Skip to main content

Jobs and Me

 

In Steve Jobs’ video (Jobs Official, 2017), we see how the Apple Corporation came together to create one of the most influential technology companies in history. Jobs was an idealist, which as funny as it may seem, is how I also see myself. I like to think of it as the world being open to individual interpretation where people can continue to build on the functions which already exist but are malleable and can be influenced.

I recently participated in a management assessment that analyzed certain personal characteristics and how they would apply to the workplace. The assessment pegged me as dynamic in a large company setting that is:

·       highly self-confident

·       assertive

·       ambitious

·       aggressive

·       wants to be challenged

·       highly motivated to be successful

·       takes risks

·       likes to solve problems

·       inventive

·       creative

·       role model

·       perfectionist

·       uses metrics to drive success

The assessment showed that my leadership management style is based more on being extroverted, confident and logistical, or someone that focuses on the facts.

The video shows how Jobs is passionate about helping college aged people find new solutions to old problems. The video points to this in comments from the narrator about Jobs interrupting others at an employee retreat to keep the focus on the priorities and his vision (7:15). Jobs relentlessly interjects with his beliefs about the price and schedule for the product rollout. He puts pressure on the others in the group by saying they should be out of business if they can’t meet the priorities. I think that I would fit into this situation because I like to be challenged, as Jobs is doing with his team regarding the price and schedule. The video shows a second employee retreat where Jobs level-sets with the group and tells them the honeymoon is over (13:30). To get the company to the goal of shipping their product, Jobs must use $7 million of his own money to keep the company afloat. This results in having to make cuts to the budget, which can give anyone pause. I believe that the risks Jobs is taking by putting up his own money fits into my assessment because I’m not afraid of taking a chance on myself. Because I like to gather the facts before making a decision, I put myself in the best position to take a risk. Jobs then talks about not seeing the “startup hustle” (17:40), where the company is pushing and working harder knowing that it must get the company where they want it. Jobs frames this in a way where the “war” is about survival and the company winning the war by getting their product to market. As the video comes to its conclusion, the narrator speaks to Jobs needing to feel like he is contributing to history to be satisfied (18:20) and how amazing the feeling is to have planted an idea, a seed, and watched it grow into a revolutionary machine called the personal computer.

Logistical leaders like to stabilize and organize situations while administrating and communicating thoughts and actions. As with most new companies that start out looking to find their place in the world, Jobs and Apple had a lot to prove. One of the most important roles of a leader is to communicate an image of the future and inspire a shared vision of the organization (Brown, 2011, p. 156). As a leader, Jobs was a chameleon of sorts, using persuasion, inspiration, stability, and vision. I believe I would have fit into the culture at Apple in the 1980’s because I see similarities between my leadership styles and those used at Apple. Both Jobs and I see that a team-oriented approach works well, especially when it is coupled with meeting concrete goals, being risky and organizing the group to march forward. I like to follow the rules, but I also look to improve them, which would be a key component to getting the Apple Corporation off the ground. Although Jobs and I are not completely alike, I believe he and I would have worked very well together.

References

Brown, D. R. (2011). An Experimental Approach to Organization Development. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education, Inc.

Jobs Official. (2017, November 23). Steve Jobs brainstorms with the NeXT team 1985. [Video file]. Retrieved https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Udi0rk3jZYM

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Dear Marques

  Dear Marques, You’ve continued to gain a lot more knowledge of leadership, the foundational approaches using different aspects from the elements of theories, and a profound appreciation for senior leaders. The question before you today is – what will you do to get back to the mountain top? Your Personal Vision You’ve stated that your personal vision is “to be happy as much as possible” (Thomey, 2021, p. 2). We both know that you were at your best when you were happiest. Whether on the mountain top or not, you brought out the best in yourself when you were happy. You need to find a way to get back to that place so everything else can fall into place. Three Learning Goals In order to accomplish your personal vision, you must establish three learning goals with milestones so that you have a plan and a pathway for getting this done. Your first goal should be to reengage with the Dale Carnegie group for continuing education classes. I know you found this group to have a tra...

Consequentialism vs Deontology

  Consequentialism vs Deontology Is it a glass half-empty or a glass half-full? It appears to me that what separates consequentialism and deontology is perspective. LaFollette (2007) writes that consequentialists must explain which consequences we should count, how much weight or consideration we should give those that do count, and how we should use these considerations when deliberating (p. 25). However, deontology is usually regarded as a foil to consequentialism ( Heinzelmann, 2018, p. 5201). What I find as the takeaway from this situation is that consequentialism isn’t necessarily grounded in morality, whereas deontology finds itself in a set of negative rules. As LaFollette points out with consequentialism, we must look at and use several dimensions to understand and consider what are the consequences of a situation. Deontology doesn’t require this additional gate check, but instead relies on our experience learning right and wrong from the negative perspective. Much like a...