MeatPack is a food-processing company located in Sydney in Australia. It’s a family-owned business with several processing plants in Queensland and New South Wales. It has dealt with the processing of meat products and fresh soups for over 27 years now. Its customers mostly include the food-service companies and the retail chains within Australia and in other countries. Derek Bison is the Chief Executive Director (CEO) of the MeatPack company being the 4th generation down the family line to lead the organization. The company has set various targets that have to be met to become successful and grow to greater heights. The significant changes that have been implemented include; cultural and performance shift as well as senior leadership changes. The paper, therefore, focusses on the effectiveness of these changes, barriers to the cultural change, as well as the best approach (either hands-on or hands-off) to carry out their business.
Managing and leading a company is a task that requires to be taken with seriousness. How a manager will lead the company will determine its failure or success in the long-run. Within an organization there are various employees of a different culture, therefore, there many disagreements that can arise, as such the manager has to find means through which he or she will resolve those issues. Otherwise, failure of addressing such matters will affect the working relationship of the employees and eventually the output will decrease (Algahtani, 2014). As a manager, you need to select the best style and approach of dealing with situations that arise within the organization. Currently, Bison employs the hands-on approach in dealing with the junior staff and leaders. For instance, he inspires the line managers in taking a hands-on approach, especially when hiring new personnel’s or when performing performance appraisals. I believe Bison need to keep on using a more hands-on approach in the management of the business has it involves direct interaction with the employees and day-to-day needs, activities, and operations of the organization.
Hands-on leaders work to connect the world of management and leadership through the creation of a vision as well as modeling behavior of the organization (Giessner and Wong, 2016). The manager, however, does not detach himself from daily operations of the company. He involves himself in the standard work that other employees are involved. Just like the way Bison engages himself in training the employees on the vital business skills, a hands-on-approach encourages managers to coach their team and invest heavily in their progress. According to the 21st VUCA (Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity, and Ambiguity) business model, the Leader-Manager approach is usually preferred over the Manager-Leader approach (Nandram and Bindlish, 2017). A manager having leadership skills as the principal role in the management of business operations (leading rather than managing) can recognize future challenges that a company may face and hence make significant changes and shifts. In a hands-on approach, the manager interacts directly with the junior staff and takes part in the ongoing projects. Employee mentoring is crucial, and the line of communication from upwards or downwards is always open (Saleh and Watson, 2017). The employees can ask the manager and other top managers any question and get clarification immediately. Such kind of interaction is vital in creating a conducive environment for employees to work smoothly. The culture of the organization will be family-oriented making every worker to feel accommodated and hence increase their productivity (Ward, 2016).
If Bison keeps on using the hands-on approach in managing the MeatPark company, there is a guarantee they will reach their set target of 1 billion dollars by the year 2020. Due to this, the manager can obtain diverse ideas from the employees on how to run the company. The relationship between the employees and the manager is open such that they can tell him their problems, areas that need improvement, and what can be done for the company to be more productive. As a manager also, you get to have a deeper understanding of the business at large from all the corners (Samovar et al., 2015). It is easy as such for a hands-on manager to understand areas that need improvement in the organization and implement the appropriate techniques that can overcome those challenges. Since the employees more focused due to the manager’s active role in the participation of the daily activities, there are high chances for the continued growth of the company.
On the contrary, a hands-off manager leaves all the operations and running of the business in the hands of the employees and their team leaders. As such, he has limited command on the way the business activities are carried out. He has little knowledge on the ongoing operations of the business as well as the details. He is not much involved in the projects neither does he make much effort to ask employees to keep him in the loop (Nisbet, 2018). He also does not invest much time in listening to the employees or following the agreements made. Much of the work is left to the employees. Such kind of approach is risky as the manager may fail to foresee a threat and hence crumble the business as at once. Also, it’s only a few employees who will work under minimum supervision while the rest will not thereby affect the quality of their output. Therefore, Bison should keep on using the hands-on approach in carrying out the activities of the MeatPark company.
Some of the leadership changes that Bison implemented in the organization is the development of leadership competencies, particularly for the senior strategy team. He also shifted the structure of the business from a hierarchical organization to a horizontal one, thereby giving the front-line workers and the rest a more responsibility and accountability regarding their performance (Williams, 2014). Other changes include; development program for the leaders, coaching consultation for every member of the senior strategy team, and change in the set-up of the company’s human resource department. These changes have been effective so far as Bison has seen tremendous changes and improvement in the company concerning productivity and growth. In particular, the senior strategy team experienced a positive dynamism through the changes introduced. The open dialogue fostered between the manager and other employees, for instance, has encouraged free conversation between the employees as well as with the manager (Williams, 2014). Through this, it is easier to understand the needs of the workers and come up with appropriate solutions.
