Kokkulepped vs enesejuhtimine: miks julged eesmärgid ja väärtuspõhine juhtimine on päris tulemuste alus?
15. detsember 2025
Detsembrikuine Estonian Business Schooli hommikukohv teemal „Kokkulepped vs enesejuhtimine” tõi kokku saalitäie juhte ja spetsialiste, et Semu astelpajuglögi saatel arutleda, kas ja kuidas kokkulepped meid päriselt eesmärkideni viivad. Endise tippsportlase Kaarel Nurmsalu ning coach´ide ja arengupartnerite Kiur Lootuse ning Merle Viirmaa eestvedamisel sukelduti enesejuhtimise, tippsoorituse psühholoogia ja julgete eesmärkide maailma.
Kohtumise fookuses oli küsimus: kas tööelus ja juhtimises piisab vaid kokkulepetest või loeb ainult tegelik tulemus? Arutelu käigus koorus välja, et need kaks ei ole vastandid, vaid tippsoorituse lahutamatud osad – eeldusel, et me oskame oma „sisemist kriitikut“ vaigistada, eesmärke õigesti seada ning kokkulepetest päriselt kinni pidada.
Protokoll kui lõplik tõde, fookus ja „Naudi!“
Päeva peaesineja, endine kahevõistleja ja suusahüppaja ning tänane turundusjuht Kaarel Nurmsalu tõi värvikaid paralleele tippspordi ja ärimaailma vahel. Kui spordis on tõde lihtne – päeva lõpus on protokoll lahti ja sa kas oled viies või ei ole – siis äris ja juhtimises on „tõde“ sageli hägusem ja eeldustepõhisem.
Nurmsalu jagas oma kogemust enesekindluse kasvatamisest: see tekib teadmisest, et oled teinud oma asjad ära paremini kui konkurendid. Ta meenutas olukorda, kus ta pidi asendama treenerit ja andis sportlasele vaid ühe soovituse: „Naudi.“ See ei olnud üleskutse mugavusele, vaid sügavam mõte – kui sportlane suudab sooritust nautida, on tal olemas vajalik enesekindlus ja ta ei hakka „leiutama“. Nurmsalu rõhutas: „Kui me hakkame leiutama, siis 95% tõenäosusega me tulemust ära ei tee.“
Oma ettekandes tõi ta välja universaalsed kriitilised edutegurid, mis on rakendatavad igas soorituskeskses keskkonnas. Edu vundamendiks on täielik kontsentratsioon ja vankumatu eneseusk – see tähendab oskust valida tegevused, mis viivad eesmärgile lähemale, ning hoida fookust vaid enda tegevusel, laskmata teiste arvamusel või kõrvalisel müral end häirida. Samavõrd kriitilise tähtsusega on põhimõte, et kõik sõlmitud kokkulepped on mõeldud elluviimiseks, mitte vaid rääkimiseks. See nõuab juhilt ja tegijalt tugevat isiklikku eeskuju, sest kui soovitakse tiimilt tulemust, peab eestvedaja olema esimene, kes kokkulepetest kinni peab.
Miks me kardame julgeid eesmärke?
EBSi coaching’u õppejõud ja arengupartnerid Kiur Lootus ja Merle Viirmaa avasid teemat psühholoogilisest vaatenurgast. Inner Game’i teooria kohaselt on meis alati kaks tegelast – ratsionaalne „korrigeerija“, kes kommenteerib ja kritiseerib, ning alateadlik „tegija“, kellel on paljud vajalikud oskused juba olemas. Meie potentsiaal hakkab avanema hetkel, kui suudame sisemise kriitiku nii palju vaiksemaks keerata, et „tegija“ saab rahulikult oma tööd teha.
