Introduction
For several decades, employee motivation and satisfaction have been among the most debated issues within governmental and non-governmental organizations with the urge to improve employee job satisfaction being the core motive. Managers have always been under pressure to meet organizational demands and control employees, with the contemporary world awakening to the realities of employment standards.
Despite substantial prior literature, extensive empirical evidence and strong theoretical frameworks existing throughout several researches across the world with the principle aim of stressing on the importance of employee motivation, leadership principles, and theories, little seems impressive on the current employment standards. Frederick Herzberg’s motivational theories, viz. theory X and Y, are among renowned theories that have assisted in understanding motivation and leadership.
However, workers in several organizations still work under frustrations, are underpaid, or denied their rights. In submission to the leadership and motivation theories, principles, and issues, this research paper introduces Ricardo Semler, CEO of Brazil’s Semco S.A, who is popularly known as part of the highly celebrated pioneers of organizational change.
Background of Semco and Selmer S.A
Perhaps one of the most outstanding cases relating to corporate leadership, employee motivation, and proper principles and issues concerning management is the transformational case of Ricardo Semler & Semco S.A Company.
This case is one of the case studies constantly reviewed by learners and researchers and has long stood as the most substantial case in the history of evaluating principles of management. The case simply entails background, development, and triumph of Semco and Selmer S.A under the stewardship of Ricardo Semler after he took control of the business, which was hitherto being run by his dad.
This business operated in Brazil and during this moment, most of the Brazilian companies’ organizational structure, just as numerous historical Latin American enterprises, rested upon the paternalistic and authoritative leadership with majority demonstrating pyramidal hierarchy. During this same moment, the Brazilian economy was undergoing stress with extensive cases of hyperinflation, currency devaluations, unemployment, and virtual cessation eminent in industrial productions.
The emergence of Semler & Company
Ricardo’s father and “Austrian-born engineer, Antonio Curt Semler relocated to Sao Paulo in 1953, after numerous years of managing a certain plant for DuPont in Argentina” (Killian & Perez, 1998, p.7).
Antonio Curt Semler immediately invested in centrifuges manufacturing company, which he named Semler & Company and within one decade, this company became a market leader principally following its ability to acquire worthwhile contracts dealing with providing military with marine pumps.
Within a short moment, Antonio Curt Semler started supplying marine pumps to the Brazilian government military and Semler & Company ultimately grew into being among the major providers of National Shipbuilding Plan material.
The period between 1950s and 1980s saw Brazil enjoying the greatest economic position with the economy rapidly growing, and thus majority of the companies failed to acknowledge management principles as influential factors to organizational productivity. At the close of 1970s, the Brazilian economy dramatically changed with the rigid management structure designed by Antonio Curt Semler failing to strategize the organization to meet the prevailing conditions.
Arrival of Ricardo Semler
Immediately after his graduation with an MBA from “Harvard University at the age of only 20 years, Ricardo Semler revisited Sao Paulo to assist his father in managing and developing Semler & Company” (Killian & Perez, 1998, p.3). On his arrival with diverse democratic organizational philosophy that probably acquired from the school, Ricardo transformed the entire leadership in Semler & Company from his father’s autocratic and paternalistic control to democratic and participatory leadership.
This move was evident that Ricardo’s management and leadership ism was entirely different from that of his father as the two adopted disparate management theories. The father strictly believed in inextricable association involving personal and business matters, while Ricardo estranged work and personal life and promoted participatory management style.
During the successive years, Ricardo and his father, Antonio Curt Semler, continuously disagreed on the management principles, ideologies, and philosophies that the son had started implementing, but finally understood that power transfer does not means a constant continuation of the status quo. Ricardo arrival met the harsh economic times when the Brazilian national economy was undergoing a terrible recession in 1980.
During this tormenting period, Semler & Company depended exclusively on sales from shipbuilding products, with an average of 90% of its revenue haggard from such products.
Ricardo was certain that the future of the company’s success was solely in the hands of product variegation; unfortunately, no one in the company shared or accepted these sentiments. On noticing, the aptitude of his son and the unwillingness of the company to accept change with Ricardo threatening to resign and leave the company on his third year, Antonio Curt Semler decide to retire and leave the leadership to the son.
