Abstract
The relevant case study is devoted to the analysis of managerial performance in the context of cooperation with a star performer. It touches upon the questions of corporate ethics, urgent decision-making, and management of the problem of relationships within a team. A particular emphasis is made on the conversation’s planning. One considers the possible ways of behavior during the so-called “crucial conversations.” The study also enlightens the problem of corporate priorities’ balance.
Main Body
Taking into account the peculiarities of Vijay’s character, one can understand that finding a good time for a productive conversation with him is rather problematic. Nevertheless, Stefan is obliged to discuss the current state of things as soon as possible to prevent potential complications. The dinner has neither positive nor negative implications in the quality of appointment time; therefore, the success of this conversation depends entirely on Stephan’s effort and the selected approach.
On the one hand, the upcoming dinner can be a good moment for this difficult task as it will be held right after Stefan’s meeting with the corporate staff. Thus, Stefan has the latest data for the discussion and can operate the up-to-date information.
On the other hand, the chosen appointment time has a series of disadvantages. First of all, the dinner is held immediately after Stefan’s visit to the office so that the man has no opportunity to consult the headquarters and to receive the necessary instructions. Secondly, due to Vijay’s rhetoric on the phone, one can feel that the star performer is initially negatively tuned – Vijay openly expresses the discontent with his performance being examined. Moreover, the dinner is to take place a day before the important meeting with clients. Hence, the negative results of this conversation can have an unfavorable effect on the coming meeting or even scuttle a deal. It means that Stefan will have to be particularly careful about this dialogue.
One might make the conclusion that the coming conversation is likely to be of crucial character: it implies the opposing opinions and strong emotions on the one hand and high stakes on the other hand. Therefore, in this case, the wise strategy is of primary importance while the selected time is of marginal significance.
As it has already been mentioned, the coming discussion refers to the category of crucial conversations; therefore, it requires thorough planning and the critical analysis of all the possible outcomes. One should necessarily take into account the fact that Stefan has to act promptly and his time for preparation is limited.
To begin with, one should essentially evaluate the importance of Vijay’s personality for the company’s performance. On the one hand, he is a valuable employee with excellent working ability and all the skills favorable for the relevant position. Besides, Vijay has the so-called “cultural intelligence” which is an important condition for working in the Indian region. On the other hand, the man shows an unsatisfactory team performance. His managerial capacity tends to be rather low that has already resulted in the significant staff’s loss and can lead to negative consequences in the future.
As far as one realizes that Vijay’s personality is ambiguous, and his quit will not be crucial for the company one can start planning the conversation itself. First of all, it is important to maintain an advocacy-inquiry balance. Thus, one is to be tough and precise while formulating the existing problems. At the same time, it is also necessary to express interest in Vijay’s opinion and his ideas regarding the problems’ solution. In other words, one is to present the situation as a new challenge that Vijay can overcome with the help of his exclusive abilities.
It is vital to consider Vijay’s personal traits and peculiarities. It is highly important not to lose one’s temper during the conversation. Instead, one can try to turn Vijay’s ambitiousness and egocentrism into a benefit. Thus, it will be possible to make him perform the necessary changes in the managing policy on condition that one constantly makes an emphasis on Vijay’s talent to find efficient solutions.
Ishan Raina has given a very precise estimation of the relevant situation. I fully share his point of view. His insights have touched upon a series of key questions.
First of all, it is very important that Ishan Raina has emphasized the fact that every star performer can be replaced, and the outcomes of the quit are less dramatic than one might presume. Another significant observation is that managers have to use a specific approach in case they want a star performer to stay. Thus, Ishan Raina advises appealing to Vijay’s ego to make him perform the necessary changes. Finally, one of the crucial issues that Ishan Raina has enlightened is that urgent actions are required in cases similar to Vijay’s problem. Hence, the necessity for Stefan’s conversation during dinner is no more questioned.
I am firmly convinced that such a position is the most reasonable as it focuses on the company’s benefits in general rather than on the satisfaction of a particular employee’s needs. I believe one should not neglect the interests of the entire team for the benefit of a star performer.