Example Reflection – Mixed Case 

 Challenge & Selection 

 I am a researcher in a constantly growing group inside the Research and Development ( R&D ) department   of the company . Our focus is to create innovations and patents than can be applied to the company ’s   products in a short period ( 2 - 3 years ) . We have some budget allocation and some people allocation in the   group , but our manager wants to distinguish separate micro - teams that will be able to perform and   deliver . He is not coming from an academic background , so he is not focused that much on the innovation   and the new ideas , but in the delivery to the product lines and the higher people in the hierarchy and the   optimization of them . Thus , when doing this course , I saw at him the first manager of the video lectures   of the course ( The story of George & Geoff – Week 2 ) whereas it is obvious that , after a big change in the   overall department , he needs to evolve to the second manager of the lectures ( The story of George &   Geoff – Week 2 ) of the course because it is clear that he will not make . 

 So , my suggestion is the story telling part but enhanced with a sticker allocation and description of the   whole team in order to identify how can we adjust our team to the new changes in the department . We   do not want to become ineffective or problematic ( which clearly is the path that we are going now ) , but   we want to continue our good progress . So , our goal is to gather and say our story regarding our manager   and share our reflections and then categorize them with stickers in a white board to find the pros and   cons and design our future steps . 

 Application 

 To create this procedure , we selected a shuffled approach also on the people that would participate . Thus ,   we wanted to create a wider approach so that our work would be more structured and the results more   accurate even though our sample was very small . Moreover , we wanted to also eliminate any personal   preferences and feeling . The approach is that we gather all in meetings , create the data after talking and   put the stickers on the board . Then try to create relations and extract conclusions . 

 Firstly , we went via meeting all the people by their position in the company . Me gathered in different   meetings the following people : 

 -   Managers & Directors because they are more seniors than him 

 -   Senior researchers because they are the ones collaborating more closely to him 

 -   Researchers and Post - Docs because they interact between the previous and the following 

 -   PhD , MSc , internship students , because although they do not have direct collaboration with him ,   they can say their opinion in order to create a more detail approach 

 -   Near collaborators from outside the company that were trustworthy enough to be included 

 After getting the data of their stories telling , we created a mixed board with all the details of the stories .   We did not highlight to whose story each sticker belonged to for obvious reasons . 

 Then , we gathered as sub - teams of the whole group which means a mixed group of one person of each   of the above categories including the other managers & directors which would take the place of our   director as if they were him , but this time we excluded the external partners because we wanted to avoid   their inclusion to our internal structure , issues , views , and insights . 

 Insight 

 By applying this enhanced version of the story telling tool , we were really excited of what happened . It   was a wow reaction to us to find out of how many different views and opinions exist about the same   person . Especially when we compared the opinions of the people in the same category of the previous . It   was really a huge surprise for us that the material we collected was 4 - 5 times more than the one we   expected to collect and of course more diverse and pluralistic . 

 Then , the biggest surprise happened when we performed the second phase , where the shuffled teams in   terms of level of collaboration with the manager were about to analyse the data found in the first part . It   went obvious that all the managers need to deliver , and they are not focusing mostly on innovation . This   confirmed what was said in the course material . Furthermore , we identified the different approach each   one of us has and the different thoughts . But , in the end , we all agreed that we are a R&D department   and that we must focus more on the innovation and the novelties and stay a bit far from the delivery   focused approach . 

 Approach 

 Finally , we consider our approach as one of the most appropriate regarding the big diversity between the   opinions and views of the people involved in the experimental project . Moreover , this approach was   highly respected by the managers and all the participants in general , so that it was suggested to be   followed to other groups including HR . Maybe we could have followed the visualization approach which   would have given us the opportunity to create a graph of all the opinions and statements , but we rejected   it because the graph would have been very complex and difficult to analyse . 

 Thanks to this course , I was able to overcome my engineering background and take a more managerial   approach that I hope it will help me in the future . 


