Working with people presents a challenge no matter what, but when it comes to working with your fellow fellows, it’s different. The difficulty arises for a couple of reasons: different perspectives on how a problem should be solved, and understanding the hierarchy of authority in the group.

Different perspectives when it comes to problem solving is something that we have now covered as a class: the dominants are problem aggressors, conscientious people and their attention to detail and so on. In working on a real project, these personalities become something much more real, not a topic to get us thinking. Balancing the ideas and aspirations of the certain individuals with the realism of others proves a significant effort. There is no doubt that the diversity of perspective contributes the quality of ideas, but navigating around people is much harder than navigating a task itself (not unlike navigating the human in our human centered design.

Next came the issue of authority, which was still difficult but less complex. The issue came with working with these individuals in which: no defined authority structure was established and lack of a system of discipline/reward. In working with peers that we have had a small amount of experience with, trying to establish/utilize a position of authority was a moot point. Next was not being able to use some sort of system of discipline, although the need did not arise (and I can’t imagine that it will), not having something to resort to in the case of a coworker/employee not meeting expectations inherently limits the effectiveness of a leader.

Both elements, while important, are not necessarily solvable (or should be solved) in the environment of Challenge Detroit, they’re simply some ideas crossing the mind of a recent B-school grad in a new city at a new gig.

-Alex