Case Study You're a management consultant and have just spent the day observing Mike, the president of New Electronics Development Inc. Mike, who has been with the firm for just over a year, called you in to help him figure out why several of his product development employees who are responsible for creating new electronic products are such low performers. Mike is in the process of taking over the day-to-day operations and leadership from the founder and owner, who is looking forward to retirement. The company, while currently healthy, is facing an uncertain future in the rapidly evolving world of electronics. Mike knew the firm's future, and his personal success, rested on the firm's ability to develop truly innovative electronics devices. Within the past six months, more than a dozen new products were in the process of being developed and tested. The owner was delighted, but Mike, while pleased, thought his product development teams could do even better. Mike recently developed a complex metric to look at research group output and productivity with input from his marketing and finance groups. This measure was based on the projects the groups were working on and incorporated time to market, five-year revenue estimates, market share projections, resource requirements to bring the products to market, the potential for after-sales service revenue, and a subjective measure of "fit" with Mike's vision of the firm. Mike used this overall output measure to evaluate product development team members' output and the allocation of research resources. While Mike had the time to inform several of his "star" product development teams in advance, the measure's company-wide rollout was made at a staff retreat. Mike posted two lists: the "BOBS" (best of the best) and "WOWs" (worst of the worst). The BOBs were treated to rounds of golf. while the WOWs were instructed to use the time away from the office to improve the creativity of their new product ideas. Since the retreat, Mike has had weekly "BOB Council meetings to expedite research allocations and foster further innovative research. Mike explained this process as, "I want to spend my time where it will be the most productive." While there was initially some movement on and off the BOB and WOW listings, the groupings have remained relatively stable over the past three months. Mike's "problem children" are two product development groups that have been on the WOW list since its beginning. Mike cannot understand these groups. He told you he would personally rather resign than be constantly on a "loser list." On the way to your car this afternoon, you were stopped by Leslie, the leader of one of these WOW list groups. Leslie has been the group leader for 10 years, and while she admits her group has had a few "flops," she quickly lists numerous successes that she states are the foundation of the firm's current product group. She firmly states that the revenue from the products developed by my group is paying for that egotist's inflated salary, and he has the habit of making me communicate in memos rather than take my calls. If he had any experience in the industry, he would know his BOB measure is bogus." Leslie tells you that she never had any problem with the owner and suspects that Mike is trying to push her out because, in his world, women should be at the club playing tennis, not leading product development teams. She states that she and Carlos, the other "permanent" WOW member, are tired of being called "Loser Listers" and are fed up with Mike's abusive treatment After you have read the background information mentioned above, please answer the following questions individually: QI(a): Which leadership model/theories may be used to describe the situation best! QI(b): If you were coaching Mike, what pointers or suggestions would you offer him to improve his leadership approach?
Case Study
You're a management consultant and have just spent the day observing Mike, the president of New Electronics Development Inc. Mike, who has been with the firm for just over a year, called you in to help him figure out why several of his product development employees who are responsible for creating new electronic products are such low performers. Mike is in the process of taking over the day-to-day operations and leadership from the founder and owner, who is looking forward to retirement. The company, while currently healthy, is facing an uncertain future in the rapidly evolving world of electronics. Mike knew the firm's future, and his personal success, rested on the firm's ability to develop truly innovative electronics devices. Within the past six months, more than a dozen new products were in the process of being developed and tested. The owner was delighted, but Mike, while pleased, thought his product development teams could do even better. Mike recently developed a complex metric to look at research group output and productivity with input from his marketing and finance groups. This measure was based on the projects the groups were working on and incorporated time to market, five-year revenue estimates, market share projections, resource requirements to bring the products to market, the potential for after-sales service revenue, and a subjective measure of "fit" with Mike's vision of the firm. Mike used this overall output measure to evaluate product development team members' output and the allocation of research resources. While Mike had the time to inform several of his "star" product development teams in advance, the measure's company-wide rollout was made at a staff retreat. Mike posted two lists: the "BOBS" (best of the best) and "WOWs" (worst of the worst). The BOBs were treated to rounds of golf. while the WOWs were instructed to use the time away from the office to improve the creativity of their new product ideas. Since the retreat, Mike has had weekly "BOB Council meetings to expedite research allocations and foster further innovative research. Mike explained this process as, "I want to spend my time where it will be the most productive." While there was initially some movement on and off the BOB and WOW listings, the groupings have remained relatively stable over the past three months. Mike's "problem children" are two product development groups that have been on the WOW list since its beginning. Mike cannot understand these groups. He told you he would personally rather resign than be constantly on a "loser list." On the way to your car this afternoon, you were stopped by Leslie, the leader of one of these WOW list groups. Leslie has been the group leader for 10 years, and while she admits her group has had a few "flops," she quickly lists numerous successes that she states are the foundation of the firm's current product group. She firmly states that the revenue from the products developed by my group is paying for that egotist's inflated salary, and he has the habit of making me communicate in memos rather than take my calls. If he had any experience in the industry, he would know his BOB measure is bogus." Leslie tells you that she never had any problem with the owner and suspects that Mike is trying to push her out because,
in his world, women should be at the club playing tennis, not leading product development teams. She states that she and Carlos, the other "permanent" WOW member, are tired of being called "Loser Listers" and are fed up with Mike's abusive treatment
After you have read the background information mentioned above, please answer the following questions individually:
QI(a): Which leadership model/theories may be used to describe the situation best! QI(b): If you were coaching Mike, what pointers or suggestions would you offer him to improve his leadership approach?
Step by step
Solved in 4 steps