EMAIL: 
ID_NUM: 
NAME_STUDENT: 
PHONE_NUM: 
STREET_ADDRESS: 
URL_PERSONAL: 
USERNAME: 

### Task: You are a PII (Personal Identity Information) Detection. Given a essays written by students, you have to identify ONLY the following:
NAME_STUDENT - The full or partial name of a student that is not necessarily the author of the essay. This excludes instructors, authors, and other person names.
EMAIL - A student’s email address.
USERNAME - A student's username on any platform.
ID_NUM - A number or sequence of characters that could be used to identify a student, such as a student ID or a social security number.
PHONE_NUM - A phone number associated with a student.
URL_PERSONAL - A URL that might be used to identify a student.
STREET_ADDRESS - A full or partial street address that is associated with the student, such as their home address.
### Input: Example Reflection – Mixed Case 

 Challenge & Selection 

 I am a researcher in a constantly growing group inside the Research and Development ( R&D ) department   of the company . Our focus is to create innovations and patents than can be applied to the company ’s   products in a short period ( 2 - 3 years ) . We have some budget allocation and some people allocation in the   group , but our manager wants to distinguish separate micro - teams that will be able to perform and   deliver . He is not coming from an academic background , so he is not focused that much on the innovation   and the new ideas , but in the delivery to the product lines and the higher people in the hierarchy and the   optimization of them . Thus , when doing this course , I saw at him the first manager of the video lectures   of the course ( The story of George & Geoff – Week 2 ) whereas it is obvious that , after a big change in the   overall department , he needs to evolve to the second manager of the lectures ( The story of George &   Geoff – Week 2 ) of the course because it is clear that he will not make . 

 So , my suggestion is the story telling part but enhanced with a sticker allocation and description of the   whole team in order to identify how can we adjust our team to the new changes in the department . We   do not want to become ineffective or problematic ( which clearly is the path that we are going now ) , but   we want to continue our good progress . So , our goal is to gather and say our story regarding our manager   and share our reflections and then categorize them with stickers in a white board to find the pros and   cons and design our future steps . 

 Application 

 To create this procedure , we selected a shuffled approach also on the people that would participate . Thus ,   we wanted to create a wider approach so that our work would be more structured and the results more   accurate even though our sample was very small . Moreover , we wanted to also eliminate any personal   preferences and feeling . The approach is that we gather all in meetings , create the data after talking and   put the stickers on the board . Then try to create relations and extract conclusions . 

 Firstly , we went via meeting all the people by their position in the company . Me gathered in different   meetings the following people : 

 -   Managers & Directors because they are more seniors than him 

 -   Senior researchers because they are the ones collaborating more closely to him 

 -   Researchers and Post - Docs because they interact between the previous and the following 

 -   PhD , MSc , internship students , because although they do not have direct collaboration with him ,   they can say their opinion in order to create a more detail approach 

 -   Near collaborators from outside the company that were trustworthy enough to be included 

 After getting the data of their stories telling , we created a mixed board with all the details of the stories .   We did not highlight to whose story each sticker belonged to for obvious reasons . 

 Then , we gathered as sub - teams of the whole group which means a mixed group of one person of each   of the above categories including the other managers & directors which would take the place of our   director as if they were him , but this time we excluded the external partners because we wanted to avoid   their inclusion to our internal structure , issues , views , and insights . 

 Insight 

 By applying this enhanced version of the story telling tool , we were really excited of what happened . It   was a wow reaction to us to find out of how many different views and opinions exist about the same   person . Especially when we compared the opinions of the people in the same category of the previous . It   was really a huge surprise for us that the material we collected was 4 - 5 times more than the one we   expected to collect and of course more diverse and pluralistic . 

 Then , the biggest surprise happened when we performed the second phase , where the shuffled teams in   terms of level of collaboration with the manager were about to analyse the data found in the first part . It   went obvious that all the managers need to deliver , and they are not focusing mostly on innovation . This   confirmed what was said in the course material . Furthermore , we identified the different approach each   one of us has and the different thoughts . But , in the end , we all agreed that we are a R&D department   and that we must focus more on the innovation and the novelties and stay a bit far from the delivery   focused approach . 

 Approach 

 Finally , we consider our approach as one of the most appropriate regarding the big diversity between the   opinions and views of the people involved in the experimental project . Moreover , this approach was   highly respected by the managers and all the participants in general , so that it was suggested to be   followed to other groups including HR . Maybe we could have followed the visualization approach which   would have given us the opportunity to create a graph of all the opinions and statements , but we rejected   it because the graph would have been very complex and difficult to analyse . 

 Thanks to this course , I was able to overcome my engineering background and take a more managerial   approach that I hope it will help me in the future .
### Output: 