Arutleti ka automaatsete negatiivsete mõtete ja aju evolutsioonilise kalduvuse üle pigem riske vältida kui julgeid sihte seada. Tihti jäävadki eesmärgid liiga tagasihoidlikuks, sest sisemine hääl küsib: „Aga mis siis, kui ei tule välja?“ Samas kinnitab nii teadus kui praktika, et mida rohkem me pingutame ja mida julgemad on eesmärgid, seda suurem on hilisem rahulolu ja motivatsioon ning seda rohkem me õpime. Just seetõttu on enesejuhtimise keskne küsimus mitte „kui vähe ma julgen lubada“, vaid „kui julgelt ma saan eesmärgi sõnastada nii, et see mind päriselt käivitab“.
Töötoas tehtud sirutus-harjutus näitas, kui palju on meis varjatud varu: kui paluti käe sirutust esimesest sooritusest „pool sentimeetrit kõrgemale“ viia, jõudsid osalejad peaaegu alati parema tulemuseni, kui esialgu arvasid võimalik olevat. Sama loogikat saab kanda üle ka töö- ja karjäärieesmärkidele – kui latt seada teadlikult veidi kõrgemale, avastame enda seest uusi ressursse, mida mugavustsoonis ei näe.
Praktika: eesmärkide „trimmimine“ ja kokkulepped iseendaga
Merle Viirmaa eestvedamisel liikus hommikukohv kiiresti teooriast praktikasse. Osalejad sõnastasid oma enesejuhtimise väljakutse ning vaatasid sellele otsa kolme nurga alt:
- Mõtestatus: Miks see eesmärk on mulle päriselt oluline ja mis väärtust see loob – mulle, tiimile, organisatsioonile?
- Selgus: Mis täpselt muutub, kui see on saavutatud? Üldine „tahan olla parem juht“ asendus konkreetsemate sihtidega, näiteks „tahan õppida delegeerima nii, et teised võtaks vastutuse rõõmuga“.
- Julgus: Mis oleks selle eesmärgi ambitsioonikam versioon, mis tekitab kerget ärevust, aga on siiski jõukohane?
Kõlama jäi mõte, et tõeliselt edasiviiv eesmärk on seotud meie identiteediga, tekitab emotsiooni ja loob väärtust laiemalt kui ainult ühe inimese tulemused. Sageli ei ole see 100% meie kontrolli all – ja just seetõttu sunnib see meid päriselt arenema. Enesejuhtimise tuumaks ongi kokkulepped, mille me sõlmime iseendaga: kui ausalt me endaga räägime, millest me tegelikult hoolime ja mis hinnaga me oma eesmärgid ellu viime.
Hommikukohvi arutelus jõuti ka meeskondlike kokkulepeteni: kuidas luua turvaline ruum, kus saab ausalt rääkida eesmärkidest, eksimustest ja õppimisest, ilma et keegi tunneks end ohustatuna. Väikestes gruppides arutleti, milline üks kokkulepe on nende jaoks kõige olulisem – olgu selleks konfidentsiaalsus, aus tagasiside või üksteise aja ja fookuse austamine. Rõhutati, et kokkulepped ei ole ainult formaalsed reeglid, vaid elavad praktikad, mida tuleb aeg-ajalt üle vaadata, vajadusel uuendada ja ka rikkumistest rääkida.
15. jaanuari hommikukohv „Kasumlikkus või inimesed“
EBSi hommikukohvide sari jätkub jaanuarid teemaga, mis seob omavahel väärtused, tulemused ja igapäevased juhtimisotsused.
15. jaanuaril toimuv hommikukohv küsib, kas ettevõtet juhib rohkem kasumlikkus või inimesed – ning mida see tegelikult organisatsioonikultuuri ja otsuste tasandil tähendab. Fookuses on väärtuspõhine juhtimine, HR-i rolli muutumine ja aus pilk sellele, miks väärtused on tihti seinal, aga mitte juhi igapäevastes otsustes.
Arutleme muuhulgas:
- kas organisatsioonikultuur on „pehme teema“ või mõõdetav juhtimishoob,
- mis elu elab täna sinu organisatsioon,
- ja kuidas viia väärtused päriselt käitumisse, mitte ainult dokumentidesse.