Antonio’s decision was flawlessly the beginning of revolution and transformation of Semler & Company that immediately received a new name Semco, under the influence and management philosophies employed by Ricardo. The new Semco believed that the key to better management is to exonerate managers, to get better production one must acknowledge investing corporate profits with employees and the only way to proper is to receive the profit notion and freely engage workers in management.
Ricardo’s fruitless efforts to secure Semler Company
On his entry as the new CEO, “Ricardo dismissed approximately two-thirds of Semler & Company’s top management, majority of which were close colleagues to the father and instantly plotted the new product diversification strategy that he intended to implement given the chance to manage Semco” (Killian & Perez, 1998, p.8).
Ricardo’s first approach in eradicating the old Semler & Company organizational legacy and developing Semco bore little achievement as he employed much energy than strategic foundation. Ricardo vowed to work tirelessly with most of his moments spent in long hours trying to restore the collapsing business, but unfortunately made meaningless progress in the first year.
Evidently, Ricardo was making retrogressive mistake by thinking that he could change the company overnight and due to stress and depressive disorder, he collapsed on his sojourn to the US. Fortunately, he learnt a strong lesson from his mistakes and noticed that lack of strategic vision could completely burry his efforts to restore the image of the old Semler and more.
The advent of some significant Changes
In subsequent years, the new Semler that is Ricardo for that matter, decided to dismantle the rigid management arrangement completely that was constantly dragging his efforts to restore Semler’s corporate image.
Ricardo quickly removed the rigid management structure developed by his father and replaced it “with a more flexible organization based on three interdependent core values: employee participation, profit sharing, and the free flow of information” (Killian & Perez, 1998, p.2). Ricardo supposed that all people yearn to achieve excellence and felt that it was no longer time to tolerate autocracy, which was a constant thwarter to individual’s motivation and creativity.
Ricardo then reached a conclusion that the only way to allow change is to begin by improving the decision making process in Semco and that decision-making will remain evenly distributed. His first efforts to change the organization structure began with the implementation of matrix structure that his admiration hinged upon Delaware W.L. Gore. This structure made managers take few risks, remain cautious, but learnt little.
The implementations of matrix organizational structure failed to work perfectly for Ricardo as managers became more cautious, inactive and uncreative, with few or no ideas shared freely. These constantly protracting challenges with the organizational set up of the company compelled Ricardo to create different segments of the company each under independent management.
According to Killian & Perez (1998), Ricardo’s believe rested upon understanding that this approach will aid in removing obstacles that marred effective participatory management. The competition among autonomous groups grew exponentially with employees having a greater feeling of motivation. Subsequently, in the mid 1980s, Semco manager name Joao Vendramin managed to persuade Ricardo to introduce a lattice organization where under this setup, a group of six to ten self-managed manufacturing employees emerged.
Killian and Perez (1998) posit, in a bid to promote “a sense of true ownership of the process, the groups were responsible for setting their own budgets and production goals” (p.3). Prior to this implementation, unit production cost reduced drastically as employee productivity surged.
Ricardo’s new lattice organization prompted numerous changes in the newly developed Semco as employees became more participative in the management through self-managed teams and there was sudden perception that managers were losing autonomous power.
The adoption of lattice organization appeared easier to employees with the company witnessing the quitting of almost a third of middle managers between October 1985 and January 1987 (Killian & Perez, 1998). These managers simply failed to adapt to this management style with much of them claiming to have lost their power.
Following the implementation of lattice organizational structure, a diverse number of practices and commonalities changed with time as Ricardo bestowed employees the ability to share some cultural values concerning corporate governance. Among the major changes that took place during this moment was the traditional means of employee motivation that involved profit sharing, that included workers taking the profit and loss responsibilities, free flow of information among other strategies.
Overcoming the auspicious era of 1990s
The 1990s was one among the worst moments that saw the Brazilian government impose some stringent laws and regulations that aimed at responding to the treacherous hyperinflation that marred economic growth during this epoch.
