Wolfgang Keller: - Case Study Example

? Wolfgang Keller: Case Study Wolfgang Keller: Case Study What is your assessment of Brodsky’s performance? Does Brodsky fit this job? Evidently, Brodsky is not a good for the post of commercial director. The first and foremost reason is his inability to properly communicate with the chairman, the managing director, his own subordinates, and distributors. Admittedly, in an organization, it is important to communicate effectively. Admittedly, communication is one among the six basic functions of management, which are leading, planning, organizing, staffing, controlling, and communicating. As it is evident from the case, Brodsky was a poor communicator, and there are instances when his subordinates claimed that their problems are neglected by Brodsky (Gabarro, 2008, p. 5). Thus, they refused to follow what Brodsky ordered. Moreover, Brodsky was a poor motivator as he failed in communication. He himself lacked seriously in confidence, and hence, he could not motivate his subordinates. Another important problem with Brodsky was that he was not socializing in nature. Referring to Kreitner & Kinicki (2013, p. 4), he forgot the basic requirement of giving less emphasis on status in order to develop a ‘we’ feeling. Instead, when other people tried to implement an informal way of interaction, he tried to stay away from them and stuck to the formal way of interaction and communication. Thus, those who tried to interact with him found it difficult. He could not even develop strong connections with the distributors who were very vital for the growth of the company. 2. What are the underlying causes of Brodsky’s performance problems? The first underlying problem is Brodsky’s lack of confidence. He found it entirely difficult to work under Keller who was a go-getter and rather impatient in nature. In fact, Brodsky was highly experienced in his work but he lost confidence when there was intrusion from the part of Keller. It is evident from the part that in Keller’s absence and when Keller did not criticize, Brodsky performed better. The second cause was Brodsky’s inability to motivate sales staff. Evidently, he was not a motivator as he did not believe in close interaction and informal communication. Furthermore, because of his self-centered nature, he failed to interact closely with the distributors too (Gabarro, 2008, p. 6). Thus, he was a total failure in implementing the commercial strategy adopted by the company. 3. What actions should Keller take upon returning to Kiev? It seems that the leadership styles of Keller and Brodsky will not match in any case. While the former believes in immediate hands-on action, the latter is not that impulsive. He takes time and believes in delegating as much as possible. In fact, Brodsky even failed to understand the spirit of the new commercial strategy introduced by the company. So, on coming back, what Keller can do is to reduce his interference in the commercial department’s affairs and encourage Brodsky to perform better through a salary rise. In fact, this will go in accordance with McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y which state that people have the capability to self direct and self-control if they are committed to the work in hand and are rewarded suitably (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2013, p. 4). Moreover, for the time being, it is wise to ensure a positive annual appraisal to ensure that Brodsky does his best for the firm. At the same time, Zelenko, the talented marketing manager, should be given adequate training and opportunities to learn all aspects of the commercial department so that he will be able to replace Brodsky in future. When Zelenko becomes able to handle the department, it is possible to think about firing Brodsky. These steps should be communicated with the chairman and the managing board. This is so because if Brodsky is forced out at this time, it will be difficult to find another suitable person to replace him. In fact, placing Zelenko as the sales director will not help improve the performance of Brodsky as he already has problems with the way Keller promotes Zelenko. The real problems lie in the differences in the leadership styles of Keller and Brodsky. As far as the company has the existing commercial strategy of aggressive sales and service along with close communication with distributors, Brodsky will not be able to change altogether. So, reorganizing will only bury the problem as Brodsky will always be in conflict with the system. If the decision is to coach and counsel Brodsky, there are a number of factors which make it highly risky. First of all, Brodsky is older than Keller, and secondly, their leadership styles are totally different. In this case, the upcoming evaluation should include an open discussion about the problems involved. This will cover the basic differences in leadership styles and communication. If coaching is offered to Brodsky, it is necessary to ensure that his higher age and experience are respected. The coaching must make Brodsky understand how his leadership style is not suited to the commercial strategies adopted by the company. Evidently, the 87K debt case could take a different turn if it was Zelenko. Keller believed in the ability and attitude of Zelenko. So, if he had reached the conclusion that the customer would not be able to pay the money, Keller would not have resorted to meet the customer personally. He would have taken the opinion of Zelenko into consideration. 