A brief case summary
Tom Parker performs the duty of a field technician and coordinator at Arctic Mining Consultants. His work involves training, supervising and hiring field assistants who receive fairly low wedges despite the hard work that they do. In this case, Parker managed a project involving three team members.
The project was done in Alaska, near Eagle Lake. John Talbot, Brian Miller and Greg Boyce had a duty of staking 15 claims by marking a line using flagging tape. Due to the requirement of 60 lines overall, the four team members were to complete seven or more each day.
The team members came up with a work plan courtesy of Parker. He however was not happy when Boyce and Miller failed to work within the plan. He occasionally insulted Miller who seemed to be so slow. The work was not even completed within seven days as planned and miller left the sight so demoralized. He has never worked for the company again.
Symptoms
Parker assumed that all the members were capable of completing the claims as per the plan without allowing every member to have their arguments. He did not respond well to his subjects when they presented their evening reports. In day four, Parker grunted uncommunicatively when the members reported their production instead of even congratulating them for the hard work they did.
He did not understand the need for team work hence he forced Millar to work at the same pace as other team members instead of using them to build him. Parker did not have time to talk to his members on their progress but expected more from them.
Parker worked together with his members but treated them as though he was more powerful than them. Whenever Millar failed to complete his work as per the plan, the project manager shouted at him portraying unfair discrimination. Miller could not understand why Parker did not do the same to Boyce who also failed to meet the target.
In day 8, Parker did ten and quarter lengths while his colleague, Miller, only did five. He ought to have worked together with Miller in order to discover where the problem was and solve it. Boyce and Talbot on the other hand also teamed up to complete their work leaving Millar alone when the whole project was for them.
The assistants had a low morale as shown by Millar in day eight when he thought he could not manage five posts as per the requirements. He knew he would receive insults from Parker even if he did six lengths or seven and a half. As a result of low morale he opted to go for lunch instead of completing his job. They worked so hard and got a low wedge even though they were promised a bonus which was hard to come by. Millar also had a low morale because Parker blamed him for the team’s failure to reach the target.
Problem analysis
There was no motivation among the team members. Miller told Boyce that he was working hard to get the bonus money which did not seem true to Parker. Boyce also told Miller in day five that he was doing his best despite the hustle and bustle that involved their job. This kind of persistence shows how far an individual can maintain his efforts (Robbins and Judge, 2012).They were subjected to too much work with low wedges and no overtime.
The condition for the bonus made it hard for them to get the money because they were behind schedule. Parker was also another stress to project team. He did not have time to talk to his followers so as to identify with their problems. As a result of Parker’s cruelty, Miller went to eat instead of completing his job in day eight. He had missed lunch on several occasions to complete his job but Parker still abused him so he thought it was not worth it.
The organizational culture also contributed to the problems within this project. The culture is result oriented where Parker uses the end to justify the means. Parker did not care to know how the team performed when they met in the evening, he remained silent. He did not even sit down together with them as a team. He instead got furious when the team failed to complete their target the following day. When Miller collapsed on the table in day seven due to the hard work he had done, no one helped him.
Boyce seemed to be okay with Talbot while Parker preferred just being alone and doing things on his own. The project members were not really working as a team. This seclusion hinders all the efforts of team work where everybody feels that their efforts are not necessary in the project (Robbins and Judge, 2012). Millar thought that it was not necessary to complete his work when Boyce was delaying them and that he was not going to get the bonus after all.
As far as leadership is concerned, Parker did not understand his environment. He acted contrary to the contingency theory which states that one cannot practice one leadership style in all situations.
Parker knew that his team had staked claims before and that he had seen them do it successfully under his watch but this project was different and needed more attention. He overlooked the qualities of his followers which is why he gave them too much work only to realize later that Millar could not cope up. According to participative theory, a leader is expected to encourage team work and participation of every individual (Robbins and Judge, 2012).
Parker felt that Millar was not relevant and left him alone to make mistakes so that he could find a reason to blame him for the failures in the project. He did not encourage his team members whenever they reported to him in the evening. He instead complained and insulted them. He also lacks emotional intelligence which is why he could not realize that his cruel behavior was hurting miller and he could not control his anger.
Recommendations
The four members should have done more team work instead of doing the work separately. If Millar paired up with Parker and Boyce with Talbot, the team could have completed the work within the planned time. Team work also involves listening to each other which Parker should have embraced. The team expected him to at least ask them to share out their challenges in the evening as they took supper.
As a consultant in the company, I recommend leadership training to the management team especially on emotional intelligence and management. The company should also organize for retreats where the followers can have time to talk to their managers about their experiences at work. More workshops should also be conducted and leadership duties should be delegated to the team while the managers maintain the management roles.
The company should consider offering bonuses to the employees within an achievable target in order to motivate them. The job description should be considered in determining the wedges and not previous experiences. The project team was not satisfied with their pay despite the hard work. Millar has never worked for the company after his experience with Parker and low wedge after the project completion. The company can avoid losing more employees by motivating them with considerable payments.
More mentoring should be done in order to help weaker employees to catch up with the rest. Mentoring motivates employees because people fear making mistakes (Robbins and Judge, 2012). Millar could not manage seven stamps a day while his fellows almost reached the number. In future, the company should consider the team’s weaknesses and strengths and find ways of improving.
The company should have a team oriented culture and proper maintenance mechanisms should be practiced. Maintaining the culture should involve hiring qualified and skilled personnel. The management should not just focus on the result but how to achieve it (Robbins and Judge, 2012).
The team members should be provided with enough training and the procedures on how to reach the provided targets. Managers should incorporate the assistants’ views in their decisions. In cases where members are unable to finish their work within the provided time, managers should find out where the problem is.
Reference
Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. (2012). Essentials of organizational behavior. Upper Saddle River, N.J: Prentice Hall.