Project: Critical Reflection on Leadership crisis

An example of one leadership crisis that I have witnessed was one before the COVID-19 pandemic
actually started. It all started with a manager that was not willing to hear her employees/ subordinates
who would have appreciated a regular schedule to work from home, very common thing in a financial
institution where there is no client facing job. The manager had an oversight role on Americas and
EMEA and could not understand and/ or agree that people could be actually capable of delivering
results/ performing while working from home and could not in this way track their actual working hours
(if not physically in the office). The first issue was that she was lacking trust in her people and was
always trying to micromanage/ check their time sheet entries. The situation occurred months before
the actual pandemic started when employees were asking for more flexibility.

The actual conflict occurred when people where claiming more flexibility, as in similar financial
institutions worldwide, and they did not get it. The discussions that took place created an inner conflict
for the people in the team and even more, there was a shift of attitude from their manager, after the
discussions took place. Before pandemic started, 80% of the team decided to leave the company and
look for opportunities outside, where they could be more flexible, taking care of their families but also
delivering results while working from home.

At that point in time, the manager was facing a leadership crisis both from a high turnover and also
from the lack of motivation from the people that remained, as well as from attitude. The manager was
then considered not flexible and it was very hard within the team to try to convince them otherwise.

In March 2020 pandemic of COVID-19 started and in times of crisis, ruled by unfamiliarity and
uncertainty, something had to change so that the team could perform and deliver further and change
the approach towards work from home.

Thus, the group manager (who was in charge of the entire team) read the exit interviews of the people
leaving the firm and set up regular time with the current manager and the team so he could better
understand the problems/ challenges the team was facing. What he considered, as a group manager,
was that what a leader needs to do in times of crisis is not to have a predefined response (i.e. like not
agreeing with people working from home and offering lack of flexibility) but rather have behaviours
and mindsets that will prevent them from overreacting and help them look ahead. Thus, during the
regular meetings, he decided they should agree on the following:

- Check the number of headcounts needed to fill the open positions;

- Setting clear priorities to that the most important tasks/ deliverables are performed with
the staff left in the team;
- Organise network of teams – meaning they had to work together and create a highly
adaptable assembly of groups within the team, which were united by a common purpose
and would work together in the same way that the individuals on a single team
collaborate;
- Help the employees left adapt to new working conditions (i.e. Zoom calls, work from
home on a regular basis, no social interaction);
- Foster collaboration and transparency across the network of teams (which was lacking
before) by distributing authority and sharing information;
- Another item that the group manager added was that the initial manager of the team
would need to promote psychological safety for the people so that they could openly
discuss ideas, questions and concerns without fear of repercussions. This was not the
case before, as only asking to work from home would trigger a totally different attitude
from their manager. This would allow within the newly created teams to handle situations
they face in a healthy way;
- They also discussed promoting people (senior ones within the team) and grant them
authority to implement decisions without having to gain approval. This triggered within the
team a sense of accountability, clear responsibilities and the fact that decisions are made
by appropriate people at different levels, so that the decisions are not only taken by one
 person (i.e. the manager) without any consultation and are only being communicated to
the team. Creating such environment would basically empower the individuals to take part
in bigger decisions and having also the possibility of being closer to their peers so they
get a closer idea of what the team is facing versus the manager, who might seem
unapproachable;
- In crisis situations, experience is the most important item that people can bring to the
table. So they decided to talk to people closely so they could understand the important of
calm and optimism, as their job was not in danger and their performance is appreciated.
That way the managers showed they cared and built again confidence and credibility
back in the team.

Class concepts discussed and seen in the above example:

- Attitudes in the workplace – first let’s think about the affective component of the
situation and how this was seen for the members of the team that were left within the
organisation after 80% of their team mates left. This was a trigger to affect their wellbeing,
level of stress and mental health. Their reaction to the situation could have been
resigning or moving on thinking they face to face obstacles and difficult times together
with their manager. However, they could see before there was no flexibility shown from
their manager, so they needed to solve the issue in a way they could trust again their
manager, the company and the whole team. Thus, this also reflects their attitude towards
the situation – the behavioural component of the workplace attitudes.
- As discussed in class, the situation created uncertainty and unknown for the members of
the team left. As we know that organizational commitment predicts job performance
and this has been shown in research papers, the best thing that happened was to have
the discussion between the manager and the group manager through which they could
assess the situation and take action for the future. The discussed items on their list would
create the premises of a more positive working environment and would somehow help the
members of the team left through crisis and the pandemic.

Lesson learned from the abovementioned situation

I personally believe that during times of crisis and also during a pandemic, the best thing a team
manager can do together with his/ her superiors is to create safety for people in their teams and make
a positive difference in their lives. As during the pandemic everyone was facing a fight we don’t know
about and leaders have to acknowledge the personal and professional challenges employees are
facing together with their families, I honestly believe the action items on the list discussed between
the manager and group manager were the best thing that could have happened. This also shows us
that even in difficult situations, people can provide safety and inspire for resilience in other people. It
was vital in this situation to not only demonstrate empathy towards the people affected by the
pandemic but also for their families. Flexibility was the first baby step for a better working environment
and also creating the small teams within the initial team would bring empowerment to the people and
the possibility to take decisions, through which they would be accountable and responsible of their
own actions.

I believe the right approach was taken here, by offering an optimistic and realistic outlook towards the
crisis made by the pandemic and the shortage of the personnel. This approach is definitely a positive
one, having a powerful effect on employees and other stakeholders, inspiring them that through rough
times everything can be done as a team and by organizational commitment, without putting the core
values of a team in danger, so that the team as a whole can support the company’s recovery.