Our MBA course on Organizations and Leadership was very involved, stimulating and inspiring. We dealt with various behaviors at large in companies at various levels – individual, group and organization. The learning was geared towards utilizing the academic research and concepts to real world situations. Overall the class was very interesting and allowed students to honestly express their perceptions, thoughts, ideas and led to harmonious sharing of knowledge and information. I will be posting my responses to various virtual discussions we had on OB topics.
1. Describe Wal-Mart’s culture? Why and how is it relevant to the business it is in?
“What makes ordinary people do extraordinary things?” Sam Walton once asked. “Aren’t we a group of ordinary folks? We really are. And I think we, together as a team, have done extraordinary things. We’ve all grown, we’ve all accomplished much more than any of us ever thought that we could.”- Sam Walton, founder of Wal-Mart
Wal-Mart’s organizational culture is driven by being customer-centric and service-oriented. The focus is on leadership, employee empowerment, efficiencies and a “culture of control.”
I wanted to focus on both the positive and negative aspects of the organizational structure prevalent at Wal-Mart.
Wal-Mart has been plagued with lots of negative publicity and that has been grounded in unfair and exploitative practices that have been adopted to run their businesses successfully. As the largest employer after the federal government, Wal-Mart had taken heat from federal prosecutors, social activists, environmental groups and the media for employing illegal immigrants, lowering wages and driving down prices, providing meager health benefits and causing environmental damage. As stated in a recent LA Times article – “By the company’s own admission, a full-time worker might not be able to support a family on a Wal-Mart paycheck.” Wal-Mart is able to provide lower prices by undercutting the welfare expenses of its own employees. Wal-Mart needs to improve it’s corporate culture and instead of focusing just on giving back to the community, it must do more in giving back to it’s employees. Wal-Mart is known for its system of shared actions, beliefs and values which guide the behavior of its employees. Organizations cannot afford to be frugal and undercut the benefits to its employees. Wal-Mart needs to improve its image among the local communities, empower employees, loosen control and be more socially responsible.
On the contrary Wal-Mart has been able to provide employment to millions of workers, forced competitors to be more efficient and instrumental in driving up nation’s productivity. It is a model of how successful capitalism is supposed to work.
2. Does it make sense for all organizations to take a “Google-like” approach to supporting employees? Why?
Google is an innovation company with a learning culture which is characterized by programs, processes and systems which encourage people and organizations to learn, recover from mistakes, and innovate. It follows open communication and shares all information with employees, encourages debate and critical reviews, like-minded cooperation. Google hires the best talented people (through rigorous screening procedures) who are highly focused and align them with the strategic goals of the company. There are very few managers and most employees are empowered and allowed the choice to pursue their own interests as part of their jobs. Creativity is fostered and instant decisions are made. But as the organization grows bigger and bigger, it will be more difficult to retain such close knit focused groups and use constructive criticism and make fast decisions.
The culture prevailing at Google can only by emulated by companies which constantly deal with change, are creative and innovative. Initially it may work when the company is growing but as the company expands and diversifies; it will become difficult to follow the learning culture of small high focused groups with instant decision making capabilities. Building talented teams and fostering cooperation may not be possible in most companies. In addition, the provision of employee benefits to motivate employees may not be matched by other companies.
See the link below to learn more about the Google culture
http://www.forbes.com/global/2005/1114/054A.html
3. How should “young” leaders approach motivating their direct reports who are significantly older?
The Organization I work for has a significant number of older employees who are supervised by young managers. Motivating such an older workforce requires lots of perseverance, patience and determination. Older workers are not ambitious to climb the corporate ladder and establish themselves as stereotypes that show no inclination to learn new technologies or adapt to new processes. But that is a misconception. Older workers are truly loyal, have vast experience and expertise and know how business is managed. Managers need to deal with them with extreme caution, tact and skill. Managers need to shed their supervising authority and engage them with due respect and treat them fairly without letting them realize the age gap. In situations when they are under physical and emotional work stress, the manager should sympathize with due concern and provide them comforting words. Always reiterate the value they contribute to the company, loyalty, their role significance and the immense experience they are endowed with. Allow young workers to interact with the older employees and encourage them to seek guidance, assistance and mentoring from them. Respect the ideas and opinions brought out by the older employees and reward and recognize them for their input. Communicate openly without inhibitions and learn from their experiences. Finally, managers need to provide autonomy and freedom to take appropriate actions when demanded.
4. Considering the “Are Five Heads Better Than One” case, how would you have selected members for this team?
The team composition should include a mix of people and skills. The individuals must have strong understanding of the goals and tasks, are objective towards the process, are creative and open-minded, creative problem-solvers, great team players with good reputation, excellent communication skills, and ability to adopt to change and deliver in a highly dynamic environment. Some members should be external with no knowledge of business to have a fresh perspective and outlook to the team.