Registreeri Fientas:
Muutused ja stabiilsus: 23. jaanuari ingliskeelne hommikukohv
Jaanuari teises pooles ootab juhte ingliskeelne hommikukohv teemal Muutused vs stabiilsus, kus rahvusvahelised interim-juhid, tippjuhid ja eksperdid jagavad kogemusi muutuste juhtimisest erinevates kultuuriruumides. Juttu tuleb sellest, kuidas muutused on iga juhi igapäevane tööosa, kuidas leida tasakaal pidevate muudatuste ja vajaliku stabiilsuse vahel ning kuidas tagada, et muutused ei jääks paberile, vaid saaksid osaks organisatsiooni kultuurist.
Registreeri Fientas:
Mõttemuskli rühmatreeningud: kui tahad päriselt harjutada
Kui hommikukohvil kogetud mõtted vajavad järjepidevat treeningut, siis selleks on Mõttemuskli rühmatreeningud – grupikohtumised, kus juhid treenivad oma „mõttemuskilt“ samamoodi nagu sportlased lihaseid. Fookuses on enesejuhtimine, keskendumine, otsustusjulgus ja õppimisvõime olukordades, kus mugavustsoon on juba selja taha jäänud.
Esimene Mõttemuskel alustab 02.02.2026:
Mõttemuskli rühmatreening: Enesejuhtimine –
Lisainfo ja teised rühmatreeningud:
Arengukiirendi: personaaltreeneriga koostöö sinu juhtimisteemadel
Kui rühmatreeningu asemel või kõrval soovid personaalsemat lähenemist, on Arengukiirendi nagu personaaltreeneriga koostöö sinu juhtimisteemadel. See ei sõltu koolituskalendrist – alustad siis, kui sina soovid – ja võtad fookusesse just need väljakutsed ja võimalused, mis sind täna tõeliselt inspireerivad või tegutsemist vajavad.
Arengupartner aitab sul:
- sõnastada päris väljakutse (mitte ainult sümptomi),
- näha oma „pimedat nurka“,
- hoida fookust ja tempot, et head kavatsused ei jääks plaaniks,
- siduda kokkulepped ja enesejuhtimine konkreetsete tulemustega.
Rohkem infot ja kontakt:
Other News
Mohammad Toyon’s Doctoral defence highlights retention of working university students in Estonia
On December 18, 2025, at Estonian Business School, Mohammad Abu Sayed Toyon stood before a defence committee to present five years of work on a question that affects students more than most universities and policymakers care to admit: what happens when students have to work to pursue their education?
The defence, led by Associate Professor Riina Koris, brought together Associate Professor Maarja Beerkens from Leiden University and Senior Lecturer Oleg Badunenko from Brunel University as opponents. Both praised the thesis for clear research questions, rigorous focus, and genuine relevance.
Beerkens noted that she was initially sceptical about measuring dropout intention rather than actual dropout, “but I see it’s really well argued now... You convinced me entirely why this is a valid measure, perhaps even a better measure.” Badunenko emphasised the thesis’s value in “highlighting the realities of working students, how they see education and how universities need to align with this new reality.”
The supervisors, Professor Kaire Põder and Assistant Professor Niveditha Prabakaran Pankova, spoke with affection about the journey. “It was five years ago, 2020, when we first saw you,” Põder recalled, noting that Toyon entered during the pandemic, part of a cohort that learned to be independent researchers while isolated. “You were sitting in Sillamäe alone, no social capital, no peer effect, very limited teachers’ effect.” Pankova, who joined EBS the same year as Toyon, described growing together: “He’s my first PhD student... I could relate to him a lot because I was in his shoes not very long ago.” There was laughter when they recounted Toyon arriving with 300 pages, saying, “The thesis is done.”
After a brief deliberation, the committee returned with three unanimous votes in favour, awarding Toyon the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Management.
