Organisation and Management
1. Based on P & G case study
a. Carry out Force Field Analysis and Compare Different Approaches Between Alan Lafley and DurkJager to change P & G
P & G was founded by William Procter, a candle maker, and James Gamble, a soap maker. Became Both sisters-in-law when married to Olivier and Elizabeth Norris brothers. The idea of establishing a joint venture was pioneered by Alexander Norris, whose father-in-law, who had a meeting where he persuaded Procter and Gamble to become business partners. On August 24, 1837, as a result of the meeting, Procter & Gamble was founded. This date is then commemorated as the anniversary of P & G in each year.https://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procter_%26_Gamble
On 1 September 1999 P & G named CEO DurkJager. However the term of office was only 18 months due to Internal Facing economic problems and the crisis that o ccurred within the P & G Coperation. Then, AG Lafley who Became CEO in June 2000, reaffirmed P & G’s Purpose and Values and refocused the Company on the few choices Necessary to get the business back on track: growing its leading categories and brands with its Reviews largest retail customers in its top geographic markets, while accelerating growth in health, beauty and personal care and in fast-developing developing markets. In the five years that followed, P & G increased sales more than 40%, doubled profits, generated more than $ 30 billion in free cash flow, and delivered more than $ 70 billion in shareholder value.
To advance Organization and make them keep going, there needs to be a change to it. there is many type to change an Organization, such as Internal and External Factor.
An External environmental changes in which organisation exist like economic conditions, legal or political developments, societal or demographic shifts, competitors’ actions and technological developments. The last two are relevant to P&G, as we know P&G management team was facing competition from competitors present in their industry also in the dynamic world of business development of new technologies forced them to implement change.(Hitt, Steward, & Porter, 2014)
Internal Forces more towards to managerial decisions and employee preferences and suggestions which operate within the organisation can also be vital forces responsible for change to happen in an organisation.(Hitt, Steward, & Porter, 2014)
In performing his duties there is Force field analysis of different approaches to change take by DurkJager. Jager had failed to lead P&G. Durk is an aggressive change agent that launches several new brands and often makes changes without knowing the capacity of employees that can cause fatigue changes. Employees may just wait for that phase to pass by keeping their heads low. Aggressive change at a very fast pace can work as a retaining force.
|Force Against the Chance
|Force to Change By DurkJager
|Durk jager was aggressive to move the organizational and too much launch new products without knowing employee capability. This is might be become a flaming between the employee. Aggressive change at a very fast pace might work as restraining force.||Launch New Technology. P&G was facing competition in their industry due to entry of new technologies. This external environment factor is one of the major pacing for organizational to change.|
While doing his work. Jagermore focus on processes and structures to change rather than focusing on people. This is biggest failure he made but different case if he involve people in change process.
To achieve change in the face of global competition in the future. Later will many new and sophisticated companies that will emerge. This can be one of the external environmental factors that the world is changing so quickly can be one of the reasons for realizing the change to P & G.
DurkJager too much Openabout criticismregarding company’s internally focused culture. This also become restraining force and decrease employees to ready with the changes. to help people adopt new changes Leader should preserve the core culture and values of organisation
|Since jager joining P&G. the organizational and the profit was growth very slow. This impact to the future for the Company. So this is also a big Force for Change|
Force field analysis of different approaches to change taken by DurkJager.
Driving Force Restricting Force
Organization Slow Growth
Pace Aggressive Change
Entrace of New Technology
Cost of Apply New Technology
Employee Resistance to Change
Too much realese new products without understand employee capability
After DurkJager’s departure, P & G replaced their CEO position to Alan Lafley. Alan Lafley is the CEO of P & G for two terms, from 2000 to 2010 and then again from 2013 to 2015. When appointed as a CEO for the first time in June 2010, P & G is facing a major problem, namely the decline in stock market value of around USD 50 billion (P & G, 2015). But thanks to Lafley’s expertise, slowly but surely P & G can achieve their success. Alan Lafley is now the savior of P & G’s history and with the receipt of various awards against him. For Examples, He received the CEO of the Year (ChiefExecutive.net, 2006) Alan Lafley has syle Leadership favored employees. According toHersey and Blanchard’s situational Leadership models he implements Coaching / Selling Leadership Style where he frees his employees to provide opinions and inputs to P & G and provide support and guidance so that employees can be better. Hersey and Blanchard’s situational leadership model is Hersey and Blanchard model is a situational leadership model which suggests that there is no single optimal leadership style, and successful leaders adjust their styles based on Follower maturity. (Hersey and Blanchard situational modelship, 2014) In addition, in the face of changes in the Company Alan Lafley implement Transformational Leadership methods that always inspire, empowering, and provide training to each employee. Unlike Durk Jager’s, Alan Lafley prefers to give priority to customer satisfaction. Where he has a slogan “Costumer is Boss” Alan Lafley always provide the best innovation of each product for keep be loved and desirable among customers. It also brings good change to the corporate culture that is becoming more Friendly and Keep Innovation in Every Part of Department.
