The Visible Employee - Literature review Example

Introduction Personality within leadership is an important aspect of any global organization. Specifically personality can either enhance or destroy the corporate image or performance of a business. Therefore it is essential for personalities to be managed appropriately to ensure positive outcomes in both the short and long term for a business. The following essay has been created in reflection of the case study “The Rise and Fall of Carly Fiorina” and will argue that personality is of great importance to organizations, however it must be managed effectively at all times. This essay will acknowledge how certain personalities can benefit an organization whilst others can create business liabilities. It will also suggest that whilst Fiorina had a big personality which enhanced the visibility of HP, her ego became a barrier between her achieving the goals of the company and her maintaining popularity with the business. It will also be argued that Fiorina's termination within HP was also an example of the double standard that being aggressive and forceful works for men but backfires for women, however gender was not the only reason for her termination. Finally this essay will identify the value of personality testing in relation to Fiorina’s selection as CEO of Hewlett Packard. Personality can be used to understand how individuals may perform or interact under various circumstances. Under the Big Five Personality Theory there are five distinct personality traits that are measured commonly in the work setting including conscientiousness, extraversion, optimism, openness to new experiences and agreeableness. Additionally, stress tolerance, service orientation, emotional stability, pro-activity and initiative are other valuable personality traits which are necessary for an individual to perform successfully at work, particularly in the light of a leadership position. Consequently understanding personality can also be used to determine the ability of a potential candidate being successful in a job where performance requires an enormous deal of work in team settings or interpersonal interaction (Furnha, 2008). It is arguable from the case study that certain personalities can benefit an organization whilst others can create business liabilities. In regards to the chief executive officer of Hewlett-Packard from 1999-2002, Fiorina was described as a charismatic, aggressiveness, tenacious and enthusiastic leader within the company. She also was recognised for her ‘rock star’ personality which allowed her to comfortably rub shoulders with celebrities and other well recognised individuals. Fiorina’s charismatic qualities were an asset to her as an individual as she stirred lots of excitement in the workforce and public eyes, however the energy generated from this excitement should have been channelled to the right course to realise the desired results (Lane 2003). Evidently these personality traits boosted her personal image but she neglected her personal performance as a CEO of HP. In the Fiorina case, her much publicised strong qualities set a high benchmark on which her level of performance was going to be measured. It is unfortunate for her that stakes were high as well as the standards. She had joined one of the reputable computer companies with a big name that required someone with effective credentials to steer it to a clear course of success. The qualities that Fiorina had demonstrated that included tenacity, vision, aggressiveness, enthusiasm, vision and charisma should have translated to the real performance on the ground (Furnha, 2008). The qualities possessed by Fiorina had the potential to be positive but they should have been translated into the real work on the ground. The expectation were too high and the standards overbearing. It was anticipated that she would be appointed a cabinet minister or Senate candidate from California. It is clear that Fiorina did not realise the limitation of her abilities. Many books featured her and she had a big reputation. However, it should be pointed out that prior to coming to Hewlett-Packard Fiorina has steered Lucent Technologies to its success where she was widely recognised as a visionary leader and an agent for change. This is where it should be understood that Fiorina was resting on her past achievements without acknowledging the challenge of dealing with the affairs of the new company. In this case she was being given too much respect including not contradicting her views or giving a second option. The trust bestowed upon her was based on her past achievement at Lucent Technologies and not Hew-Packard (Nash, 2009). Under the circumstances it is also arguable that Fiorina was unable to successfully deliver due to her personality being overtaken by her ego. There are some people who argued that Fiorina’s personality was too big. To some extent there is some truth in this statement. In taking the majority of the decision making power onto herself, Fiorina started expecting people to accept her decisions without question. In this regard the anticipation of Fiorina's performance at Lucent Technologies made her to be given a very high profile that she struggled to maintain at the expense of the actual running of the business. It is correct to say that Fiorina focused on herself as opposed to the nuts-and-bolts of the business. There was a mentality that some how things would work out. She had performed well at Lucent Technologies and she knew at the back of her mind her credentials gave her the job at Hewlett Packard and consequently she believed that she was very suited for the job. She failed to consider the different challenges at the new place of work and therefore failed to steer Hewlett-Packard to the desired heights. She saw herself as flawless and having an innate gift in organizational performance (Furnha, 2008). Fiorina’s ego also caused her to not pay attention to the advice given by others. Take for instance the acquisition of Compaq in the year 2002 which the company’s co-founder son, Walter Hewlett, was adamantly opposed to, which resulted in serious problems for the company. Maybe if she had listened to Walter Hewlett the unfortunate event could have been avoided. Hoffma (2001) notes that this kind of overconfidence possibly blinded her to seeing the real situation, resulting in the assumption that she would eventually emerge as the successful C.E.O as had been the case at Lucent Technologies. Her personality was too strong so she could not recognise the tale-tell signs as she strayed away from the correct path. The investors who had bought HP stock at the time she ascended to the helm of the company realised a negative growth until the time of her departure which resulted in 55 per cent of the stock vanishing over the period. At no point did Fiorina call for a crisis meeting to look for the solution to the negative growth in stock (Hoffma, 2001). The struggles of the company resulted in the executive board considering the limitation of her powers. She had been given enormous power and apparently no one could challenge her decisions, not even the biggest shareholder of the company who was against the acquisition of Compaq in 2002. A month prior to her firing, three board members prevailed on her to change her style but she stubbornly refused. This demonstrates her big ego that was buoyed by her personality being ‘too big’. She never realised her mistakes or acknowledged that they existed. Later on she was informed about the decision to fire her and she realised belatedly that events had overtaken her (Stanton, & Stam, 2006). There are people in the company that felt that Fiorina had forgotten about her mandate. She was the rock star C.E.O in