Colleague 1 Maria Espenida, “Putting the ME in Leadership” “What is our goal’—not as individuals, but as managers.” (Goldratt, E. M. & Cox, J., 2024, p.123) It tells about “Personal Mastery,” as the leader, what is his personal vision and purpose? Personal Mastery is about the idea of leadership that starts within oneself, regardless of leadership level, roles, and goals, associated with personal empowerment, emotional intelligence, and self-awareness (Cropper, n.d.). “Every plant in our company, has already launched at least four or five of those pain-in-the-neck improvement projects. If you ask me, they lead only to indigestion problems. You go down there, to the floor, and mention a new improvement project and you’ll see the response. People have already developed allergies to the phrase.” (Goldratt, E. M. & Cox, J., 2024, p.123) This just tells that employees were not satisfied with the management’s improvement projects. Even though the company has plans for improvement, the stakeholders are having trouble executing them. The philosophy of companies about successful continuous improvement is maximum improvement with minimum investment, but eliminating all waste does not result in an increase in revenue automatically (Iona, 2018). Management should determine which part of the system needs to be prioritized and involve stakeholders, such as the employees, in planning. We were dealing with physical constraints, with bottlenecks, that’s easy. But at the divisional level we’ll have to deal with measurements, with policies, with procedures. Many of them are cast already into behavioral patterns (Goldratt, E. M. & Cox, J., 2024, p.138) In “Personal Mastery,” as a leader, you focus on your own behavior, being mindful of choices and how it affects others and the company. There are challenges in policies and procedures that may need to be changed, even if it creates hard feedback for the leader. But staying open to hard feedback enables the leader to behave differently, try out new ways, and replace dysfunctional patterns of thinking, feeling, and behaving (Cropper, n.d.). “Putting the ME in Leadership” My experience as a leader, I often just focus on what is happening outside and not on myself. I tend to focus on what tasks need to be done rather than focusing on my energy or being mindful to get a clearer view and different angles around me. As a nurse, I tend to focus on the tasks for my patients to get the utmost care they need, even when I am juggling. This drains my energy and leaves me burned out. The demands in healthcare can be very stressful. Stress and anxiety can affect performance and can cause medical errors that can affect patient outcomes. To avoid stress and anxiety, studies have shown that reflection and mindfulness allow better concentration, less reaction to stimuli, and enable the person to become more focused and in tune with oneself and surroundings (Flatekval, A. M. 2022). A company that fosters self-management, self-responsibility, self-awareness, and choice is a key operating principle, allowing personal and cultural transformation to make better choices and achieve more results; thus, leaders need to become models, mentors, and coaches for personal mastery to achieve this kind of transformation. (Cropper, n.d.). References Cropper, B. (n.d.). Personal mastery—putting the “me” in leadership. The Change Forum. https://www.thechangeforum.com/Personal_Mastery.htm Flatekval, A. M. (2022). Utilizing a mindfulness application in the nursing classroom. Reflective Practice, 24(1), 113–123. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2022.2143342Links to an external site. Goldratt, E. M. & Cox, J. (2024). The Goal: A Process of Ongoing Improvement (40th Anniversary Edition). North River Press. https://bookshelf.vitalsource.com/books/9780884272755Links to an external site. Ioana, B. R. (2018). TOC, lean, six sigma are complementary? Ovidius University Annals, Economic Sciences Series, 18(2), 389–394. Colleague 2 India Holmes, A Reflection on The Goal and Strategic Practice in AML Leadership In Chapters 29 through 40 of The Goal, Goldratt and Cox (2014) delve into the emergent power of systems thinking as it applies to organizational transformation. These chapters underscore that true operational improvement requires leaders to transcend local optimization efforts and instead prioritize systemic constraint identification and resolution. This insight has profound implications for enterprise-level compliance environments such as Bank of America’s Anti-Money Laundering (AML) division, where siloed thinking often impedes throughput and innovation. Below, I critically engage with three passages that illuminated essential truths about effective management and discuss their relevance to both theoretical leadership and my applied experience. Passage 1: “A bottleneck is any resource whose capacity is equal to or less than the demand placed upon it.” (Goldratt & Cox, 2014, p. 237) This deceptively simple definition was revelatory in reframing the operational challenges I encountered in the AML space. Historically, investigative backlogs were often interpreted through a deficit lens attributed to analyst inefficiency or inadequate staffing. However, this passage compels a more systemic interpretation: that inefficiency often emerges from structural imbalances in capacity relative to flow. Recognizing the investigative triage system as a bottleneck, rather than the investigative personnel themselves, reoriented our performance management strategies. We transitioned from punitive