As this course draws to a close, I now pause to reflect not only on what I have learned, but also on how my new knowledge has altered my perspective on technology in several ways. Going into this class, I thought I was fairly proficient with technology, especially regarding using a personal computer. Of course I never thought of myself as an "expert" in any respect, but at least I knew how to operate a computer to satisfy my daily needs for the last 17 years or so--I'm 27 and have been using computers since I was around 10. Much of my so-called "proficiency" with computers, in retrospect, was very limited. My skills consisted primarily of: installing and mastering several different editions of Sid Meier's' "Civilizations" video games, using Microsoft Word to type school assignments, surfing the Internet, using e-mail, instant messaging, social networking websites, iTunes, and a few other entertainment-related GUI applications. Other instances of work-related computer proficiency I had limited experience with were: Excel spreadsheet, online database and library catalog searches, two instances of creating a simple personal webpage, one instance of using Oxygen XML software for a school assignment, one instance of using FileMaker Pro database software for an internship--and that is it! During our class introductions and throughout the discussions in most modules I felt like I was behind the curve in my experience with and knowledge of work-related technology. Sometimes it was a struggle for me to even express myself adequately in the Activity section to get the assistance I needed to complete the assignments.
Therefore, in many respects, this course was a "Trial by Fire" in technological competency for me. Most, if not all the topics, were completely new to me. Additionally, I struggled in the beginning to trouble-shoot my Linux setup in the virtual machine. I think that was the scariest part of this class, since it was so frustrating and all my future success in the class hinged on getting the setup correct. After Module 4 though, I started to feel more comfortable with the course setup and that in turn helped me to cope better with the course material and assignments. Looking back at what I have learned and created in this class compared to what I knew at the start, I feel as if I have completed a bachelor's degree in computer science in one summer semester! The course definitely covered a plethora of material at a fast pace, which is only possible by addressing each topic at the most introductory level, focusing on providing us an overview of the concepts and their relations to each other across modules. I certainly realize that there is much more to learn in each and every module we covered, so much so that people devote entire careers dedicated to mastering a single aspect of some of the lessons (e.g. database managers, webmasters, etc.).
Now that I have gained significantly more exposure to the technology behind creating a simple LAMP server, I am much more cognizant of all that I don't know. So I feel both smarter and more ignorant at the same time. This class was a poignant experience for me in dealing with the so-called "digital divide." On the one hand, I still feel like I'm much more competent in technology than complete novices like my parents. However, I also realize that I'm still pretty low on the technology totem pole even with everything I now know.
My perspective on technology has also fundamentally been changed. I feel more confident in attempting to learn about computer languages or applications that I know nothing about yet. This course exposed me to some great resources for self-directed learning, particularly the W3School website and the Harvard technology tutorials. I probably won't have the time to explore these resources on my own anytime soon, since I expect to be plenty busy keeping up with assignments for the rest of the classes in the DigIn Certificate, but someday I suspect I will come back to these resources and explore on my own. I used to panic when computer programs didn't work, but now I think I can keep my head and work through some of the simpler trouble-shooting processes. Another insight that has come into sharper focus for me is the pervasive, perhaps exponential, spread of technology in the workplace and society. Thank goodness for good ol' Wikipedia!
In thinking about which modules were most useful and interesting to me, I have some clear favorites. First and foremost I am very happy to have gained some database application experience. I had very little understanding of databases coming into the course and a basic familiarity with database applications is a prerequisite to almost every job in my field. Fixing the glaring hole in my resume regarding databases was more than enough to make this course worth my time. I know that I will build on my current level of understanding with database applications in the future and I see this as a vital skill for my career. The most interesting module for me was project management. I can definitely see the usefulness of this broad discipline and enjoyed learning about it. Again, I had only the most basic understanding of project management going into this class, maybe enough to define it; but now I feel like I know most of the core concepts, as though I learned enough to learn more on my own. However, I look forward to learning more in a structured environment during the spring semester in the Project Management class for the DigIn certificate.
Monday, August 18, 2008
Monday, August 11, 2008
Project Management Readings Response
The readings this week were interesting. I like project management and see myself using it in the future. I like how it is so broadly applicable to a variety of endeavors. However, some articles were more useful than others to me in learning about project management.
The "Microsoft Project and the Project Management Domain" article was concise and provided a distilled overview of the most critical aspects of PMBOK. It also introduced some good examples of practical project management methodologies. While it was mostly centered on software industry, I thought the examples aided me in understanding how project management works in "real world" scenarios. Another article I thought was helpful was the H. Frank Cervone "Project risk management" article. I felt that unlike the other three "fluff" articles by Cervone we read this week, the project risk management was more in-depth and offered real, prescriptive advice for project managers rather than very general overviews or listings of "don't do this," which I felt constituted most of his other articles.