many peoples’ eyes but inside she struggled to maintain the classy and flashy image as opposed to engineering a performance that would allow her to keep her job at HP. She could have held consultation meetings and sought other peoples’ opinions but did not as she was still living in the glory of her past achievements. She placed her portrait in the HP headquarters next to the HP founders and she often rubbed shoulders with rock stars like Gwen Stefani, Sheryl Crow and U2’s the Edge. This shows a kind of person who struggled to maintain a very high profile at the expense of running the company effectively and efficiently (Saraf, 2005). It is also arguable that gender was not the main cause of the Fiorina firing. She had been given adequate time to access her performance and she failed to please or demonstrate that there was going to be an improvement. With a closer look at the situation it will be noticed that Fiorina was hired despite her being a woman and it does not rule out that there were men who were capable and interested in the position. It is however possible that her aggressive nature may have been resented by some of the board members, as many of today are still disadvantaged within the corporate world. It is addressed in much academic literature that aggressiveness is expected of men, however not expected of women in corporate leadership. However in the case being aggressive and forceful and once achieving desired results did not make her lose her job. There is no way to substantiate the existence of double standards as far as the Fiorina firing is concerned (Scott & Reynolds, 2010). In relation to the real cause of Fiorina’s termination, there should have been at least some subversive behaviour that is worthy reporting showing that Fiorina was being undermined on the basis of her being a woman. In the acquisition of Compaq she went ahead and implemented her decision despite the red flag raised by Walter Hewlett. She had plenty of time to prove that she was capable of performing and that she had been hired on merit. Those with the view that Fiorina was sabotaged in her job might be covering up for her since they were not brave enough to speak out where the performance of the company was concerned. There should have been at least few incidences showing that Fiorina had not succeeded on the basis of her being a woman, but instead it is clear that she was given too much power which the HP Board thought about reducing. Personality tests are also highly valuable to many organisations. However personality tests possess both weaknesses and strengths that can break or make an institution when applied to top executives. Specifically they can be used to identify key attributes of an individual and also be used to predict future behaviour. In some circumstances some personality tests may lead to individuals responding in such a manner so as to create a positive outcome as opposed to how they really are. However these tests may pose a problem in employee selection if the test is one that is normally used to diagnose medical conditions such as mental disorders as opposed to simply assessing personality traits that are work-related. Despite personality testing being important there should be enough care to ensure the right procedure is followed and the errors that are usually reported are dealt with successfully. It is always prudent not to use only personality testing as the sole method of deciding the fate of a potential job position particularly the top job such as that of the chief executive officer (Paul, 2005). Rather multiple selection methods are recommended to compliment the used of personality testing. Methods such as cognitive ability tests, integrity tests, interviews, job knowledge tests, physical ability tests, work samples and simulations may be useful to avoid the disadvantages presented by personality tests. Furthermore, personality testing is important but the variance from reality should also be factored in. In some cases personality testing may be found to be skewed and therefore representing a false impression of the true picture. Therefore personality testing is valuable however they should not be the only method used for job selection (Lane, 2003). In relation to Fiorina, personality testing was useful in that it identified her strengths, however her results would have been influenced by her positive result at Lucent Technologies. The personality tests may also had questions that do not appear to be job related or seem to be intrusive if not well developed. It is also possible that her achievement at Lucent Technologies overtook the reality on the ground at HP. She had been given a very big image and her personality was so strong that it derailed her from the right course of action. Her weaknesses might have come to fore if other methods of employment test had been administered as opposed to relying on personality testing only. It is also possible that as personality tests are less likely to differ in outcomes by gender or race as compared to other testing, it should used as a means of simply predicting, but assuming that a person will be exactly as they reported on the tests. According to Hoffma (2001), personality testing has been shown to produce results that are valid for a vast number of organizations. They are also easy to administer and do not always require much technology or training to carry out. Therefore in all cases it would not be appropriate to write personality testing off as of no value to an organization (Nash, 2009). In conclusion this essay has successfully argued that personality can either enhance or destroy the corporate image or performance of a business. In order to achieve best outcomes, personality needs to be managed appropriately to ensure business objectives are achieved and leaders are managed in way that maximizes their performance. Using the case study of “The Rise and Fall of Carly Fiorina.” this essay has recognized that that personality can benefit an organization whilst others can create business liabilities. It has also suggested that personality and ego should be managed in order to avoid business complications. It has also been established that Fiorina's termination within HP was also an example of the double standard that being aggressive and forceful works for men but backfires for women, however gender was not the only reason for her termination. Finally personality testing has been argued as a highly useful tool in employment selection; however it should be used in conjunction with other methods for best results. Bibliography Furnha, A., 2008, Personality and intelligence at work: exploring and explaining individual differences at work. New York: Routledge. Hoffma, E., 2001, Ace the Corporate Personality Test. New Jersey: McGraw-Hill Professional. Lane, F.S., 2003, The naked employee: how technology is compromising workplace privacy. New York: AMACOM Div American Mgmt Assn. Nash, J.R., 2009, Workplace Privacy: Proceedings of the New York University 58th Annual Conference on Labour. Amsterdam: Kluwer Law International. Paul, A.M., 2005, The Cult of Personality Testing: How Personality Tests Are Leading Us to Miseducate Our Children, Mismanage Our Companies, and Misunderstand Ourselves. New York: Simon and Schuster. Saraf, D., 2005, Conquering Your Workplace: From Mail Room to Board Room-A Sourcebook for Today's Workforce! Indiana: iUniverse Scott, J.C. & Reynolds, D.H., 2010, Handbook of Workplace Assessment. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Stanton, J.M. & Stam, K.R., 2006, The visible employee: using workplace monitoring and surveillance to protect information assets--without compromising employee privacy or trust. New York : Information Today, Inc. Read More