The lumen and absorb Teams at Crutchfield Chemical Engineering - Case Study Example

HERE HERE YOUR HERE HERE The Lumen and Absorb Teams at Crutchfield Chemical Engineering INTRINSIC MOTIVATIONS It isdifficult to surmise specifically how intrinsic motivational disparities arose between Lumen and Absorb, as intrinsic motivations are inherent. An individual with intrinsic motivation will perform an activity for the innate satisfaction it gives the person rather than being motivated by some externally-driven reward (Ryan and Deci 55). One must, first, assume that the organizational structure and reward systems in place for top performance are not the catalysts for high productivity or low productivity since intrinsic motivations are highly individualized and in-born. With this definition of intrinsic motivation in mind, several assumptions as to how these differences arose can be formulated. Primarily, it could be assumed that not all individuals on the Absorb team are working in their desired career goals, even though the majority of them hold academic-supported credentials in their current domain of work practice. Under this assumption, there would be little that could be done to improve the Absorb team’s motivational stance since working in the chemical field might simply require an adjustment of work environment in order to satisfy intrinsic needs. Secondly, as supported by the case study, there are some clues about what is driving intrinsic motivational failures present in the Absorb team that are not present in the Lumen team. Chip, the team leader, is 49 years of age and has been at the company for almost 25 years. It is probable, based on rather subjective assumptions, that Chip enjoys this field of work or would have pursued new opportunities in the past if he was not intrinsically motivated for this particular profession. Furthermore, Chip seems to have a natural propensity (an inherent motivator) to maintain a very authoritative and hierarchical management system with many control systems in place. This conflicts with virtually every team members’ desire for inherent needs for autonomy and recognition in work performance. Under models of the autocratic leadership style, this type of manager is motivated by achievement of absolute dominating power, believing that subordinates do not maintain the capacity or abilities to effectively work without strict and regular management presence (Goodnight 82). Chip, who seems to maintain many of these characteristics, works as an externally-driven force that drives down motivation on the Absorb team. In the Lumen team, however, there is much more team-working occurring and social attitudes seem to sustain the same intrinsic motivations for cohesion and unity when working in group environments. Max, the team leader, is much more forthcoming both professionally and emotionally when working with his group members, applauding their performance publicly. Under respected models of psychology, one of the most fundamental aspects that drive both self-confidence production and self-actualization (the pinnacle of individual achievement) is rooted under the establishment of social belonging (Morris and Maisto 164). The case study shows a marked appreciation from the Lumen team members for this social cohesion and the ability of their team leader to find inherent satisfaction when his team members are satisfied, motivated, and willing to go the proverbial extra mile to satisfy group needs. Assuming that these team members are, indeed, motivated intrinsically by harmonious team membership environments, then Max serves as an ideal catalyst for securing these motivations by providing outward social practices that feed inherent needs in all of his group members. The effects of these differences are clear. The Absorb team members do not appreciate being second-guessed and, in some instances, allegedly deceived by their team leader. The Absorb team is not receiving proper reinforcement when they feel they have accomplished significant achievements, always being told to restructure their work in a way that satisfies this autocratic and controlling team leader holding absolute power over decision-making. The organizational structure of this group is not conducive to satisfying their inherent needs at the psychological, social and professional levels which can dramatically reduce productivity and effective group harmony. Furthermore, the Absorb team does not feel that they are being properly challenged in their roles, as supported by the data indicating the factors driving limited motivation from Exhibit 6 in the case study. This would suggest that the team members have an intrinsically-driven desire to be tested or otherwise experiment with their unique creativity. Chip, the team leader, does not assist in developing these inherent traits which could serve as the rationale for why motivation and productivity have been reduced in the Absorb team. A more humanistic model of leadership that works to build human capital and coach/mentor group members would likely facilitate more effective support for what drives their in-born needs for creative work and pushing the boundaries of their ingenuity which could have, originally, been a motivation for entering this dynamic field of work that requires ongoing innovation development and imaginative product developments. Again, it is difficult to surmise the specific, individualized, inherent motivations that drive each individual team member in the Absorb team to desire maximization of their abilities and talents since the case study does not provide qualitative data based on subjective rationale and assessment provided by the data results of the intrinsic motivational survey. However, the conflicts occurring in the team between leadership and subordinates would seem to point toward a significant disparity between the inherent needs of the team leader and those of the subordinate group members that continues to conflict finding a common ground by which to move forward and achieve strategic goals established by the executives of the business. WHY IS CHIP BEHAVING THIS WAY It was aforementioned that Chip seems to have an inherent desire to be a bureaucratic and dictatorial leader that imposes many compliance measures. Assuming that this assumption could be verified by psychological examination or further quantitative studies, then there is going to be this disparity in opinion and cohesion occurring