Running head: Theres no I in Team

Theres no I in Team
Miranda Young
SUNY New Paltz

Theres No I in Team

2
Theres No I in Team
Case Overview

This case involves the CEO of a company called BioGeneTech named Patricia Sypher.
Patricia Sypher was hired when the original three members decided to leave the company and
wanted it to be taken in a new direction. The original shareholders Meader, Parrott, and Moon
felt that they had already made enough money off of the company and felt it was time that they
give back to the world rather then just the shareholders.
Sypher was hired specifically for her humanitarian background and beliefs. When Parrott
died his children made the decision to sell their fathers share in the company and sold it to Karl
Geher, a venture capitalist who is known for coming into a company and systematically
destroying it.
After working behind the scenes for months Geher managed to get a number of board
members to back him when he suggested Sypher step down. Needing only one more vote on the
board to fire her he suggests she step down because with in months he will manage to gain the
last vote he needs to fire her. This leaves us with the problem, what do Sypher and Meader do in
order to make sure Sypher doesnt do her job and the company still moves into the direction that
Meader, Parrott, and Moon intended it to when they hired Sypher.
Selection of Criteria
Criterion #1: Corporate Image
Description of Criterion. Corporate image is important in this situation because it
matters how they appear in the eyes of their stakeholders and how they look on the public
market. The company needs to remain one that people are interested in buying stock in it. If they
decide to move forward with Gehers plan it may be problematic due to the fact that they will

Theres No I in Team

come across as though they are flip flopping, they went from working mostly for money to being
a humanitarian company to being one that is looking completely for financial gain. This is not
only making the company look less caring in the eye of the public because they now seem
greedy, but now they also seem unsure of what they want.
Measurement of Criterion. A good measurement of this criterion would be the stock
price; if a person does not want to buy the stock the price will drop making it clear that the
corporate image is going bad. It is important to note that the Encyclopedia of Public Relations
states Going into strategic partnerships is not easy. Corporate management does not like to
acknowledge that others can influence how they plan and operate. (pg 885) We cannot expect
that everyone will agree right away and that we can make them agree with the ideas we present.
Criterion #2: Employee Motivation
Description of Criterion. Employee motivation is useful in this case because it will help
us to find exactly what the employees of the company want. What motivates them? Are they
happier working in a company thats main goal is to make the stakeholders money or are they
like Don Little and they care about helping others and the companies original goals. The way
Karl Geher is spoken about gives the impression that he will not help the company to grow as a
whole more he will help it to grow financially until it is not longer worth it to him. If the
employees are motivated by helping others and doing good around the world they will not be
happy with the proposed direction of the company.
Measurement of Criterion. This criteria can be measured via an employee survey or
individually asking the employees how they feel about Sypher and the possible new direction
that may be taken if Sypher was to be fired.
Criterion #3: Flexibility

Theres No I in Team

Description of Criterion. This is questioning how flexible the people with in the
company are working together. How much can we do while still maintaining the companys
goals and making everyone involved happy. Would Sypher be willing to work with Geher in
order to reach an understanding and come to a compromise?
Measurement of Criterion. This could be measured by the ability to reach some sort of
agreement throughout the company that would make the most people happy. The employees,
stakeholders and CEO would all have to try and have a subjective view and look at what is best
for the company.
Decision Alternatives
Decision Alternative #1
One possible alternative is having an emergency board election in order to have the
company stakeholders and employees vote on whether or not Karl Geher and company can
remain on the board. It is clear that some of the long term employees are unhappy with the ideas
that Geher has, this is shown by Don Little telling Meader that he was approached by Geher. If
this is any indication of how the employees will react to the ideas that Geher holds they will want
to be part of the decision.
Decision Alternative #2
Speak will all the other members of the board to ensure that Geher cannot get the last
vote in order to fire Sypher. If Geher has not jockeyed for these last people to be members of the
board, that means they most likely have long term interest in the company and because they have
not yet been convinced one can hope that they would not be easily convinced and can be used as
allies.
Decision Alternative #3

Theres No I in Team

Patricia Sypher could agree work more in order to make money for the company while
still maintaining humanitarian values on the side. Making it a secondary concern in order to keep
everyone happy. This may make Sypher unhappy but if we keep a balance of power between the
major stake holders and the CEO. The company will be hopefully working at its best. If they are
working to make money and to remain somewhat humanitarian at the same time hopefully they
will be able to achieve both in a decent way.
Application of Criteria to Decision Alternatives
Decision Alternative Not Selected #1
Emergency board meeting.
Application of Criterion #1 This would help the corporate image because it would make
it known that the company cares about what its employees think. It would show that they want
to involve them in a decision as important as this one. Calling an emergency board meeting
would allow the employees and stakeholders to voice their opinions on where the company is
going. It would give the members of the company not hand selected for the board by Geher to
chance to voice their opinions and concerns about the direction of the company.
Application of Criterion #2. Employee motivation would work in a similar way. If the
employees feel as if their voices are being heard and that the company cares about their opinions
they will be more satisfied with their job and more motivated to work hard. According to the
Encyclopedia of Business and Finance Good management has the potential for creating high
morale, high productivity, and a sense of purpose and meaning for the organization and its
employees. (pg. 531)
Application of Criterion #3. The emergency board meeting would show flexibility
because all the members of the company would be asked their opinions and that would be the