But the research itself demands attention beyond the ceremony. In a room full of academics, Toyon’s findings landed differently because they weren’t abstract. They were about the students sitting in every classroom, working night shifts between lectures, choosing between rent and textbooks.
Understanding the work: A conversation with Dr Mohammad Abu Sayed Toyon
What is your research about, and why does it matter?
My research focuses on the retention of working university students. It matters because retention is not only about keeping students enrolled, but also about how they are treated after they enter university. Just as organisations pay attention to the experience after a purchase (post-purchase experience), universities must recognise that students arrive with expectations, responsibilities, and lives that extend beyond the classroom.
This research centres on working students and gives them a voice. In Estonia, one in three students identifies primarily as a worker, and 37% of working students cannot afford higher education without paid employment. Yet higher education has long been imagined for a different kind of student: one with time to spare, sufficient financial security, and a life arranged neatly around the academic calendar. But today’s students live differently. They work to pay rent, to support families, and to build a future that cannot wait.
When institutions fail to recognise this reality, students rarely fail loudly; they simply leave. This research shows which groups of working students are most at risk of dropping out, why relationships within universities matter, and what working students need while integrating study and paid work. It also highlights what universities can do to better support them and help them stay.
What has the doctoral journey been like for you?
The doctoral journey has been full of memories, challenges, and insights. One of the most meaningful moments for an academic is seeing their academic works accepted by scholars in the field and made publicly available. This brings a sense of validation and motivation to continue contributing to the knowledge community, and I am no exception.
One of the main challenges has been learning that success in science is not only about what you know, but also about how well you communicate it and meet the expectations of others.
Who from the faculty has been instrumental to your journey?
Everyone at EBS has contributed in different ways, but Professor Kaire Põder has been especially instrumental in supporting and guiding my journey.
What has been the most rewarding part of this process?
The relationships and connections formed during this journey have been the most rewarding. Education is not a destination, but a never-ending path. What makes it meaningful is the sense that something uncertain still lies ahead, along with the hope that keeps one moving forward.
What advice would you give to other doctoral students or those considering a PhD?
I would advise thinking carefully before enrolling in a PhD programme, as it is very different from master’s-level study. It is not simply a matter of enrolling, publishing a few articles, writing a monograph, and then saying goodbye to the university. A PhD is a process of capital accumulation, where you build resources through connections, skills, and, most importantly, self-reliance.
What is next for you after the defence?
After the defence, I plan to focus on upcoming projects and continue applying the skills and insights gained throughout this academic journey.
Dr Mohammad Abu Sayed Toyon defended his doctoral thesis, “Retention of Working University Students in Higher Education: Insights from the Estonian Context,” on December 18, 2025, at Estonian Business School.
The thesis was supervised by Professor Kaire Põder and Assistant Professor Niveditha Prabakaran Pankova. The defence committee was chaired by Associate Professor Riina Koris and assisted by EBS Research and Doctoral Studies Coordinator Sigrid Lainevee, with opponents Associate Professor Maarja Beerkens (Leiden University) and Senior Lecturer Oleg Badunenko (Brunel University London).
19. detsember 2025
Other News
Mohammad Toyon’s Doctoral defence highlights retention of working university students in Estonia
On December 18, 2025, at Estonian Business School, Mohammad Abu Sayed Toyon stood before a defence committee to present five years of work on a question that affects students more than most universities and policymakers care to admit: what happens when students have to work to pursue their education?
The defence, led by Associate Professor Riina Koris, brought together Associate Professor Maarja Beerkens from Leiden University and Senior Lecturer Oleg Badunenko from Brunel University as opponents. Both praised the thesis for clear research questions, rigorous focus, and genuine relevance.
Beerkens noted that she was initially sceptical about measuring dropout intention rather than actual dropout, “but I see it’s really well argued now... You convinced me entirely why this is a valid measure, perhaps even a better measure.” Badunenko emphasised the thesis’s value in “highlighting the realities of working students, how they see education and how universities need to align with this new reality.”
