I can’t really say it was a jerk move because I thought it was hilarious. I would have been all for it and supported your idea 100%. I despise “team builders” like that and would delight in metaphorically tweaking the instructor’s nipple. Perhaps that makes me a jerk, too, I dunno.
I have nothing to contribute except to say that I absolutely loved this story.
Where did he say he points it out? The way he exposed it was by performing the exercise according to the rules.
Again, I don’t see anywhere that his behavior hinged on some spoken observation, rather, it is left up to the instructor to realize what was wrong. He didn’t brag or crow about “beating the system.” He simply convinced his colleagues to agree on a solution, which as far as I can see is the point of the exercise.
How did he reveal the truth, other than to play by the rules and leave it up to this authorized person to figure it out himself?
If others had insisted that they do it the way the instructor wanted, even after agreeing that the exercise was pointless, is that any less a pretense? If you know that the end result has to be that everyone agrees, why not just agree from the jump? Why hold out at all if ultimately everyone has to be on board? I would argue that the OP’s solution reflected real life more than the instructor’s did, in that it had no forgone conclusion.
HELLOOO! ARE YOU SURE IT WAS A GOVERNMENT CLASS YOU WERE IN???
:D:D
I can’t recall reading if you made your speech to the class in front of the instructor; if so, I’d have to say, yeah, jerk. However, that isn’t a bad thing. Let’s be real-these things are so idiotic, and one can see the instructor’s point without going through all of the lesson, and save time. But, no, the instructor insists. On one hand, they are just as glad as you that the class ended. OTOH, they are worried that their employer will bust them.
Also, I am amazed that you got 20-25 people in one group to all agree on something this sensible. Whenever I have been in this kind of situation, there were at least 2 saps who would demur, with some kind of retard excuse, or a double cross when the instructor questioned them. Either you are another Cicero, or you had a remarkable group, or both!
Irrespective, congratulations!
hh
Well, contra, it seems your experience with co-workers and training exercises differs from mine. I wonder which of ours is more representative.
If the OP seriously thought he was having an original insight - that the assignment could be circumvented - well, he’s being pretty naive.
OTOH, he says he feels quite “smug” about his performance and he felt like he was being “manipulated.” Oh my gosh - being manipulated in a training exercise!
So I see the options as pretty much between naive or smartass. And I don’t know that either is anything much to feel too terribly smug about.
Yours, probably.
I don’t see where he claimed said original insight, or even implied it. My point is that it was circumnavigated by expressly following the instructions; ergo, flawed.
To be precise, he says he *felt *smug. The OP makes it clear that he no longer feels that way.
From the OP : My bolding.
Not smug at all.
A real leader would have convinced the instructor to move up the afternoon session, skip lunch and let everyone go home two hours early.
Thanks for clearing up my poor reading comprehension. I know decades back in my career I was stupid enough to offer my honest impression on a training exercise. And I’ve seen others crash and burn far more spectacularly.
Like I said, my main - often sole - goal in EVERY training exercise is to KEEP MY MOUTH SHUT!
That sounds like real good advice.
As a rule leadership training courses, especially for jobs are wastes of time. Let’s face it, your company wants you to lead, so long as you lead EXACTLY TO THE LETTER, as the top management would make. They don’t want you to act accordingly.
To be fair a lot of these teachers are outsider, I’ve done similar things myself, with companies. And it’s bull and you know it.
The fact is even if you learned something you would not be able to apply it to your job, unless it’s in accordance with a company manual anyway. So why waste everyone’s time.
I agree you were just saving everyone a lot of time. If I was the instructor, I wouldn’t have let you get away with it though. I would’ve said, “if you don’t want to take the course fine, but go back to work.”
I would love to know what those 20-25 people are thinking now…6 weeks later. OP is having a change of heart…I would reason that quite a few of the 20-25 are feeling the same way.
I would love to add more to my viewpoint, but I’m starving for lunch…gotta go.
