I thoroughly enjoyed the first section of this assigned reading. The reason being as the title states it gave me a glimmer of hope that all things are possible and that one is able to get through their darkest days and after doing so there is light at the end of the tunnel. The article begins by discussing how the author was attending a conference in which one of the audience members stated that one person is not enough to evoke positive change in the world. The author responds by describing her medical condition called Perilymph Fistula which a disease that causes temporary paralysis. She goes on to give personal anecdotes to how we do have enough power as individuals to evoke change. She gives the example with the turtles being stuck in the railway tracks and how she had enough power to save their lives. She also dives into the fact that her disability has opened her eyes to how miraculous it is to be able to simply walk across a room and within each of us we have the power to change the world for the better. As she discusses each major historical figure that brought about major change did small acts of good and then one major act propelled them to fame.

In a time where our world is being crippled by a pandemic, it is difficult to see the light at the end of the tunnel. Many people feel stuck in our homes and feel hopeless in the sense that we are disconnected from our family, friends, and loved ones. Due to this many people are not practicing social distancing properly which is increasing the spread. Many people adopt the mindset it’s just me and even if I do have it, it will only affect a small number of people when that is not the case. In addition, in a time like this people feel as though they are too insignificant to make a change with their donation. As a collective group if we adhere to the CDC’s rules, donate, and practice social distancing we can combat this disease.

https://youtu.be/sW_PN3BDa0A 

The Surprising Truth in How to Be a Great Leader

In this Ted Talk, the speaker focuses on numerous leadership attributes that individuals should practice in order to be influential, and successful. She also focuses on numerous traits that leaders ought to try to suppress as to improve the opinions of their followers on their leadership. The main characteristic this speaker recommends for successful leadership is the ability to coach those one leads to achieve their goals. This is very different from what one’s perception of leading usually is.

The tactic of coaching-focused leadership works in contrast to the act of giving advice, or instructing in any way. When individuals offer advice when anyone comes to them explaining a problem, they are likely to deter the effective production of those they lead. The speaker explains the psychology behind the “yeah, but…” response that we are all too familiar with. Though it seems obvious that when people have problems, we can help them but offering what we think is the best solution to their problem, yet problem solving is more complicated than this. People are not great at getting across their true concerns when they attempt to express them. Individuals are often well aware of the solutions others offer them, and simply do not pursue them due to other emotional responses to them. Another common tactic that is far less useful than people think is “motivational micromanagement.” This is the art of making suggestions or asking questions that have a clear goal in mind of guiding individuals towards the questioners desired act. This generally does the opposite of its perceived goal. The key to successful leadership is truly leading individuals to their own success. Providing them with useful resources, telling them of examples of how others dealt with similar issues, and generally allowing people to fight their own battles will always lead to maximize production

In the context of my own leadership experiences, and just in daily life, this made a lot of sense to me. For starters, I certainly have negative responses to motivational micromanagement, as it generally leads me to even work against my own interests sometimes. It is incredibly useful for leaders to make an effort towards making those they lead feel like they are on the same theoretical team. Offering advice can provide a connotation that individuals are ignorant if they don’t follow the instructions you provide. By understanding the emotions, as well as the reasons causing people’s problems, and providing tools for them to deal with their problems themselves, leaders can be effective.

This Tedtalk touched really strongly on the one of last readings we did, and how we actually can have a really large impact. In the video he talks about how we all have inspiring moments which really impact and help others, but we often don’t realize it or remember because we didn’t view it the same way. Our impact on others and the power we hold is often far more than we initially realize, and we find that terrifying.

Another thing this video touched on that I hadn’t really thought of before is how most people are actually scared of the idea that we hold that much power. It’s a terrifying thought, so we try to ignore it. Which the speaker cites as one of the reasons people often don’t remember or realize how important what they did was. We see leadership as something we need to work for and earn, and to use the title of leader without doing so is, as Daniel Goleman puts it, arrogant. But as he also says, this ignores the huge impacts we can have, and does us a great disservice.

