CASE STUDY A - ANSWERS

1. What does nice mean to you? Do you think nice is a good trait for leaders or the
kiss of death?

As for me, the word nice, I think that an individual may be respectful, empathetic and
always pleasant to be around and it is depending on the individual giving this description
to a manager, the word nice might have different meanings. I do not agree that the case
study interpreted nice as a bad thing. It is because they indicated that his weaknesses
were due to his pleasant personality. Some people who are polite will make excellent
leaders, while others will make bad leaders. I believe that a manager's quality cannot be
entirely determined by how nice they are. There are many other aspects that will
determine whether a leader succeeds or fails. These two things are different because
the personality or human traits are more stable, whereas your life beliefs, theories, and
philosophy are more flexible and changeable.

2. Is nice related to any concepts in the chapter, such as one of the big five
personality dimensions, Myers–Briggs components, or left-right brain
dominance? Discuss.

The word "nice" is frequently used to describe a set of qualities and behaviors
represented by an individual. So, when we look at some of the concepts presented in
this chapter relating to personality or an individual's thought process, we can see how
these sides of the spectrum of thinking correspond to an individual's ability to have
positive aspects and traits. The level of agreeableness, for example, which is defined as
which an individual can get along with others by being nice, cooperative, forgiving,
caring, empathetic, and trustworthy shows the various traits described in the word nice.
Myers-Briggs components and left-right brain dominance can both be considered as
having sections that are similar to nice.
 3. If Harry is passed over for promotion, what feedback and advice would you give
him about how to improve his leadership skills for possible future promotion?

If Harry is passed over for promotion, I recommend that he practice saying no to people
and assign more tasks rather than taking on more responsibility himself. As a manager, it
is your responsibility to ensure that others are doing their jobs, and if they aren't, it is
your responsibility to find someone else who can. A manager should not undertake the
tasks themselves, but should take the required procedures to ensure that the person in
charge of the task can complete the task in the given timeline without incurring any
additional costs or disadvantages to the company. Within that, if you spend time doing
things that should be done by others, you are wasting time that could be spent managing
other tasks and there are a lot of nice people who say no all of the time. The people in
the case were actually describing the concept of weakness when they used the word
nice. It is totally plausible to be both nice and strong.

CASE STUDY B - ANSWERS

1. Analyze this situation using the Hersey–Blanchard model and the Vroom–Jago
model. What do these models suggest as the appropriate leadership or decision
style? Explain.

Kevin Mcarthy has discovered that, if needed to conduct correctly as a small team
oriented business, the participative leadership style is likely the best solution. This
approach produces two different outcomes. One in which the team is left with just two
options, one of which is in direct opposition to his newly implemented policies, and the
other of which leads to a conflict amongst themselves. If we analyze the subordinates'
readiness, we might conclude that they are able to generate the supplies, but that they
are unwilling and uninspired to do so, based on the recent product quality. This could be
due to a lack of knowledge of new equipment or a lack of motivation as a result of policy
changes. Then, the Vroom-Jago model would apply a different style to each problem,
since each issue had a different outcome. When it comes to production quality and
incentives, the approach would lead to a filication method. According to the
Hersey-Blanchard model, this would place them at a level of 3 readiness.
2. Evaluate Kevin McCarthy’s leadership style before and during his experiment in
participative management.

Before the experiment, Kevin had a leadership style in which he made all of the choices,
and the team was in category 2 readiness. This means that his staff are motivated to
work, while he is responsible for training his subordinates on the work at hand and
making executive decisions (work standards, vacation time). Later, in order to improve
the work environment, he chose to use a participative strategy in which employees had
more participation. This approach in strategy shows that Kevin considers the group to be
at level 4, where he would outsource the concerns to the group as a whole and let them
decide for themselves. The problem with this affect the movement in strategy is how he
evaluated the group's readiness despite recent changes in the environment, such as
standards and equipment. As a result, the group reached an impasse on both matters,
one with Kevin and the other among themselves. As a result of this, Kevin realized that
his initial estimate of their readiness was inaccurate, and he had to reassess the issue to
a level 3 readiness. Employees with the required qualifications and work experience may
feel unmotivated in this situation.

3. If you, were Kevin McCarthy, what would you do now? Why?

If I were Kevin McCarthy, when it comes to vacation weeks, it seems obvious that the
group's leader should make the decision. His understanding of his subordinates' job
efficiency has enabled him to efficiently choose the best date while also considering
other aspects such as work performance and the employee's personal reasons. When it
comes to incentives, it's important to remember the path goal theory, which aims to
achieve company goals through employee rewards. The argument advanced in support
of the new policy is that present wages are no longer competitive due to inflation. The
current equipment compensates for the problem by having a higher production capacity,
which means higher pay because more supplies are produced. Then for the organization
is struggling in that new equipment must be paid for, and the current policy requires
employees to work more for less incentives. The best way is to be able to reason with
the group by outlining the problem from the perspective of management and then act as
a facilitator to come to an agreement. A new level of standards can be established to
motivate the group to perform while also ensuring a fair reward.