Faculty of Commerce

School of Commerce
Assignment One

Class: S.Y.B. Com Hons

Subject: Strategic Business Leader
Date of Submission:
Marks: 15

Read the Case Study Carefully and answer the questions mentioned below:
Both Questions have equal Marks

Peter was 23 years old when he started to work for Company A as a concrete
pump truck operator. At Company A, Peter’s division was made up of 3 pump
operators who were delegated work based upon seniority. Peter enjoyed his
work and always arrived to work early, often continuing to help out at the shop
even off the clock. Peter however was disappointed with the amount of work,
never being able to put in over 35 hours a week because of the hierarchy of his
division combined with the slow economy and reduced job assignments in his
division. In Peter’s division, the senior operator always took the prime
assignments, ones where an employee could put in a full day’s work. Peter had
met with the owner and expressed his interest in working in any aspect of the
company as he had a full range of construction skills and felt his desire to work
and enjoyment of the field was reflected in his past year’s performance.
However, not long after his meeting with the owner, Peter was laid off.
Peter applied for work at Company B, a competitor of Company A. Peter was
hired as a concrete pump truck operator. Two years after working for Company B
Peter was promoted as a construction foreman. As a salaried foreman, Peter
made it a personal goal to arrive early to help assist in getting the supplies for the
day loaded onto all trucks. Daily, he stayed at his job site as late as needed to get
all the tasks completed. Often Peter would arrive home at night with enough time
to eat and go to sleep to start his day over again. When he was home, Peter
remained mentally engaged with work, dominating conversation by reiterating his
workday and discussed industry news and company activity. Rarely did Peter take
vacation and always went to work regardless of sickness. The only day Peter had
off during the week was Sunday as he reported to work every Saturday whether
or not he actually went to the job site. There was always work to be done around
the shop! Peter also enjoyed attending company functions. In particular, the end
of the year party where the entire company gathered along with invited key
people Company B did business with.
After working 10 years at Company B, the owner promoted him to supervisor. As
supervisor, Peter worked directly next to the owner of Company B for the next 10
years. Over the years Peter's relationship with the owner developed not only into
one of mentor, where he taught Peter details in running the Company but also as
confidant, discussing their personal lives. Peter had incremental pay raises and
on years that were especially profitable for the company, received substantial
end-of-year bonuses, and two years ago the owner established Peter with a
special retirement fund in which the company intends to make yearly 5 digit
contributions on years the company makes lucrative profit. Peter will be 100%
percent vested in 15 years. One year ago Peter received a pay cut and 75% bonus
reduction as part of a company-wide cut in an effort to reduce company expenses
due to an economic slowdown; the owner himself took a cut in salary.
Over the past several years Peter has taken on side (concrete) work outside of his employment with
Company B. Most recently he received a call to bid on a job that would undoubtedly launch him in own
personal concrete business, but would place him as a direct competitor of his employer, Company B, he
has worked with for 20 years. Peter decided to turn down the lucrative job offer, stay with Company B,
and devote even more energy into his work as the owner promised as soon as the economy turns
around Peter will return to his previous salary.

Peter’s strategic alignment during his tenure with Company A was low. The
organisation had a poor Strategic planning and retention strategy. Peter’s
disappointment in the lack of work led to a negative attitude toward his job and
low job satisfaction. Over time, Peter became less interested in his work, was
often absent and his performance was mediocre. Naturally, as lay-offs became
imminent during the bad economic time, Peter was one of the first employees to
be laid off.
During Peter’s tenure with Company B, however, his job engagement was
dangerously high. Peter’s work began to consume him. He worked long hours, 6
days per week, never took time off and was unhappy if he was not working. Peter
became a workaholic. His personal life suffered. He became less involved with
his children and rarely attended any of their extracurricular events. When he did
attend their events, his mind was on work, not his children. His relationship with
his wife deteriorated and they frequently spoke of divorce. Peter’s work-life
balance was inadequate and he had low life satisfaction.
Peter’s emotional and interest remained relatively high throughout his tenure in
the concrete industry. He thoroughly enjoyed his line of work and had great
interest in it. His interest in the job was also evidenced by his long-term career in
the concrete industry. Despite not always being a part of the decision-making
process, specifically during his tenure with Company A, Peter was a willing
participant. Only when it became apparent that Company A was not and would
not be providing him with a sense of job satisfaction did his emotional and
cognitive job engagement begin to decline.
Peter’s behavioral job engagement, however, varied significantly amongst his
tenure with Company A and Company B. While working with Company A, Peter
was not afforded the opportunity to engage in additional roles, responsibilities or
learning. In fact, assignments were scarce and Peter found it difficult to even
work 35 hours per week. Peter’s tenure with Company B was the exact opposite.
Peter was constantly involved with as many assignments as possible, often
bringing his work home with him. Thoughts of work were with him every day of
almost every hour. There was always something for Peter to do and learn and he
made sure he kept himself occupied with work both in the workplace and at
home. With Company A, there was too little job engagement. With Company B,
there was too much of it, which led to Peter suffering from work holism.

Case Questions
Q1) Read the case study carefully and write in detail which organisation followed
a more Strategic Leadership approach in dealing with Peter ? Your answer must
be related to the points from the syllabus.
Q3) After reading the case study, what is your suggestion to the leadership and
decision makers of both the organizations ?