So after managing my little heart out during the power outage of June 7-9, I spent last Wednesday and Thursday in management training.
There weren't a lot of surprises during the two days of distraction. The first day we learned how not to get sued and how to parse annual reports. The fun thing about this is that we are owned by a British company, so fully half of our consultants flew across the pond to school us. Given that the jet lag seemed to exacerbate their use of slang, that aspect was pretty entertaining. The Don't-Get-Sued guy was a Boston lawyer who grew up in Philly, but it was a David Tennant wannabe (whose hair became spikier and wilder as the afternoon dragged on,) who did his level best to teach us how to read a balance sheet. I don't know if it was the hair or the content being delivered, but I still find our annual report fairly impenetrable, and from what the guy said most of it is a big fat smoke and mirrors show anyway, so I'm not sure what the point was. Though all the concrete stuff he did say about our parent company looked to be fairly positive.
The second day was actually only the first of two sessions -- the second session will last for two days in August. We took a poor-man's Meyer's Briggs, which was interesting because you basically pop online, take a 5-minute multiple-choice survey ("I am: organized/spontaneous/emotional/insane") and then the software spits out 15 pages of results detailing not only Who You Are but also Who You Act Like You Are.
It was no shock when the thing informed me Who I Am charts as a perfect V, with the high points indicating "I like to be in charge" and "I like to make decisions based on facts and logic and efficiency." The absolute low point, also unsurprisingly, reflected that "I don't want to share my personal probs and I certainly don't want to hear yours, please shut up and go back to work."
It was mildly amusing to see that Who I Act Like I Am entirely wiped out this clearly defined V by a hugely concerted effort on my part to demonstrate calm, laid-back patience.
My favorite line was from a description of the category I fell into ("Developer,") that read: Others see the Developer as someone who knows her business and requires a lot from herself, but someone who
is also critical and peculiar.
I have concluded that "critical and peculiar" should be my epitaph.
So anyway, after we took this survey, we spent about 30 minutes going over our results with the group. Then the whole thing morphed into team-building exercises. For someone who hates talking, I sure spent a lot of time representing the group to the rest of the room. (Though perhaps that is the "likes to be in charge" aspect coming through.) All this stuff about "how to build trust" and "how to get results," and "what are some key factors to employee development?"
Then, at the end of the day, we basically gave ourselves three things to work on for the next couple months, and in August we all get to go back and lie about how much effort we put into it.
There actually was some value to the whole thing, but a lot of that seemed to stem from just yapping with the other participants. The lead consultant -- who looked a lot like I reckon my dad would if my dad lived in Shrewsbury and had gone into consulting -- wasn't really dispensing a lot of advice from on high. I guess maybe he felt himself more a facilitator? In any case, he mostly stayed out of the way while the rest of us sort of puzzled out why Offering Food at Meetings Is Good and how Maybe If People Constantly Misinterpret Your E-Mail, You Should Pick Up a Phone FFS.
So all in all, there were maybe 45 minutes of value in 16 hours of sitting. But you know what? They gave us lunch. So I was happy. It's the little things, you know?