This TED talk was given by Derek Sivers and is called “How to Start a Movement.”  I thought it was really interesting because he used a funny video of a man dancing which turned into a crowd dancing as his example of a movement, but the lessons that he derived from it still hold true.  First, he discusses how leaders start out with only one follower, and when they are starting out, its important to treat the small number of followers as equals because the cause that you are fighting for is more important than your role as a leader because it is something that is bigger than you.  This was my favorite message from the video because I think it is a really important part of leadership.  Leadership doesn’t just mean being in charge of others.  It’s about leading them in the fight for the cause that you are all passionate about.

He also made an interesting point about the first follower.  Sivers commented about how the very first follower was a leader of his own because he showed others that it was okay to follow and join in.  If the first follower hadn’t chosen to join in, then the crowd would not have formed because people wouldn’t have been following anyone to join in.  As followers, we can act as small leaders, so it is important to be an active and public follower for the causes that we care about.  This also reminded me about one of our most recent readings about how we can be leaders even when we don’t realize it because we have so much more impact than we give ourselves credit for.

I’ve attached a ted talk called “Everyday Leadership.”  Drew Dudley starts off by talking about how not enough people feel comfortable calling themselves leaders because we as a society we have started celebrating really great things that only a few people can accomplish and fail to acknowledge and celebrate.  This reminded me of one of our most recent readings and how we have a much larger impact than we give ourselves credit for, sometimes.  He tells a story about a girl who was nervous about going to college and almost didn’t go because she was so nervous, but he was advertising for a student group he worked with and came over to her and her parents and joked with them and she immediately felt more comfortable and decided to stay.  Dudley comments about how he doesn’t remember this moment at all, but it was so important to this girl, that she found him before he graduated and thanked him for what he did.  Dudley had also been joking with the boy standing in line behind the girl and they ended up dating all four years of college and getting married due to how they met each other.

For Dudley, this moment was so small and normal that he didn’t even remember it, but for this girl, it meant so much more.  This shows how our smaller actions can have much larger ramifications than we expect them too and that we should take that extra moment to do a small act of kindness because it can go so much farther for the other person than we realize.  Dudley uses this example to show how leaders don’t always have to be doing these big monumental things that we tend to think they do.  Leaders can be normal people who impact other people’s lives, and it is something everyone can do.

This TED talk by Kyle Eschen, entitled “The art of cognitive blindspots,” explores the idea of cognitive vulnerabilities. He exploits human psychology through magic to illustrate how humans can have blindspots of perception and awareness, known as inattentional blindness. He uses a variation on the classic “cup and ball” trick to show how people can look directly at something and completely miss the important parts. At the end of the video, after he pulls off several tricks, he explains how magic is really just about understanding these blindspots and exploiting them. Specifically, he notes that the blindspots are a lot bigger than we would expect. This relates to our discussion of mindbugs earlier in the semester. Once we understand that we have these potential gaps of knowledge, we can address them, but it is so hard to realize that we have them in the first place.

https://www.tedxvienna.at/watch/the-art-of-cognitive-blindspots-kyle-eschen-tedxvienna/

I watched a TED talk by speaker Simon Sinek called, “How great leaders inspire action.” I must say, this talk was actually very quite interesting. So he presented a model called the “Golden Circle Model” for how leaders inspire action. And so this model has three separate circles organized by WHY, HOW, and WHAT and apparently those three components sorts out how any organization or any person function at its highest potential. Also, according to him this model is the pattern that all leaders and organizations follow; WHAT they want to do, most know HOW they aim to do it but few are don’t know the WHY they want to do what they do. He explains this by giving an example and using Martin Luther King. He says that what Dr. Martin Luther King believed was that there were two types of laws in this world: those that were made by a higher authority, and those that were made by men. So MLK had to constantly speak about what he believed in until it resonated with the others and that is how he was able to get thousands of people to come here him speak because they could link themselves with what he believed in.