I had mixed feelings about the Edward F. McDonough III article, "Investigation of Factors Contributing to the Success of Cross-Functional Teams." My first impressions where 1) this doesn't seem very relevant to library and information sciences, 2) the terminology is foreign and this is hard to read, and 3) this article from 2000 isn't that current, given the fact that he proposes so many ideas for future research--I kept wondering what he was suggesting had already been settled by someone else in the field. However, once I finished the article I realized that this article was a true research article and I appreciate the amount of methodological work that went into it. Also I started to see how team members in a digital library project could be thought of a cross-functional team in the sense that he was discussing if you substituted "services" for "products" in his continual focus on "new product development." I still have some reservations about how directly relevant this study is to the library and information professions, but it provided some good exposure to serious research in the field of project management and outlined some interesting ideas.
Perhaps the most helpful article I read this week to me personally was the article I selected and reviewed for my assignment three. For the sake of any interested parties besides Bruce, I'll post my review below. The last paragraph details why I thought it was most personally beneficial.
Cervone, H. F. “Working through resistance to change by using the ‘competing
commitments model.’” OCLC Systems & Services, 23 no.3 (2007): 250-53.
Library Literature. Database on-line. OCLC FirstSearch: accessed 11
August, 2008.
This article provides a brief overview of four primary perspectives regarding how scholars in the fields of management science and applied psychology have traditionally viewed resistance to change in the workplace. Following a review of the existing literature, Cervone then describes the relative advantages of a new perspective called the “competing commitments model” and outlines the steps involved in its utilization. Cervone argues that the main advantages of the competing commitments model lies in its ability to diagnose the principle underlying assumptions of an individual’s resistant to change, which he argues are the root causes of their sometimes ambiguous unproductive behavior. This approach is especially useful in the context of project management situations where cooperation and “buy-in” is a necessity for effective teamwork.
I enjoyed reading this article and believe that it addresses an important topic in the project management field—dealing with “difficult” people. Cervone’s article distills an approach first outlined by Kegan and Lahey in a 2001 Harvard Business Review article and provides some analysis on how it can be used as an effective project management tool in the context of a digital library project. Cervone effectively supports his thesis regarding the relative advantages of addressing resistance to change using the competing commitments model as opposed to other more traditional models, which ultimately do a poor job of providing guidance to project managers on how to positively impact such behavior. The competing commitments model is a two step method. The first step is an interactive dialogue in which the project manager asks a series of hypothetical questions in a specific sequence in order to elicit the true causes or assumptions that are driving an individual’s resistance to change. In the second step, the project manager basically follows the scientific method: 1) observe and record an employee’s behavior over a period of time, 2) look for evidence contrary to their assumptions (identified in step one), 3) hypothesize about the origin and history of the identified assumption, 4) test the assumption and 5) evaluate the results. Cervone points out that when evaluating the results of step two, the project manager can determine whether the employee’s assumption underlying their resistance to change is true or not, which then can be used a basis for either re-evaluating the project if the employee’s resistance is well-founded or discovering ways to accommodate the assumption in ways that still promote the goals of the project now that the root cause has been correctly identified.
I found this article extremely topical to my own work environment. In my work for a state government agency, I have found that some covered state employees harbor many assumptions that can impede teamwork on projects. In my situation, interpersonal conflicts among my team members had gone unresolved for years due to the drawn-out and complex nature of progressive discipline policies regarding unacceptable behavior. After a year of dealing with this situation, appropriate disciplinary action is just now unfolding after much waiting, watching, counseling, and documenting among several supervisors and managers while instances of bad behavior escalated to the point of a pending termination.
The "Microsoft Project and the Project Management Domain" article was concise and provided a distilled overview of the most critical aspects of PMBOK. It also introduced some good examples of practical project management methodologies. While it was mostly centered on software industry, I thought the examples aided me in understanding how project management works in "real world" scenarios. Another article I thought was helpful was the H. Frank Cervone "Project risk management" article. I felt that unlike the other three "fluff" articles by Cervone we read this week, the project risk management was more in-depth and offered real, prescriptive advice for project managers rather than very general overviews or listings of "don't do this," which I felt constituted most of his other articles.
