The Team That Was Not: Leadership Issues Identified At FireArt’s Co

Leadership problem identified

Question:

Write about the Case Study for Journal of Applied Psychology.

The following is the report of the case study “the team that was not”. The report summarises the leadership problem that have been identified in the company called FireArt’s Co. In addition, the major concern of the company has been highlighted and discussed. The reason for the Company’s problem of issues is identified to be revolving around two main characters as Randy, the sales manager and Eric the leader of their team (Yasur and Boyd 2015). This report further analyses the solution based on the performance model and also different group dynamic theories which applies for this situation of FireArts’. Lack of group norms and too much disruptive behaviour of the members are one of the major problems. The team has no clarity regarding the regarding the leadership role of their leader (Goleman et al. 2013). The lack of control of the leader and lesser clarity is known as the more important part of an organisation, failing which is reflected in lower and poor productivity (Hoch and Kozlowski 2014). In addition, the performance of the labour are not receives quit thoroughly and more attrition rate among the staff.  Moreover, the process of learning and the different reflections of the group members and learning outcomes are discussed in the process. The solutions are also recommended to the reasons that are identified in the case.

Randy, the Teams sales manager is proving to be of a difficult personality to improvise with. The major problem is the lack of leadership ability in the team. The leader’s role should be a managing the people in the organisation, which Eric, the designated leader if FireArt Co. is unable to execute as responsibility. The company’s ability to retain employee and avoid pitfalls of the matter related to unsuccessful management caused frustrations among the employees, which leads to stress in workplace (Goleman et al. 2013). The clarity, standards, rewards and responsibility are major identified problem. Overall trust among the employees and lower cohesion among the team members are also a cause of the non-alignment among the members. The company also tangled in troublesome phases to have gone through strategic repositioning decision of the CEO, Jack.

• The team dynamics of the sales managers is misplaced, as the CEO appears to only trust Randy. Initially there was very low level of trust among the employees and individuals have low cohesion (Goleman et al. 2013).
• Eric has poor leadership style and the norms, standard procedures and decision-making process are not effective. The decision making and decision taking process is not at all verified (Hoch and Kozlowski 2014).
• The most important part is taking initiatives or stepping up to resolve conflicts with as they occur. The responsibility lies with the Group Leaders Eric, though he has not taken any steps towards resolving the issues (Bolman and Deal 2017).
• The lack of leadership skills and being more of an observer is the main problem of Eric and thus, this affects the company personnel has and team members in negative way. Eric, the leaders acted, as he was a facilitator rather than the final decision maker of the team. The power of enforcement lays with the leader, though the company. As the leaders should be more reactive rather than proactive in their work and thus it should be reflected on their team’s performance. Eris was more of a reactive in decision making rather than proactive (Yasur and Boyd 2015).

• The steps must be taken by the leader to eradicate the group dynamics that has caused the real problem. Eric has overlooked the team performance, thus not resolving the issues, which must be identified and resolved by the leader according the performance models (Yammarino et al. 2015).
• The idea sharing process, special meeting roles and responsibility outlines must be held in front of the team. The role and position of Randy must be cleared through and he must be encouraged to share ideas. Eric must encourage and help Randy to achieve his personal goals in the company and must be lead to create a good solution for the team. In that case, the personal motivation and desires that drives Randy must be identified (De Hoogh et al. 2015).
• The integration of the team is required with or without Randy. Randy can be given a different space to work and thus communication with members under the leader’s supervisory note. Thus, the communication will be well monitored and sharing of good ideas will be easy (Bolman and Deal 2017).
• Eric should initiate a periodical individual interaction status with the team members and should ask the setbacks they perceive to be affecting the team as a whole. As the perceived statement should be applied in the feedback, to resolve the upcoming issues for a better restart of the team activities. The group norms should be based on that too (Rocco and Griffin 2015).
• To reinforce the new status of Randy, Jack must be involved, as coming from higher authority instructions will be well communicated to the individuals. The presence of Jack in the daily meeting in side of Eric will ensure the fear of higher status of Eric in front of their team members. The expertise and experience of the senior positions managers and leaders should given more emphasis on building the communication more transparent.
• The rewards system of the company must be given a thorough review, as the members must be motivated of certain goals to be achieved in favours of the organisation’s vision and mission. The individual success must be identified and given emphasis for the sake of individual motivation(Northouse 2015).

Conclusion

Therefore, from the above discussions it can be concluded that the company is in dire need of strategic reposition. The key members needs to acknowledge their responsibility and handle the work diligently while remaining competent. The group dynamics, lacklustre leadership and diversity in personality and control of leaders in their team members are main issues of the problem. The solutions are also given after analysing the cases problems. Moreover, the process of learning and the different reflections of the group members and learning outcomes are discussed in the process.  The reflection of the writing is also given in the following passage.

Solution based on performance model and group dynamic theories

The case analyses the different theories of leadership. The major problems of leadership and personality diversity are given the above report. The group members including me solved the case and thus the group activity was observed and documented in the following discussions. The discussions about the company’s leadership was analysed by the team’s members and thus given the major emphasis different models. The group communicated and acted as their part of the role in the task. The depth of the knowledge has been helpful in building the foundation and direction of the study. The proper manner of behaving in a team and the how to create a effective team in the manner is also acknowledged in the process of developing a solution of the case study. This is also a ad-hoc team to resolve the project. While solving the theories of group dynamics and group reflections the features and preoccupied reasons were gone through. Thus, it was a process that helped me deal with different personality, while coming together and sharing the knowledge was the most effective part It is evident for me that a task will be well achieves if the background consist of competent people. The result will be also as per desired requirement. This will help me further in my project and further in the work life in the future. Analysing the problem for further improvement and suggesting the solutions for FirtArts’.co made us equipped with different models that have real application in the professional life of a corporate. Thus, it enhanced our knowledge of behavioural pattern of different individual and helped us enrich the clarity of different models. The competencies of the group member and cohesion factor among the group members were essential as this is the one factor to builds and increases the sustainability of group’s existence, be it long term or short term.

Reference

Bolman, L.G. and Deal, T.E., 2017. Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership. John Wiley & Sons.

De Hoogh, A.H., Greer, L.L. and Den Hartog, D.N., 2015. Diabolical dictators or capable commanders? An investigation of the differential effects of autocratic leadership on team performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 26(5), pp.687-701.

Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R.E. and McKee, A., 2013. Primal leadership: Unleashing the power of emotional intelligence. Harvard Business Press.

Hoch, J.E. and Kozlowski, S.W., 2014. Leading virtual teams: Hierarchical leadership, structural supports, and shared team leadership. Journal of applied psychology, 99(3), p.390.

Northouse, P.G., 2015. Leadership: Theory and practice. Sage publications.

Rocco, M.L. and Griffin, K.A., 2015. Exploring Leadership: For College Students Who Want to Make a Difference by Susan R. Komives, Nance Lucas, and Timothy R. McMahon. Journal of College Student Development, 56(1), pp.107-109.

Van Wart, M., 2014. Dynamics of leadership in public service: Theory and practice. Routledge.

Yammarino, F.J., Mumford, M.D., Connelly, M.S., Day, E.A., Gibson, C., McIntosh, T. and Mulhearn, T., 2015. Leadership Models for Team Dynamics and Cohesion: The Mars Mission. In Team Cohesion: Advances in Psychological Theory, Methods and Practice (pp. 213-245). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Yasur, M. and Boyd, M., 2015. What impact does the type of leadership style, or mixes of styles, have upon team dynamics and performance in a final year undergraduate community pharmacy business simulation?. International Journal of Pharmacy Practice, 23, p.76.