Case Study (50%) (CLO1 & CLO3)

Case Study Part 1: Consolidated Products (30%) (CLO1)

Consolidated Products is a medium-sized manufacturer of consumer products with

nonunionized production workers. Ben Samuels was a plant manager for Consolidated
Products for 10 years, and he was very well liked by the employees there. They were grateful
for the fitness center he built for employees, and they enjoyed the social activities sponsored
by the plant several times a year, including company picnics and holiday parties. He knew
most of the workers by name, and he spent part of each day walking around the plant to visit
them and ask about their families or hobbies.

Ben believed that it was important to treat employees properly so they would have a sense of
loyalty to the company. He tried to avoid any layoffs when production demand was slack,
figuring that the company could not afford to lose skilled workers that are so difficult to
replace. The workers knew that if they had a special problem, Ben would try to help them.
For example, when someone was injured but wanted to continue working, Ben found another
job in the plant that the person could do despite having a disability. Ben believed that if you
treat people right, they will do a good job for you without close supervision. Ben applied the
same principle to his supervisors, and he mostly left them alone to run their departments as
they saw fit. He did not set objectives and standards for the plant, and he never asked the
supervisor to develop plans for improving productivity and product quality.

Under Ben, the plant had the lowest turnover among the company’s five plants, but the
second worst record for costs and production levels. When the company was acquired by
another firm, Ben was asked to take early retirement, and Phil Jones was brought in to replace
him.

Phil had a growing reputation as a manager who could get things done, and he quickly began
making changes. Costs were cut by trimming a number of activities such as the fitness center
at the plant, company picnics and parties, and the human relations training programs for
supervisors. Phil believed that human relations training was a waste of time, if employees
don’t want to do the work, get rid of them and find somebody else who does.

Supervisors were instructed to establish high performance standards for their departments and
insist that people achieve them. A computer monitoring system was introduced so that the
output of each worker could be checked closely against the standards. Phil told his
supervisors to give any worker who had substandard performance one warning, and then if
performance did not improve within two weeks, to fire the person. Phil believed that workers
don’t respect a supervisor who is weak and passive. When Phil observed a worker wasting
time or making a mistake, he would reprimand the person right on the spot to set an example.

Phil also checked closely on the performance of his supervisors. Demanding objectives were
set for each department, and weekly meetings were held with each supervisor to review
department performance. Finally, Phil insisted that supervisors check with him first before
taking any significant actions that deviated from established plans and policies.

As another cost-cutting move, Phil reduced the frequency of equipment maintenance, which
requires machines to be idled when they could be productive. Since the machines had a good
record of reliable operation, Phil believed that the current maintenance schedule was

1
excessive and was cutting into production. Finally, when business was slow for one of the
product lines, Phil laid off workers rather than finding something else for them to do.

By the end of Phil’s first year as plant manager, production costs were reduced by 20 percent
and production output was up by 10 percent. However, three of his seven supervisors left to
take other jobs, and turnover was also high among the machine operators. Some of the
turnover was due to workers that were fired, but competent machine operators were also
quitting, and it was becoming increasingly difficult to find any replacements for them.
Finally, there was increasing talk of unionizing among the workers.

Source: R. L. Daft (2008) The Leadership Experience, 4th Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning pp. 58-59

Questions

a) Compare the leadership traits and behaviors of Ben Samuels and Phil Jones.
(CLO1, 15 Marks)

By referring to the case, we define the meaning of traits and behaviour. Traits means a
distinguishing quality or characteristic, typically one belonging to a person. Behavior define
the way in which one acts or conducts oneself, especially towards other. Based on the case,
we can compare the leadership traits and behavior between Ben Samuels and Phil Jones.

Ben Samuels was a people-oriented leader who shows respect to the people or subordinates,
give time and encouragement, display trust and showed acceptance. We can see that he was
very well liked by the employees there. He allowed employees to participate in social
company’s activities. He showed respect by knowing most of the worker’s name. Ben will
try to help the workers if they had a special problem. He put trust on his supervisor by giving
the authority to make a decision and let them to develop the plant.

Ben Samuels was an Employee-centered leader. His leadership behavior displays a focus on
the needs of his subordinates. He believed that it was important to treat employees properly
so they would have a sense of loyalty to the company. He spent part of each day to visit them
and very concern on their needs and feelings.

He also proves that he was totally fall under an Advisory-role which means he always
provide advice, guidance and support in his subordinates need. He responsible for developing
broad organizational capabilities rather than accomplishing specific business result. It can be
seen that the plant department had the lowest turnover among the company’s five plants, but
the second worst record for costs and production levels.