However, despite the positive changes seen within the organization due to changes experienced with the senior leadership styles, there have been some shortcomings. For instance, the composition of the strategy team is not known, and this has brought about uncertainty within the team members. The members never understood whether they were indeed part of the team or not (Williams, 2014). The employees also have issues in determining the exact roles of the strategy team and those of the senior leadership team as well as the functions of Bison. Some of the senior strategy team, for instance, fear questions decisions made by Bison since he is the CEO of the company despite the freedom they have been given to question him of anything. They don’t understand who should hold another accountable; is it Bison holding the senior strategy team or the board holding Bison accountable. Such confusions affect smooth operations of the company as each member does not understand their role hence may leave some unattended (Jaques, 2017). The structural changes that the strategy team was to introduce in the company as well brought in a heated discussion concerning the position of the members. They did not understand whom they would be reporting to if Bison became a Chairman of the company instead of the Executive Chairman. Such changes, therefore, brought a lot of issues within the organization since they never understood their position and what they were supposed to do or respond to amongst the leaders (Núñez, 2016).
The manner in which the senior leaders’ effect change in an organization will determine how other employees will take it. Otherwise, they might be met with a significant resistance that will bring huge differences affecting the operations of the business (Cameron and Green, 2015). This is what happened in MeatPack when the senior leadership tried to bring in a new structure of business management. Therefore, the senior leaders need to bring in new strategy on how to bring the proposed change to the organization. For instance, communication breakdown can help bridge the differences that arose within the MeatPack. Through this, the leaders should share all the information regarding the change and explain step-by-step how the change will be useful. For example, when CFO raised various concerns concerning the new structure in the annual general meeting, he was not answered satisfactorily, and this frustrated several members. However, if the senior leaders cared to explain the whole process slowly and clearly, the members could probably understand and hence cement any differences (Stayer, 2009).
In future Bison and other senior leaders should be willing to collaborate and coordinate with other employees in bringing a change within the company (Doppelt, 2017). When employees feel involved in bringing in their ideas, they will accept the change fast and also push for its implementation. Allowing workers to have input, listening to their needs, and solutions can play a huge role in bringing in a positive change. If the company takes in the issue of employee engagement earnestly, then there are assured of creating a positive change in the company in the future. Effective leadership means driving positive change in an organization. Senior leadership can only ensure their ideas are implemented, and the change is effective if they inspire the employees (Cummings and Worley, 2014). Bison has been employing the hands-on approach, and that’s what other leaders have to do. By working with the teams at a personal level allows one an opportunity to explain to them logically the significance of the change and hence they will embrace them. If the senior leadership of MeatPack can employ these tactics in bringing in the transition, there is a high chance of attaining a positive response from the staff. Eventually, the future of the company will bright since the workers will support the change and work towards achieving the best outcome for the business.
The Executive training that Bison got from Harvard Business School played a significant role in influencing him to implement a flatter structure within the organization. An organization culture refers to the shared practices and beliefs in a company (Hickman and Silva, 2018). Creating a positive culture within the organization that is inclusive of all the employees offers a feeling of fulfillment and enjoyment thereby improving employee productivity and performance. The flatter structure across the MeatPack company has given supervisors and managers powers of greater accountability and responsibility. Bison encourages his leaders such as the line managers to keep using the hands-on approach in carrying out the activities of the business such as in recruiting of personnel and offering performance appraisals (Nisbet, 2018). The flatter structure drives senior leadership to lead as compared to managing. Managers who apply Leader-Manager model in business obtains high turn-over concerning productivity and performance. Workers need to feel cared for, and their leaders are involved in their day-to-day activities. Usually, the diverse culture experienced in an organization with workers of different cultural background can affect the working relationship of the employees if not managed correctly (LeVine, 2018). However, at MeatPack the composition of the staff is from diverse cultural backgrounds with many coming from various countries.
Nevertheless, only a few cross-cultural clashes have been experienced, and this can be largely contributed to the flatter structure. Although the flatter structure has brought positive change in the company, it is essential for Bison and other senior leaders to implement the cultural changes slowly (Hartnell et al., 2016). Most of the workers have been in the company for a more extended period (10-15 years). Therefore, some may have some difficulties in adjusting to the cultural changes proposed. Its culture is accommodative, friendly, honest, trustworthy, and has created a family atmosphere. Even those that have moved to other companies, they still rank MeatPack as the most systematic, collaborative, and organized regarding their organizational culture.
Staff training has also been a critical area of cultural development for Bison. The training has enhanced the leadership skills of the senior leaders that have seen them lead and manage their teams better (Yap and Webber, 2015). It has also reinforced a culture of accountability where now managers embrace the culture of Leader-Manager as opposed to Manager-Leader. Together with the implementation of Rockefeller Habits model which emphasizes on priorities (strategic goals), rhythm (accountability), and data (performance feedback), the managers have appreciated this kind of investment, and the productivity of the managers and the company at large has gone up (Harnish, 2002). Introduction of huddles between the day and afternoon shifts also has seen an increase of productivity concerning yield output as well as eliminated the loss time injury (LTI).