|Force Against the Chance
|Force to Change By Alan Lafley
|Since Alan Lafley replace Jager place to save P&G from the brink of destruction. Employees will be hesitant and fearful in accepting New changes. this will be a challenge for Lafley.||Being an insider Lafley was very much aware of company’s culture and values so it became easier for him to understand what exactly needs to be done to bring about successful change in P&G.|
Lafley was applicating Transformational Leadership style. Its make him to always empowered his employee and always give motivate and being Inspirational to people. He also visioner person.
|He is Consumer based Oriented And Externally focused leader. Lafley focused more on outside forces which were pressing in on company for example he focused more on consumers’ needs and wants by spending considerable time with them every day. He focused on how to defeat the competitor in the marketplace|
Force field analysis of different approaches to change taken by Alan Lafley.
Driving Force Restricting Force
Organization Slow Growth
Employee still afraid to change after what happen to Jager
Entrace of New Technology
Cost of Apply New Technology
Motivation and Empower Employee
Innovation, Visionary, Insider Leader
More Focus on External Factor such as Costumers, Competitor
Give P&G more Profit
|Different approach Between Durk Jager and Alan Lafley|
|Durk Jager||Alan Lafley|
|Bad at Communication, Critism about P&G people rather than help and empowering people.||Good communication, Help the employee and empowering them also always give motivation towards the staff|
|Change too fast Organization without Realizing employee Capability||Careful and always research before doing something and learn the capabilities of the existing employees.|
|Transactional Leadership Style||Transformational Leadership style|
|Bad Negoitator||Good Negoitator|
b. Reccomendations to DurkJager
a. Planning and Preparing for change
According to (Hitt, Steward, & Porter, 2014) After understanding, assessing and evaluating the need for change next step is managing the change. Planning and preparing for change comes under process of managing change. For Prepare and Plan P&G should evaluate which they already done and cross check for what they done wrong for this time. It could be analyse they last 10 years profit or checking all the existing employee performance, until we find something goes wrong in Organization then we can start to do list what should we change for the future and ask for permission to Board of Director about what we will do.
To get more accurate Prepare and planning, we can carry out the Force Field Analyses. Later, the team must make the process to understand what drives the forces that support the change process. especially what happened with P & G today. in the face of existing competition they must be more diligent in the face of competition, by preparing several new technologies, changing the way of competition, and seeking visionary leaders, receiving criticism from several parties and not only focus on internal issues but also focus on external problems. list employees in the change process, etc. In order for the equilibrium management team to increase the driving force or reduce the strength of detention.
Learn from Jager’s mistakes in leading P & G’s too fast adaptable for a change and an aggressive change agent while lead P&G with short time but change major things in organization. Then, we should have focussed and accurate time to implemented the change. We should not be too fast because this will endanger the company as employees are unprepared to adapt new changes. also should not be too slow because the company will not grow and could in result failure.
- Building support and Communication
To build support and communication within an organization, there are several ways that can be applied. One of them, by giving motivation speech to the employee, build good communication to every staff. (Maxwell, 2007) Also biased in the form of incentives, where the leader can reward the best employees who will motivate the employees to work better and make them like the leader. Jager made a mistake in which he did the opposite against P & g employees by criticizing instead of providing assistance and motivation to them.