I had mixed feelings about the Edward F. McDonough III article, "Investigation of Factors Contributing to the Success of Cross-Functional Teams." My first impressions where 1) this doesn't seem very relevant to library and information sciences, 2) the terminology is foreign and this is hard to read, and 3) this article from 2000 isn't that current, given the fact that he proposes so many ideas for future research--I kept wondering what he was suggesting had already been settled by someone else in the field. However, once I finished the article I realized that this article was a true research article and I appreciate the amount of methodological work that went into it. Also I started to see how team members in a digital library project could be thought of a cross-functional team in the sense that he was discussing if you substituted "services" for "products" in his continual focus on "new product development." I still have some reservations about how directly relevant this study is to the library and information professions, but it provided some good exposure to serious research in the field of project management and outlined some interesting ideas.
Perhaps the most helpful article I read this week to me personally was the article I selected and reviewed for my assignment three. For the sake of any interested parties besides Bruce, I'll post my review below. The last paragraph details why I thought it was most personally beneficial.
Cervone, H. F. “Working through resistance to change by using the ‘competing
commitments model.’” OCLC Systems & Services, 23 no.3 (2007): 250-53.
Library Literature. Database on-line. OCLC FirstSearch: accessed 11
August, 2008.
This article provides a brief overview of four primary perspectives regarding how scholars in the fields of management science and applied psychology have traditionally viewed resistance to change in the workplace. Following a review of the existing literature, Cervone then describes the relative advantages of a new perspective called the “competing commitments model” and outlines the steps involved in its utilization. Cervone argues that the main advantages of the competing commitments model lies in its ability to diagnose the principle underlying assumptions of an individual’s resistant to change, which he argues are the root causes of their sometimes ambiguous unproductive behavior. This approach is especially useful in the context of project management situations where cooperation and “buy-in” is a necessity for effective teamwork.
I enjoyed reading this article and believe that it addresses an important topic in the project management field—dealing with “difficult” people. Cervone’s article distills an approach first outlined by Kegan and Lahey in a 2001 Harvard Business Review article and provides some analysis on how it can be used as an effective project management tool in the context of a digital library project. Cervone effectively supports his thesis regarding the relative advantages of addressing resistance to change using the competing commitments model as opposed to other more traditional models, which ultimately do a poor job of providing guidance to project managers on how to positively impact such behavior. The competing commitments model is a two step method. The first step is an interactive dialogue in which the project manager asks a series of hypothetical questions in a specific sequence in order to elicit the true causes or assumptions that are driving an individual’s resistance to change. In the second step, the project manager basically follows the scientific method: 1) observe and record an employee’s behavior over a period of time, 2) look for evidence contrary to their assumptions (identified in step one), 3) hypothesize about the origin and history of the identified assumption, 4) test the assumption and 5) evaluate the results. Cervone points out that when evaluating the results of step two, the project manager can determine whether the employee’s assumption underlying their resistance to change is true or not, which then can be used a basis for either re-evaluating the project if the employee’s resistance is well-founded or discovering ways to accommodate the assumption in ways that still promote the goals of the project now that the root cause has been correctly identified.
I found this article extremely topical to my own work environment. In my work for a state government agency, I have found that some covered state employees harbor many assumptions that can impede teamwork on projects. In my situation, interpersonal conflicts among my team members had gone unresolved for years due to the drawn-out and complex nature of progressive discipline policies regarding unacceptable behavior. After a year of dealing with this situation, appropriate disciplinary action is just now unfolding after much waiting, watching, counseling, and documenting among several supervisors and managers while instances of bad behavior escalated to the point of a pending termination.
Monday, August 4, 2008
Databases Part Deux: The Reckoning
There were many things about MySQL that I found conceptually difficult. Overall, I believe this module has been the hardest one yet. The most difficult aspect of this module is a tie between 1) having to watch so many video tutorials and 2) the sheer amount of new linguistic/mathematic syntax rules and commands we needed to master in such a compact lesson. My eyes started to blur after watching so many of the tutorials back to back, which couldn't be helped because unlike reading assignments, which I can just print out and work on anywhere, I have a limited amount of time I can budget in my busy schedule to sit down and watch (and try to comprehend) hours of fast paced tutorials. There is absolutely no way I would have been able to actually follow along on the virtual machine with the tutorial, as I think was suggested, given the short timeframe. Conceptually, all the new material was difficult. I have no prior experience with MySQL per se. I have learned about some aspects of Boolian logic for using wildcards in searching online databases, presumably since they have SQL beneath them. However, I've never built a database or had to use one consciously so this was all Greek to me. I am relieved that the next module is more reading intensive and centered on a less technical topic. I look forward to learning more about project management.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
