Group presentations

Last Fridays class was a very good experience for both audience and presentors. On the informative side, I was very pleased to learn alot of valuable information about global issues happening today. The groups whose focus was on water supply was very detailed and shared alot of interesting facts. I knew about the shortage but I never understood fully why,and their explanation of contamination and allocation helped to give me a better idea. The other group who presented upon the subject of urban development also did a very nice job with their organization and delivery. They're knowledge about the top nations in the world using greenroofing compared to that of the United States tells me that there is a huge international market in this industry,and that should be appealing to all students who desire a career and want to help keep our communities healthy at the same time. My groups presenatation about food scarcity was an overall success. I believe we touched upon all the points we wanted to get across to our audience. Our organization and preparation could have been better with more practice of course, but none the less we all came together and made it work.
The other part i liked about this class period was the evaluations we got to conduct. Besides the fact that i was able to get constructive criticism about my presentation skills as well as the content of my presentation, I was able to analyze and learn from other people. Whether it was a positive or negative critique, it was very beneficial for me because I am able to apply that to my next presentation. Things such as body language and the use of filler words "like" and umm" are somethings we all must conquer in order to be great presentors as well as leaders. Learning from my mistakes is a great way for me to improve myself in various aspects of my life, and I'm sure others feel the same way.

Aracruz

1) After the Aracruz simulation I learned that in order to be an effective global leader you must be open minded you must be able to present your ideas and/or suggestions well, and you must be able to take criticism and use it in a way that would work to your benefit. Being from the Aracruz company was quite challening because it felt as if everyone was trying to attack us and make our company look bad one way or another. Many people from different groups would bring up their suggustions but for some reason their solutions always hinted towards asking for more money or land from our Aracruz company.

2) I think that our stakeholder dialogue started off a little slow because as a group we were still trying to understand one another and out different situations. However, as time went on we were able to develop more of an understanding between the differnt groups of people and inch towards a possible solution which was to get the government to purchase land surrounding the Aracruz mills and plantations and give that land to the native people and placing a tax on the land which would satisfy everyones' needs.

3) I think that in order for my group to have been more effective that we should read our groupd task and description more carefully to the point where the idea was crystal clear to every group member.

GCI

1) I feel that my scores were very valid because there was alot of detailed questions and I was able to read and answer all questions carefully. I liked how each result showed an explanation as to how I was ranked by demonstrating my level of effectiveness.

2) After taking the GCI test I learned that I am not ready to be a global leader just yet, for there are alot of noncompatible results that came back. Also alot of my scores were ranked really low as well as my overall score was right in the middle; meaning my social disirability had no impact what so ever.

3) The only six I scored on my GCI test was in the Relationship Management category under Emotional Sensitivity. I'm not exactly sure what this mean but I'm guessing it is to show that I am understandable and very openminded when is comes to people and their emotions. I always try to stay optomistic in every situation and I really like being there for other when my help is needed. I ranked the lowest in the Perception Management section and the Self-Management section. Specifically in the Nonjudgmentalness category, the Cosmopolitanism category, the Emotional Resilience category, the Non-Stress Tendency category, and the Stress Management cateory.

4) Personally, I would like to try to develop anything below a four; however, realistically I would have to focus on one thing at a time. I would like to first focus on fixing all the ones that I got on my chart then work from there.

Globesmart

1) My Globesmart scores are not as valid as I expected. According to my results I am more interedependent then independent. I would have to disagree with this because I feel that I am more independent, for I usually like to make my own decisions in most situations. Results also show that I am indirect, I have restraints, and I like to think more long-term as opposed to short-term. Although some of my results came back in valid about four out of five were valid.

2) I think that my grandparents would have had a profile very similar to mine. I was raised by my grandma and my parents in a very traditional Filipino household so their morals and values were instilled in me starting at a very young age. Therefore, our profiles would be very similar and very close to cultural values.

3) Suprisingly I am not considered a typical member of my culture according to Globesmart. The Philippines stays more towards the right side of the scale and my results show that I am more back and forth on the scale.

