Wednesday, September 12, 2007
Chapter Three Case: "For the good of the many" (p. 227)
Chapter three presents a bunch of ways of viewing and thinking about organizations, from scientific to human resource approaches. This case flips many of our assumptions about these approaches on their head. Howard Crane is not a novice manager, he is experienced and savy about his business and his employees. What does this case reveal about approaches to management and how they work "in the field?"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
I think that this case reveals a lot about management and the different approaches taken in management styles. Howard and his coworkers seem to have taken on the human relations approach. All three were very concerned about the social needs with their employees, and Anne had mentioned that when the company's employees did not respond as well as they had thought to their "great plan," she took it somewhat personal. The company of 50 or so employees has close interpersonal relationships with one another, and the management seemed to be genually concerned about the 19 employees well being. I think going back to the idea that communication is often misinterpreted is the main setback to their plan. Ann even says "I'm suppose to know something about communicating crisis information to employees effectively." She and Jason realized that the source of the problem was the lack of communication to the employees about their plan. They felt confused and mislead after working for a company they had a good interpersonal relationship with, and they weren't getting any explanations for the sudden change in their lives. With the kind of management their company utilized, it seems logical that workers would want more answers.
This case reveals a great deal about different management styles. I was very surprised that Howard came up with this great idea to "save" his employees. When I started reading the case I thought to myself "I wonder if there are really bosses out there like this". Howard seemed to have to right ideas at the right time, but hadn't thought the idea through, they forgot to run the idea by they people they were trying to "save" in the first place. I believe that this case shows that there are many ways to deal with one situation in a company and lay offs is the most common. It seems as though Howard had already taken care of the employees and given them what seemed like a great working relationship. Yet he still forgot to consult the people he was looking to protect. Sometimes the more we read about organizing groups or employees, the more we get confused on the right way to handle things. I believe that this case is showing that real life experience is the only way you'll gain the knowledge you need to manage a successful 'team'. As Anne said in the case study "In school I had studied the ways in which employee resistance to change can be a normal part of organizational functioning, but now I was seeing it up close, and it was hard not to take it personally"(p 234). We must learn to communicate in every way possible.
I found Howards approach to management very interesting. I wouldn't think that there are many bosses out there that would come up with a way to 'save' his employees like he did. It seems as if Howard is and always has been a good manager, giving people time off on holidays and their birthdays and really apperciating the work that they do for the company. The mistake that they made in this situation I would imagine happens frequently. They came up with a great idea and way to keep their hard working employees. They even took the time to make phone calls to the nonprofits. They listed all the benefits of this situation yet neglected to think about the potential negatives. Clearly, this showed up the next day when the employees found out the 'plan' and wern't so happy. I think that many times managers do indeed come up with ideas such as this and become so caught up in the excitment of the new idea, they forget to really think of what is most important, the employees. This case study shows how essential it is to communicate not only with other managers but employees as well. If there had been some employee input in the first place, there potentially could have been a solution created that would work and make everyone happier. Communication is extremely important on every level.
I think it is great that Howard actually attempted to do what he could to keep his employees around. There are too many people out there overly concerned with bottom lines and profit potential to take their employees feelings into consideration. I do however think the decision to use loaned labor was rushed. In one day the three managers made and enormous decision that would impact the company greatly. Howard’s quote at the end rings very true, “You know, there’s no way to demonstrate respect for the employees like empowering them to help solve the challenges that they’ve raised.” I think if the employees would have had a part in the decision making process from the beginning, the management would have been able to settle on better conclusion. Open communication between all levels of employment would have helped everyone succeed. The management should have taken more time to research the idea and its effect on the employees. Hopefully after this experience, Howard will remember to consult those affected by a situation when attempting to solve it.
I think this case reveals a lot about the different approaches to management styles. I was actually surprised to hear that Howard wanted to come up with an idea that would help save his employees. I definitely wasn't expecting that. I also thought that Howard's plan was very well thought out, but it goes to show that organizations really need to be careful how they word their ideas to their employees. The employees at Wister obviously didn't fully understand Howard's idea and I think with a better explanation and reasoning for the idea, there wouldn't have been as much confusion. It also goes to show how important it is for organizations to have good communication skills. However, you can tell that this company has really good communication with one another, and everyone for the most part seems to be on the same page. The only thing that I might suggest to Howard as to how to solve his problem would be to take into consideration the perspective of his employees. He was so happy with his idea that he didn't take into account what the reaction of his employees would be. So not only does the company have to solve the crisis of their employees, but they also have to figure out how to make this non-profit idea work to everyone’s advantage. This case shows a lot about how different approaches work for different companies. You definitely have to be concerned with what works for your organization and what doesn’t work. Even if you think something is a great idea, it is still very important to communicate to those who might be affected, because those people’s views may be a lot different.
I also thought that it was great that each one of them did have different management styles and were able to work together to come up with ideas. It was great to see that their ideas showed concern for all of the employees and at first I thought that they had some very good ideas. But as soon as they agreed I knew that there was going to be a problem because they hadn't asked the opinion of any of their employees. Telling all of the employees what was going to happen without explaining to them why it was happening created a lot of confusion. Alot of times when lack of communication or explanation about large changes such as this one creates a lot of confusion between the employees. This case study shows the importance of communication in a work place. As most have already stated, this was a good idea that the managers came up with but the fact that they did not think about what the employees wanted created some upset employees. This case study really made me think about how I need to look at some of my "great ideas" while working with a group. I need to make sure to look at the different angles and make sure that I am communicating with everybody to ensure that it really is an idea that will work.
