Simulation Crisis 4

OGL 300: Theory Practice of Leadership

Karissa Kaiser; Group 1

2/25/2022

1. Report the metrics (Customer, Employee and shareholder satisfaction percentages). How did
your team do? Compared to last weeks? What could have been done better?
Our customer metrics were 64%, employee was 72%, and shareholder was 64%. I think we did a
good job but could’ve spent more money to do better. Our metrics compared to the rest of the
class stayed on the high end throughout the crisis until the final stage. Our customer metric
plummeted 9 points and employee dropped 4 which dropped to average or below. We decided
to fight the hostile takeover and not sell out. We had a decent cash reserve and wanted to
utilize that to stay afloat as well as make the shareholders happy and keep our employees in
the loop throughout the crisis. At the end of the last crisis, we brought up our shareholder
metric up by 9 points. Because of the crisis, we put our focus on increasing this number further
to gain shareholder influence to stay afloat. I think we did a really good job the first three
stages with this strategy, but in the final stage where our metrics dropped, I think we could’ve
been less conservative with our cash reserve and spent more to maintain employee and
customer metrics.
2. How did your individual decisions compare to those of your teammates? Did you
agree/disagree?
My team has been very consistent in making decisions together. We met via Zoom so we could
share screens and walk through each crisis together and get an idea of what sort of challenges
each team member faced. I think we were all very customer focused overall, but some would
be too focused on shareholder, and they probably thought I was too employee focused. Where
we disagreed was when the CEO would initially select a harsh answer that would potentially
crush our employee metric. It seemed like the rest of the team would chime in when they
disagreed, and we were all very receptive of everyone’s input. We would discuss why we
thought the softer option would be more beneficial and try to keep the employees in mind and
she usually would come around. Based on our metrics, we seemed to be working well together
in doing so. I think myself and our COO were both very employee focused as opposed to
shareholder focused. I think it’s important to maintain a positive culture and ensure the
employees are getting what they can out of their job and vice versa.
3. Which theory or theories in the textbook (Ch.s 1-11, 14) you have studied so far are
applicable to this crisis? Explain.
The first type of leadership that comes to mind to work through this crisis is Transformational
leadership. I think the leaders needed to stay strong and strategic, while continuing their
connections with the team members. With Reis trying to purchase share of Liberty Air, a divide
could’ve come between the leaders and followers. I think understanding their leaders being a
charismatic leader would help bridge this gap that may be forming because of this crisis. I think
this would be a great time to hear what the team is saying and show them their needs matter.
I think another form of leadership that may have been useful in this crisis is servant leadership.
Again, the company is risking a shark swooping in and buying out shares of the company. This
could drive a wedge amongst leaders and followers and putting the follower first can
strengthen their relationship with the leader as well as strengthen their loyalty to the company.
4. What is your demonstrated leadership style in this week’s game? Have you used this style in
your personal life or in your job as a leader? Give an example.
This week we had Authentic style leadership again. I think another example I have of this style
was when I was a leader at a distribution center. Our department was one of three shipping
departments, and we were affected by each department in the building in some way. We were
constantly getting errors on our next days because they would get lost in the mix of regular
orders by picking and other shipping departments and not show up in time for the truck. In
order to resolve this issue, a leader in a different shipping department decided to step up and
make a decision that benefited his team, affected my team in a negative way and he didn’t
bother talking to any other leaders about his decision. Needless to say, I was irate and needed
to stick up for my team and I used the theoretical approach in doing so. I wanted to come up
with a solution that benefited the building and get the team members’ input as they would be
the ones affected most. I analyzed our options and walked around having conversations with
team members throughout the shipping and picking departments to see which option they
thought would work best. I then presented the best option in their words to the other leaders.
The solution was simple and cheap and those that had ideas or opinions were able to see them
come to life in this new process we put in place for our next day items.