CPQ

I feel my scores are pretty accurate. I consider myself for the most part having a moderate personality or view point. Most of my scores were pretty close to the group average. This is probably do to the fact that we are all around the same age,share many of the same experience as students at SJSU and all live in the bay area. I scored lower then the class average and country average on “basic nature of people”. When interacting with people from other cultures I need to be aware of that so I don’t let my biases get in the way when engaging with them. I scored the highest on “harmany”and “past” and I feel this is very accurate to my personality. Harmony is essential for any relationship whether it be business relationsships, your neighbors, coworker’s significant other etc I try to keep harmony in all relationships when possible and only break that harmony if I strongly feel something isn’t working or it’s wrong. In many cases I’ll choose to make sacrifices in order to maintain that harmony. Its s very important though to know when to push back so that people don’t take advantage of your desire to maintain harmony. I also scored high in “past” I strongly feel that we must study the past and learn from it so that we don’t make the same mistakes. History often repeats it’s self.

Aracruz:

1)What did I learn from the Simulation?

When preparing for this presentation as a FUNAI member  I made the assumption that we were the only organization supporting the Indians and I assumed that FUNAI would have to persuade other Government parties to pass laws to protect the Indians. Because of this assumption many of my arguments and demands were very liberal initially. When entering the heterogeneous group I realized I had to be more conservative in order to portray the government more accurately. I learned the importance of not making assumptions b/c they many times lead to inaccuracies. I also feel that I learned to have better listening skills as well as to be more open minded. I really liked this simulation b/c in away it forced us to compromise with one another to gain a resolution that satisfied all members needs.

2) what helped our group be effective was?

All members where respectful to everyone points of views and end goals. I feel we had a good mix of personalities in our group. The members with extraverted personalities would engage with the more introverted members to ensure all voice were heard. I feel we came up with a good conclusion once we where able to prioritize the Indians and Aracruz’s needs.

3) What ways was your group ineffective?

Our group was ineffective towards the beginning of the exercise as many members were some what stand offish. I believe this was do to the fact  that many of us were prepared to debate and when changing gears we were worried about coming off as confrontational. Once we got the 5min call to turn in the 1^st section everyone in the group realized that we weren’t being productive and snapped into gear. After that 5min warning I believe the group did very well in engaging with one another. We just got off to a slow start.

GLOBESMART

1. Do your GLOBESMART scores seem valid? Why?
Yes they seem valid because the points where I am at either end of the lines are accurate. For instance, interdependent is correct because I like to make sure everyone’s opinion is included and everyone agrees with the end result. Another is Egalitarianism because at work, I am able to direct myself as in what projects I need to complete with minimal supervision.

2. Do you think your grandparents (or oldest living generation of relatives if you didn't know your grandparents) have the same profile as you do? Why?
No because I have grown up in the US since 3 months old. I believe this has played a major role in the difference between my grandparents profile and my profile.

3. Are you a typical member of your culture? (Compare your results with the profile for your country.)
I believe I am not, however, I am unable to verify that since my country (Nicaragua) was not listed in the list of countries.

GCI

1. Do your scores seem valid? Why?
My scores seem valid because 95% of the results describe me well. For instance, Emotional Sensitivity is definitely correct, I scored a 6. I like to think of myself as highly capable of understanding the feelings and concerns of others and respond with empathy to their circumstances. Also the Non-Stress Tendency and Stress Management I scored a 1 for both dimensions. This is true because I tend to stress very easily and I find it difficult to distress.

2. What is the most significant lesson you learned from this instrument?
I learned that I need work on making fewer assumptions and not being judgmental.

3. What are your major strengths and weaknesses according to this instrument?
My strengths are Relationship Management, Emotional Sensitivity, Optimism, Interest Flexibility, and Inquisitiveness. My weaknesses are Perception Management, Nonjudgmentalness, Tolerance of Ambiguity, Category Inclusiveness, Non-Stress Tendency, and Stress Management.

4. Which dimension should you try to develop more or to leverage to be more effective at work or school?
Nonjudgmentalness is a dimension I should try to develop more for work. In regard to school, I should try to work on Non-Stress Tendency.

Aracruz's Discussion

1. What did you learn from this stimulation?
- First off, I learn how to be an active listener. Not only did I have to express my view point clearly, but also I had to understand others’. Just like professor Joy explained, the situation was not a debate. Rather, it was a discussion to reach a feasible solution for all: indigenous people, government and community representatives, international groups, and Aracruz employees. Obviously, with different backgrounds and multiple interests at stake, it was hard to find practicable solutions, so I felt that learning the similarities and differences among participants were keys. This helped us to find a common ground and elaborate from there. However, the role of differences between parties played as other values added to the solution if we could agree upon. In this kind of discussion, I learned that it’d be best to understand others’ values and interests and find similarities among the parties. From that, finding a possible solution for involved parties might be achieved.