P&G managers should encourage employees to participate in change process. They could have included most agreeable and influential employees to strengthen their process of change. In order to make participation effective employee’s feedback and suggestions must be taken in to consideration to actually involve them in change. This could have helped management to improve their plans and also gaining their trust and commitment towards change.
b. Focus on Change
For Implementation on the change there are some things that must be considered by Durk Jager as focus on changes that will be made to the company. Example;
Seeing Alan Lafley’s innovation on P & G. Jager should have thought of this before. for example, He Can purchasing a new sophisticated machine that can support the quantity and quality of the product in order to be better in the future, or to present a research place that will examine the products the customer wants. This can spur P & G’s reputation better in the future as it delivers high-quality products.
2. Share Values and Culture
By accepting Values or ideas from others and accommodating all criticisms and suggestions from the Internal factor it can create a quality workplace that is conducive. And with a conducive and comfortable working environment, will build a work culture that can motivate employees to work better.
Jager also can prepare what the right strategy changes in the future to face globalization. As Alan Lafley does with how he confronts competitors by listening to consumers. so they are happy with P & G products and do not look to other competitors. Jager can do the same plus think about how to market the product widely to different distributors.
In making a change, a CEO must be able to understand the situation. In this case DurkJager made a fatal mistake in which he was too fast and too aggresive making changes to P & G without doing research first before making any changes. He should do some researches first and thinks about the worst case that happened in the future. It means, a Leader can do with a moderate amount, slowly but surely follow the developments that occur in the time and see the changes that occur within the internal company itself. By making changes gradually. For example, every year held the performance evaluation agenda of each division where if the division or department has decreased it will be changed the structure of employees in the division. To make any changes can be done Rapid but deliberately and appropriately so that the right target.
In Performing his duties as CEO of DurkJager has many errors. See how Alan Lafley was successful at planning the Company shortly after he became CEO of P & G. According Kurt Lewin-Refreezing Unfreezing-Movement Theory.DurkJager has tried to change the culture and corporate structure but failed. Where Durk Mistrust and Lack of Information with the many P & G employees fired by Durk as an effort to cost-effectiveness cost labor, this resulted in the chaos of his situation that occurred at P & G. After the dismissal, the company lost the number of workers and the quantity of product decreased, this resulted in the loss and fall of P & G stock prices in the stock market. This is because Durk Lack of Clarity and capabilities determine what happens after the dismissal. After that DurkJager realized that he made a mistake. What he did was only bringing a bad impact on the company and did not give a profit, it also makes DurkJager stuck and does not do anything. should be shortly after being appointed CEO on September 1, 1999 DurkJagermemplanning what he will do to make the company continue to grow for the better. For example, it provides a sophisticated tool tool for the benefit of product production at the company. Or provide training to employees so that later employees will be responsive and alert with whatever happens to the company. Jager can also provide laboratory observations that aim to research first before marketing other new products. So that later every product launched in the market. To carry out the change, it also requires support from the Internal factor or the people closest, where the person can first know what will happen and what is ready to respond to the change for the company. Jager must also be good at choosing the right way to convey ideas or ideas to all elements and divisions in the company. For example by means of Persuasive and put forward the principle of Brainstorming together to find new ideas. This will be a positive thing because with a conducive internal approach will have an effect on the progress of the Company. If the Employees can pour their ideas on the company this can be a positive thing to encourage the company to move forward. Durk can also choose and find the right time in the delivery process for example, at the time of the annual meeting where all employees are at the same opportunity and are gathered, at that time DurkJager can ask for advice or criticism and input to the Internal to face the readiness in the future such as what they will do or what innovations they will launch using media such as Polls and Survey or direct mail submissions.
d. Planning choices for change
when we are looking for changes and we want to change some functions in the organisation first we need to know which part could be developed or changed. For this we need to make a list of things that we want to change. So Durk Jager should make a list of stuff that he want to change which can be like what I am suggesting him below.
First make a list of all the functions of the organisation
- Strategy, means the norms, rules, discipline, way of work and the method to deal with work. So he need to analyse that should this part need to be changed or not.
- Structure, means the pattern of management for example the management structure that a company is following like line management, function management and hybrid management structure. He should scan it as well.
- System, this is the way that a company choose to deal with all management affairs like management conflicts, strikes, employee motivation method and working operations. If there was any problem in these functions then he should go for it.
