Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Team Case Analysis 1 James Cranston & Eugene Kirby: Lindsay - Ryan - Margaret Pesikov Alejandro
Team Case Analysis 1 James Cranston & Eugene Kirby: Lindsay - Ryan - Margaret Pesikov Alejandro
Lindsay -
Ryan -
Margaret Pesikov
Alejandro -
Management 302-B
Lori Coakley
October 24, 2011
Case Analysis
Executive Summary:
James Cranston, the Vice President of Colonial Food Services, is about to conduct a
performance appraisal interview of the district manager, Eugene Kirby, who is ten years his
senior. Cranston is debating whether or not Kirby has the personality traits and abilities to
become a successful Operations Manager for the organization. In the appraisal, Cranston
highlights Kirby’s best assets as his administrative knowledge and his ability to motivate
employees to achieve organizational goals. Kirby, however, performs poorly in decision making,
problem solving, and conflict resolution. Kirby sees himself as misunderstood, and has an
explanation for all of the “defects” that Cranston perceives him to have. Both Cranston and
Kirby agree that Kirby’s lack of education makes it difficult for him to grow within the
company, setting his career at a plateau. Kirby believes that his 20 years of work experience
should compensate for a college degree; however, Cranston insists that Kirby would benefit from
training seminars. This leads to conflicting points of view coming into the interview. On the day
of the meeting, Kirby is forced to wait for several hours before James Cranston finally has the
time to begin the interview. Even when Cranston is ready for the meeting, the two men have to
move to a different location just to have it. Through Cranston’s nonverbal communication, he
shows a lack of interest in Kirby.
In the following analysis, we assume that the organization already has an Operations
Manager who is either retiring or transferring to a new location. We assume that Cranston and
Kirby have a close relationship because they talk frequently and are very defensive of each other.
Cranston thinks Kirby is experienced, has high technical competence, and an ability to meet
forecasts, which makes him a suitable candidate for Operations Manager position of CFS.
However, for all of the positive qualities, there are also negative aspects that prevent Kirby from
becoming a qualified operational manager. Also, we assume that Kirby has a lot of autonomy
because he is able to fire and hire who he wants, but his decisions must be approved by Cranston.
In this case there are several smaller issues and problems that contribute to the major
problem. Within the past twenty years of working at the company, Kirby has only been evaluated
three times, a contributing factor in his inability to handle criticism well. Due to the evaluations
being so infrequent, Kirby feels as though the evaluations only occur when he is doing
something wrong, instead of regarding them as standard procedure. This makes him defensive
and reluctant to accept the criticism. The corporate level officer in charge or organizational
development felt that Kirby’s assessment workshop results were that he does not handle
feedback well, and tends to block out results from questionnaires and constructive criticism.
Cranston and Kirby also have differing opinions on whether or not Kirby needs to attend college
in order to fill the Organizational Manager position.
We recommend that evaluations are made more frequently and are administered on a
regular basis so that they are regarded as standard protocol to make Kirby accustomed to
receiving criticism. Also, establish periodic training sessions and cross-functional training
programs so that Kirby is more knowledgeable about the organization. In addition, these “small
doses” of training will keep Kirby from being offended.
Problem Statement
James Cranston and Eugene Kirby are walking into this performance appraisal interview
with different expectations due to conflicting role perceptions, biases, and miscommunication.
Cranston is entering the interview with a developmental angle, whereas Kirby is entering the
interview with the expectation of being promoted.
Alternative Solutions
Alternative solutions that are recommended for the Cranston/Kirby case can be seen in
Appendix A, as well as the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative.
Recommended Action
In order to have prevented this conflict in expectations from occurring in the first place,
Kirby should have received effective feedback in the years prior to that meeting. The feedback
should have been timely, relevant, credible, and specific. Had Cranston used these criteria to give
Kirby feedback on his performance and been more open about his true views of him, Kirby
would have been more accustomed to receiving negative evaluations and would have been more
likely to try and improve himself. If the feedback was timely, instead of occurring three times
every twenty years, Kirby would have a more accurate perception of his abilities and
weaknesses. Kirby should have gotten feedback from Cranston, his boss, because that is what
his role should entail. Also, Cranston should have participated in active listening and both Kirby
and Cranston should have communicated constantly considering they are both upper level
management. Had this been done prior to the performance appraisal interview, Kirby and
Cranston would have come to the interview with coinciding visions about the potential outcome
of the interview.
Appendix- A
Alternative Solutions:
Works Cited
McShane, Steven Lattimore. Organizational Behavior. New York: Irwin/McGraw-Hill, 2012.
Print.
Case Book Organizational Behavior MGT302B, Harvard Business Publishing, James Cranston,
Eugene Kirby