The group so established should have the following:
1. Establish task interdependencies and reinforce those linkages with congruent goals and performance feedback. Create accountability for each team member.
2. Enable team structure so that members take ownership of tasks.
3. Ensure a supportive organizational context with reward systems in place.
4. Reduce conflicting priorities and create conducive and co-operative work environment.
Apart from this the social dynamics also need to match in order to deliver excellent results.
5. What could team members and upper management done differently to avoid this failure? (Case Study)
An in-depth analysis of the team dynamics and the organizational culture prevalent at the advertising firm provides exposure to some of the critical elements of behavior missing at the personal and group level. First the selection of the team members was flawed since it encouraged like minded individuals to be tem members. Secondly, from the onset of the initiative, the group was ridden with ineffective planning, lack of communication and the absence of proper group structure. Though the team members had extensive past experience dealing with such similar projects, the “Group Think” behavior slowly started shadowing the opinions of the individual members. We see the rise of a dominant personality exerting influence on the viewpoints and opinions of others. In such a climate, individuals lose confidence and are pressurized not to express their ideas and opinions. They live in fear of rejection and refrain from brainstorming and decision-making activities.
In my opinion the following recommendations would have changed the outcome and resulted in better working environment for the group.
1. The selection should have been more diversified attracting talent with varied experiences, talents and personalities
2. Group should have been properly structured with some form of hierarchy and accountability in place
3. Ideas, opinions and viewpoints of every member should have been taken into consideration before any decision was made.
A consensus based approach will definitely keep up the group morale and make individuals feel that their voice was heard and that their
Contributions are tightly associated with the mission and vision in mind.
4. Communication channels should have been made open and individual expressions respected and encouraged
5. The early involvement of the client on the project would have given the opportunity for the stakeholder to suggest ideas and improvements.
It would have resulted in a more cohesive and collaborative undertaking.
6. Effective monitoring of the project by upper management along with experts would have drastically reduced any flaws with the design or development.
8. Management buy-in and effective support would have instilled confidence and kept the group energized to accomplish their desired goals.
These are some of my suggestions, but I know there are many more that will make this list which will favor a better outcome.
6. Considering the current business climate, what are the three most essential elements necessary for effective leadership?
When businesses face unexpected and unprecedented crisis, the most desperately needed element is effective leadership, a leadership that can restore faith and confidence amongst employees, business groups and clients, motivate, inspire and reinforce commitment to goals, values and responsibilities.
It is crisis and uncertainty that will bring forth the extraordinary leadership qualities of an effective leader. The three most essential elements are character, communication and conceptual capacity. Listed below are some of these exaggerated traits, which in my opinion are of utmost importance to being a successful leader:
Confident Visionary – One who can provide clarity of shared vision and goals
Empathetic and Caring – Treat everyone with respect, dignity, value and trust, encourage feedback and consensus opinion
Excellent Communicator – An individual with well-honed communication strategy who can address fear, anxiety and worry.
Emotionally Intelligent– be able to recognize, and manage emotions and feelings of others
Competent & Ethical – a passionate personality to restore confidence and display managerial competence, diligent enough to anticipate, prepare and mitigate impending crisis and one who is accountable and integral.
Effective Decision Maker (Tactical & Strategic) – An individual who can analyze the problem, weigh all alternatives, understand the consequences and makes a conscientious decision with long-term positive impact
Enterprising & Innovative – An individual, who can exploit opportunities even in times of crisis, is creative and won’t hesitate to innovate and take calculated risk.
The above listed traits are paramount to effective leadership. Though not every leader is endowed with all these qualities, the existence of right proportion of these traits will establish oneself to lead, motivate and manage businesses successfully under any duress.
7. The trait-based approach to leadership is one of the most common. What are its limitations?
I can understand the prominence of this trait based leadership theory during early part of the century when not much research was done in the areas of psychology and leadership excellence. But the rapid industrialization and economic boom of the 20th century has created extremely competitive landscape for businesses where situational behavior and actions disdained the old myth of trait importance.
I don’t believe in the theory of born talent. It is this belief that has caused lots of grief and rift among various races. The fact that certain individuals possess special traits by virtue of birth is subject to debate. The very grounds of caste system in India are deeply engrained in this thought of trait leadership. Class distinctions, racial hatred or supremacist movements are based on this self-fulfilling prophecy that their birth entitles them to dominate others or feel supreme. I agree that some individuals are born genius, but I strongly believe in ‘made genius’ concept. Though there are innumerable examples to prove the relevance of trait theory, it is the right combination of these traits along with situational behavior that sets apart a leader.