- Technology, in the recent years companies are forcing more on technology to be in the competition, so in this case he should look for any odd technology which is effecting the sales of the company, he should change that technology like product shelves, checkouts and trollies to carry stuff inside the P&G Supermarket.
- Shared values and culture, if something is effecting to the peace of the company then it should be figured out and solved, shared values like communication channels, working environment, norms and cooperative values. Jager should have a look on that as well.
- Staff, if there is any more need of staff or due to over staff you want to cut off the staff or if you want to train your employees then he should make it in his list and discuss it later on.
This whole information is grabbed from “MANAGEMENT BOOK” ‘M. Hitt, S. Black, L. Porter, 2014. Management: third edition. Pearson New International book.
e. Implementation Choices
Now he has figured out what to change and has plenty of choices and now if go back to the case study then it is clear that he wanted to change the culture of the company and the working style so below I will recommend him to follow that one of the best pattern in my mind.
So if we assume that he want to change the culture then I would recommend implementation
1. focus of change, So if we assume that he want to change the culture then I would recommend implementation him to be stick on his priority. First he needs to talk about the change that he want in culture with all the staff and give an impressive speech and show some positive graphs of the change in future. It is also maintained in the 14 chapter of the Management Book that only one change should be done before moving to another. Because if you have many tasks to handle at a single time then you may be stressed and do something which is not acceptable in the business, we seems to be happened with Jager. “MANAGEMENT BOOK” ‘M. Hitt, S. Black, L. Porter, 2014. Management : third edition. Pearson New International book.
2. Choice of amount, it is not possible that Jager can change the whole culture because in the ground reality it is not possible, we can take many change initiative cases when someone change a function of the organisation, they do not change the whole they scan the whole function that needs to be changed and then look for some areas to be diagnosed. So in this case if Jager think that ‘for example, in the whole culture he wants to change the customer service method then he can work on that but just for one part of function changing the whole management function will definitely find failures everywhere. So he should decide what should be the amount of change. It is also maintained in the “MANAGEMENT BOOK” ‘M. Hitt, S. Black, L. Porter, 2014. Management : third edition. Pearson New International book.
3. Frequency of change, there is a particular time for every change, and after every change organisation need some rest to prepare for the next change. Jager was becoming limitless for changes which results in failure, as he decided to change culture first when it has been done then he should go for structure or some other functions which needs to be changed. But change after change always give adverse results. So the frequency of changes should be planned before actually doing them on the ground reality. Which can de figured out in “MANAGEMENT BOOK” ‘M. Hitt, S. Black, L. Porter, 2014. Management : third edition. Pearson New International book.
2. Based on the “Class Project Team” case study
a. ‘Stage and Explanations of each and Reason for selected stage
Development of the group, can be grouped into four stages (Hitt, Black, & Porter, 2014), namely
1. Formation, the stage where the new group is formed, which is marked by the stage where the group members try to get to know each other and know the position of each in the group.
This group already passed this stage, because the member already know each other and not new person to each other and also each member has start to talking and discussing with each other.
2. Early Development, which is the stage at which the case early relationships between members of the group, in which each member has to know his position within the organization, what is expected of their existence within the organization, and trying to understand the behavior of each member. At this stage is also characterized by the sharing of information between members of the group,although sometimes there are also members who are very cautious in sharing information, and even tend to be storing the information itself.
This Case Study Group also has through this stage. When every member has distribute their task and know what they responbility to do with the part. They also has know what should they do regarding the project.
3. Becoming a Group, which is the stage where the acceptance of mutual agreement in the group and also mutually agreed norms. Here the group’s cohesion begins to look like members who can accept the opinions of other members and appreciate any differences of opinion.
This is the Stage where group study stuck in. they have know their task also has agree with their own responbility to do with the task. And also has been meet to talking and brainstorming about this. But unfortunately, they didn’t proper doing their work, most of them still thinking about their own activity and abadoneed their work in this group.
4. Performing as a Team, which is the stage where a group is solid between one member and other members. This is marked by the loss of dissent between group members and the resulting work of the group.
The group still not yet in this stage. Many of the member doing social loafing which is doesn’t care about the work. And has failed to do with their task. They still not ready finalze their work and still need to be re-write, print out and polishing. In this stage team members should have taken responsibility to complete pending tasks rather than avoiding them.