We can say that Ben Samuels used a democratic approach. He delegates authority,
encourages participation, relies on subordinates for completion of tasks, and depends on
subordinates’ respect for influence.

Phil Jones is a task-oriented behavior. He clarifies task objectives and job responsibilities. He
also set the performance expectation and evaluate the performance. He checked the progress
and quality of their work. From the case, we can see that he had establish high performance
standards for their developments and insist that people achieve them. A computer monitoring
system was introducing so that the output of each worker could be checked closely against

2
the standards. He told his supervisors to give any worker who had substandard performance
one warning and if performance did not improve within 2 weeks, that person will be fired.

Phil Jones shows that he is a Job-centered leader. His leadership behavior which direct the
activities towards efficiency, cost-cutting and scheduling. His dimension is on the goal
emphasis and work facilitation. In the case, Phil made a cost-cutting move, he reduced the
frequency of equipment maintenance which required machines to be idled when they could
be productive. When business slow for one of the product lines, Phil laid off workers rather
than finding someone else for them to do. On the Phil’s first year, production costs were
reducing 20 percent and production output was up by 10 percent.

We can define that Phil Jones approach was fall under autocratic approach. He centralized
authority and derives power from position, controls of reward and coercion. He established
high performance standards by introducing a new monitoring system so that the output of
each worker could be checked. Because of his autocratic approach, three supervisor’s left and
turnover was decreased due to workers who were fired.

Phil Jones has his own strength which his role is on the operational role. He used vertically
oriented leadership role. He has direct control over people and resources and the position
power to accomplish results. Phil’s successfully deliver the result.

b) Which leader do you think is more effective? Why?

(CLO1, 15 Marks)
As mentioned above, Phil Jones acts as operational role while Ben Samuels act as advisory
role but Phil Jones has autocratic behavior and Ben Samuels democratic behavior. Phil Jones
and Ben Samuels have their own traits and leadership role that give pro and con to company
and also to subordinates.

For my opinion operational leader is more effective because they are someone who sees how
the individual elements of an organization fit together and work to create the larger outcome.
When they think about issues, their focus is on what systems and processes are needed or will
be impacted. These leaders serve a key role in ensuring that things get done in an effective
and efficient manner. The main focus of this type of leader is on production efficiencies,
quality improvements, variable cost reduction and ease of manufacture.

Leaders who have democratic behavior are more effective than autocratic behavior but this
trait usually depends on field of work. In an autocratic leadership style, the person in charge
has total authority and control over decision making. By virtue of their position and job
responsibilities, they not only control the efforts of the team, but monitor them for
completion –often under close scrutiny. This style is best used in situations where control is
necessary, often where there is little margin for error such manufacturing company. When
conditions are dangerous, rigid rules can keep people out of harm’s way. Many times, the
subordinate staff is inexperienced or unfamiliar with the type of work and heavy oversight is
necessary.

As a worker in consumer production, I will prefer to work with operational leader with
autocratic behavior because this type of leader can provide stability to the organization. They

3
have a knack and ability to create infrastructures that work to accomplish the needs of the
others in an organization by creating the systems to transform needs into solutions. They
devise systems for every problem to make things run smoothly by creating policies,
guidelines and instructions to ensure that things happen the right way, the first time. They can
prevent businesses or projects from becoming stagnant because of poor organization or lack
of leadership. They are very effective when decisions must come quickly, without time to
consult others. So the autocratic leader is more effective rather than democratic leader
because they can keep teams from missing important deadlines and error-free outcomes.

QUESTION 3 – If you were Phil Jones’s boss, what would you do now?

As a management leader for Phil Jones, firstly I will review Phil Jones’s performance
compared to previous Manager. Then I will always discuss, give some advises and monitor
the action taken by Phil Jones. After that I will explain and create awareness about
importance of policies and procedures in field of work and impacts of not followed the SOP.
Finally, the SOP needs to be endorsed so it can be used as guidelines.

The plant has a worst record of cost and productivity because of the incompetence of
previous manager. As a manufacturer of consumer product, any error should not be arise so
we need to hired a responsible Manager that can align and control the production and
productivity of employees so Phil Jones prove that he can handle and solve the problem
immediately. After review his performance, I am very agreed with the changes make by Phil
Jones and also his leadership role. The actions taken by Phil Jones is right such as cost
cutting for unproductive activities, establish high performance standard, implement
monitoring system and others planning. His leadership style also helps company to improve
the productivity and reduce the cost even though employee turnover is high.

