I forgot to mention...YES, I did have fun :)
Peace,
Mariam
Sunday, April 7, 2013
Monday, March 25, 2013
Initiative!!
I remember this question about initiative from our own applications for BLF a year ago. I think that from that time to present, my definition for initiative still applies (although I do realize that there are many different facets to this one word, and therefore many different ways to define it).
My own personal definition is that initiative is the ability to take action on a project regardless of the projected success. Basically, to me this means that you step up and take responsibility for something even if you are unsure how you will achieve this, or the obstacles that may be in your path. I think this definition also hints at why BLF places emphasis on this area--it's one of the characteristics that people who are successful leaders must have within the real world. People aren't given rubrics, and most times are not provided with a timeline to get a project done. In addition, the resources may or may not be helpful. In short, only those with initiative with take out the factor of 'uncertainty', look over whether or not the task is easy, and still take responsibility to make it a success.
For my interview, I chose to talk with my work supervisor, who had just hit the 5-year mark of working as a Clinical Research Associate in our lab. Our PI (principal investigator) is very well-known in her field and has high standards for everyone, including students, graduate students, post-docs, and especially the full-time staff. But, my work supervisor has had the ability to not only do well in her position, but excel when working with our P.I. When I asked her about initiative, she said that it was one of the biggest characteristic that our P.I. looks for people. She didn't tell me a specific instance, because there are many, but in general those who take initiative in presenting new questions and ideas for research, take the lead in spearheading helpful changes, having the ability to problem-shoot when an issue arises all full under the domain of 'taking initiative'. She said that she tries her best to do things, or act 'proactively' (she used that word a lot) and this is one of the biggest reasons she has been successful while working for such a well-known P.I.
The young alumni panel definitely illustrated that taking initiative was a key to their own successes. They didn't wait for a job to fall in their path, or continue to work in the same field that made them unhappy. They changed their situations by taking initiative, and as my supervisor said, behaving proactively. I think a helpful lesson that can be learned from the panel is that all of those individuals sitting up there didn't immediately know where they were going, but they worked with what they had and created their own opportunities to succeed (or shift their focus if it wasn't in the direction that they wanted to head). Although their specific paths didn't help me much since that's not the line of work I want to go down, I did realize an important and universal characteristic: they were flexible yet determined, and for someone about to head into the real-world, this may be the key -- evaluate what you want in life and take charge about how to get yourself there with the resources you have.
Particularly within my life I think these lessons can apply, or at least remind me that if I'm unhappy with my situation, then it's in my power to change it. If I'm having trouble with my research advisor then don't sit back waiting for time to change things, actually go and work things out in order to conquer these roadblocks. I'm sure the future may hold similar situations -- where my boss is not very helpful, but those with initiative will probably go forth and get the help that they need even if they are not in the most ideal situation. I would say that this lesson was a good reminder at the right time for me.
Peace.
Mariam
Sunday, February 24, 2013
BLF Iron-Chef Cook-Off
COOKING. Dun dun dunnnn. Not my forte, but it turned out better than I could've thought! Proud of my team and my dad.
 |
| The wonderful meal that my team made! |
Peace,
Mariam
Monday, February 4, 2013
Metacognition and ODIP
My expectation for the workshop was that we would be taking part in some creative activity or creative challenge that was semi-hands on. Although we didn't do this, I do see how the creative/critical thinking component came into play with the activities that we did do. I actually really enjoyed the activity where we spent 30 minutes looking at just one work of art and analyzing it because like the hosts mentioned, I don't think I've spent more than a few minutes looking at one piece in a museum before moving on. I actually felt like I understood art and the critiques of art which I valued because, honestly, sometimes the point of something artistic just evades me.
One thing that I learned is that not everyone is innovative. It's something that I've always thought, but innovation is so highly valued and needed in today's world that I talked myself into thinking that anyone can be innovative as long as they are a hard worker. This isn't necessarily a negative realization, just a realistic one. The interaction between imagination, critical thinking, and innovation was one that I never fully understood, and although I will still need some more explanation about the theory that the Columbus Museum of Art representatives put forth, I'm open to their interpretation.
