Chapter 28 - The chicken or the egg

I found Griffin's discussion of agenda setting very intriguing as it has given me insight to some long standing questions I've had - does the public dictate what the media reports on, or does the media dictate what we think. The answer, as described in the text, is that the media inspires what we think about, not what we think.

This economic crises has been a good example of this. The pending disaster was looming on the horizon as people were over extending themselves and properties were being purchased with little or no money down. Then, the loans were re-packaged and sold to other investors as AAA rated loans, leading the investor to believe that they had highly-qualified borrowers on the other end. They in fact did not.

The media has covered this disaster step-by-step and fueled the issue and worries as the situations intensified. Had the media coverage not been so intense, I wonder if we would be in such a mess at this point. There was indeed reason for concern, but because the media pushed the issue so hard and wore down our (the Public) confidence, consumer spending has slowed, the economy has become extremely fragile, and now people are victims of layoffs, a violent and volatile stock market etc. The media is responsible for a lot of the panic, in my opinion. Again, there was legit reason for concern, but the media has created a frenzy that lead to the out of control downward spiral that we have witnessed as of late.

Chapter 24

Toward the end of the chapter, Griffin poses some interesting commentary of Neil Postman's thoughts on technology. He said that Postman "Pondered whether the quest for technological progress was becoming increasingly more important than being humane. He wondered if information was an acceptable substitute for wisdom" (p. 320). I say no, information is a poor substitute for wisdom. The two must go hand in hand. Without wisdom, we have no bearing of how to use the information and information would have limited use. In the "information age," people aren't valued as highly for what they can physically do, but what intellect they bring to the table. Especially in Silicon Valley, information is king. Although technology and better information is meant to enhance our life, I believe, in many cases, it clutters it.

Chapter 22: without identification, there is no persuasion

I appreciated the section about identification, and will apply these ideas in my own life. Persuasion takes place much easier when the persuadee can identify with the persuader. When identification and common ground can be reached, a bond is formed and a shared perspective eases the encounter. However, it only "eases the encounter", it doesn't guarantee that persuasion will take place, because we are still separate and individual. "But without some kind of division in the first place, there would be no need for identification. And without identification, there is no persuasion."

Bring me your comments! Ch. 21

Rhetoric is something that I am very interested in because of its power for change. The presidential debates have been a great display of rhetoric from both sides, with Obama coming off as more well-spoken and polished and McCain coming off as more real due to his concrete language. Obama, although eloquent, seems contrived and well-coached. He sounds so good not saying anything. I am torn between the two candidates right now, don't have any idea who I am voting for. Both have their issues that I do and don't agree with; I am looking for the candidate that can most effectively lead our country out of these historically tough times and carry the torch for America. I am looking for the leader who has the skills and foresight to make the best decisions. Who that is, for me, remains to be seen.

Rhetorically, Obama's eloquence causes me to hesitate, but also encourages me because he displays an ability to be a steward and ambassador of the United States. In an international setting, Obama may present better and facilitate discussion with other world leaders and put them at ease. He has ease in his presentation. McCain is very awkward in his oratory skills and presentation in the public eye. But he doesn't dodge issues the way Obama seems to. I get the feeling he will fight harder for his convictions and the good of the country, but just not look as good doing it.

As potent a tool as rhetoric can be, I'm tired of its prevalence in politics. I think a lot of Americans feel the same way and the politicians know this. They tailor their campaigns to appeal to people's emotions rather than intellect because the average American will not research the issues to exhaustion. They form opinions based on their social groups and sources of media they absorb (tv, internet, etc.) and won't dig much deeper. It seems more like a beauty contest than a true discussion or critical analysis of the issues.

Let me know what you guys think -

Does either candidate display an ability to effectively lead our country?

Chapter 20

The idea of workplace democracy like an ideal situation, however I am a believer in the phrase "If you build a horse by committee, you'll end up with a camel."
I was frustrated in reading the "Strategy" and "Consent" sections of the text due to their enlightening of the struggle that goes on between the managerial side and the employee side of an organization. It's interesting that most employees don't even realize that they are subject to an oppressive company attitude. That's what's great about studying all of this is that we now realize that we have a choice - to be a cog in the machine or to be our own machine. Therefore, as I've said before, I still think that one is only a victim if they let themselves be. The voice of the workers are definitely important and the idea of having happy workers to build a better product rings true, but it isn't an employers job to make an employee warm and fuzzy. It is his job to make a better product, and he has hired employees to make that product. The employees realize this, also, or they wouldn't have signed up for the job. A manager does have the duty to provide for the employees so that their needs related to doing their job are taken care of, and to provide a standard quality for all, but at the end of the day responsibility comes on the shoulders of each individual. If management tries too hard to cater to the needs of employees it may backfire, because there is no way to please everyone. So, total democracy in the workplace is a nice thought, but in the end I wonder if it would do more harm than good.

Chapter 19 - Culture of an Organization

This chapter resonated with me easily because of my involvement with a commercial real estate brokerage firm for 2 years, prior to coming back to SJSU. All of these pieces described in the chapter applied easily to my experience.

I was interested in the section "Can a manager be an agent of cultural change?" because I've always been interested in what makes a good manager vs. a poor one, in respect to the employee's perspective. "Managers may articulate a new vision in a fresh vocabulary, but it is the workers who smile, sigh, snicker, or scoff." This happens because "shared interpretations as naturally emerging from all members of a group rather than consciously engineered by leaders." It seems that based on this chapter, a manager has little to do with the culture of an office, and no matter what an manager's efforts are, the employees will generate their own cultural reality.

Chapter 18 - What groups produce

If effective groups must analyze a problem, set a goal, identify alternatives, and evaluate those positive and negative characteristics, what then are they accomplishing? What is their product?
According to Poole, groups produce decisions. The duality of a group structure means that decisions both effect the group and are affected by the group. Stability and change are a product of the duality of groups. These decisions reinforce the group as well as alter its structures altogether.

Chapter 18 - The big picture

I like the way Chapter 18 ends, where Griffin brings it all home with a common sense idea of what we should take away from all of this. On p. 244, the comparison of different types of people sums it up best:

Some people make things happen.
Some people watch things happen.
Some people have things happen to them.
Som people don't even know things are happening.

Then, he encourages us to Step up from a passive role to having an active voice within your group.

I couldn't agree more with his words of wisdom. Especially during this time of the election, and as we as students move on to bigger and better things. Employers definitely do not want a passive, meek person to fill the needs of a company. Even if you don't have an employer and are going the entrepreneurial route this applies all the more.

This chapter came across a bit dry to me, so I'm glad I ran into these last words to put it in perspective. In the last paragraph of the chapter on page 245, Griffin concludes "Adaptive structuration theory may not be playful, but it holds out the satisfying promise that every group member can be a player in the process of what the group creates."

Chapter 17 - Group Decision Making

Reading chapter 17 opened my eyes in regards to many of the issue that groups face to reach an agreeable decision. So many times a group will get ahead of themselves because they all feed off each others nervous energy and the decisions that end up being made are completely counter-productive.
First things first, the analysis of the problem is key. Without understanding what everyone trying to accomplish, all work is futile. The problem provides the starting point for the map of how to get things done.
Second, by setting goals, the group can pul together for a cause and understand where they are headed. If analyzing the problem is the starting point, the goal would be the destination.
Third, identifying alternatives will let the group voice individual opinions. This where the strength of a group shows itself because no one person can know everything. With different minds at work, alternatives can be explored and the end result should be stronger because of it.
Lastly, when a group evaluates their alternatives, they can work out the bugs of certain ideas and dismiss others, ultimately reaching the best solution.