Home > Free Essays > Business > Management > Leaders and Crucial Strategic Decisions
Cite this

Leaders and Crucial Strategic Decisions Report

Leadership is an exceedingly crucial element of an organization. Many organizations have managers, but they lack leaders. Leaders are especially vital when an entity makes crucial strategic decisions that alter various aspects of the organizations such as its culture, structure and workforce levels.

The above scenario entails the merge of two entities Chrysler and Daimler.The deal was to bring together an American and a German automobile entity. Each entitywas successful on its own account. Hence, bring the organizations together seemed to have been a shrewd corporate move. However, this merger had catastrophic implications on one entity and the deal at large. In such a scenario, leadership would have been crucial in trying to salvage or turn around the fortunes of both entities (Jonker& Witte 2006, p. 34).

The grid managing model would have been relevant in this case. First, this model offers an array of leadership styles which would suit various problems that the Chrysler-Daimler merger deal encountered. The leadership styles included are such dictatorial, indifferent, accommodating managing styles and a few others.

Nevertheless, they are two prime concerns for leaders or managers under this model, production and employees. In the Chrysler-Daimler case, the culture clash between the employees resulted in the decrease in morale of the American employees reducing the output in Chrysler, which affected output in the entire organization. The grid model is applicable since it would have addressed the concerns which contributed to the failure of the merger.

Employees are the most crucial resource in most organizations. The German employees adhered to a more formal managerial approach while the American counterparts were relaxed and laid back. The battle to adopt one managerial style resulted in the adoption of a formal managerial style.

The Americans employees felt overlooked by their counterparts. Daimler’s failure to accommodate the American way of management triggered an erosion in job satisfaction among the American employees which eventually resulted in the plummeting of output in Chrysler. If the grid model was utilized, there would have been a remedy to the culture clash since it integrates an accommodating leadership style (Martelin2009, p.124).

The solution to this problem would have entailed each entity maintaining their managerial style. However, at the top brass, which involves few employees, the joint entity,Chrysler-Daimler should have adopted a unitary leadership approach. This would have left most employees satisfied.

Allowing one organization culture to prevail was the tipping point which caused employee dissatisfaction. Change should be gradual in such a situation owing to the numerous disparities between the two organizations. The managers should have made the employees aware of what was impending.

Most employees would have been psychologically ready. Hence, the employee dissatisfaction would have been minimal. Leadership entails the ability to influence people. In this above merge, the leadership in the two organizations failed. The German entity, Daimler was enthusiastic about its managerial style prevailing. Nonetheless, its managers failed to realize the ramifications of this precedent on the entire merger (Stellmann2010, p. 67).

Since output is a prime concern for this models of leadership, the managers should have coined measures that would have ensured adequate output. Nonetheless, Chrysler-Daimlerperformance continued to deteriorate. Managers lacked the leadership capacity to galvanize their employees toward the realization of certain output levels, which would have ensuredthat the merge survives.

Management cannot equal leadership at such a juncture since the latter appeals to the human or psychological traits, which would have ensured employees focus on certain target irrespective of the present challenges. In view of the above details, the grid management model would have solved the Chrysler-Daimler merger problems adequately (Siddiqui&Fahringer2010, p. 89).


Jonker,J & Witte, M 2006, Management models for corporate social responsibility, Berlin, Springer.

Martelin, N2009, Daimler-Chrysler Merger Case Rationale of a failure, München, GRIN Verlag.

Siddiqui, M&Fahringer, T2010, Grid resource management on-demand provisioning, advance reservation, and capacity planning of grid resources, Berlin, Springer.

Stellmann, S2010, The Impact of Cultural Differences on the Daimler Chrysler Merger,München, GRIN Verlag GmbH.

This report on Leaders and Crucial Strategic Decisions was written and submitted by your fellow student. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly.

Need a custom Report sample written from scratch by
professional specifically for you?

Writer online avatar
Writer online avatar
Writer online avatar
Writer online avatar
Writer online avatar
Writer online avatar
Writer online avatar
Writer online avatar
Writer online avatar
Writer online avatar
Writer online avatar
Writer online avatar

301 certified writers online

Cite This paper

Select a website referencing style:


IvyPanda. (2019, May 7). Leaders and Crucial Strategic Decisions. Retrieved from https://ivypanda.com/essays/leadership-16/

Work Cited

"Leaders and Crucial Strategic Decisions." IvyPanda, 7 May 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/leadership-16/.

1. IvyPanda. "Leaders and Crucial Strategic Decisions." May 7, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/leadership-16/.


IvyPanda. "Leaders and Crucial Strategic Decisions." May 7, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/leadership-16/.


IvyPanda. 2019. "Leaders and Crucial Strategic Decisions." May 7, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/leadership-16/.


IvyPanda. (2019) 'Leaders and Crucial Strategic Decisions'. 7 May.

Related papers