The cultural and performance change that Bison and the senior leadership were trying to implement in the organization was met with some challenges. First and foremost, Bison could not remove certain individuals from their positions since they had established such strong emotional ties and relationship with other members. Even though such members were not delivering, the past culture of the company prevented them from being fired (Mullins and Schoar, 2016). The attitudes of the people towards the cultural changes also varied since the company involves people of different cultural backgrounds. The junior staff is also worried that the involvement of too many managers in leading their teams leaves some duties unattended (Peng et al., 2016) What the managers say should tally with what they do. Differences experienced between the afternoon and day shifts due to their cultural norms brings a lot of pressure to the managers. However, despite these few barriers the cultural changes implemented in the MeatPack company, saw it increase its productivity.
Conclusion
For a successful organization, managers and other senior leaders need to lead the company effectively. Wrong decisions or strategies will lead to the collapse of the business in the long-run. Bison has understood the significance of this, and that’s why he chooses to use a more hands-on approach in the business administration. When managers get involved in the daily running of the business, there is a high chance of business success since they can understand areas that need to be improved. Bison proposed the implementation of senior leadership change as well as cultural and performance change through the establishment of the flatter structure. These changes have seen the MeatPack grow, increased productivity, and created a friendlier cultural relationship between all the workforce in the company.
References
Algahtani, A., 2014. Are leadership and management different? A review. Journal of management policies and practices, 2(3), pp.71-82.
Cameron, E. and Green, M., 2015. Making sense of change management: A complete guide to the models, tools and techniques of organizational change. Kogan Page Publishers.
Cummings, T.G. and Worley, C.G., 2014. Organization development and change. Cengage learning.
Doppelt, B., 2017. Leading change toward sustainability: A change-management guide for business, government and civil society. Routledge.
Giessner, S. and Wong, S., 2016. The fine line between hands-on and hands-off leadership. RSM Discovery-Management Knowledge, 25(1), pp.11-13.
Harnish, V., 2002. Mastering the Rockefeller habits: What you must do to increase the value of your growing firm. Gazelles Incorporated.
Hartnell, C.A., Kinicki, A.J., Lambert, L.S., Fugate, M. and Doyle Corner, P., 2016. Do similarities or differences between CEO leadership and organizational culture have a more positive effect on firm performance? A test of competing predictions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(6), p.846.
Hickman, C.R. and Silva, M.A., 2018. Creating excellence: Managing corporate culture, strategy, and change in the new age. Routledge.
Jaques, E., 2017. Requisite organization: A total system for effective managerial organization and managerial leadership for the 21st century. Routledge.
LeVine, R.A., 2018. Culture, behavior, and personality: An introduction to the comparative study of psychosocial adaptation. Routledge.
Mullins, W. and Schoar, A., 2016. How do CEOs see their roles? Management philosophies and styles in family and non-family firms. Journal of Financial Economics, 119(1), pp.24-43.
Nandram, S. S. and Bindlish, P. K., 2017. Managing VUCA Through Integrative Self-Management. Springer.
Nisbet, E., 2018. A hands-on hands-off approach: governance of managed long-term care services in a context of rapid policy change. Public Management Review, 20(6), pp.824-844.
Núñez, M., 2016. Bridging the 21st-century leadership gap: Emerging development practices.
Peng, A.C., Lin, H.E., Schaubroeck, J., McDonough III, E.F., Hu, B. and Zhang, A., 2016. CEO intellectual stimulation and employee work meaningfulness: The moderating role of organizational context. Group & Organization Management, 41(2), pp.203-231.
Saleh, A. and Watson, R., 2017. Business excellence in a volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous environment (BEVUCA). The TQM Journal, 29(5), pp.705-724.
Samovar, L.A., Porter, R.E., McDaniel, E.R. and Roy, C.S., 2015. Communication between cultures. Nelson Education.
Stayer, R., 2009. How I learned to let my workers lead. Harvard Business Review Press.
Ward, J., 2016. Keeping the family business healthy: How to plan for continuing growth, profitability, and family leadership. Springer.
Williams, S.H, 2014. Leadership, cultural and performance change at Meatpack. University of Exeter, UK
Yap, Q.S. and Webber, J.K., 2015. Developing corporate culture in a training department: A qualitative case study of internal and outsourced staff.
Essay Writing Service Features
Our Experience
No matter how complex your assignment is, we can find the right professional for your specific task. Contact Essay is an essay writing company that hires only the smartest minds to help you with your projects. Our expertise allows us to provide students with high-quality academic writing, editing & proofreading services.
Free Features
Free revision policy
$10Free bibliography & reference
$8Free title page
$8Free formatting
$8How Our Essay Writing Service Works
First, you will need to complete an order form. It's not difficult but, in case there is anything you find not to be clear, you may always call us so that we can guide you through it. On the order form, you will need to include some basic information concerning your order: subject, topic, number of pages, etc. We also encourage our clients to upload any relevant information or sources that will help.
Complete the order form
Once we have all the information and instructions that we need, we select the most suitable writer for your assignment. While everything seems to be clear, the writer, who has complete knowledge of the subject, may need clarification from you. It is at that point that you would receive a call or email from us.
Writer’s assignment
As soon as the writer has finished, it will be delivered both to the website and to your email address so that you will not miss it. If your deadline is close at hand, we will place a call to you to make sure that you receive the paper on time.
Completing the order and download
