MasterHedgehog2605
Looking at the case below, how to address the 4 questions? Case:…
Looking at the case below, how to address the 4 questions?
Case: Formal versus Informal Hierarchy
In most companies, there is an official or formal hierarchy. It is usually illustrated by an organizational chart or in HR documents. The official hierarchy states who is in charge of which department or division and who plays which position on the team. Just below the surface is the equally powerful and almost as easily known unofficial or informal hierarchy. Rarely is this informal hierarchy written down, let alone verbalized in any formal way; but it is just as important. In some cases, the informal hierarchy is even more powerful than its official counterpart. Written down or not, we all know who the unspoken leaders are. They are often people whose official status might be second or third from top. In some cases, they might be in positions even lower on the organizational chart; however, their official status is often meaningless because everyone knows he or she is the “go to” person.
This brings us to a consulting assignment that you have been asked to take on. The project involves an organization where a talented, hard-working Vice President (VP) faces a difficult challenge. You have been brought into this organization by the CEO to work with this VP who has been in the position for only eight (8) months. The CEO, Carla Cohen, has informed you that the VP, Victor Cabral, was having considerable personnel challenges and needed some expert advice by a consultant well versed in leadership theory. You were chosen based on your knowledge and experience in developing successful leadership development programs.
In this situation, it turns out that a rogue director, Gregory Franco, who is experienced and very good at his job, has some unresolved power and anger issues. He has been making things difficult for everyone on the team recently, especially Victor. Using every opportunity at his disposal to challenge Victor’s power, Greg was wreaking havoc on his time and energy. At meetings, Greg would directly challenge Victor’s decisions. Behind the scenes, he would badmouth and undermine his instructions and ideas. He disrupted projects and communications by trying to run them his way. Victor tried subtle and positive means to change Greg’s behavior; however, things were getting worse. Victor kept his cool, but his patience was running thin. Carla (the CEO) knew that terminating Greg would create a messy political situation, but given her level of frustration, she was ready to make the decision if he didn’t get in line soon. Carla’s only hesitation in firing Greg was that by doing so, she might further diminish Victor’s power in the eyes of his staff. Also, being very insightful, Victor encouraged Carla to see how Greg could still be an asset to the organization.
To build trust, Carla introduced you to the entire staff as her management consultant. She defined your role and responsibilities in general terms. Officially, you were brought in to facilitate communication at staff meetings and to assist with efficiency measures toward improved productivity. [Not shared with the staff were your indirect objectives: to get Victor and Greg working together or advise Carla on an alternate plan of action.] With measures for your success and timelines in place, you took on this challenge.
You observed a few staff meetings and witnessed the awkward struggle for power between Victor and Greg. You saw how Victor was subtly but inadvertently giving his power away time and again. It was clear that the staff valued Victor and wanted to follow him, but they were unsure if they should “break” from Greg, who had been their unofficial leader for quite some time. Both Victor and the staff needed some help to break this cycle. During this time, you worked with Victor to engineer your involvement in staff meetings so that the staff would get to know you and trust your judgment. Then, when your input was considered valuable to the team, the stage was set. During one staff meeting, an opportunity presented itself and you stepped in.
You asked the staff directly: “What do you want in your VP? What are the skills, behaviors, and actions that you value and require right now?” They were unsure how to respond at first, but given time to process the questions and given some encouragement, they realized it was time to speak up. There were no wrong answers. It was likely that some staffers could clearly see what was going on and approved of the intervention. There seemed to be a collective sigh of relief that at last the power struggle was going to be resolved; there was a heightened sense of energy and forward movement once the process began. Victor and Greg had a chance to listen and observe while you facilitated and charted the responses, questions, and comments. The entire staff shared in detail what they wanted.
As the session went on and you prompted for more responses, Victor shared with his staff what he wanted and what he had to offer. Not surprisingly, the staff was in close alignment on almost every point. The only person not on the same page was Greg, who sat silently during the process. He declined to participate and took a pass at each of his turns. His passive and silent behavior spoke volumes. Finally, you ask each staff member directly: “Will you agree to follow Victor? Yes or no?”
As you go around the room, each person agrees to follow Victor. No one hesitated. They were sincere and ready. Finally, when you reached Greg, he was faced with a very tough choice. He stated he wasn’t sure if he could work in this new environment. A conversation then ensued between Greg and the staff, witnessed by everyone. Even with Greg feeling isolated and with his covert support system dwindling, Victor made it clear that Greg’s input was valuable and desired. Victor also made it clear that dissention was no longer an option. There was work to be done. The political games were over. It was now decision time and the choice was simple…step on or step off. In the end, the staff publicly decided to follow Victor and Greg saw the writing on the wall. It had not been a battle or a war. The situation had been reframed. The overt, official message was clear: get on board or be left out. The implicit message was clear: being left out meant being kicked out. It was also clear that the staff wanted Greg to stay.
After a few days of reflection, Greg decided to acquiesce and stay (although he tried one or two final attempts at bullying Victor). Victor stood his ground with the whole staff witnessing his strength. This proved to be enough to remove Greg from his unofficial position of power without destroying the staff in the process.
As your assignment ended, Carla and Victor realized that they learned some valuable lessons. In particular, when subtle and gentle tactics don’t work, sometimes forcing a verbal consensus and commitment in front of witnesses is a powerful tool for leaders to use. The desire for power and control are normal, but in the wrong hands, the results can be counterproductive. The sooner this is dealt with, the better. Dealing with peer pressure and informal hierarchies can be tough; however, given the right tools and support, smart and effective leaders can be tougher.
Questions:
Describe Victor’s leadership style before and after the intervention? Please support your answer with the theories and concepts covered in the assigned readings.
It was clear that Greg had become a powerful, informal leader among the staff. Based on your understanding of the models and theories of leadership covered in class, explain how an individual like Greg could rise to become a powerful, informal leader in an organization. What factors would contribute to this process?
What would you recommend to Carla and Victor regarding the Greg’s status with the organization? Should he be terminated or should he keep his job? Please support your recommendation based on the concepts and theories covered in the assigned readings.
What expert advice would you give Carla and Victor to prevent these types of issues from arising in the future? Again, base your advice on sound leadership concepts
