Understanding Organizational Personas through a Movie
Undoubtedly, Movies are part of our lives. I recently watched a movie which is basically an adaption of a book titled by the same name as that of the movie i.e "The Great Gatsby". In this extremely engaging story, I was able to find a correlation of characters with the types of people in an organization.
I was clearly able to bucket them under 4 quadrants:
- Influential Involvers
- Non-influential Involvers
- Influential Non-involvers
- Non-influential Non-involvers,
It may not necessarily be in equal proportion in organizations, but yes, the types remain same and are debatable slightly in terms of HIGH or LOW on the defined parameters of Influence and involvement.
The premise is set amidst fundamental management challenge of decision-making and problem-solving tore between ethical dilemma and human values.
Influential Involver: Jay Gatsby
The character is shown as charming, gracious and a bit mysterious. He was a passionate young man who achieved everything in his adult life with the sole purpose of winning his love. His drive to achieve and also his perseverance is commendable. He was a self-made man in all respects which is again admirable. The character emphatically reminds of hope. He is obsessed with the past and could not let Daisy go. Also his love for Daisy represents his fascination for money and upper class. He is smart man who strengthens his friendship with Nick when he discovers that he is Daisy’s cousin. His throwing of large extravagant parties to get Daisy back can be looked upon as a true lovely romantic gesture. He intends to save Daisy from murder charges and looks at it as a noble, honourable and purposeful task. He is portrayed idealistic who wants to distance himself from his past in terms of his family but at the same time wants to recapture the past he had with Daisy.
Such people set a goal for themselves and try to achieve it at any cost. They filter opportunities in their favor. The urge to achieve the set agenda is so strong in them that they don’t hesitate to sacrifice at all to prove a point. They have idealistic view of their goals but in the process they are okay to go berserk with the laws laid by the system or society. They can also be perceived as path-breakers or leaders. They are so motivated by the vision that they are ready to take risks. The belief in Idea is so strong that they work hard to execute it in a reasonably planned way by seeking support from everyone who can help them. They are immensely good net-workers. They astutely promote themselves. They have an aura to inspire and motivate others. They genuinely think for a larger good than confine themselves to triviality. They have ability to put different hats of diplomacy as and when needed. In an organization, we find people who have such leadership ambitions, who are torch-bearers for others, who possess innate ability to influence others by their conviction, dedication and involvement.
Non-Influential Involver: Nick Carraway
It is the only character that carries values such as Perseverance, hardworking, justifiable etc. Though from a high class family, he came out to be level-headed and caring man. He was not a procrastinator or a dreamer but who lives in reality and understands human emotions. He is also an educated man who wants to make fortune through clean ways. He was also a socialite but was not blinded by the glitz of glamour and lifestyle. He is motivated by his conscience and thus forcefully pulls him away from Buchanans. He had what other characters lacked i.e. personal integrity and sense of right and wrong. He alone is moved by Gatsby’s death. He also understood by the end of the story what misery a fortune can bring, who was once a fortune-seeker by himself.
Such people believe in working hard behind the scenes. They are not Limelight-hungry. They go with the flow of the organization by setting expectations which just touch the bar of performance. They believe in steadiness to achieve things. They play safe always, follow norms, and bank on their skills-set to get to deliverable. They can be rated low on diplomatic quotient (DQ). They are social but not with everyone. Thus they can be excellent team-members but not great leaders. They don’t set vision for themselves or are over-enthusiastic about their career. They just flow with the present moment. A small aberration or disruption impacts them miserably as they are risk-averse. They don’t possess ability to self-promote and explore into areas of challenge. They prefer to confine themselves in their own comfort zone where opportunities of growth are minimal. They are naive in believing the world to be a utopia where truth triumphs. They draw wrong analogy of hard-work & sincerity being directly proportional to success. They negate networking, keep low, embrace shyness but when harsh reality bangs them, it’s difficult for them to overcome. Such people collectively contribute hugely to the growth and success of the organization but individually they get dominated and neglected at times. Their visibility in solving management challenge is less. They have no say despite their great involvement in the subject matter related to their expertise.
Influential Non-Involver: Tom Buchanan
This character has unlimited power, money, physical strength, magnificent house, personal accomplishments and top of it all a good-looking spouse. He is a consistent boaster, a cheater, a bigot and a belittler. He is a man who can justify his cheating under the garb of his influence. He knows what matters most in this materialistic world where there is no place for human emotions. He knows to take things in his stride. He is well aware of his surrounding and knows which cards to play to influence others.
Such People are not hard-workers who slog day-in and day-out to achieve their goals. Rather they are Smart-ass ones who know when to pull strings with people to gain an advantage unofficially or unfairly. They are relatively good at communicating success under their own name once their planned execution falls in place. They are highly result-oriented people who don’t pay much attention on the fair means to get things done. They are able to manage perceptions of people for their own good. They are very high on diplomatic Quotient (DQ) and climb up the ladder of success relatively faster, given their shrewdness, for which they necessarily need not to get involved fully but their circle of influence is so strong that they can move the needle in their favor anytime.
Non-Influential Non-Involver: Daisy Buchanan
The character is portrayed as most enigmatic yet a disappointing character. She is shown as object of Gatsby’s desire representing elite social class. Despite her beauty and charm, Daisy comes out to be merely a selfish, and a hurtful woman. Initially, she was shown having traits of purity and innocence but at the end she is totally opposite from what she presents herself to be. She looks like an angel on earth who is routinely linked with white color be it in her dress, car or flowers etc. always at the height of fashion. She is shown pure in the world of cheaters and liars. She is fully aware of her husband’s infidelities but does nothing about it as she enjoys the benefits which she receives from it. Daisy loves attention but she has other considerations also on her mind. What matters to her was wealth signalling her love for materialism. Her motivations are questioned over Tom and Gatsby’s altercation. Her inability to deny having loved Tom speaks well for her, but at the same time, it suggests that her attachment to Gatsby has been purely business. Her void of conscience is clearly depicted when she kills Myrtle and leaves the scene without any guilt. She abandons Gatsby in his death and also unrepentant of Myrtle’s murder shows her indifference and lack of emotions for people who are not social elites. She is not a complete non-involver but yes she is not involved in any matter whole-heartedly.
Such People are in a grey area in the whole gamut of work-related organizational activities. They dichotomise every single view. They are confused souls on a bandwagon of directionless experimental-ism. They want everything in life but can’t settle with one specific thing. They always have excuses and try their tricks at failed attempts. They don’t hesitate in shifting the blame on others when they are witnessing perils. They don’t have integrity. They don’t really get involved in their work and thus lose heavily on setting up examples for others to follow. People in organization might get attracted to them initially due to their presentable skills but their inability to be the best at their work loses people’s confidence on them. They can’t defend their situation or stand up for themselves as they hold no true ideology. They change sides according to their convenience sometimes to please others and another times to gratify their existence. In the process, they lose credibility which costs their ability to influence.
Finally, I would like to say that the movie is based on variety of themes such as justice, power, greed, betrayal etc. The distinct social classes have their own ideologies leaving a powerful reminder of how precarious the world is.
Social boundaries and stratification in the society are prominent realities wherein superficial external means such as materialism and internal emotions such as compassion co-exist. Similarly, in an organizational set-up, different kinds of people with different mind-sets co-exist.
The business environments have these multicultural confrontational characters which affect areas of problem-solving and decision-making. These intangibles of human performance can’t be ignored.