Figure 1 Development of the group
Source: (Hitt, Black, & Porter, 2014)
In my analyses of this “Class Project Team”, my conclusion is the Group is in the stage of “Early Development”. the members already know each other and already know their respective duties, but they prioritize their selfishness to make the internal group messy and irregular.
b. How the stage of development group will have an impact to its performance
This will directly change the focus of the leader and make him realize that only the final goal is not important he has to follow a pattern to get were he want to be. Because until now I assume from the case study that there was no regular check on the whole process by leader so it will change his vision. So now the focus of leader will move to norming stage and he will think to create a positive flow of information. and have to arrange some meetings because as per the situation the team is not working together which may spoil the basic foundation of team formation, even from the case study most of the team members seems not interested in the project and they are trying to finish their own tasks. So tomorrow’s project seems very difficult to achieve because a lot of work is left in team to do for tomorrow’s deadline. Second can be team conflicts, if during team meetings (maybe one more meeting tomorrow before presentation) and the leader ask the question to the members that that why didn’t they finished their work then those who has not finished until now will feel no place in the group and will perform with low energy. Which will affect the quality of performance. Third, can be team cohesion, team does not seems like cohesive because all the members know their tasks and they communicate in the group properly. (I can assume this as per the situation of team in case study). This will impact on the coordination of the team during presentation use they are not decided yet that what they will do and the timing of each other during presentation for delivering the speech. They does not have any list of the upcoming speakers of their group who will speak after one another.ao the team is ess cohesive Forth can be, task understanding, as every individual in the group know that what he/she will do, so at this stage the team know what they have to do and what are their responsibilities regarding their part of presentation, however even they know that what they have to do most of them are not finished with their task yet, which will create many problems while performing. Fourthly, team health, as this team is based on individual tasks and everyone has to complete at least two pages of their own topics, but even though this is an individual task oriented presentation but no one made any effort to get suggestions from any member of the group, and any team contribution is also not mentioned in the case study. This can severely impact on group and the group may be feeling trouble during presentation time because if someone forget something then other member may just act as spectators, so poor team health can cost a lot to this group.
c. Evaluate How Planning is relevant to this case study
As this group is of only few number of people so there should be a straightforward plan to handle all the situations and the leader should let other members know that what is the plan and how to work on the given tasks.
First, the leader of the team should introduce himself to the group and also create the ground rules to work in the group. Also address the specific reasons why this group has been formed and what is expected from them by giving them a look on the goals. It seems that the leader of the group has done it properly because it is mentioned in the case study that the members were aimed to prepare at least two pages of their work for presentation, so the leader has successfully done this situation.
Secondly, the whole team should cooperate with other mates and should have a basic cohesiveness to accomplish the task, however it can be assumed that the leader is not paying attention to the team and letting mates do what they want to do without asking them any question about their work for what they are accountable But if he paid proper attention on the communication and relationship of the team then he could get much better results than he is getting now, he should use proactive approach than reactive approach to handle and caring team members with goal.
Thirdly, this is very important but has not been performed is tracking team progress in between the task and should advise some improvements to team that where should they work on, what data should they exclude, proofs of their statement and the speed on which they are doing their part of presentation. Tracking and checking is also very important for future forecasts for a leader, he can estimate next step that he should perform along with all members. This is very important step which he just totally missed.
Fourthly, as per wikibooks.org “the leader did not perform or take any command on the group members he must inspire people and sometimes should talk to the members littel firmly because they are the part of team and everything which affect team will also affect hem as well. He should use hybrid leadership style which is the balanced combination of autocratic leadership and Laissez-faire Leadership style, in which the leader adopts two attitudes and use them appropriately” (https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Managing_Groups_and_Teams/Creating_and_Maintaining_Team_Cohesion) , for example the drama department major of the group has no interest in any team activity because he just got lead role in drama play so here the leader can talk littel firmly and remind him that what are the responsibilities that he as regarding the tomorrow’s event. On the other hand the varsity athlete of the group had cancelled all her appointments to attend today’s meeting but a mandatory session that she has to attend tonight do not let her come to the meeting in this situation the leader can give freedom to girl to complete her session and he can let her know about the meeting via e-mail or phone call and encourage her to do her task after her session and report to him any time when she finish, which does not happen but this approach would be fruitful for the leader of group to use the range of flexibility of his plan”.
