Erik Peterson Case Study Questions Essay

447 Words2 Pages
1, The inconsistency of CelluComm’s organizational structure complicated management reporting and was detrimental to GMCT. The reporting hierarchy throughout CelluComm was unclear. For instance, when Peterson was first hired, he thought he would be directly reporting to Ric Jenkins, but then, without formal communication from upper management, he found himself reporting to Jeff Hardy. the organizational structure at CelluComm changed four times, both at the upper management level and GMCT. This created confusion of reporting responsibilities, political tension, and reluctance to take responsibility and action. To address the main problem Erik Peterson is inexperienced and this shows in his incapacity to handle various situations in the case. He lacks the support of the upper management (Jenkins and Hardy), and does not reach out for help among his peers( Green,Cantor) He also has to face insubordination,Curt Andrew being the prime accused in this case. He also faces the Turn on Deadline 1) Lack of communication from frontline workers to Curt Andrews (and thus Erik) in providing tower building status, updates, or needs. Erik seems hampered at quickly knowing exactly where the 21 towers stand. 2. What are the underlying causes of these problems (offer at least one reason)? Erik Peterson lacks the leadership quality which is vital in the position he holds in the company. On more than one occasion he displayed his conflict avoiding trait instead of trying to sort the situation on. He lacked the strategic planning which was required in this case to make sure the company kept progressing as planned. His superior, Mr. Hardy who has no prior experience in this field as well makes a wonderful mess of things and even scrutinizes the positive measures Erik Peterson comes up with. His military background maybe one of the reasons as in the military ,people are

More about Erik Peterson Case Study Questions Essay

Open Document