Leadership_in_Action

Leadership in Action: Simulation Analysis The purpose of this simulation was to see how a change in our leadership style could impact a group of employees. Adopting different styles depending of the circumstances can be very positive if style is in synchronization with the needs of a group or organization. The simulation was performed at Smith & Falmouth (S&F) which is a midsize tele-shopping and mail order network with operations in the US and Canada. According to the simulation “ground Situation” section, the company is driven by forecasts and the internal strategy road map. They just have started an e-tailing division, named S&F Online. Irene Seagraves the CEO of this division has named me COO after she put together a web development team and logistics team. My goal is to achieve targets set by Irene. I will have to work with a group of resistant individuals that resent my appointment due to the changes in the organizational hierarchy made after my appointment. First and foremost I have to identify an ally. Someone that can bring me in and help me sunk in the current group; I need to be accepted. I started establishing possible connections and soon discovered that my perception was different from the ground reality. According to the “Establishing Connection” section of the simulation, the leaders are strongly aligned to their managers. If I want my decision to yield results and be welcomed I must be careful in utilizing the right influential leader. The Logistics Manager (LM) has a mutual relationship with the Logistics team and in addition the Web development Team seeks for him. The Project Manger (PM) has the same but opposite relationship with these teams. The LM and PM have a mutual relationship and the PM and Marketing Manager (MM) does as well. The relationship between the MM and the LM is towards the LM. The Logistics Team seeks the MM. Interestingly the MM and I have a mutual relationship. Rather than using this last relationship to my advantage I chose to ally with the LM since both teams seek after him. According to chapter 6, the influence process involves motives and perceptions of the target (the group) in relation to the agent (me). Currently nobody seeks after me or is influenced by me; therefore I believe is best to use the most influential person as an ally. At this time, Irene presents an issue with the shopping cart functionality therefore I take on this opportunity to start the bonding process with the LM. I know he feels strongly about empowering the team so I proceed with an official meeting in which I make the point of offering more responsibilities and promotions when meeting Irene’s expectations. Also, I presented my open door policy, a variable salary offer based on performance and a rewards system to reward performers. Although the PM was please with my approach the team didn’t like it. The team felt I was too direct and tried to gain trust with money remuneration. After looking at the current sociogram, I see the need of my plan to be more effective so that the teams and the managers can be both influenced by me. To add more fire to the fire, Irene is disappointed and challenges me with double the current customer base by-the-end-of-the-quarter. I shall move fast, streamline the product sourcing and delivery operations. In order for me to accomplish this I need to hire some specialist but this creates a treat to the current team. I call for a meeting to introduce goals to the teams and offer a Job Safety Plan. In addition, I establish productivity measures that compare with those used in other companies. The PM is once again in agreement and the teams were able to see my “supportive leadership” however we fell short and delivered 70% instead of the expected 100%. I chose to be supportive since I am in much needed of that from the team. However I should have chose to provide training or some type of capacitating program in order to prepare the team with the skills to deliver results. I didn’t choose this approach because I wanted to prevent intimidation and show some “reward power”, as mentioned in chapter 6. After this experience, Irene is able to buy some time and gave me three more months to deliver results. At this point I shall launch the “value-added services” and the marketing campaign on time. Therefore I decide to partner with the LM and try to build much needed team spirit. During our informal meeting I introduced, once again, a monetary incentive as well as the use of recreational facilities. I still want to include this approach to motivate the team. In addition I introduce the use of leadership symbols to continue with the motivational strategy and finally offer additional resources such as larger budgets for machines and training to eliminate the skill gap that led us to have a 70% versus the required 100%. Finally, Irene is happy. Not only that the LM feels strong about implementing my decisions. A key for this triumph was my “transformational leadership” approach. It proved to help me win over the teams! I was able to motivate and unite them and this helped them deliver the much needed results. I have finally found commitment instead of resistance. Despite these good results I didn’t consider the MM who had an incredible influential ability. I believe that if this company is to be successful the employees need to be empowered, educated and motivated towards the goals. Their leader shall be empowered before any other prospect is given power. It is much beneficial and strategic to let their leaders “move them” than bringing a complete stranger to deliver results. I suggest an open door policy to gain power from within the group, after all rewards can lead to compliance and not commitment. References: Organizational Behavior, Twelfth Edition, by Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2007 by Pearson Education, Inc. Simulations Leadership in Action Smith and Falmouth Simulation Retrieved March 15, 2010 from https://ecampus.phoenix.edu/secure/aapd/vendors/tata/sims/hrob/hrob_simulation2.html