The incumbent Brazilian president during this moment, Collor and his administration decided to impose restrictions to liquidity and a result, numerous companies filed bankruptcy forcefully. The only way that could secure Semco from this situation was to cut down expenditure and general cost and Ricardo decided to implement new orders and decided to organize workers into autonomous groups who were capable of selling output directly to clients.
Throughout 1990, “upper management at Semco met with groups of employees to devise cost cutting strategies” (Killian & Perez, 1998, p.4). Until this time, only two options were viable as the main solutions: layoffs and salary deductions. The Brazilian labor laws at that moment required a two-year severance pay for each employee laid off from any given company.
Workers from the shop floor committee proposed that they were ready for salary reduction, but stood firmly to three conditions. One of the conditions required Ricardo to agree an increase in profit sharing that was among the new strategies to 39% of the net income until the restoration of current salaries.
Another condition was that managers must accept a 40% salary cut and that Ricardo should stop Semco management from approving expenditure that was crucial in assuring workers accountability. Desperately and with no other option remaining after weighing the expenses and misfortunes that will rise from layoffs as highlighted in Brazilian labor laws, Ricardo accepted the shop floor committee’s offer.
Killian and Perez (1998) assert, “Labor’s partnership with Semco management during these negotiations marked the beginning of a major cultural shift toward democratic worker management, i.e., worker participation in planning, decision-making and implementation” (p.4). Workers aptitude and willingness to perform manifold tasks increased exponentially from forklifting to line production.
The preliminary success of autonomous groups developed by Ricardo Semler in the lattice organization in the mid 1980s with production lines became the most fundamental strategy that assisted workers to adopt a new approach perfectly.
Workers organized in the autonomous groups continuously became more powerful and almost everything ran under the governance of these teams as they ultimately decided to assume the role of recruiting and dismissing co-workers and managers through an open and transparent popular balloting. Automatically, the remaining elements of inflexible processes under the watch of despotic managers in Semco started to pave way to visionary teams, and subsequently democratic worker management commenced.
Flexible governing mechanisms controlled by ideologies, principles and the common sense of selfless democratic workers and officials became the simple rules governing Semco. Managers intuitively started to understand and appreciate their emerging functions as simple enablers towards corporate growth and constantly enriching employees with the requisite support to assist them in making the right decisions at work.
The contended realities of such democratic processes led to the enormous expansion of Semco that marked the history of unending development. In successive days that followed the appearance of Ricardo and his democratic process that led to substantial motivation, the satellite business emerged democratically in 1980s after a small group of employees presented a business proposal.
The proposal interest was in “inventing and reinventing new products, exposing production inefficiencies, refining marketing strategies and developing new ways of undertaking business and six months of its operation, the group that named itself Nucleus of Technological Innovation (NTI) had invested in almost eighteen projects” (Killian & Perez, 1998, p.9).
In the advent of 1990s, Ricardo and some senior managers decided to promote satellite business comprehensively. “As an added incentive to foster growth of the satellites, management guaranteed initial contract work for the new satellites and deferred lease payments on all equipment and office space for two years” (Killian and Perez, 1998, p.5). This satellite business became the most lively and innovative part of Semco.
A Completely New Semco
Semco gained completely a new image in the late 1998 after substantial transformational changes taking place from 1985 to the later. The new Semco transformed and the management team did away with some office positions like secretaries. There existed no personal or private offices, workers managed themselves with higher accountability and responsibility.
On one of the interviews conducted by researchers, Ricardo stated, “I don’t sign a single check, I don’t approve investments. I do not run the company in that sense at all. What I do is spend a lot of time being called into meetings about strategy, about pricing…” (Killian & Perez, 1998, p.5).
The title that one holds in a given job is of little or no significance given the fact that employees are at liberty to work interactively with others as well as questioning and correcting co-workers and even bosses on any discord. From 1985, Semco managed to reduce corporate staff by 75% with much of it initially composed of bureaucratic management.
Now it was eminent that middle managers, receptionists, accountants, secretaries or even personal assistants no longer exist in the new and reformed Semco. According to Killian & Perez (1998), based on the participatory approach, the company’s manual stated, “Our philosophy is built on participation and involvement.
