Can You Put Together The Two Parts Of The Paper And Update B

Can You Put Together The 2 Parts Of The Paper And Update Based On The

The assignment requires integrating two separate parts of a paper into a cohesive, updated document that reflects specific feedback and analysis relating to leadership styles, organizational culture, and case studies, notably at General Motors (GM). The task emphasizes analyzing leadership approaches, cultural influences, and their implications on organizational crises, with a focus on the GM ignition switch scandal, leadership shifts, and cultural dynamics affecting corporate decision-making and safety practices.

Specifically, the paper should examine leadership styles such as laissez-faire and authoritative/coercive management, and how these styles influence workplace behavior, including issues like bullying and misconduct. The analysis should include insights from research studies, emphasizing the impact of leadership on organizational culture, employee motivation, safety, and decision-making processes. It should also connect these elements to real-world case studies, especially GM’s culture crisis, highlighting the transition from a passive, unresponsive leadership style to a more accountable, transformational approach. Additionally, the paper must explore how internal and external influences shape leadership decisions and organizational culture, with examples from automotive industry models like GM and Toyota.

The final paper should incorporate all parts into a well-structured academic essay, including an introduction, detailed body sections analyzing leadership styles, organizational culture, case study insights, and conclusions. It must include citations from credible sources and references formatted appropriately, capturing the complexities of organizational behavior, management theory, and corporate ethics, particularly in the context of safety and accountability at GM.

Sample Paper For Above instruction

Title: Analyzing Leadership, Organizational Culture, and Crisis Management: The Case of GM and Automotive Industry Models

Introduction

Organizations operate within complex environments where leadership styles and organizational culture significantly influence decision-making, employee behavior, and corporate reputation. The recent crisis at General Motors (GM), triggered by the ignition switch defect, underscored how leadership approaches and cultural factors can exacerbate or mitigate corporate failures. This paper explores the impact of different leadership styles—particularly laissez-faire and authoritative/coercive—on organizational culture and crisis management, with a focus on GM's culture crisis. It integrates research findings, theoretical perspectives, and case study insights to provide a comprehensive analysis of how leadership behavior shapes organizational responses to safety issues and ethical challenges.

Leadership Styles and Their Organizational Impact

Leadership style profoundly influences organizational climate, employee motivation, and the capacity to respond to crises. The laissez-faire leadership style, characterized by passive management and minimal intervention (Namie & Lutgen-Sandvik, 2010), often leads to an environment where misconduct, such as bullying or safety violations, can flourish unnoticed or unaddressed. Skogstad et al. (2007) found that laissez-faire leadership fosters social climates rife with interpersonal conflicts and role stress, which can decrease organizational safety and accountability. Conversely, authoritative or coercive leadership, which relies on fear and top-down control (Singh, 2009), can quickly enforce compliance but may foster resentment and reduce intrinsic motivation, potentially undermining organizational sustainability.

Research indicates that the leadership style at GM initially reflected a laissez-faire approach, allowing a toxic culture to develop marked by denial, avoidance of responsibility, and poor safety practices (Kuppler, 2014). The case highlights a shift towards transformational leadership, emphasizing accountability, transparency, and employee engagement. Such a transition aligns with findings that transformational leaders foster trust, motivate employees through shared vision, and promote ethical behavior—elements crucial for crisis resolution and cultural change (Mind Tools, 2017).

The GM Culture Crisis: A Case Study

The GM ignition switch scandal exemplifies how organizational culture and leadership failures intersected. Upper management's passive stance and institutional indifference enabled defective parts to remain in vehicles for over a decade, contributing to accidents and fatalities (Kuppler, 2014). The organizational culture was characterized by the "GM Nod" and "GM Salute" phenomena—metaphors for avoiding responsibility and superficial compliance—reflecting deep-seated systemic issues (Tetzeli, 2016). These cultural traits were reinforced by autocratic, bureaucratic decision-making models that prioritized cost-cutting over safety (Shethna, 2016).

Leadership's response, shifting from passive to active, was pivotal. CEO Mary Barra’s decisive actions, including public apologies, safety reforms, and transparent communication, exemplify transformational leadership principles. This shift was driven by external factors—legal pressures, regulatory scrutiny, and public outrage—as well as internal motives to rebuild trust and safety culture (Kuppler, 2014). The case demonstrates that effective leadership in crisis must go beyond mere authority; it requires a strategic, empathetic approach aligned with organizational values and external expectations.

Cultural and Organizational Changes in the Automotive Industry

The automotive industry has historically operated with hierarchical, autocratic models favoring efficiency and control. Toyota’s Just-in-Time production system and Ford’s cultural transformations exemplify evolving organizational practices prioritizing employee involvement and quality (Bauer & Erdogan, 2014; Lombardo, 2017). The shift from rigid autocratic structures toward more participative, quality-oriented cultures responds to changing workforce expectations, customer demands, and regulatory standards (LeBeau & Pohlman, 2014).

GM's current culture emphasizes safety, accountability, and transparency, aligning with a supportive and participative management approach. Employee empowerment initiatives, whistleblowing rewards, and safety committees reflect an organizational climate that discourages the "GM Nod" and encourages responsible behavior (Tetzeli, 2016). This cultural change is essential for preventing future crises, strengthening organizational resilience, and fostering ethical decision-making frameworks.

Decision-Making and Leadership Influence

In crisis scenarios like GM's, decision-making processes are critical. Traditional autocratic or laissez-faire styles may delay responses or impede corrective actions, exacerbating problems. Conversely, transformational leadership facilitates rapid, evidence-based decisions rooted in ethical considerations. The case underscores the importance of inclusive, transparent decision processes involving stakeholders at all levels, which cultivate trust and accountability (Castro, 2015).

Conclusion

The GM case underscores the vital role of leadership style and organizational culture in shaping corporate responses to crises and ethical challenges. Transitioning from passive, autocratic, or laissez-faire approaches to transformational, accountable leadership fosters a safety-oriented, transparent culture capable of preventing future failures. Evolving industry standards emphasize the need for collaborative, responsibility-driven models that prioritize ethical standards, employee engagement, and customer safety. Organizations that embrace these principles are better equipped to navigate complex risks, restore public trust, and ensure sustainable growth.

References

• Bauer, T., & Erdogan, B. (2014). Organizational Structure: The Case of Toyota. Flatworld.
• Castro, N. (2015). Characteristics for managerial decisions. Retrieved from [source]
• Kuppler, T. (2014). The GM Culture Crisis: What leaders must learn from this culture case study. Switch and Shift.
• LeBeau, P., & Pohlman, J. (2014). The corporate culture: Behind the scenes at General Motors. CNBC.
• Lombardo, J. (2017). Ford Motor Company’s organizational culture analysis. Panmore Institute.
• Mind Tools. (2017). Leadership styles: Choosing the right approach for the situation. Retrieved from https://www.mindtools.com
• Shethna, J. (2016). Best 5 organizational behavior models. EDUCBA.
• Skogstad, A., Einarsen, S., Torsheim, T., Aasland, M., & Hetland, H. (2007). The destructiveness of laissez-faire leadership behavior. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12(1), 80-92.
• Tetzeli, R. (2016). Mary Barra is remaking the culture of GM and the company itself. Fast Company.
• Singh, A. (2009). Organizational power in perspective. Leadership & Management In Engineering, 9(4).