I, too, thought it was respectable that the managers, when faced with a seemingly negative problem, turned it around and figured out a way to benefit their community who has been supporting their company, as well as benefit the employees who otherwise would be without work. When I first read their plan, I didn't think of all the repercussions that arose when the news was announced to the employees. Their plan definitely happened too fast, and did not have enough thought, or consideration of outside problems. They definitely could have escaped the initial surprise, fear, and revolt from the employees if they took more time to discuss between themselves as well as with the employees themselves to come up with a solid plan. I think Howard realized this when he offered the idea of using a transformational approach. It's true that people respond better to feeling like they are "achieving a vision" and working towards something positive. This work environment obviously always need a little "ironing out" and hopefully eventually can reach a solution that both employees and managers can be satisfied with.
I thought the idea to still pay the laid-off employees and have them work for a non-profit organization was brilliant. Then after finding out how the employees felt I realized that things really aren’t so black and white and there are complications. It surprised me that I didn’t even think that there would be such large problems, just like Anne, Howard, and Jason. I was impressed that the managers cared so much about their employees and tried to find a way to keep them from getting laid off. Communication is the key in solving this whole problem of the employees not liking the idea. I think the managers need to meet with everyone, perhaps even separately, and find out the exact problems and see if the employee has any type of solution. Then after compiling all the results a large meeting should be held to tell the employees the decision. After that, if the employee does not agree, then they can be laid-off. Like I said, communication is the only way to fix this problem. I think managers have a very difficult job because they need to come up with the answers for problems, even though they don’t have all the variables. I hope that when I enter the business world, and have to present my ideas, I remember this case and realize that there are so many things that change what I might think is a great solution.
I feel this case highlighted how important communication truly is, and especially, communication between all levels of an organization. As I began reading this story I was intrigued by Howard’s great idea and surprised by the consideration he had for his employees. I too, agreed with Howard, Anne, and Jason’s enthusiasm about their loaned labor idea and was surprised by the employee’s rejection. The management had come up with what appeared to be a job-saving solution; but, unfortunately, failed in how they presented their idea to the employees it would affect. This caused the employees to misinterpret the motivation behind the idea. I think this case revealed that the classical approach to management is absolutely not the solution. Sure, management had the employee’s best interests in mind; however, they decided to implement an idea that was only discussed at one level, instead of consulting the people it was going to affect. The human resources approach to organizational communication would have been the best approach to this situation. What better of away to figure out the needs and concerns when implementing a problem than asking the direct source? Communication throughout an organization is vital to success!
In the case I was really surprised that a company would think about doing something like shared labor. I thought to myself that that would be amazingly nice. Then I read other people’s postings and I got the vibe that this is something that should be expected and that most companies/corporations are big/bad/evil because they lay people off. I guess I don’t feel that way. I think it’s is easily something that can be viewed one way. Managers are trying keep everyone pleased while at the same time make profit. Think about how hard it is to please everyone in any situation. I don’t think most companies would have the resources to pay their employees for three non-productive months. And in big corporations, if the CEO decided to do this, stockholders wouldn’t put up with it. I think this case does a good job of showing some tight situations managers get in and also why communication is so important for managers. Even the right choice, if communicated improperly, can be the wrong choice. I think that if the managers told the situation fully to the employees there would be a lot less anger. Also if they allowed slack for feedback so they could get employee feedback before they set anything in stone, they would be in a much better situation.
I was really impressed with Howard’s (and well the whole management team’s) devotion to its employees. The situation is similar to the first blog we had to read, where a company laid off employees. Even though I agreed with what the company did stating ‘that’s just how capitalism works’ it’s nice to see that people like Howard still care so much about the employee. But not only was his commitment to his employees impressive, but to the community as well, not many people would solve one problem by solving other people’s problems as well. Though I think this situation is only applicable in scarce cases I think it’s the perfect way to handle it.
I was pleasantly surprised by Howard's way of management. How often do you read about a company that has to lay do off employees and the company tries to best thing that will help the employees. I also thought it was interesting how the different generations of management each had a differet way of going about the problem. I do appreciate the way Howard tried to handle the situation. They definitely could have gone a different way then a memo to communicate such huge and touchy information. I feel like the information would have been received better. Information explaining that they will not be working the same job for 90 days is probably not best sent on a piece of paper. That was Howard's fault. A meeting with the 19 people that were being laid off would have been appropriate. Howard could have presented the idea and asked for input to make his idea work. Like I said though, Howard was only trying to do the best for his employees and keep them happy, benefit the company, and the community. That's hard to find
This situation is really interesting. I think we do this all of the time. The employees became a muted group in this situation. The managers were only worrying about how the situation looked and how it would affect them. Their plan seemed brilliant at first. It very much fit in with their values. However, when it hit the employees, there was a different story. The emplyees frame of reference included much more than the managers. The employees worried not only about their job but their family, their transportation, and their abilities.
The managers were being very generous in their mind. I think that their approach was awesome. They are less about "big" business than many other people out there. The boss really seemed to worry about his employees.
I think that this situation would turn out positively. It wouldn't be hard to twist the situation further.
In worrying so much about their emplyees, the managers forgot to ask them their input in a crisis that directly involved them.
Post a Comment