Do not settle down. Give opinions, seek opportunities and advancement, always say what you think…Do not be just one more person in the company” (p.6). However, during the mentioned thirteen years of Ricardo’s management, employees gradually understood that they must presume greater responsibilities over everything including managing the cafeteria menus to designing of new product designs to even plant repositioning.
Semco only managed to accommodate only a limited inner circle management team of three circles. The first circle entailed 6 members and their primary duty was to make the company’s overall policies. Each of the counselors, inclusive of Ricardo, operated in rotational turns of six months as CEO. The second circle was made up of individuals from each segment within the company and the last was made of all managers and workers.
Organizational profit sharing and loss responsibility
One of the most fascinating principles that characterized the form of management introduced by Ricardo and his group was the aspect of profit sharing and loss responsibility factor. Killian and Perez (1998) postulate, “Semco’s adherence to the principles of democratic worker management brought both a sense of individual freedom and a necessary commitment to financial accountability” (p.7).
Individual’s freedom and organizational financial accountability were two inseparable variables in the entire organizational performance. Sensibly, in the quest to realize answerability, the
Management team had to devise ways of monitoring and evaluating the progress or retrogression of every subdivision. The advent of profit sharing factor was typically a motivational factor that proudly enabled workers willingness to perform multiple job duties despite the prevailing harsh economic times that marred economic growth in Brazil.
This democratic nature of the leadership practiced by Ricardo and his group drastically managed to reduce the averaging and disturbing complaints concerning the allocation of funds and exemplified Ricardo’s trust in his employee’s abilities in decision-making.
Employee hiring, firing and evaluation
Through democratically selected committees, serving under stabilized democratic management structure and well-informed employees who understood the right virtues that guide success in organization, employee hiring, firing and evaluation was never a challenge again. The company’s “associates felt much empowered and were entirely responsible for hiring new recruit, be it co-workers or bosses” Killian & Perez, 1998, p.6).
Nonetheless, since none of the persons had much power to fire others, employees worked tirelessly while respecting others and remained worriless of any favoritisms. After the drafting and tabling of budgets every six months, employees proffered for positions with the rejection or acceptation depending on talents, skills and appraisals, the amounted of salary one requests and fellow employees readiness to reconsider them.
Killian and Perez (1998) note that Semler expected all “bosses to be relaxed, secure, fair, friendly, participative, innovative, trustworthy and highly competent” (p.8). Workers would rank managers and the views made known to everyone with managers scoring below seventy-five percent completely exempted from the management.
Free flow of information
Ricardo Semler was one of the fascinating managers who managed to make all his company’s financial data always readily available to all employees.
This aspect played an imperative role as employees felt much appreciated, motivated and their rights observed with great changes emerging from Ricardo’s effort of training employees how to interpret balance sheets and other financial statements. Terminologies like profit and losses for each division became common idea for almost everyone in such partitions with employees capable of understanding the principles of payments including knowing salaries of top managers.
Since the management adopted democratic leadership that involved participatory management, all employees had equal commanding power through democratic voting process. Free flow of information provided associates with the necessary knowledge to make knowledgeable decisions and insist on democratic culture following the more transformed means of decision-making that was all-inclusive.
Salaries and strategies
It was the responsibility of the associates in Semco to manage and set their own salaries and as postulated before, re-hiring of any employee depended on the amount one states and the appraisal so employees remained keen in estimating their desired pay. In the first place, committees overseeing and analyzing salaries ensured that salaries remained publicly posted.
Typically, if an employee overpaid her/himself for the past six months before then he/she should remain prepared to lose his/her job during the drafting of budget and setting of employee bids. Since the labor laws in the Brazilian government prohibited salary deductions, and stiff penalties existed to employers who dismissed workers, it was imperative for Ricardo to depend on profit sharing and accountability as one way of settling financial matters with employees.
New strategies were put in place and by 1998, the company would only meet when extremely necessary, for instance during deliberations on management, engineering, applications, and research & development. They also spared other high intensive functions that were of core competencies.
Theoretical framework
Principles of leadership and motivation have been the subject matter to several researches with the main aim being improving factors related to employee satisfaction, enhance leadership welfare and enhancing working environment to both top and low level workers.