4. How effective has Keller been as a coach to Brodsky? Why? Keller was not a good coach in the case of Brodsky. First of all, Keller failed to acknowledge the fact that different people have different management styles. Instead of acknowledging this, he went on criticizing Brodsky. Here, he forgot to use people-centered practices like giving power to people (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2013, p. 4). Secondly, instead of encouraging Brodsky and discussing with him the differences in leadership styles and the need for Brodsky to change his style to successfully meet the company’s new commercial strategy, Keller tried to interfere in the activities of the commercial department, creating further frustration in Brodsky. In fact, it was possible to handle the situation in a better way. For example, from the very beginning, Keller could have discussed with Brodsky the issues in a positive manner. 5. How would you evaluate Keller’s performance as general manager? Keller was successful as a general manager. He proved his ability in introducing an aggressive commercial strategy and bringing the company into profit in a short term. However, he was a failure in acknowledging the differences in the behavior of his subordinates. Though he was a good communicator, he was a poor delegator. He forgot to understand the fact that a typical member of any organization has imagination, ingenuity, and creativity. In his impatient leadership, he failed to acknowledge the abilities of his subordinates like Brodsky (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2013, p. 4). He was impulsive and believed in hands-on experience. However, he was an ineffective coach and motivator. He failed to acknowledge the diversity in workplace, the ‘like me’ bias and stereotyping. 6. What are the implications for Keller’s development as a leader? For Keller, in order to develop as a leader, it is necessary to develop the habit of believing and delegating others. Secondly, as a leader, he should possess the willingness to listen to others without prejudice. Also, he should learn to respect the feelings of others in order to motivate them. 7. What does Keller find on returning to Kiev following his assignment in Brazil? Why has Antonov turned on Keller? The fact is that in the absence of the intimidating and intruding leadership of Keller, the department heads including Brodsky performed well. Also, Brodsky proved that he was capable of performing well if Keller is not intruding in his affairs. Antonov developed a negative attitude towards Keller because in the absence of Keller, Antonov realized that the poor performance of people like Brodsky is the result of the leadership style of Keller. That is the reason why he became disappointed in the management style of Keller. 8. Why did Brodsky change during Keller’s absence? What should Keller do now? Brodsky changed considerably in the absence of Keller because there was no intimidation or intrusion from the part of Keller. Brodsky had the chance to manage the situation in the way he wanted. Unlike Keller who was impulsive and impatient, Brodsky was slow and thorough in his actions. Thus, all his actions were getting criticized by Keller. However, in his absence, Brodsky did things in his own unique way and became successful. In fact, this situation can be connected to the Expectancy theory. According to the theory, people do things when they expect a valuable, positive reward (Stevens, Loudon, Harris & Hartman, 2001, p. 261). In the absence of Keller, Brodsky felt that his work would be appreciated by the management, and he performed well. Now, Keller should make sure that he gives a positive performance appraisal. In addition, through open communication, encouragement, and space, he should allow Brodsky to take up more responsibilities with confidence. 9. Does Keller have a future with Konigsbrau? What does he need to learn? What can he do to ensure he learns it? It is necessary for Keller to understand the various forms of management and the need to control ones zeal and instincts to let others understand what his strategies are. Also, he should learn to avoid intruding into the works of others. In addition, he should learn to develop a culture that enhances communication and cooperation. 10. What else does Keller have to do to fulfill his objectives? From this point, Keller should know that it is necessary to acknowledge the skills of others and delegate them with confidence so that they too develop enough confidence to become good leaders (Bernardin & Russell, 2013, p. 45). Secondly, Keller should not act on instincts and interference in the affairs of others. Instead he should slow down a bit and take the official way. References Bernardin, H. J. and Russell, J. E. A., (2013). Human Resource Management. McGraw-Hill/Irwin. Gabarro, J. J. (2008). Wolfgang Keller case study. Harvard Business School. Kreitner, R., Kinicki, A. (2013). Organizational Behavior. McGraw-Hill/Irwin. Stevens, R. E., Loudon, D. L., Harris, O. J & Hartman, S. J. (2001). Organizational Behavior. US: Routledge. Read More