until Chip changes his methodology of management and leadership development. Furthermore, Chip seems to be acting against principles of political affiliation within the business, attempting to proverbially save face by complying with political compliance measures being dictated by customer segments and executive corporate leadership. As supported by the case study, there were numerous references in the diary entries about the political behaviors of Chip that were conflicting realistic timelines for project completion and market entry strategies even when the group continued to tell their leader that they were wholly unprepared for the consequences of this rapid decision-making. The group clearly desires a more democratic group in which sensibility and reasonable decision-making should be the established group norm and value systems. However, in order for such a democracy to exist, there must be transparency, equality, freedom and trust (Barrett 1). This is something that is significantly lacking in the Absorb team which is being sparked by a leader that continues to make improper decision-making either to support his own career reputation or satisfy peer opinion from other stakeholders in leadership positions within the business. Chip is clearly not taking into consideration the emotional and sociological needs of the group, which further conflicts their tangible work practices and impede long-run productivity. WHAT MAX COOPER DOES THAT DIFFERS FROM ABSORB LEADERSHIP Max Cooper manages to show approval and appreciation for the dedication and motivation of his group subordinates, which translates into more effective social relationship development and inspires greater creativity and performance. Many leadership models and psychological models support that in the workplace, peers and subordinates are more likely to be dedicated followers when their efforts are respected and when trust can be developed between group members (Fairholm 27). Max is not exhibiting an autocratic type of leadership style, rather he uses principled leadership in which a holistic set of values that are shared by the entire group create an ethical team climate and where respect is a common virtue. Rather than chastising his group members for failures, he seeks out opportunities to find common ground and consensus, thereby feeding the inherent motivations in group members for autonomous work and recognition for achievement. Trust is the foundation built on homogenous group values associated with ethical treatment and mutual respect which, again, translates into much better productive outcomes and better social development in the Lumen team. Therefore, it should be said that Max excels in transformational leadership where he champions change in a way that is courteous and where mutual praise becomes the outcome. This is highly imperative in a group structure where constant contact and consultation is required of team members and where all have diverse demographic backgrounds and psychologically-based needs. Max recognizes the importance of building a solid sociological system within his group dynamic and excels in this process, which is supported by the many commendations granted the leader by Lumen team members. WHAT SHOULD PAUL BURKE DO? Paul Burke has been provided with ample data on what is driving limited performance in the Absorb team. Paul could, in the short-term, put the Absorb and Lumen teams together to discuss the social elements of their group, such as establishing a role play exercise meeting, so that Absorb can learn some of the fundamentals of how to drive cohesive and harmonious team environments. Secondly, Burke could sit with Chip and discuss opportunities to extend more autonomy into their job roles and reduce political motivations that erode practical decision-making. Clearly, the case study supports that Chip’s leadership style is strongly driving down innovation development and time-to-market which is critical for achieving the strategic goals outlined by the case study. Burke could develop an in-service training package, customized for Chip that illustrates more effective leadership, rather than management controls, to build positive responses in followership. He could also use his own authority to develop a set of sanctions and punishments as consequences for not being a more humanistic manager, such as setting up a 360 degree feedback appraisal system in which his followers critique his management style to determine whether he is complying with this new request to abandon some of his autocratic management philosophies. In some instances, consultation is not the answer to making change, rather it is about illustrating absolute control in which behavior is modified through reprimand for non-compliance. Though this might drive down some motivation by Chip, the ultimate responsibility of Burke is to ensure that the business remains profitable and perceived as a quality-minded organization for its important revenue-building customer segments. Burke must decide whether or not to allow Chip to drive down motivation through his bureaucratic, rather self-serving agenda philosophies or whether to achieve the strategic goals necessary for the business to successfully compete. In the long-term, Paul Burke could, himself, become a transformational manager, one that coaches, mentors and consistently reiterates mission and vision to achieve follower dedication and productivity. Paul could become more visible within the organizational model, illustrating through role modeled behaviors what it means to be a humanistic, principled leader that is dedicated to more human resources-based management systems. Trust is created over time through reciprocal acts that benefit both parties in a social relationship, therefore long-run strategies could involve this transformational leader where, under social learning theory in psychology, it is likely these behaviors would be modeled by others. Works Cited Fairholm, Matthew R. Leadership and Organizational Strategy, The Public Sector Innovation Journal. Vol. 14, Iss 1. 2009. Goodnight, Ronald. Laissez-Faire Leadership: Encyclopedia of Leadership. Sage Publications 2004. Print. Morris, Albert and Charles Morris. Psychology: A Down-to-Earth Approach. 11th ed. Pearson Prentice Hall. Print. Ryan, Richard M. and Edward L. Deci. Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions, Contemporary Educational Psychology. Vol. 25, Iss. 1. 2000. Read More