Finally planning process also includes goal setting. Goals should be SMART
S-SPECIFIC M-MEASURABLE A-ACHIEAVABLE R-REALISTIC T-TIMEBOUND this statement below is particularly for leader, can be consider as suggestion or evaluation of plan, as I mentioned above that leadership has not been taken seriously by the leader, but he should know about the basic process to interact people which is also maintained in “MANAGEMENT BOOK” ‘M. Hitt, S. Black, L. Porter, 2014. Management : third edition. Pearson New International book. It is clearly mentioned in situational management theory by Hersey and Blanchard that there are four stages of relationship development
Figure 2 Control’s Feedback Loop
Source: (Hitt, Black, & Porter, 2014)
d. Control process and control mechanism recommended
Basic control process,
The definitions are being quoted from cliffs
- Establish standards, as per cliffsnotes.com “Within an group overall strategic plan, leaders define goals for team members in specific, team terms that include standards of performance to compare with”. So in this case study all the expectations and all the standards were described very well, they have established the standard that there should be two pages of the work that everyone should have about their work and they should also add academic stuff and references in their work along with one day before presentation they should submit their work however the story in the ground reality is totally opposite nobody did their paper work and those who do they just assume and did not give any proof. https://www.cliffsnotes.com/study-guides/principles-of-management/control-the-linking-function/the-organizational-control-process
- Measuring performance during the process, It is maintained in the cliffsnotes.com that, most groups prepare formal reports of performance measurements that leaders review regularly. These measurements should be related to the standards set in the first step of the control process. For example, if proper paper work is a target, the team should have a means of gathering and reporting proper work. In this step there should be frequent checks of the performance so that everyone is doing their best but in this case nothing like this happed everyone were doing whatever they want and the leader did not take any initiative to re-correct the work which made this tiny problem a mountain.
- Comparing performance with standards, as per cliffsnotes.com from where I found the best definition for this is “This step compares actual activities to performance standards. When managers read computer reports or walk through their plants, they identify whether actual performance meets, exceeds, or falls short of standards. Typically, performance reports simplify such comparison by placing the performance standards for the reporting period alongside the actual performance for the same period and by computing the variance—that is, the difference between each actual amount and the associated standard”. https://www.cliffsnotes.com/study-guides/principles-of-management/control-the-linking-function/the-organizational-control-process, in this case this step yet to be done because no one submit their work so leader cannot compare their work with standards.
What type of control mechanism would you have recommended
well it really depends upon the nature of members that what kind of control will be suitable for them because it vary from team to team. For example if the team members are totally unknown about the tasks because they are doing it for the first time or are not willing to do task then directive control should be appropriate, because the members have to go through all the training and basic task process so at this stage they need more control and supervision.
However, if they group know how to do tasks, what are their responsibilities, have already gone through training and basic task process and also willing to work then they should be controlled by suggestive control process. Because they already know what to do and what is expected from them.
In this group(taken into case study) I would recommend directive leadership style not because they are not able to do work but because of the unwillingness of some group members to do the task which can affect other’s performance as well. In this controlling style small groups work better and also follow leader’s orders to finish tasks.
3. Based on the “Class Project Team” case study
a. 3 types of conflict you would expect to exist in this group
1. Task Conflict
Ambiguities regarding the task. As seen when they first meetings, most of them do not have even one page and several others are handwritten. After know whats going on in the group with all the mess they made. The actor member only responsible for the task.
2. Process conflict, this type of conflict can also occur in the group because nobody in the group put any attention on what they should do and what is the process they are supposed to follow for example their responsibility was to gather on the team meeting but they did not meet each other and discuss the progress so this conflict can occur in the group.
3. Relation Conflict
Due to bad relationships established between Team Leader and International student member. So this has an effect on the disruption to the conflict in doing the tasks and ideas among them.
b. Suggest five (5) potential causes of these conflicts
In this case there are (5) factors that occur ie;
1. Under pressure
When only the leader who suffering with this group problem. Because now the deadline is coming so everyone rush and complain about everything.
