Identify The Key Problems And Issues In The Case Study

Identify the key problems and issues in the case study • Formulate and include a thesis statement

Florida International University Fall 2018

Executive Summary:

This case study centers on Tom Green, a rising-star executive at D7 Displays, who faces significant challenges with his new supervisor, Frank Davis. The core issues involve leadership style clashes, misaligned expectations, and communication breakdowns. Tom’s ambitious efforts in developing market strategies and innovating services are hindered by Frank’s dismissive attitude and authoritative management approach. The key problems include Frank’s hypercritical supervision, Tom’s difficulty adapting to his managerial style, and the broader challenge of managing innovation within a rigid organizational culture.

In summary, the outcome of the analysis suggests that Tom must strategically navigate this managerial conflict by balancing assertiveness with operational compliance, fostering communication, and aligning his initiatives with organizational priorities. The recommended plan involves a measured approach to addressing Frank’s concerns while persisting with innovative efforts, supplemented by a contingency plan involving escalation through formal channels if necessary. The overarching goal is to protect Tom’s career growth and contribute effectively to the company’s strategic objectives.

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

The case of Tom Green at D7 Displays exemplifies the complex dynamics between high-potential employees and authoritative managerial figures within the corporate environment. Tom’s rapid ascent within the company was driven by his innovative mindset and proactive approach to market development. However, conflicts with his supervisor, Frank Davis, highlight fundamental issues of leadership style, communication, and organizational culture. This analysis aims to identify key problems, explore causes, evaluate solutions, and propose an effective course of action for Tom while considering organizational implications.

Statement of the Problem

The primary problem faced by Tom is the clash between his entrepreneurial spirit and innovative approach versus Frank Davis’s rigid, control-oriented management style. The symptoms include Tom’s frustration with micromanagement, public criticism, and strained communication channels. Root causes stem from differing leadership philosophies—Tom’s emphasis on agility and innovation contrasted with Frank’s focus on adherence to hierarchical authority and short-term targets. Short-term problems include reduced morale and strained relations, while long-term issues involve potential career stagnation or termination if conflicts persist.

The central decision facing Tom concerns whether to conform to Frank’s management style to secure his position or to challenge the existing hierarchy to advocate for innovation and change within the organization. This dilemma requires a strategic response balancing personal growth with organizational alignment.

Causes of the Problem

Applying leadership and organizational behavior theories, the root causes can be traced to differences in leadership styles—transformational versus transactional leadership. Frank’s authoritative style mirrors transactional leadership, emphasizing control, compliance, and short-term results, as supported by Burns (1978). Conversely, Tom’s innovative approach aligns with transformational leadership, fostering creativity, motivation, and strategic thinking (Bass, 1985).

The case also reflects elements of organizational culture theory, where rigid hierarchies and risk-averse attitudes suppress innovation (Schein, 2010). Resistance to change and communication gaps exacerbate conflicts, preventing mutual understanding. Furthermore, the lack of effective feedback mechanisms and misaligned performance metrics contribute to the misunderstandings, emphasizing the importance of managerial communication and cultural fit.

Decision Criteria and Alternative Solutions

Evaluation criteria for potential solutions include the feasibility of implementation, impact on career trajectory, organizational compatibility, and the preservation of innovation capacity. Alternatives include:

• Conforming to Frank’s management style: Pros - job security, alignment with organizational expectations; Cons - suppression of innovation, personal dissatisfaction.
• Strategic alliance with management sponsors like Shannon: Pros - increased influence, advocacy for innovation; Cons - potential alienation from Frank, risk of marginalization.
• Open confrontation or escalation: Pros - addressing root issues, potential organizational change; Cons - retaliation, damage to reputation, or termination.

Rejection of full confrontation is advised unless strategic support and contingency plans are in place. Combining diplomatic compliance with planned advocacy emerges as the most balanced approach.

Recommended Solution, Implementation, and Justification

The recommended course involves Tom asserting disciplined professionalism while engaging in strategic communication. Specifically, he should:

• Maintain operational compliance by adhering to Frank’s directives but document all interactions systematically.
• Seek mentorship or sponsorship from senior allies like Shannon for advocacy and career advancement.
• Prepare data-driven proposals demonstrating the value of innovation aligned with organizational goals.
• Schedule regular, formal check-ins with Frank, emphasizing listening and mutual understanding.
• Develop a contingency plan: if conflicts escalate or performance expectations are unrealistically maintained, consider formal channels such as HR or higher-level management review.

This approach aligns with transformational leadership principles, emphasizing strategic influence, persuasion, and professionalism (Northouse, 2018). Evidence suggests that combining assertiveness with diplomatic navigation fosters organizational change while safeguarding personal integrity (Kotter, 1998).

External Sourcing

Supporting the recommendations, sources from current management literature underscore the importance of emotional intelligence and strategic communication in conflict resolution (Goleman, 1995; Lussier & Hendon, 2019). Studies on organizational change emphasize that employee advocacy, backed by data, enhances acceptance of innovation (Kotter, 1998). Furthermore, research on leadership styles indicates that adaptive approaches combining transformational and transactional elements yield optimal results in complex environments (Bass & Avolio, 1994). Lastly, contemporary journal articles underscore the significance of HR intervention and formal escalation procedures when conflicts threaten organizational effectiveness (Cummings & Worley, 2015).

References

• Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. Free Press.
• Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership. Sage Publications.
• Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (2015). Organization development and change. Cengage Learning.
• Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. Bantam Books.
• Kotter, J. P. (1998). Leading change. Harvard Business School Press.
• Lussier, R. N., & Hendon, J. R. (2019). Human resource management: Functions, applications, and skill evaluations. Sage Publishing.
• Northouse, P. G. (2018). Leadership: Theory and practice. Sage Publications.
• Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership. Jossey-Bass.
• W. Earl Sasser & Heather Beckham. (2011). Challenge the Boss or Stand Down? Harvard Business Review, May 2011.
• Additional credible journal articles and sources from current management research literature (not specified above but should reference latest publications on conflict management, organizational change, and strategic communication).