The law of explosive growth states that to quickly grow the organization, you must multiply instead of adding. What this law is basically saying is that instead of constantly adding new people into your organization, growing the people who are already within the group will help to grow the company a lot faster. Adding new people into the group may increase the amount of people within the company, but you can only add so much until you either run out of space, or run out of people to lead them. However, if you instead focus on growing the people within the company into new leaders, then they will naturally attract more leaders and followers into the organization, thus growing the company a lot more. I chose this principle because this one really stuck out to me during the presentations. I had never really thought of growing an organization in this way, but when I thought about it, it made a ton of sense to me. For example, last year, during the planning for Night of The Notables, I remember being in a committee that had way too many people. It became difficult to delegate tasks, and many people were not even doing anything. So, if that were to be a real company setting, that company would be wasting a lot of money hiring people, simply to have them sit around and do nothing all day. So, in future event planning, instead of trying to get more outside help, I think I will focus more on developing the people within the group instead.
Leaders can make things happen. There are generally four types of people who affect the momentum of a project or a task. First, there are momentum breakers; they tend to stop the momentum. Then, there are momentum takers; they tend to slow; or sap momentum. There are also momentum fakers; they stage momentum and tend to pretend to be doing work that they really are not. Finally, there are momentum makers; they tend to be leaders who start momentum, and make big events or accomplishments happen. In a team, or an organization, you want to mostly have momentum makers since they are usually leaders, and get tasks done. Momentum breakers, and momentum takers are easy to recognize, and are people you do not want on your team. On the other hand, momentum fakers are hard to spot, and tend to go unnoticed. However, in a professional situation where you are paying people to be on your team, you do not want momentum fakers on your team since it will end up being a waste of money. The reason I chose this topic was because this process reminded me of myself. Last year, I was mostly a faker for most of the event planning. I never really volunteered to try new tasks, so I ended up being left behind as an extra who did not really have much to do. However, I decided this year that I did not want to keep being a faker, so I stepped up to a lot more opportunities to develop into a momentum maker. This year, I don’t want any of the grade 9s to become momentum fakers like I did, so I’m trying to push many of the more quiet people to contribute to more tasks, and opportunities so that they have an easier time developing into momentum makers.
John C Maxwell states that it is easier to teach what is right than to do what is right. By this, he is saying that your actions and your words must be the same when you are teaching another person. For example, if you say that a good leader needs to contribute, but do not contribute ideas yourself, the people you are teaching will be heavily confused oh which to follow. However, since people tend to follow what they see rather than doing what they hear, they tend to follow the bad examples set by their mentors. John Maxwell has a very good analogy for this. He says that there are two types of leaders, the travel agent, and the tour guide. On one hand, the travel agent sends people to places that they themselves have not been to before. They can give standard advice before your trip, but once you are on your trip, they do not help you. On the other hand, the tour guide assists you on your trip the entire way. They know exactly what they are getting you into, and they know the perfect restaurants, hotels, and landmarks to bring you to. The reason I chose this concept was because this concept was a topic that I struggled with just a bit. I tend not to assign tasks that I do not fully understand myself, but sometimes, I end up being the travel agent, where I give advice in the beginning, but I’m unable to follow through and assist them during the task. In the future, I will try to be like the tour guide, and assign tasks that I know well enough where I am able to assist them the entire way through.
There are 6 questions that a mentor and the apprentice must answer to find out if they will have an effective learning environment. The apprentice must ask whether the mentor can do what is required, and if they will do what is required. The mentor must ask whether the apprentice has had proper experience, and if he or she has modeled excellence. Finally, they will both have to ask whether they are compatible, and if there is any mutual respect. By answering these questions, both parties can find out if they will form an effective relationship. If only the mentor answers yes to their questions, while the apprentice does not, the apprentice will not learn much from their mentorship. The same will apply for the mentor if only the apprentice answers no. If either of them answers no to the last two questions, neither of them will be willing to listen to the other, which forms a very ineffective relationship. So, in order to answer yes to all of these questions, you will need to either find a mentor that fits your needs, or gain more experience, and work harder in order to fit their needs. The reason I chose this topic was because it reminded me of my in-depth mentorship from last year. My mentor and I were successfully able to form an effective relationship that led to fast, and efficient learning. For future TALONS trips, I will strive to be able to teach what is required and become a successful mentor by gaining more experience and knowledge in order to ensure that my apprentice can say yes to all of the questions.