2. Task Conflict
The other member has lack of Responsivity doing their work. The group members did not complete any of their responsibility which can make many conflicts.
The Leader doesn’t get proper help from anyone. They are busy in their own stuff and are not giving attention to each other tasks.
Most of the member putting forward to his own selfishness. They think their tasks are more important than the group which can cause conflicts.
They doesn’t patient to understanding each other. They just ignore everyone and try to show nothing happen which can make leader sad.
6. Relation Conflicts
Nobody is putting any attention on each other work and try to help if any problem is in the process. No One is getting in touch with each other and no communication has been figured out in that group.
c. Describe six (6) source power could employ as team leader to achieve your goals
1. Reward power, the reward power is something that we can use to increase the potential of the group. A leader can reward many incentives to get what he want. In this case leader can reward reference on CV to the international student who is willing to do work and assign more work to that student. Which will encourage her to get the team goal.
2. cohesive power, leader also have the power to punish if he suppose to give rewards on the achievements of the group. He should balance reward and punishments to get success. In this case the school student is ignoring the presentation because he get main role in school drama. Leader can let her teacher know about that student so that she can take an action against the student. Which will let him know that he should respect the group and do his task
3. Personal power, everyone has some hidden personal power that only can be used in emergencies and this power is being supported by the position. So in this case if I’m the leader then I would use my emotional power that I know very well to use. In this case there is no single person to whom this power should be used, the whole group need some emotional strength that will boost them and lead them to success.
4. Position power, the biggest power to a leader is his position he can order to get work from members when ever he feel it is necessary. The leader should be a little firm towards the goals to achieve them. In this case leader can clearly order to the manager to give proofs of his work that he did not do even he finish the task. Because without references the work is nothing so he has to do it properly to make the presentation meaningful.
5. Expert power, the leader needs to use the expert power that he get with his experience. In this case the athlete was not able to do her work because she had to attend her mandatory sessions of practise with her coach. But if I am the leader then i would suggest to her that she should do work online and send e-mail to me so that I Can print the work which is much more easier and in this way I would get what my goal demand from me.
6. Legitimate power, this power is what a leader get with his position. He get something in his hand that he can use to make critical decision. As a leader of the group this group leader hold some power that he can use like one member of the group is busy in travelling and do not seems to do anything which means leader has the power to blacklist him and in future ban him to be the part of the group in this way leader can show to the team members that they should respect the goals and never let leader down and also boost them to do their work and save themselves from being insulted like this.
d. Suggest three source of motivation and three ways in the which you would lead and MOTIVATE the individuals in this group
1. The Characteristic of The Individuals.
When leaders push to do what he / she want. They need such as achievement, attitude, and responsibility towards the job. Leaders can assign tasks with deadlines and ask them to assign responsibilities to their work. Leaders can also ask the members to show good ethos and good attitude on their work.
2. The Characteristic of Job / Task
In this stage, when leader push and pull member. When before give assignment to each member there. He must first know the field of mastery of each member. For example, with an Internal student who is proficient in the field of speaking then the right task for him is to give a presentation / oral in front of the audience. The leader must be able to ensure that the members understand what their tasks and how to. Also assign tasks based on the level of education and qualifications they have.
3. The Characteristic of Work Situation
In this last Stage. Opposite with the first stage (push stage).the leader pull the members how to do. For example by giving incentive and gifts to the members. By using push theory, the leader can provide motivation in the form of gift or incentive to the member. For example if the members complete their tasks before the deadline then the leader will give a gift in the form of concert tickets or vacation tickets as well farewell party at the weekend. So motivate the members to do their duty with their own will
Hersey and Blanchard situational modelship. (2014). Retrieved from https://www.investopedia.com: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/hersey-and-blanchard-model.asp
Hitt, M., Steward, B., & Porter, L. (2014). Management. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
Hitt, M., Steward, B., & Porter, L. (2014). Management. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
Hitt, M., Steward, B., & Porter, L. (2014). Management. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
Maxwell, C. J. (2007). Everyone Communicates, Few Connect: What the Most Effective People Do Differently. Chicago: HarperCollins Publishing.
Cite This Work
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:
Related ServicesView all
DMCA / Removal Request
If you are the original writer of this dissertation and no longer wish to have your work published on the UKDiss.com website then please: