As for screaming at employees from across the room, this is absolutely never okay. I do not understand why anyone would think that treating employees in this manner is alright. The obvious disadvantage to this type of leadership is having your employees transfer to different departments or just leaving the company. It will also have an effect on employee morale. Employees are going to be happier and work harder toward company goals when they have a supervisor who shows them they are a valuable asset to the company.
A good boss makes sure you have the correct hours on your paycheck. A bad boss will hassle you for every little thing that you do. A bad boss will hire you just because he/she has the authority to do so. A bad boss will not give you a chance to succeed into the company and take all the credit for them. I was in a recent situation with a good boss vs. a bad boss.
MBA 540 Chapter 16 Case Study Why Teams Fail The common reason a team or corporate failures is because the leadership failed to convey its vision and purpose all the way down to the lowest level employees. It is crucial for the entire team to be in-tuned and understand why they are working for a common goal. As a result, the lowest level employees can see the big picture and be proud of each accomplishment. A positive working environment is when everyone understands and knows each other's responsibility. Another reason for team failure is free-riders.
Article 144 requires “that a director/officer does everything in their power to serve the interests and obligations of the corporation first, ahead of any personal interests; does everything in their power to serve the interests and obligations of the staff, ahead of any personal interests; does everything in their power to serve the needs and requirements of customers ahead of any personal interests” (United America, 2009). In the past decade, there have been numerous stories in the news about executives that did not follow the direction outlined above. One of those companies was WorldCom and involved a large number of their executive team. There were ethical problems that were brought up as a result of the investigation in to the downfall of WorldCom and in reviewing ethical problems; these can be evaluated using the deontological framework. One point of view that can be explored when assessing ethics is Immanuel Kant’s Categorical Imperative.
With the economy in recession, high unemployment rates, and high interest rates proved very challenging for Welch to run GE. The challenges faced from inside the company were massive information and inefficient macro-business models. Amidst all the challenges, Welch took them on with a motto, which was to be “Better than the Best” (Bartlett & Wonzy, 2005). Welch took a stand to restructure the company and identified managers who would fit in areas that could assist to restructure the company, while other managers who did not bring value to the company were let go. By eliminating the sector level, about 123,450 jobs, and also eliminating addition of new jobs, Welch implemented lean and agile methodologies, as well as real-time-planning strategy.
Article Summary: “What Leaders Really Do” Lisa Marvel EDD 7200 – Supervisory Behavior Wilmington University October 4, 2010 Article Summary: “What Leaders Really Do” The article, “What Leaders Really Do” by John Kotter is written on the premise that leaders and managers are different yet organizations need both in order to succeed. According to Kotter, managers promote stability while leaders press for change, and only organizations that embrace both sides of the contradiction can thrive in turbulent times (p. 85). Kotter believes that most corporations today have too many managers and not enough leaders. So what is the difference between management and leadership? Management is about coping with complexity whereas leadership is about coping with change (p. 86).
The Subject of leadership has been greatly described by the many scholars, researchers and authors, but still it’s a challenge to many companies. A good leadership is the most essential and competitive advantage in the organization than technology or finance or operations etc. A good leadership frames the company’s business strategy, operations, human and other resources like finances. A good trust worthy leadership is the most valuable assets to any company. Dysfunctional Leadership Behavior and Preventive Methods Negative leadership or dysfunctional leadership impacts to the organization with negative
The case of Enron is said to be a “smoke and mirrors” act dictated by top executives presenting the positive financial wealth of the company. Shareholders, lower executives, employees, and most American’s were not aware of the grieve financial trouble the company was enduring. Company Culture Enron’s motto was “respect, Integrity, Communication and Excellence” and along with that its Vision was “Treat other as we would like to be treated ourselves…” Both the motto and vision were inconsistent with the actual company procedures. Enron had a much different approach to the company culture and reward system they actually used. Competition was the main concept; which led to numerous financial mistakes in future years.
The current Employee Review Process (EPR) that had been in place for the past three years was not providing Steve with the information he had been hoping for to determine who the outstanding as well as poor performers were in the corporation. The EPR was not well liked within the organization by employees or the managers. It quickly became apparent to Steve that something had to be done. The problem with the EPR system in place at the time was that managers were to rank their employees on a scale of 1 – 5 on seven different characteristics. This caused problems as most employees received either 4’s or 5’s (the highest ratings) for every characteristic.
Unit I Case Study Karen Seymour DBA 7559-10C-2A15-S1 September 23, 2014 Professor Addie Mattes Unit I Case Study 1) What seems to be the main source of conflict between supervisors and the HR department at Sands Corporation? It seems to be a power conflict between the supervisors and the HR departments. The supervisors feel that the HR department took over authority of hiring, compensation, appraisal, training and pay increases has which the supervisors feel they should be doing this. On the other hand it seems the HR managers want to keep the authority themselves because it is a source of power due maybe lack of communication of duties related to human resources. The human resource department job is to act as an internal consultant or experts, assisting the supervisors to do their jobs better ( Gomez-Mejia, Balkin & Cardy, 2010).