Please reply to
A and B with 150 words a pieceAWhen I read the
topics for this week’s discussion, I was surprised by the term we would be
talking about. Time for some research! The local and cosmopolitan
classifications for scientists were created quite some time ago and are still
in use today in a wider sense. Kornhauser (1962) defined locals as scientist
who stayed close to home and worked/published/presented in their native
countries, more or less. Cosmopolitans were more global and networked in
nature. My guess is that many more scientists and other working professionals
today consider themselves cosmopolitan based upon techno logical advances and
the ease of global visibility.
In my corporate life I started out very much as a local, writing software
for radar systems in my cube that I shared with three other engineers. I did
not attend conferences, did not do scholarly work aside from learning enough
electrical engineering to program firmware, and no one in the industry knew my
name. They knew my boss Carl’s name, though, in the US and elsewhere in the
world; Carl the cosmopolitan, even before technological advances made it easy
to network and be known globally, was quite the authority on radar systems
microcode and firmware in the day. As I grew more senior and took on more managerial roles, my
visibility and reputation began to change. I attended conferences for
telecommunications Subject Matter Experts, spoke at conferences on our
technology products and implementations, published articles with other experts
in trade journals and performed global product sales support around the world.
Over time, I became quite a bit more recognized and cosmopolitan in the telecom
industry. Then I moved on to managing a software consulting district. The new
job had little to do with my telecom days but everything to do with the Susan
recognition factor. This carried forward into my consulting life as a project
management SME and led to travelling everywhere, editing textbooks and writing
one of my own. After 15 years of this high-visibility, road warrior role I
decided enough with the travel. So now I am more of a well-networked “former
cosmopolitan” a local again although I am still known by and in touch with many
buddies from the past in my professional network. My contribution to the success of my
project teams, groups and consulting clients depended upon the role I was in at
the time According to Haas (2006), “cosmopolitan and local team
members can help their teams to acquire and apply knowledge more effectively,
by bringing both internal and external knowledge to their teams and enabling
the teams to more successfully transform this knowledge into improved project
performance” (p. 368) Being a cosmopolitan opened more doors to knowledge in
the industry and discipline but being more local was where the actual work is
done. This was true even in global companies as most had divisions based in a
specific spot where the folks working there were local in the job. Some of the
managers may have traveled to different sites and taken on the sheen of being
cosmopolitan, but their impact was limited as the scope of their efforts still
resided in a single company. I think that Glaser (2011) has the best view of
these two definitions, making scientists an effective, hybrid
local-cosmopolitan types. I can see how more networked visibility
in your professional life is seen as a negative by your team or direct reports.
It is easy to spend more time on the speaker’s trail and writing articles about
what you did versus doing something and paving the way for your team’s success.
This visibility is easier when you are a consultant as it is one of the
reason’s your clients select you to perform work. The less public, local view
of getting work done sits better with the teams who work for you and are making
things happen. Your focus is local and on the effort at hand versus external
and perhaps off the beaten track of the work efforts. Let’s face it – teams
know when their manager is out for personal glory versus supporting and
enabling the team.BDiscuss a perspective that reflects personal cosmopolitan a
local view with a organization. An example will be provided that shows why I
chose a particular perspective.The following table provides an example of the tensions that
project managers experience that sometimes don’t align with organizational or
sponsored company views. According to Hodgson, et al, (2016), contains the
argument that compares cosmopolitan and local views as companies strive to
complete projects or implement change are thus identified. Goulder, (1957),
“developed and identified the original concepts within the organizational
settings that differentiate cosmopolitan and local identities amongst college
employees. He identifies and defines cosmopolitans as those with ideals of low
on loyalty to the employing organization, high on commitment to specialize
roles skills, and likely to use an outer reference group orientation.
Comparatively with the local ideas he identifies them as high on loyalty to the
employing organization, low on commitment to specialize role skills, and likely
to use an inner reference group orientation.” (Goulder, 1958, p. 290). More
specifically and perhaps more importantly Goulder identifies key implications
that there are tensions between the modern organization’s needs for loyalty and
expertise thus the resulting organizational conflicts. (Hodgson, et al.,
2016). This is my growing
conflict and personal struggle with my current organization. The latter of
progression seems to be focused on employing from within and this creates a
tension to those who are skilled and perhaps expert with advanced degrees, they
are somehow overlooked because of their lack of experience. This seems quite
unfair that companies would have such bias opinions of those who possess expert
knowledge but have not proven themselves to be loyal having seniority with the
company. The same people are often overlooked for promotion and favor is given
to those who have climbed through the ranks. Again, those possessing
cosmopolitan ideas and able to forecast, estimate and inquire skills from some
book of knowledge are often seen as informants of information and ideals that
don’t apply. Often, those who have built long standing relationships with
friends and associates who are the ones that do the work within the team the
insider is given in favor and often receives the cooperation from the local
body or coworker in a less hostile fashion. In other words, they are able to
break down barriers to improvement by less political means and erect new
barriers as identified by the results. (Kanter, 1995, p.23-24) My contributions to the group
are often seen as being aloof and commonly perceived as nonconforming to the
local understandings and feelings of the group. I am often seen as being
hands-off and high-minded, thus not wanting to engage with the local narrative
of a respected leadership. This conflict and tension exist because of their
policies and procedures to ignore forward progression of those who are skilled
and better fit, thus cosmopolitan in ideology.My behavior may be additionally
mistaken by others is not being helpful or standoffish to the group’s effort
through my silence and non-participative behavior being read by leaders as
nonconforming and silent. Most of this is due to my lack of time to contribute
to various committee meetings which require my time and provide an unneeded
distraction as I am a full-time student and full-time employee. Likewise, those
with time (the locals) are able to network and become friends with those who
would promote their long-term agendas for growth.