The supervisors, Professor Kaire Põder and Assistant Professor Niveditha Prabakaran Pankova, spoke with affection about the journey. “It was five years ago, 2020, when we first saw you,” Põder recalled, noting that Toyon entered during the pandemic, part of a cohort that learned to be independent researchers while isolated. “You were sitting in Sillamäe alone, no social capital, no peer effect, very limited teachers’ effect.” Pankova, who joined EBS the same year as Toyon, described growing together: “He’s my first PhD student... I could relate to him a lot because I was in his shoes not very long ago.” There was laughter when they recounted Toyon arriving with 300 pages, saying, “The thesis is done.”
After a brief deliberation, the committee returned with three unanimous votes in favour, awarding Toyon the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Management.
But the research itself demands attention beyond the ceremony. In a room full of academics, Toyon’s findings landed differently because they weren’t abstract. They were about the students sitting in every classroom, working night shifts between lectures, choosing between rent and textbooks.
Understanding the work: A conversation with Dr Mohammad Abu Sayed Toyon
What is your research about, and why does it matter?
My research focuses on the retention of working university students. It matters because retention is not only about keeping students enrolled, but also about how they are treated after they enter university. Just as organisations pay attention to the experience after a purchase (post-purchase experience), universities must recognise that students arrive with expectations, responsibilities, and lives that extend beyond the classroom.
This research centres on working students and gives them a voice. In Estonia, one in three students identifies primarily as a worker, and 37% of working students cannot afford higher education without paid employment. Yet higher education has long been imagined for a different kind of student: one with time to spare, sufficient financial security, and a life arranged neatly around the academic calendar. But today’s students live differently. They work to pay rent, to support families, and to build a future that cannot wait.
When institutions fail to recognise this reality, students rarely fail loudly; they simply leave. This research shows which groups of working students are most at risk of dropping out, why relationships within universities matter, and what working students need while integrating study and paid work. It also highlights what universities can do to better support them and help them stay.
What has the doctoral journey been like for you?
The doctoral journey has been full of memories, challenges, and insights. One of the most meaningful moments for an academic is seeing their academic works accepted by scholars in the field and made publicly available. This brings a sense of validation and motivation to continue contributing to the knowledge community, and I am no exception.
One of the main challenges has been learning that success in science is not only about what you know, but also about how well you communicate it and meet the expectations of others.
Who from the faculty has been instrumental to your journey?
Everyone at EBS has contributed in different ways, but Professor Kaire Põder has been especially instrumental in supporting and guiding my journey.
What has been the most rewarding part of this process?
The relationships and connections formed during this journey have been the most rewarding. Education is not a destination, but a never-ending path. What makes it meaningful is the sense that something uncertain still lies ahead, along with the hope that keeps one moving forward.
What advice would you give to other doctoral students or those considering a PhD?
I would advise thinking carefully before enrolling in a PhD programme, as it is very different from master’s-level study. It is not simply a matter of enrolling, publishing a few articles, writing a monograph, and then saying goodbye to the university. A PhD is a process of capital accumulation, where you build resources through connections, skills, and, most importantly, self-reliance.
What is next for you after the defence?
After the defence, I plan to focus on upcoming projects and continue applying the skills and insights gained throughout this academic journey.
Dr Mohammad Abu Sayed Toyon defended his doctoral thesis, “Retention of Working University Students in Higher Education: Insights from the Estonian Context,” on December 18, 2025, at Estonian Business School.
The thesis was supervised by Professor Kaire Põder and Assistant Professor Niveditha Prabakaran Pankova. The defence committee was chaired by Associate Professor Riina Koris and assisted by EBS Research and Doctoral Studies Coordinator Sigrid Lainevee, with opponents Associate Professor Maarja Beerkens (Leiden University) and Senior Lecturer Oleg Badunenko (Brunel University London).
19. detsember 2025