To keep loyalty of employees in order to retain a talent and experienced worker, I will always
discuss with Phil Jones about his planning, achievement and result including talent
management. As autocratic leadership, it is difficult balancing the use of authority with the
morale of the team so I will advise Phil Jones to always respect the subordinates, explain the
rules, be consistently and fairly and educate before enforce in order to having everyone
understand his expectations to avoid miscommunications and misunderstandings.

I am also will help Phil Jones to conduct the plant by his style as long as productivity
improves and cost is reduced. At the same time, I’m also need to make sure all the staff can
adapt with these new changes by giving an explanation and create awareness about
importance of SOP and implications if not followed by allow opinions from them and
encourage staff to express themselves. Permitting employees to offer suggestions even if
ideas aren’t adopted, people appreciate the freedom to share their thoughts.

I will propose to endorse the standard of procedure and policies made by Phil Jones to the top
management (Board of Directors) so the procedures and policies can be enforced and
implemented in the whole plant and all employees should follow the rules without exception.

4
Case Study Part 2: International Bank (20%) (CLO3)

Top executives and board members of a large international bank in New York are meeting to
consider three finalists for a new position. The winning candidate will be in a high-profile
job, taking charge of a group of top loan officers who have recently gotten the bank into some
risky financial arrangements in Latin America. The bank had suffered serious financial
problem when the Mexican peso collapsed, and the board voted to hire someone to oversee
this group of loan officers and make sure the necessary due diligence is done on major loans
before further commitments are made. Although the bank likes for decisions to be made as
close to the action level as possible, they believe the loan officers have gotten out of hand and
need to be reined in. The effectiveness of the person in this new position is considered to be
of utmost importance for the bank’s future. After carefully reviewing resumes, the board
selected six candidates for the first round of interviews, after which the list of finalists was
narrowed to three. All three candidates seem to have intellect and experience to handle the
job. Before the second-round interview, the board has asked their regular consulting firm to
review the candidates, conduct more extensive background checks, and administer
personality tests. A summary of their reports on the three candidates is presented below:

A.M.
This candidate has a relatively poor self-concept and show a fear of the unknown. She is
somewhat of an introvert and is uncomfortable using power openly and noticeably. A.M.’s
beliefs about others are that all people are inherently noble, kind, and disposed to do the right
thing, and that it is possible to influence and modify the behavior of anyone through logic and
reason. Once a person’s shortcomings are pointed out to her, A.M. will try to help the person
overcome them. She believes that all employees can be happy, content, and dedicated to the
goal of the organization.

J.T.
He is an extravert with a strong drive for achievement and power. He likes new experiences
and tends to be impulsive and adventurous. He is a very self-assured and confident in his own
abilities, but highly suspicious of the motives and abilities of others. J.T. believes the average
person has an inherent dislike for work and will avoid responsibility where possible. He is
very slow to trust others, but does have the ability over time to develop close, trusting
relationships. In general, J.T. believes that most people must be coerced, controlled, and
threatened to get them to do their jobs well and to the benefit of the organization.

F.C.
This candidate is also an extravert, but, although she is competitive, F.C. does not seem to
have the strong desire for dominance that many extraverts show. F.C. is also highly
conscientious and goal-oriented, and will do whatever she believes is necessary to achieve a
goal. F.C. has a generally positive attitude toward others, believing that most people want to
do their best for the organization. F.C. does, though, seem to have a problem forming close,
personal relationships. Her lively, outgoing personality enables her to make many superficial
acquaintances, but she seems to distrust and avoid emotions in herself and others, preventing
the development of close relationships.

Source: R. L. Daft (2011) Leadership, 5th Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning p. 439

Question

5
1. Based only on the consultant’s summary, which of the three candidates would you select
as a leader for the group of loan officers? Discuss and justify your decision for each
candidate
(CLO3, 6 marks x 3 candidates = 18 marks + 2 marks for adequate explanation)

Final Assessment (20%) (CLO4)

This assessment will be given on 20 March 2022.

Guidelines for the Presentation of Assignment, Case Study and Final Assessment

1. You should use Microsoft PowerPoint Slides for presentation.

2. The softcopy of your Microsoft PowerPoint Slides must be submitted on the day of
presentation.
3. The maximum time allocation for each presentation is 20 minutes.
4. There is no minimum time limit for presentation.