunning and sneaky in order to work deals players he shouldn’t have been able to afford. Billy was great at this aspect of managing, and this helped to create a winning team year after year for far less a cost than the rich team sin New York or Boston. Through Billy’s genius, the Oakland Athletics were yearly contenders, something most teams with his budget couldn’t dream of becoming.

(Section 4, Chapters Eight and Nine, Pages 162 - 216)

Leadership Philosophies

I was really interested in the three leadership archetypes discussed in class today. While I would have to say I think the Platonic method is the best, I also realize it is pretty  much impossible to  implement. I don't think it can happen due to the inherent selfishness of people, so it would be impossible to find a group of people willing to give everything up in order to work and think for the good of the group as a whole. It sounds like a great idea, but it would never work if attempted. So I guess in terms of actual possibilities, I think the Lincolnian method is the best way to lead. This method puts the people who gave you your power as your main responsibility, and you are nothing more than an agent. I agree with this, because it will help to produce a progress driven leader, one whom would put all self interests aside, and work to create the best outcomes for the job he has. You can have personal interests, but they should never sway your decision making if they don't fall in line with your work goals. While this may seem cold and distant, in terms of the business world I think this is the best way to govern your actions and make the best decisions possible.

Motivation Video

The video we watched about the employee complaints was very entertaining and showed a good point. While the manager did technically solve the problem, the video clearly showed how this was a terrible method of dealing with issues. While the video was meant to be entertaining, it also clearly showed that simply eliminating complaints doesn’t make happy employees. You must actually deal with valid complaints in order to keep a happy and motivated workplace. The employees in the video were influenced by fear of losing their jobs, which just creates worried and stressed workers, and will still end up hurting in the long run.

Hierarchy of Needs

I can see how Maslow’s hierarchy of needs makes sense at first glance, and it has its merits, but after studying it for a while it becomes apparent that it has its flaws. The example in class explained this perfectly, physiological needs are listed as most important, but in reality almost all people would never think of selling their own children for food. The needs are listed in a logical order, but clearly certain things outrank things in the physiological and safety groups. The self actualization group is a very interesting thought.  While it says that you must strive to be the best that you can be in order to meet growth needs, I also think there are clear examples of people who did not live up to their potential but live happy lives. So while the theory has its merits, it also has its flaws.