One thing I didn't say that I wanted to was while we were doing the small group challenges at the end. A few people made comments that they just did not agree with the interpretation that the specific group made about their selection without looking outside their point of view to understand the other group's perspective. Although different viewpoints are valuable, so is the ability to acknowledge different interpretations. You can just flat our refuse or say no. The point of the challenge was ambiguous for a purpose and if some groups wanted to take an angle of choosing a piece that evoked the certain emotion rather than literally representing that emotion, then that is also a legitimate course of action as well. Actually, I think it is better because it shows creative, critical, out-side-box thinking.
The following picture is the view from my apartment window (it was one I took last semester, but I thought it fit well for this assignment).
ODIP
Observe: This is a picture of a view outside a window.
Describe: There are three windows in a dark room with few trees in the scenery outside. There are silhouetted images infront of the window including what looks like a floating table and a glass on the table.
Interpret: Whoever lives here is in a rush to leave.
Prove: There's papers everywhere, there is no light on, the glass of water hasn't been put away, there is no chair with the table illustrating that it's been moved out of the way.
One thing that I learned is that not everyone is innovative. It's something that I've always thought, but innovation is so highly valued and needed in today's world that I talked myself into thinking that anyone can be innovative as long as they are a hard worker. This isn't necessarily a negative realization, just a realistic one. The interaction between imagination, critical thinking, and innovation was one that I never fully understood, and although I will still need some more explanation about the theory that the Columbus Museum of Art representatives put forth, I'm open to their interpretation.
One thing I didn't say that I wanted to was while we were doing the small group challenges at the end. A few people made comments that they just did not agree with the interpretation that the specific group made about their selection without looking outside their point of view to understand the other group's perspective. Although different viewpoints are valuable, so is the ability to acknowledge different interpretations. You can just flat our refuse or say no. The point of the challenge was ambiguous for a purpose and if some groups wanted to take an angle of choosing a piece that evoked the certain emotion rather than literally representing that emotion, then that is also a legitimate course of action as well. Actually, I think it is better because it shows creative, critical, out-side-box thinking.
The following picture is the view from my apartment window (it was one I took last semester, but I thought it fit well for this assignment).
ODIP
Observe: This is a picture of a view outside a window.
Describe: There are three windows in a dark room with few trees in the scenery outside. There are silhouetted images infront of the window including what looks like a floating table and a glass on the table.
Interpret: Whoever lives here is in a rush to leave.
Prove: There's papers everywhere, there is no light on, the glass of water hasn't been put away, there is no chair with the table illustrating that it's been moved out of the way.
Monday, January 28, 2013
The Power of Retrospection and Introspection
The G-360 activity was great. I welcomed it because it allowed us to be upfront with one another in a positive atmosphere for a constructive purpose. During the challenge our group dynamic was interesting in that we treated each other very well and didn't have any big problems (unlike a typical group dynamic). But, as a consequence, issues that maybe should have been brought up and adressed were pushed aside and we became passive. However, this same kind courtesy was very much appreciated when the time came for our G-360 discussion because critique, hard enough as it is, is definitely made easier by kind and honest delivery.
The actual in-person comments weren't bad as expected, but I noticed we did take some time to formulate our thoughts and explain things in the best way possible about each other. It may have also helped that during the G-360 feedback meeting only 3 members including myself were present from our group and we were all girls. I'm interested to hear what feedback the guys might have for me, but I haven't gotten a chance to see them yet.
The actual results were in a way surprising, but in a way not. What was most surprising was the discrepancy in my ratings of myself to what my peers rated me, especially in the social category. I believe I rated myself so low in comparison because I've put myself into a leadership box. Think about it -- many of us have been involved in leadership roles and activities for years. We've taken multiple leadership, personality, and strengths assessments. I think what's happened is essentially what we call confirmation bias in research: we selectively favor or choose information that supports a belief we've come to hold. In my case, I've self-labelled myself as an introverted, analytical leader and consequently I rated myself lower on social 'wooer' items, although I'm pretty descent at them as well. I think this reveals an important lesson: In the process of cultivating your leadership style, be weary of confining yourself to a leadership box, especially one that causes you to place self-imposed limits on your abilities.