So basically it is by inspiring others that leaders are able to their followers to take action and that this the fine line between leaders and those who lead; leaders are those who have an authoritative status while those who lead inspire. So we tend to follow a leader not because we have to, but because we want to. So to be able to inspire those who lead we need to figure our WHY.

I watched Chimamanda Nggozi Adiche’s TED talk entitled “The Danger of a Single Story.” This talk fit really well with our discussion of narratives and storytelling this semester. She warns of using a single story and applying it to all people, places, or things of the same type. This is actually a logical fallacy, called the fallacy of composition. I found myself trying to think of times that I succumbed to a single story. This mostly happens when I meet people from different cultures and backgrounds, and let my limited knowledge, or single story, affect how I see and treat them. I think this TED talk can help people be more aware that we have implicit biases and work to correct them. It also speaks to the importance of getting knowledge from a diverse set of sources, and being willing to tell your own story.

This Ted Talk by David Rothkopf, entitled “How fear drives American politics,” was primarily about the inability to generate proportional policy responses in government. He starts off using 9/11 as an example of fear driving policy. He argues that a strong response was necessary, however the changes to our defense system were disproportionate and did not have the intended effects. Rothkopf says that the dysfunction in Washington is more dangerous than terrorism. He acknowledges that sometimes fear can produce constructive responses but that has not been the case for a long time. In today’s world, the largest obstacle to democracy is technology, he seems to believe. I thought he made some good points, for example the deterrence of policy makers to create bold ideas because public attack on social media can be so severe that it threatens reelection. There is an us versus them mentality that is amplified with technology, and this can certainly be threatening.

I thought watching this Ted Talk was rather stressful. A lot of what he was saying made sense, and I can definitely see the ways that the government has failed to adjust to technological advances. There is a great deal of fear and power held in the internet, and it is important that they respond proportionally. However, I wish he had gone a bit more into a solution. I was left with the sense that the government is not working effectively but less of an idea of how to fix it. Nonetheless, Rothkopf highlighted a lot of key problems so I am happy I watched it.

I do see a large connection to the current situation of the pandemic. It makes me especially nervous that the government will make a mistake in their response that we will suffer from for years to come. On a hopeful note, I think there may be an important opportunity for change on the other side of this crisis. So many inequalities have been brought to light that it will be (hopefully) impossible for policy makers to ignore, and that successful changes will be enacted.

https://youtu.be/UUnRKf2CemA 

Great Leaders Do What Drug Addicts Do

For my first event post, I watched a Ted Talk titled “Great Leaders Do What Drug Addicts Do.” In this talk, the speaker explains how his past of battling addiction equipped him with special leadership attributes that directly led to his success. He explains how his story is not one of stopping addiction, and then becoming successful, but is instead one of how he became successful because he was an addict. Within a week, this speaker went from fearing not reaching the age of thirty, to deciding to go entirely clean, and pursue change. His first step in doing so was seeking help, and eventually being assigned a sponsor. The speaker explains how it is precisely what his sponsor told him to do to get over his addictions that he claims he did to become successful.

His sponsors’ instructions were simple; to be authentic, commit to your goals, and do uncomfortable work. To heal through addiction, the speaker had to be honest with himself and others about how things were, never lose sight of the task at hand, and be prepared to go through difficulties. As he was successful, the speaker kept these three principles with him when going into the business world, where he started one of the first online programs for connecting with doctors. By never lying about his true strengths and weaknesses, doing uncomfortable work such as telling clients of his mistakes, and keeping sight of his goals, this man was able to become a millionaire. 

This ted talk was truly interesting, and when listening I tried to think of other examples of where this method has been successful. Authenticity is certainly viewed as an asset, yet it is a shame it is not seen as more of a necessity. We associate politicians with being liars, and see this as negative, yet we do not seek out change. If more leaders were authentic, the world would benefit, but I am not certain authenticity always springs individuals into success. Either way, I hope to adopt many of these principles going forward, and found this Ted talk to be interesting and compelling.