2. What went well in your group and stakeholder dialogue?
- My first impression was that other parties were really interested in what I, a representative of indigenous people, had to say. I only presented a partial of landless family, but my interest might play as an essential role in the discussion. Just like Aracruz stated in our discussion, if landless families were happy with the solutions, other parties would also be satisfied.

3. How could your group have been more effective?
- My group would be even more effective if there are a little more information on the landless families and how many members were to have in each tribe. Further, I felt that I didn’t have relevant information to talk to the Aracruz’s employees about how much hectare one family needs. Another useful piece of information might be how indigenous people value the land and in what way that they would like to ask for the land. To us, these are critical information, and it would possibly help to generate feasible solutions.

The Queen's Garden

I felt award playing a role of a submissive man in the country X. however, it was not hard for me to play such role as it illustrated somewhat my personality. I was sure giving those Americans hard time to figuring out how to get the permission for the Queen’s garden. It was because of not making eyes contact since Americans evaluated the content of a conversation through people’s eyes. Further, my limit of English words hindered further my communication. From my perspective, a better approach was to ask about the country X’s culture and how people interact with one another. Then, it would be best to ask what the role of men and women in the society, for it’s different between community. From there, we’d use feasible approach for both side without causing any uncomfortable feelings between parties.

Alphan & Betan - Cultural Collision

The stimulation was really good. I could see how I reacted to alpha culture, a different culture with my own, beta. Indeed, I used mostly evaluation to look at alpha culture. When I first arrived at their land, my first impression was that they were really untrustworthy, weird and disrespectful. This interpretation is wrong in several ways.

First, I perceived their actions of playing cards as gambling. This was wrong to interpret as such since I used my own cultural value and assumed that they were untrustworthy due to gambling. Second, alphans seem to overly enjoy each other company by hugging, talking and smiling. Although this should be described as description, I interpreted the acts as weirdness from betan’s view point. Indeed, this was wrong as well because I jumped to conclusion prior to understand what it really meant to be alphan. Third, unaware of the situation, I got my cards taken without my permission. Rather than trying to understanding the reason behind it, I evaluated such behavior as disrespect toward me. This evaluation was wrong in many ways. In fact, I was rude enough to jump in their game without even asking their permission. Then I judged their act as disrespectful instead of judging whether my act was reasonable and understandable. Another mistake was that I did not at all try to make descriptions of what alphans were doing but applied my own reasons and cultures value upon them.

There is one important lesson I learned from the stimulation. It is always best to create descriptions about other cultures, not interpretation or evaluation. After clear descriptions established, I should observe and try to understand the context meaning driving such behaviors.

Globesmart Self-Assessment

This assessment is a good one for me. I could see clearly how much I have changed since I tried to understand and assimilate myself to the US cultures. Obviously, I have become highly interdependent. For this trait, I used to be around the middle between the independent and interdependent. One of the reasons is that my family interacts with one another even more in the US. Thus, I became more interdependent. Another noticeable value is my long-term perspective. My long-term increases dramatically, compared to my native born culture and the US. I don’t know whether this is good or bad, but I feel that I set up my goals all in long term perspective and achieve short term goals along the way. The other four elements, status, restraint, indirect, relationship, change greatly compared to my own culture.

First, my tolerance for risk drifted further from Vietnamese. Right now, I feel that I’m willing to take more risk to achieve my goals rather than wait for fortunate things happen and take initiation. Another thing is that I become more and more direct in giving my ideas. Often, I limit using circular communication toward people that are not from my culture. However, I still try to save others’ face when it comes to confrontation. The next thing I notice is that I focus less on relationship now and more on task. It’s true since my schedule everyday is going to school and finishing my readings and assignments. The environment is much different here and harder to build a relationship even at a friend level since everyone seems too different. For me, the task is much easier to deal with. The last important thing is that I value equality more, although not as much as an American does. This might also be the influence from the US cultures.