As stated by the theory, the traits of adaptability, assertiveness, co-operation, decisiveness, dependability, dominance, persistence, self-confidence, tolerance and responsibility can all be learned, though it requires lots of perseverance and hard work. Some find it easy to learn or some have that pre-existing knowledge/intelligence to understand and apply them without having to learn. The selection of a leader is dependent on the culture existing in a company. If the company emphasizes honesty and integrity, then it may be prompted more to look for such traits in an individual.
The trait theory does not help us identify:
1. The type of traits absolutely needed in various leadership situations.
2. The right combination and mix of these traits.
Apart from these, the theory fails to address the concerns:
1. Discourages individuals from aiming for leadership positions for which their traits are not a fit.
2. Implants the false notion that leaders need to excel in every characteristic and trait in order to be successful.
As Peter Drucker put it, a leader cannot be categorized by a particular personality type, style or set of traits, instead must be understood in terms of his or her constituents, results, behaviors, and responsibilities. In short, the existence of certain traits, motives and characteristics will help in being an effective leader, but ultimately it is the situational behavior and the skills that are applied what matter.
Reference:
Zaccaro, Stephen J. 2007. “Trait-Based Perspectives of Leadership.” American Psychologist 62, no. 1: 6-16. Business Source Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed October 2, 2009).
8. According to Kayes, Stirling, & Nielsen, what is the most difficult aspect of building organizational integrity?
As discussed by the authors – Kayes, Stirling, & Nielsen, four organizational practices: operating controls, principles and purpose, core values, and culture make up the pillars of building integrity within an organization. While most of these approaches can be built, building a culture of integrity is very difficult. This, according to the authors requires understanding of deeply held assumptions, not just the day-to-day behaviors. Instituting a culture of integrity requires facilitation of ethical decision making and building a culture of openness, responsibility, and commitment to business goals. The Best Buy culture discussed in the article is a classic example of how a culture of integrity can be built. Assessing values, weighing choices, and considering multiple demands is what helps Best buy excel at building integrity.
Changing culture overnight is impossible. You have people with firm beliefs and values who cannot give up easily. Transforming culture requires the recognition of these beliefs and then challenging them. Although an organization can have well established controls such as compliance, oversight and auditing, strict conformity to core values, principles and purpose, all it finally flows down to is individual values and beliefs. Unless people are made aware of the unethical implications of their actions, companies will be held captive to the actions of these individuals.
The prosecution of Martha Stewart is a stunning example of how leaders engaging in unethical behaviors can ruin the reputation of a company. Such low standards of moral behavior can result in loss of revenue, brand equity, loss of customers and lost productivity. And building a clean culture of integrity is time-consuming and very difficult to achieve.
9. What are some key steps organizations can take to implement change more effectively?
In order to make effective organizational changes, an organization should:
1. Communicate, co-ordinate and educate people on the need for change. Inform them of why the change is needed, how it will affect them and what will be their role in it. Finally discuss the benefits to the organization as a whole.
2. Translate the vision into a realistic plan and carry it out.
3. Involve people and accept their honest feedback, understand various perspectives, have constructive discussions and accordingly formalize a plan.
4. Delegate decisions to employees and make them accountable for change.
5. Negotiate and agree with hostile opponents, provide incentives to eliminate resistance.
6. Train and provide professional development skills for employees who are fearful of change.
Though these are golden nuggets to follow, most organizations lack the approach, skills and competing leadership to implement it. The organization I work for has set lofty goals to achieve over the next five years, but lack the vision, commitment, resources and faces stiff resistance.
10. What are some of the fundamental elements of organizational change?
The following are the essential elements of organizational change:
1. Change (Organizational Change) is mostly an alteration of core aspects of an organization’s operation. The core aspects include the structure, technology, culture, leadership, goal, or personnel of an organization.
2. Change is a never-ending process. It does not cease after certain actions or transformation events have happened. Businesses must meet the new emerging demands of intense competition, rivalry, changing socio-economic factors, technological transformation and socially sustainable business practices. These challenges make ‘Change’ a never ending process.
3. Change is not always embraced in an organization. It comes with its own set of challenges, hostilities and resistance factors. The degree to which change is allowed, implemented and retained varies from organization to organization in the context of business challenges they face.
4. Change can be fundamental and radical. Most changes usually involve organizational culture, business processes, staff skills/knowledge, job design/responsibilities, policies and procedures. Small changes can be radical, but most complex changes take time to materialize and require the support and commitment from everyone (most ones) within the organization.