For several decades, theories concerning motivation, leadership and their relationship with individual satisfaction and corporate growth have existed with studies practically evaluating and proving such theoretic concepts through empirical evidences.
Taking and example of the most fascinating case of Semler and Semco S.A, one would have to understand where the imperativeness of theories including theory X and Y, Frederick Herzberg’s motivational theory comes, and to which extent they influence management practice and employees behavior in real cases.
For several decades as eminent in the case of Semler and Semco S.A and the revolutions emerging through Ricardo’s management interventions approximated to only 16 years, there is always an existing correlation between leadership techniques in governing human resource, motivation and productivity in organizations. This study focuses on the two theories.
Motivation theory
Motivational theories have always focused on the ways through which management and employees need to have conduciveness in a given environment to enable them undertake their duties and practices tactfully. Motivation in numerous employee impetus studies may refer to a situation whereby individuals feel comfortable and either internally or externally moved by certain aspects of life towards greater performance.
As postulated in several theories, motivation in terms of employee realm is the sense of having greater comfort and aptitude that results from intrinsic or extrinsic forces that manage to move individual’s morale in an organization towards higher accountability and responsibility that further triggers high productivity.
Motivated employees therefore may simply mean a self-directed and powerful workforce that feels intrinsically moved into achieving not only their personal ambitions in an organization, but also assisting the organization itself in achieving its desired objectives. In almost all motivation theories, there has always been a certain correlation appearing between the aspect of motivation and the leadership or management styles that favor enthusiasm.
McGregor Theory X and Y
The constantly rising urge of employee satisfaction, employee motivation and the aspect of employee empowerment have prompted the imperativeness of numerous theories.
Perhaps one of the most outstanding theories that have always been useful in propelling the campaigns of employee and general motivation through researches and empirical confirmation is McGregor’s Theory X and Y. Through McGregor’s theory X and Y on which individuals come to understand two main preconceived perceptions of how people understand human behavior in organizations or at the workplace, a better understanding of motivation and leadership emerges.
McGregor’s theory X is an exact replica of the principles and philosophies that Antonio Curt Semler and some of the investors from Brazilian companies believed to have an impact in triggering employee performance. Since its introduction in 1970s by Douglas McGregor, theory X has featured in several studies with the majority of them associating it with foregone leadership traits that involved misunderstanding human resource as leaders emphasized on the use of tyrannical ways of human resource management.
Views of Theory X and its suppositions
McGregor’s theory X has been among the most studied and critically analyzed motivational theories for several decades with the current generation that opts for theory Y, constantly criticizing it.
Theory X emphasizes on pushed motivation where managers envisage that a common human being has an inbuilt dislike towards work and is capable of doing anything to avoid certain responsibilities, therefore much predisposed to errands. The perceived nature of human detest and objectivity to responsibilities therefore requires some individuals, most likely managers, administrators, supervisors, executives, all in the common name bosses, to oversee human practice in the workplace.
Theory X supposes that human beings tasked with certain duties are generally lazy, lack dedication and avoid responsibilities whenever capable and therefore, these bosses must always remain well positioned to coerce, direct, control and to a certain extent threaten workforce to trigger productivity. Theory X deems that average human beings have less focus, do not even have wishes or ambitions to become productive and therefore must remain monitored at the workplace.
Views and suppositions of theory Y
McGregor’s theory Y is a typical contract of theory X with its assumptions giving astringent views on the facets of employee satisfaction, empowerment and motivation. Theory Y that has become the most preferred motivational theory especially in the contemporary world where democracy is everyone’s anticipation with Y generation becoming more apparent in the recent decades, may practically fit in Ricardo’s profile.
According to Stella (2008) drawing view from theory Y, employees are capable of accepting responsibilities heartedly through self-control and determination. For theory Y, given a favorable working environment, human beings have the aptitude and ability towards productivity and driven by personal commitment towards achieving individual and organizational objectives, employees feel intrinsically motivated, develop imaginations and make an informed decision imperative to organizational success.
Contrastingly, subjected to certain conditions and limitations employees feel unsafe, develop unnecessary fear, become resistant towards success, and more predisposed to erroneousness, subsequently affecting organizational productivity. Given honor, respect, freedom and desired recognition as part of company, employees can perform.