Theres No I in Team

deciding vote as to what the future of the company looked like. Although this would not allow
for any kind of compromise in action. The compromise would have to be that whatever the
employees and other stake holders decided would be the final answer. This is the main reason if
feel this would not be the best answer.
Decision Alternative Not Selected #2
Speaking with other members of the board.
Application of Criterion #1. This would work well for the corporate image because it
would show concern for all parts of the company. A move like this can make people who are
interested in the company comfortable with the idea that they will matter if they ever join the
company because they work hard. This may help Sypher to keep her job because of the social
responsibilities involved with Corporate Image, board members may realize this is an important
factor and want to keep the company in a good light. According to The Encyclopedia of Small
Business A final factor stimulating the current interest in corporate image is society's growing
expectation that corporations be socially responsible. Many of today's consumers consider the
environmental and social image of firms in making their purchasing decisions. Some companies
have recognized this reality and reaped tremendous benefits by conducting themselves in a
socially and environmentally responsible manner. (pg 257) If the company does not come off as
socially responsible it will most likely not do as well, showing share holders that Gehers plan
may backfire because the very thing he intends to get rid of is necessary.
Application of Criterion #2. This would make the members of the board happy with
their jobs however it may not thrill the employees and researchers. They may feel as if their
opinions matter less. The board members are shareholders not necessarily employees. Sociology
of Work makes the point that Employees who feel as if they are being treated unfairly are

Theres No I in Team

motivated to change the way they think and behave until their situation appears to be fair. (pg
614) This would leave them possibly wanting a different outcome from what happens and if the
board is not swayed and votes in favor of firing Sypher they would be much less motivated
because they would no longer be working for the good of humanity they would be working to
basically make some one else rich.
Application of Criterion #3. This would again be a flexible decision because it would
come down to what the group felt was the best, but there would be no compromise involved it
would be a decision made by the group and that would be the end of it.
Selected Decision Alternative
Compromise.
Application of Criterion #1. This would help the corporate image because it would not loose all
of its humanitarian and social awareness. It will remain good in the eyes of the public because it
will send the right idea. It will show the company still cares about the world and wants to help
but it will also make money keeping the stake holder happy.
Application of Criterion #2. The employees will remain motivated because whatever they
wanted the company will be working to do whether it was to make more money or to help people
around the world. It will be something that the company does and it will help to make them feel
like the company cares about what they think and want. Working for a cause like helping people
will most likely motivate the employees who are most likely getting paid the same regardless if
their projects make a ton of money or not.
Application of Criterion #3. This will be the best alternative when it comes to flexibility
because it will help both parties to work towards what they want. Geher gets his way and the
company looks for ways to make more money and Sypher will be able to keep her job while still

Theres No I in Team

working towards helping people. It also shows that the company makes it a priority to help make
everyone involved happy. A Marketing Business Plan Handbook states that Area businesses are
attracted to the firm's national client list and the firm continues to capture the attention of large
corporations because of its track record, ability to execute projects for tens of thousands of
dollars less than other firms and flexibility in working with in-house marketing staffs. (pg 307)
This clearly shows anyone who is willing to be flexible in different ways will get more business
because they will be deemed easier to work with.
Alternative Implementation
Discussion of Plan Goals
The first thing that could be done was a drafted plan for the board to compromise the
ideas of working towards making more money while at the same time working on humanitarian
causes. If you can get the majority of the board to sign off on this idea you can move forward
and because Karl Geher stormed out of the room he has no say in the fact that a compromise will
take place. Most of the other stakeholders will most likely care more about the corporate image
than Geher would because they were not interested in cannibalizing the company. He has
stocked the board with half and was unable to pass a vote on firing Sypher so if he is gone a
majority would form on the opposite side. A compromise may also satisfy some of his like
minded people who have some soul left.
Once an agreement that a compromise will be made is in place. A plan will be written
that if one party doesnt want to work towards the agreement their vote on the board will be
revoked leaving Geher no choice but to work with Sypher. From there it can be decided just what
this compromise would say. Every other project will be a humanitarian one. This would make
the stakeholders who were looking to make money happy and would keep the companys

Theres No I in Team

corporate image in tact without allowing Karl Geher to raise the company up then watch it crash
and burn.
Discussion of Goal Measurement
Decision criteria would be the stocks at the end of a six month or year long period. If
stocks were still high and the stake holders were making money, and the company was still
working on the humanitarian ideas it would prove that it was working. In addition to this there
could be a board meeting to discuss the progress, and an employee survey done to see if
everyone is happy with the way the company is being run now. If Geher is not given too much
power he can be balanced and the company will not go under. Both Geher and Sypher have
strong opinions and would be a good balance for one another if forced to work together.
Implementation Steps
Short Term Steps. Short term steps would be devising a plan and getting everyone to
agree to work as a unit. Once Geher is forced to compromise the issue faced there is no other
option. There is also the possibility that the board could vote without him there to keep Sypher
and make some kind of rule about firing the CEO during the rest of the meeting that Geher
stormed out of. This would be a safety precaution in order to ensure he does not do what he is
known to do and cannot fire her in the future.
Long Term Steps. Long term steps would be finding projects that could satisfy both
humanitarian goals and make money for the share holders, possibly applying for grants and other
things like that and selling patents that are designed to help people for large sums to other
companies that can mass produce them to help people. Another long term step may be to try and
fill the board with people who have the good of the company as their main interest rather then
the people who are like-minded with Geher.

Theres No I in Team

10

References

Health, Robert L., (2013) Encyclopedia of Public Relations, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
publications
Kaliski, Burton S. (2006) Encyclopedia of Business and Finance. New York: Macmillan
Reference USA.
Laurie Collier Hillstrom and Kevin Hillstrom. (2002) Encyclopedia of Small Business Vol. 1.
2nd ed. Detroit: Gale, Cengage Learning
Park, Amy Lynn (2005) Marketing Consultant: Simmons Marketing Associates
Detroit: Gale, Cengage Learning
Smith, Vicki (2013) Sociology of Work: An Encyclopedia Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
Publications ,Inc.