Hey guys… Remember that person who led us to fast-track a meaningless decision weeks ago in that useless “leadership session” and let us take a 2 hour lunch instead of having us argue over theoretical minutia for an hour? Wasn’t he a jerk? He really devalued my learning experience, which has led to my current depression.
No, I don’t think so.
Being a leader is more than simply generating a consensus and making a decision. Leaders know how to make decisions that they can justify using rational principles, not 1) arbitrary ones or 2) only the most convenient ones. So that’s two strikes against the idea that the OP exhibited good leadership.
A good leader also delivers results that are satisfactory to the person(s) at the top. Which, in this case, is the teacher who gave the assignment. Since the teacher was visibly annoyed by the decision made by the OP, this means he failed to produce an outcome that a good leader would. Third strike. Conclusion: He outsmarted no one and really has no reason to feel smug. It doesn’t matter that he played by the rules as stated, because the unspoken rule is that if the boss ain’t happy, no one is.
In the real world, management passes down orders that are tedious and seemingly pointless all the time. People who respond to such requests by delegating major tasks to the office janitor, using a magic 8 ball as a decision-making tool, and letting all of their staff go home early aren’t called leaders…they are called unemployed. All the OP showed in this stunt was that he can’t delay gratification long enough to suffer through an exercise thatcould potentially have taught him something. I dunno, if I were his wife I’d be irritated out of the fear that he could have cost himself a future promotion or maybe even a job. Stranger things have happened in this global recession.
It would have been ballsier and probably just as clever to just walk out on the assignment. More honest, too.
My concern with the OP is this sentence:
If you publicly picked out one of these ‘girls’ and told her that since she hasn’t yet said anything she gets to make the list, you would have been a major jerk.
Other than the possibility of jerkdom on the manner of picking out the decider, though, AFAICT you obeyed the letter AND the spirit of the exercise.
Remember, one of the responsibilities of leadership is judging what is worth your time and attention.
I think it would be good to pick a quiet person to do the rank list. A talker would want to discuss it with everyone.
Not a jerk. In fact, I HATE those stupid exercises, and I think people probably learned from more by outsmarting the instructor than by actually discussing and working out a solution to the “problem”.
Chances are good that if you were feeling smug about it, a part of you does believe you were being a jerk, yeah.
I think the instructor missed her chance for a prime “teachable moment”; she could have led the discussion back to why extreme efficiency in getting the requested result is good/bad leadership, and what makes it so.
Personally, I’m very results oriented, so giving what’s asked for in the most efficient manner possible is the only thing I’d concern myself with in the real world. And I don’t see much point in learning “leadership” that doesn’t actually allow one to lead anything. I also think that lateral thinking is an excellent skill to have, especially when it comes to problem-solving and leadership.
I don’t know if this has been mentioned yet, but I think people are incorrect in assuming that the OP cost the company money. It sounds to me like he may have saved the company a ton of money by showing how unnecessary that program/instructor was. That company can either scrap plans to hold future classes like that, or go with a different instructor, but they have a much better idea of how to effectively use their money.
As for the actual question in the OP, I think it all depends on how you approached the group and offered your solution. It is very easy to imagine a scenario in which your exact approach could be a major jerk move or a non-jerk move based on how you approached that group. If you were shouting or hushing people, belittling the exercise or instructor, and/or coming off as a holier-than-thou, “I have it all figured out” bully, then you were absolutely a jerk. There isn’t enough information for me to decide, but I will say that in my limited experience with similar types of exercises, people who propose a solution similar in tone to yours were always jerks (for the aforementioned tone/approach they used). They were always condescending. Not saying you were, but that I can’t know if you were. Without more information, my experience says you were probably a jerk.
I, for one, am impressed with the OP’s leadership abilities.
The first, and I mean the first, thing a leader should do is not follow blindly. That’s the definition of a leader, idn’t? steronz assessed the situation, realized the situation was pointless, and rallied the group to take action to minimize the damage of lost time. The instructor wants the students to think inside his box and was annoyed when steronz didn’t do that.
The instructor is not a leader, but steronz led his group in a tactical retreat. That’s a leader.