Important facts on theory X and Y
In the growing contemporary world where several challenges are constantly marring economic growth to greater lengths, the application of both theories by managers has been eminent with the organizational interests being more of concern than employee welfare.
It is definitely true that a force coming from internal push of psychological tuning has always proven imperative in human success as intrinsic motivation allows individuals to exercise their ability skillfully and confidently. In support to this, according to Stella (2008), employee’s talents not until in the latest decades have always remained partially utilized, as research has noticed still the existence of substantial evidence of demoralizing hierarchical structures that undermining employee’s capacity.
Nonetheless, the aspect of over-democratization of organizational management is constantly posing great danger on human resource management as research has noticed absconding of important employee duties in the name of enjoying democracy. To remain productive and avoid corporate failure due to governance in some organizations, application of both leadership approaches may remain paramount.
Frederick Herzberg’s motivational theory
Frederick Herzberg’s motivational theory is also among the most theories that constantly feature in the motivation, empowerment and job satisfaction issues that are currently among the hottest and most contested labor affairs. A substantial number of studies have been using Frederick Herzberg motivational theory convincingly to support important arguments raised across the global employment paradigm.
In a bid to reinforce the imperativeness of motivation, Frederick Herzberg managed to raise some important considerations that seem to control human enthusiasm with Herzberg raising an understanding that events leading to satisfaction are completely different from those encumbering satisfaction.
In this theory, Frederick considers “company policies and administration, supervision, working conditions; interpersonal relations, money security, and job status are some of the paramount factors that can depict healthiness of the working environment” (Stella, 2008, p.57). Taking of Frederick Herzberg’s hygiene and motivational factors theory, the above principles, factors and issues must be the company’s priority as one way of ensuring suitable working environment for workers that must remain considered.
Considering the transformations undertaken by Ricardo Semler to change Semco completely, something that could remain, challenging to the father, Frederick Herzberg’s hygiene and motivational factors theory represents a complete facsimile of the case of Ricardo Semler and Semco S.A.
According to Herzberg, for employees to feel satisfied in any organization, employers must provide a safe working environment with favorable working conditions, must provide some motivational elements including financial and fringe benefits to enhance employee commitment to work and encourage teamwork dynamics to increase performance.
Organization’s administrative approaches including policies must consider employees welfare and always remain supportive to employee personal growth and professional development.
It is important for employers to understand that people need to grow professionally, need to recognize employees as important facets to corporate growth; employees need a sense of responsibility and their security at work is paramount. All these hygiene factors as postulated by Herzberg are equally essential for the employees’ professional growth and organizational recital.
Methodology
Using information from the website might not have qualified this approach as a methodological research; nonetheless, skillful website searching techniques might have prompted the success of this research. This study simply used the case of Ricardo Semler and Semco S.A, one of the renowned cases that are in constant use in research with substantial evidence liking the existence of motivation, leadership principles and issues in the case.
Though one might not be in exactly the best position to determine the most appropriate methodology employed in this study, triangulation methodology may have played an important role in investigate, inspecting and analyzing data used to explore the facts addressed herein. Triangulation is a “method used by qualitative researchers to check and establish the validity in their studies by analyzing a research question from multiple perspectives” (Guion et al. 2011, p.1).
This study concentrated with only two of the triangulation techniques namely data triangulation that may represent almost the entire methodology and methodological triangulation. Data triangulation refers to the use of different data sources or information material in order to enhance the validity of the study as well as reinforcing the pieces of argument inherent in the study.
In such cases, stakeholders of data may be program staff, participants or even other researchers. For this study, triangulation involved an analysis of the case of Ricardo Semler and Semco S.A, a case that has always been imperative in reinforcing arguments on employee satisfaction, motivation and empowerment. Methodological triangulation was also essential in providing significant facts and assisting in reinforcing arguments.
According to Guion et al. (2011), methodological triangulation typically engrosses the application of multiple quantitative and/or qualitative methods to explore a given topic. Prior surveys, empirical researches and cases that analyzed motivational aspects were important in providing facts and reinforcing arguments.