The second significant idea I realized is that I didn't really have any other hidden strengths or even blind spots; for the most part I ranged in average/middle scores meaning that I'm not terrible with these characteristics, but I'm not great in those areas either. I still need to work on polishing up those edges, but I'm definitely on my way.
Finally, the concept of forming open feedback loops is a difficult one to address and accomplish. When I think about the people I react the best and worst to when getting feedback, they vary greatly. For example, when I really respect someone or feel that they genuinely care about seeing me improve, then I take feedback very well. This leads me to another important point I think we need to acknowledge: It's hard to take feedback well when you're in a program with a constant competitive undertone and surrounded by smart, strong, and intimidating peers. When the feedback is coming from people in this environment, there's a possibility of distrust, even from your own group members because everyone's thinking of ways to one up each other, or save their own butts. Inevitably, such an environment may result in disregard or even distrust of the feedback peers may give. Thankfully I did not feel this way with my own group while discussing our G-360s, but I'm not going to pretend like this might not happen in the future. However, by the same token I sometimes actually react the worst when feedback comes from a close family member or friend because I realize they know most, if not all, of my weaknesses and that is an uncomfortable feeling to have when you're being called out by such as close person. You value what they think about you more than with a peer, so you feel bad when they point out that you let them down.
...I hope other fellows address this question about how to create open feedback loops as well because it's an interesting, but hard one to tackle. We'll undoubtedly need to figure out the best way to continuously and openly communicate while giving constructive feedback in BLF (it's not practical to hold mediator-led discussions every time an issue needs to be adressed in our groups). So we better start figuring out how.
As always,
Peace.
-Mariam
The actual in-person comments weren't bad as expected, but I noticed we did take some time to formulate our thoughts and explain things in the best way possible about each other. It may have also helped that during the G-360 feedback meeting only 3 members including myself were present from our group and we were all girls. I'm interested to hear what feedback the guys might have for me, but I haven't gotten a chance to see them yet.
The actual results were in a way surprising, but in a way not. What was most surprising was the discrepancy in my ratings of myself to what my peers rated me, especially in the social category. I believe I rated myself so low in comparison because I've put myself into a leadership box. Think about it -- many of us have been involved in leadership roles and activities for years. We've taken multiple leadership, personality, and strengths assessments. I think what's happened is essentially what we call confirmation bias in research: we selectively favor or choose information that supports a belief we've come to hold. In my case, I've self-labelled myself as an introverted, analytical leader and consequently I rated myself lower on social 'wooer' items, although I'm pretty descent at them as well. I think this reveals an important lesson: In the process of cultivating your leadership style, be weary of confining yourself to a leadership box, especially one that causes you to place self-imposed limits on your abilities.
The second significant idea I realized is that I didn't really have any other hidden strengths or even blind spots; for the most part I ranged in average/middle scores meaning that I'm not terrible with these characteristics, but I'm not great in those areas either. I still need to work on polishing up those edges, but I'm definitely on my way.
Finally, the concept of forming open feedback loops is a difficult one to address and accomplish. When I think about the people I react the best and worst to when getting feedback, they vary greatly. For example, when I really respect someone or feel that they genuinely care about seeing me improve, then I take feedback very well. This leads me to another important point I think we need to acknowledge: It's hard to take feedback well when you're in a program with a constant competitive undertone and surrounded by smart, strong, and intimidating peers. When the feedback is coming from people in this environment, there's a possibility of distrust, even from your own group members because everyone's thinking of ways to one up each other, or save their own butts. Inevitably, such an environment may result in disregard or even distrust of the feedback peers may give. Thankfully I did not feel this way with my own group while discussing our G-360s, but I'm not going to pretend like this might not happen in the future. However, by the same token I sometimes actually react the worst when feedback comes from a close family member or friend because I realize they know most, if not all, of my weaknesses and that is an uncomfortable feeling to have when you're being called out by such as close person. You value what they think about you more than with a peer, so you feel bad when they point out that you let them down.
...I hope other fellows address this question about how to create open feedback loops as well because it's an interesting, but hard one to tackle. We'll undoubtedly need to figure out the best way to continuously and openly communicate while giving constructive feedback in BLF (it's not practical to hold mediator-led discussions every time an issue needs to be adressed in our groups). So we better start figuring out how.
As always,
Peace.
-Mariam
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)