The Great Post-It Mascare - Essay Example

Ramakrishna Surampudi 9 May The Great Post-It Massacre Under Beverly Sadowsky’s leadership, Bob Scanlan turns out outstanding workand proves to be an asset to the organization Adventures Plus. Trouble begins when George Fishman takes Beverly’s position following the latter’s promotion. George’s authoritarian attitude and his nagging Post-It notes make Bob feel persecuted to the point that he decides he can’t take any more of it.Diagnosis: The root cause of the problem is George’s personalized power motive (Tosi et al.

, 2001, page 139). What makes it all the more difficult for his subordinates to get along with him is that his predecessor has been a leader with a socialized power motive. He exemplifies Nietzsche’s observation that intelligence, mind, spirit etc. are falsely regarded as man’s highest faculties and in reality they have no privileged status within that power complex which we call a human person (Grimm, 1977, page 10). He finds a justification to his intense desire to exercise control over others by assuming that people have an inherent dislike for work and tend to avoid responsibility; they must, therefore, be pushed, punished, coerced and directed to ‘extract’ work.

Such attitude is bound to prevent free and fair communication. Conflict is inevitable when there is neither motivation nor communication.Theory: It is almost a century since the Hawthorne Studies revealed the significance and benefits of informal organization. It is an irony that managers of George’s kind still abound. Positive organizational behavior recognizes employee well-being to be the heart of performance of improvement in workplace (Kinder, 2008, page 51). The perspective of Beverly or Bob is that the average worker enjoys work, is ready to accept responsibility if adequately reinforced and can exercise self-direction.

Such perspectives can create win-win situations. It cannot be denied that Bob owes his success, to a great extent, to Beverly’s trust, encouragement and willingness to delegate. The approach is grounded in the awareness that ‘passing the torch from generation to generation is the primary conduit through which core lessons of leadership are learned’ (Deal et al., 2010, page 152). The benefits of the awareness are mutual.Prescription: Beverly, as the COO, is still responsible for the people she has molded.

She must see to it that the methods and processes initiated by her (in the interest of the employees) will be continued and improved upon by the successor. As George’s superior, she can monitor his leadership style and act as necessary. Changing the departments of Bob and George cannot be a solution; it is temporary escape from the actual problem. The organization must make it a point to conduct periodical training sessions and workshops for the managers. There must also be a mechanism that ensures two-way communication and feedback.

As summarized by Ritti in The Ropes to Skip and the Ropes to Know, it is important for everyone in the organization to be able to read the unwritten protocols and invisible definitions about how people behave. It is a simple question of diplomacy and is vital for success and survival (Schwartz et al., 2000, 180).Key Points: Personal prejudice is a universal phenomenon. Its implications are terrible when it is together with authority. The way out is through introspection. No matter how much training is offered, managers like George are difficult to persuade because of their ‘I-know-it-all’ attitude which makes them inflexible.

The word ‘massacre’ is in reality too big to be used in the context of what George did to Bob. The word becomes acceptable because the sympathies of everyone (who has known them) will invariably be with Bob. The case is purely of academic interest. If at all the organization has a vision as to how it wants to go about in dealing with its human resource, ‘Post-It massacres’ are quite unlikely.ReferencesDeal, Terrence E & Lee G Bolman (2nd Edition). 2010. Reframing the Path to School Leadership. Sage. California. 152.Grimm, Ruediger H. 1977.Nietzsche’ Theory of Knowledge.

Walter de Gruytes. Berlin. 10.Kinder, Andrew, Rick Hughes & Cary Cooper (Ed.) 2008 Employee Well-being Support. John Wiley. West Sussex. 51.Schwartz, Mary K & Kinsey G Gimbel. 2000. Leadership Resources. Center for Creative Leadership. US. 180.Tosi, Henry L, Neal P Mero & John R Rizzo. 2001. Managing Organizational Behaviour (4th Edition). Blackwell. Massachusetts. 139.