Using the discussion answer provided below, please provide a brief response by continuing the discussion rather than just commenting. Use personal insight and relative course materials.

Discussion Answer:

If I was in Charles' situation, I would have felt defeated and like I had failed. It is natural to have emotions about a project that took so much of your time and energy. The immediate emotions are normal and okay to feel. The important part is how you reflect on the project after those immediate emotions. This is applicable to anything in life that may not be going your way. After talking with his boss, Charles was able to recognize that the decision was not personal and was in the best interest of the organization. If he had pushed to revisit the decision, it would have hurt his career and relationship with his leaders. The higher-ups at the company expected someone in that role to have the ability to view the big picture. Luckily, that is what Charles did. His company does a great job of incentivizing based on what they are looking for. Instead of paying based on how many projects a person gets approved, they pay on how that person conducts themselves and their hard work regardless of approvals. This action had an informational effect on Charles by letting him know what his organization really values (Pfeffer & Sutton, 2006). Although Charles' bonus is important to him, I think he was also seeking the approval of his leaders. By not docking his bonus for the rejected project, he also received an intrinsic reward. Intrinsic rewards and knowing your work is valued is also a very important motivator (Pfeffer & Sutton, 2006). Charles' leader made the right move by keeping his bonus because it showed the company valued his hard work even if a project was not going to be pushed through to implementation. Leaders must not only provide opportunities to generate new ideas, but they must also incentivize them to encourage employees to keep trying (Grant, 2016). Overall, I think Charles' company did a great job setting the culture through their values and norms.

In Lisa's example, the executive viewed her competitive response as inappropriate because she was not accepting the constructive feedback and instead was trying to argue against it. As a professional, it is important to be open to feedback in order to better your project or idea. I think Lisa's leader was protecting psychological safety by talking to her in a private setting instead of scolding her in front of her peers at the meeting. Psychological safety is a shared belief held by members of a team that the team is a safe place for risk taking (Duhigg, 2016). It was important that Lisa's leader handled the situation with care to avoid discouraging Lisa from feeling safe to speak freely in future meetings. At Lisa's level of leadership, there are high expectations for how you should react to situations. You must be open to feedback and have the ability to view the big picture. I believe Lisa's actions in the meeting were based on her initial emotional response. I think her emotions would have led her to run and quit, but after reflection she was able to see the right step forward. After Lisa took the initiative to receive feedback from all of the senior executives, they promoted her within a year. This action was an example of the company managing culture through reward systems. Chatman & Cha (2003), describes this as one of the ways leaders can instill culture in their organizations. Lisa's experience is a good lesson for all of us. Criticism is not personal and should not always be viewed as negative. All criticism should be evaluated carefully to find how it can be applied to future situations. Even at the executive level, there is room to change and grow every day. Personally and professionally, I can reflect on Lisa's story when I receive criticism. Instead of running with emotions, I can explore how to better myself.

The last video of Dave Lyons echoes many of the themes of the first two. He is successful in meeting his deadline, but he fails in a different area. He ignored the importance of culture and working as a team. He instead isolated himself and his group which looked competitive and self-absorbed from an outside perspective. I would hope Elon Musk did not encourage this when he spoke to Dave about using "Special Forces." I think it was inappropriate to have this conversation with Dave without also involving Dave's leaders. I think by "special forces" he meant for Dave to be more autonomous, but not isolated. I think Elon Musk was also hinting that he is willing to use more resources to get the project done. Had Dave involved his leaders, he may have been able to be collaborative while still meeting the deadline.

Overall, all the employees needed to look at failure as an opportunity to grow. The "failure" they all felt was the constructive feedback from one of their leaders. There were initial emotions felt, but they needed to get past those in order to see the big picture. After taking time to reflect, they were able to move forward as more well-rounded professionals. They can take this feedback to be better leaders of organizational change.