productivity metrics toward process diagnostics and root-cause interventions, such as intelligent automation and workload forecasting. Passage 2: “Every minute lost at a bottleneck is a minute lost for the entire system.” (Goldratt & Cox, 2014, p. 247) This insight articulates a fundamental systems principle: that the constraint determines the upper boundary of system performance. Within the AML department, delays in SAR approvals particularly at the compliance sign-off stage often halted case progression. Despite efforts to increase speed elsewhere in the process, these gains were rendered null if the constraint was not addressed. This passage pushed me to champion upstream reforms (e.g., template-based SARs, legal pre-review algorithms) to alleviate the pressure on bottlenecks rather than diffuse energy across unconstrained areas. Goldratt’s axiom served as a corrective to our habitual firefighting mentality, redirecting leadership focus from activity to leverage. Passage 3: “Utilization and activation of a resource are not the same thing.” (Goldratt & Cox, 2014, p. 283) This distinction is especially salient in environments where resource saturation is equated with effectiveness. In my early tenure, I measured AML productivity through volume metrics alerts touched, cases opened. However, this passage challenges that notion by suggesting that activation (being busy) is not inherently productive unless it contributes to increased throughput. Consequently, we recalibrated our KPIs to align with strategic value creation: fewer but higher-quality escalations, reduced false positives, and improved conversion rates to SARs. This redefinition not only elevated performance but also enhanced analyst morale by aligning effort with impact. Reflective Statement: “If I had only known this back when…” If I had only known this back when I was promoted to lead compliance operations, I would have resisted the allure of linear performance improvements and localized quick fixes. I would have examined the entire AML function as an interconnected value stream, where constraints not effort dictated performance. Had I internalized this earlier, I would have challenged silo-based budgeting, centralized decision-making authority at constraint points, and advocated more effectively for integrated metrics. This shift in perspective from functional oversight to systemic stewardship has since redefined my approach to leadership. Personal Mastery and Systemic Leadership Senge (2006) frames personal mastery as the continuous pursuit of personal growth and alignment with one’s vision. This discipline, when embraced by organizational leaders, becomes a catalytic force for change. In complex regulatory environments such as AML, personal mastery is indispensable for navigating ambiguity, resisting reactive behavior, and modeling reflective inquiry. According to García-Morales et al. (2007), personal mastery fosters innovation and adaptability, creating a feedback-rich environment conducive to learning and transformation. Gregg Learning (2018) articulates that leaders who cultivate personal mastery exhibit emotional intelligence and clarity of purpose qualities essential for leading systems change. At Bank of America, where compliance rigidity often stifles innovation, leaders who demonstrate self-awareness and resilience are more capable of resisting institutional inertia and challenging unproductive paradigms. Moreover, Stroh (2014) emphasizes that systems change requires conscious, long-term investment in stakeholder alignment and collective learning. By integrating personal mastery with systems thinking, leaders can better discern leverage points, reduce unintended consequences, and foster sustainable transformation. Stroh and Zurcher (2012) further underscore the importance of identifying interconnections and feedback loops, arguing that meaningful change rarely emerges from isolated interventions. The Goal provides more than a narrative on manufacturing efficiency it offers a strategic paradigm shift in organizational leadership. For compliance leaders at institutions like Bank of America, the text challenges conventional metrics, hierarchical power dynamics, and localized control. Through the lens of systems thinking and personal mastery, I now appreciate that effective leadership lies not in command but in comprehension understanding the system, recognizing the constraint, and aligning resources accordingly. References: Cropper, B. (n.d.). Personal mastery putting the “me” in leadership. The Change Forum. https://www.thechangeforum.com/Personal_Mastery.htm García-Morales, V. J., Lloréns-Montes, F. J., & Verdú-Jover, A. J. (2007). Influence of personal mastery on organizational performance through organizational learning and innovation in large firms and SMEs. Technovation, 27(9), 547–568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2007.02.013 Goldratt, E., & Cox, J. (2014). The goal: A process of ongoing improvement (4th ed., pp. 237–337). North River Press. Gregg Learning. (2018, February 9). Personal mastery in leadership [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KrKgjAbxpw Senge, P. M. (2006). Personal mastery. In The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization (pp. 129–162). Doubleday. Stroh, D. P. (2014). Systems thinking for social change: Making an explicit choice. Reflections, 14(3), 35–42. Stroh, D. P., & Zurcher, K. (2012). A systems approach to increasing the impact of grantmaking. Reflections, 11(3), 31–43.Week10LearningResources-ImprovingBusinessPerformance.docx