Culture Perspective Questionnaire

I feel that this test illustrate my very close to my Vietnamese cultures, although not all of it. Some of my areas are significantly different with my birth country. This is mainly due to influence of the US cultures. Honestly, I changed a lot since I immigrated here. I observed and assimilated any positive culture traits that would help me not only to merge into this country but also contribute to my personal growth. I realize that many of my negative or close minded ideas from my traditional culture are replaced by positive ones from a variety of culture, or that is how I see it. I don’t know whether doing so is good or bad in term of my self-identity. Still, my core values are unchanged, such as harmony, being and past values.

Global Competencies Inventory (GCI)

My Global Competencies Inventory (GCI) gave me inside to my perception, relationship and self-management. I understand my strengths and weaknesses for specific area that I need to improve.

First off, I notice that my perception management is very low, but the main focus in this area for me is my tolerance of ambiguity. I feel that this might be my culture of high uncertainty avoidance. I have some hard time keeping up with any ambiguous ideas in a conversation. In fact, I usually space out to think or evaluate such ideas. A better approach for me to overcome this is to be exposed more in this area. A practical way is to participate in business discussion, or watch business videos. Additionally, the other two areas that I also need to focus on is cosmopolitanism and inclusiveness. In other words, my curiosity in different cultures and acceptance of differences are extremely low. I think a better way to improve this is gradually observe my classmates and friends since I live in the US, a nation with multinational background immigrants.

The main focus for me on relationship management is to improve my relationship interest. I believe this can also be accomplished through conversation with friends. From there, interests can be easily built if there is chemical between parties.

For my self-management, I score well in different area except for self-identity, my ability to maintain own values and beliefs while still being accepting of those who are different. This might be accomplished through prior method that I have described: get exposed to different cultures but still keep my culture.

I wonder whether my ways are effective in improving these areas.

Aracruz Simulation

What did you learn from this simulation?
I learned how to be respectful with people that have different opinions. We did not argue, fight or got aggressive. We respected others opinions and ideas. We did not interrupt when someone else was talking and there were pauses after each one talked to keep the meeting calm. Everyone had the opportunity to share his or her idea and everyone else listened with respect.

What went well in your group re-stakeholder dialogue?
We listened carefully to each idea and then tried to make up some solutions. At the end the only effective solution was that the Government should buy some of the Aracruz terrain and surrounding terrain and give it for free to the indians. Then the indiands could work for Aracruz, therefore they ought to pay taxes to the Government.

How could your group have been more effective?
Probably at the beginning we were to shy and did not express our ideas firmly and clearly. But in general we did it very good. We ended up with a solution and everyone seemed to be happy.

Aracruz Simulation

What did you lean from the simulation?

Being part of the "community" it was more difficult to get the real story from each party. After watching the presentations, I had a much better understanding of each party's values and their approach to the problem at hand. It was a first time that I got to participate in a real world situation and figure out a bottom line solution that would satisfy all parties. That was much easier said then done.

What went well in your group and stakeholder dialogue?
Everyone was very respectful to each other and everyone was eager to hear the other person's thoughts and values. Everyone participated and contributed their ideas and even though we kept hitting a conflict, we kept going to figure out a better compromise.

How could your group have been more effective?
The shyness factor was a bit of an issue in the very beginning and everyone was a little too respectful to the point that we couldn't figure out what was the true values and intentions of each party. But in the end as we got more comfortable everyone clearly voice their thoughts on the situation.

Aracruz Simulation

What did you learn from the simulation?

I learned a lot from this simulation, but the most important experience I learned was stakeholder dialogue. It was very interesting learning how to represent a specific group and listen to different goals and ideas of other representatives of stakeholders. During the stakeholder dialogue I represented the FUNAI so I had to make sure I protected the rights and culture of the indigenous community. The simulation was about coming up with a solution that would benefit everyone. I learned how to listen to other stakeholders ideas and point of views. The simulation was very fun because it gives an idea and experience of the real world in international dialogue when people from other groups have different opinions, goals, or point of views.

What went well in your group and stakeholder dialogue?

During the stakeholder dialogue everything went well because all the stakeholders worked together for a solution. Everyone listened carefully to each others ideas and interests. There were few differences at first but through our dialogue and conversation all stakeholders agreed to a solution that would benefit all sides. Also, in my group everything went well because all team members contributed on the activity and our presentation.

How would your group have been more effective?

I think we all did a great job because at the end we all agreed to a solution. Everyone was using the methods of stakeholders dialogue that facilitated our communication within the stakeholders.