Results and Findings
Following a comprehensive analysis of the case of Ricardo Semler and Semco S.A, with the transformational events that emerged from the efforts of Ricardo in changing his father’s tyrannical leadership, results and findings are evident.
The advent of numerous changes in Semler & Company initiated by Ricardo did not bring about the demise of Semler, but the participatory or rather democratic leadership proved imperative in enhancing corporate growth. Triangulating data provided by Killian & Perez in an attempt to recognize the iconic nature of Ricardo Semler who remains an important inspiration to many leaders, a substantial change is eminent.
Ricardo’s efforts to impose democratic leadership and abolish tyrannical, totalitarian or even authoritarian leadership began in 1980s where Brazil was under extensive economic recession. Within a period of approximately 16 years or simply estimated to one and a half decade, Semco managed to triumph economically with the majority of employees having the sense of self-governance, motivation and successfulness.
Instead of crumpling or disintegration, the skillful Ricardo Semler managed to create remarkably a flexible organization that grew exponentially. The organization attracted millions of workers from allover Brazil with a continuum of products produced through manufacturing.
Approximately, over 100 Fortune firms across the continents toured the company in the quest to learn how the company managed to realize exponential growth and seemingly unparalleled success. Semler’s sensations were all the most extraordinary when measured alongside the milieu of the unpredictable financial system that all the Brazilians operated.
Considering the situation where a country suffering from four currency devaluations, hyperinflations, high unemployment and a practical termination of every industrial production, Ricardo’s democratic change in Semco brought substantial changes that may even remain anticipations forever. Reducing corporate staff by about 75 per cent, creating a different environment altogether, and making workers to adapt to changes has never been easy, but democracy may ensure that this goal is achieved.
Summary
This study reviewed the case of Ricardo Semler and Semco S.A.,“Ricardo’s father and Austrian-born engineer, Antonio Curt Semler relocated to Sao Paulo in 1953, after numerous years of managing a certain plant for DuPont in Argentina” (Killian & Perez, 1998, p. 7). Antonio Curt Semler invested in centrifuge manufacturing, a business that boomed, but the economic hardships of between 1980s and 1990s, slightly a few decades after Antonio’s invention in centrifuge manufacturing.
Fortunately, a young entrepreneur with democratic skills namely Ricardo Semler, a son to Antonio curt Semler appears in time and implements the participatory democratic leadership that helps the company to succeed economically despite serving in erratic economic moments.
Combined with theoretical concepts and arguments reinforced through theory Y and Frederick Herzberg’s hygiene and motivational factors theory, Ricardo Semler forms a complete facsimile of the two theories. Theory Y and Frederick Herzberg’s motivational theory suppose that employees can willingly take responsibilities in a motivating workplace. The father can be a complete replica of leaders who fit in theory X, which discerns democracy.
Conclusion and Recommendation
Conclusively, democratic management system seems to have been gradually been consuming the interest of a multitude of workforce, with some managers inclusive in the recent decades.
The case of Ricardo and his revolutionary efforts to restore Semler and its reputation through autonomous leadership skills is among the cases that may reflect the realities behind the most desired governance styles.
Nonetheless, leaders may not normally seem impressed by participatory leadership since it cleaves away their leadership power and workers may eventually feel over empowered. To bring substantial change to the most challenging management paradigm that involves controlling grownups with focused minds in workplace, democracy may play a significant role in human resource management.
This leadership does not only relieve managers from unnecessary stress resulting from psychological frustration created by pressurized workplace, due to attempting to control sovereign beings, but also results in substantial organizational efficiency. With a considerable empirical evidence drawn from the case of Semco and prior management principles highlighted in a number of theories, this study recommends organizations to lead democratically.
Reference List
Guion, L., Diehl, D., & McDonald, D. (2011). Triangulation: Establishing the Validity of Qualitative Studies. Web.
Killian, K., & Perez, F. (1998). Ricardo Semler and Semco S.A. Web.
Stella, O. (2008). Motivation and Work Performance: Complexities in Achieving Good Performance Outcomes; A Study Focusing on Motivation Measures and Improving Workers Performance in Kitgum District Local Government. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Erasmus University.