For a considerable time, the Canadian unit of the International Mining Corporation (IMC) has maintained an exemplary position in the company, combining excellent performance and safe, sustainable operations. Operations have not been affected significantly by COVID-19, as the employees continued working in the same manner as before while observing new safety rules. Much of this success can be attributed to Lee, the current regional manager for Canada, who has risen from a miner’s position and become an excellent leader for the team. However, with economic shortfalls caused by the pandemic and the shuffling of IMC’s Board of Directors, the new leadership has determined that the Canadian branch can and should produce a higher output than it does currently. The reason for the shortfall is Lee’s middle-of-the-road management style, which fails to capitalize on the full potential of the assets under him, an issue that this report’s author can rectify.
Current Leadership Issues
Lee is a manager that understands the needs of his subordinates, having been one in the past. He is aware of the problems and considerations that they have, and he also knows what stimuli will drive them to exhibit superior performance. Moreover, his in-depth knowledge of mining enables him to organize operations efficiently, avoiding unnecessary waste production or safety risks. The COVID-19 situation is an example, as the Canadian branch was able to maintain its productivity despite the numerous concerns. With that said, Lee is also result-oriented, motivating the workers under him into performing excellently without needing to use negative reinforcement extensively. This combination of qualities makes him an irreplaceable asset to the company, as he is both knowledgeable and well-regarded by staff, able to supply excellent policies.
With that said, while Lee’s traits make him excellent at guaranteeing his subordinates’ well-being and motivating them into performing well, they also prevent him from maximizing the productivity of the mines under his management. Lee emphasizes the well-being of the workers under him, which he infers from his past experience as a miner. However, his situation is different from that of many of his subordinates, as he greatly enjoys his work and was able to be promoted to an upper managerial position. Many miners will remain in their positions until retirement, possibly gaining seniority but ultimately continuing to engage in labor. As such, many may be interested in earning increased rewards through an improvement of their output, especially knowing that Lee will not permit them to overexert themselves and be hurt.
Lee’s reliance on his knowledge as a miner is also a significant problem in his relationship with IMC’s various suppliers. As the Board of Directors identified, the Canadian branch’s suppliers, logistics workers, and partners were not delivering all the performance that they potentially could. Lee may be unable to recognize these issues or identify ways to resolve them, taking a laissez-faire approach to the relationships as long as the fundamental obligations set in the relationships were satisfied. With that said, IMC is a large company with adequate influence to pressure its partners into maximizing their performance. These improvements are likely to affect the business’s performance as a side effect, helping it create the desired 3-5% improvement without overtaxing the workers. The help of a manager who has knowledge regarding partner relationships that supplements Lee’s competencies can help achieve this goal with minimal issues.
Leadership Self-Assessment
The author is results-oriented, seeking to use all available opportunities to produce performance improvements in their unit. They prefer to operate with precise and measurable objectives, establishing expectations ahead of time and working to fulfill or surpass them. They prefer to target the long term, seeking to achieve continuous and stable performance instead of overloading the system to achieve the nearest goal before needing to reduce the pressure and let it rest. With that said, they seek to push their subordinates regardless, driving them to improve themselves and meet the organization’s needs, consistently achieving objectives while growing and remaining able to perform at optimal capacity. If necessary, they can also push the team to work harder, though they prefer to avoid doing so due to the long-term implication of overwork. As such, they seek to set rational yet ambitious targets and optimize performance rather than increase the intensity of operations to achieve them.
The author is also strongly concerned for people, recognizing them as the most valuable resource that a company has. They recognize the needs of their subordinates and strive to satisfy them in a manner that does not jeopardize company performance. They tend to set a development plan for each of their direct subordinates and consider it during task assignments, providing as many people as possible with the opportunity to improve their skills, broaden their horizons, and grow as a professional. They also encourage others to do so, collecting feedback and using direct employee engagement as defined by Bratton (2020) to improve operations. As such, the author would rate themselves moderately high on both the concern for people and the concern for results scales of Blake and Mouton’s managerial grid. There is still substantial room for improvement, but the author would self-classify as a team management-oriented leader, as shown in Figure 1.
Theoretical Framework and Improvement Options
Lee’s problem is best conceptualized using a dispersed theory of leadership, more specifically the self-leadership model. Per Bratton (2020), in this view, employees govern their work, defining their responsibilities and productivity. As such, the Canadian branch’s productivity stems from Lee’s ability to convince them that performing well is in their self-interest. He trusts his subordinates to perform well in return for proportionate compensation while providing favorable conditions for them to operate. With that said, Lee also expects the same of the company’s partners, which is not necessarily the case. The interests of IMC and companies that work with it do not necessarily align, and Lee’s refusal to pressure partners into delivering the best performance possible enables them to focus on other, more aggressive clients. As such, a more active managerial approach that aligns the needs of the employees and the partners with those of the company is required.
Recovery from COVID-19 is likely to take a substantial time from the present. As such, increasing the pressure on workers, especially through negative reinforcement, is not a feasible approach. Instead, a permanent change in the Canadian department’s long-term operations that can accommodate the increased requirements is required. The miners need to be persuaded to apply more effort, which should be accomplished via the symbolic-interactionist framework. By creating shared meaning in the organizational culture that demonstrates to workers the need to increase their efforts and the benefits to them from doing so, it should be possible to achieve a performance improvement. At the same time, negotiations with partners need to become more aggressive, with IMC leveraging its position to establish itself as a high-priority customer.
The author can achieve both of these goals as a Chief Productivity Leader at the Canadian branch of IMC. They will generally attempt not to interfere in Lee’s work, especially where it concerns interactions with employees. However, they will provide him with suggestions for productivity growth that he can evaluate using his expertise and possibly implement. The author will take a more prominent role in negotiations with partners and suppliers, initiating new discussions and contributing to existing ones. They will formulate specific performance objectives and discuss them with relevant companies, aiming to achieve a compromise that benefits both parties. By contributing their knowledge and technical expertise, the author can help IMC achieve its goals without compromising the Canadian branch’s structure or long-term performance.
Conclusion
Ultimately, Lee is a highly capable leader for his subordinates due to his background and abilities and should not be undermined. He should be capable of pushing the team to work harder, especially when assisted with suggestions and numerical evaluation tools that the author can supply. However, he struggles to address the Canadian branch’s relationships with its partners, expecting them to emphasize their relationship with IMC and deliver the best possible results. In practice, that is not likely the case, as these companies act as service providers and aim to deliver performance that is within specifications but not necessarily the best possible. As Chief Productivity Leader, the author can address this problem, setting specific improvement objectives and working with these companies to achieve them. With their aid, the Canadian branch can improve its performance permanently and minimize the burden of overwork while still compensating for the issues the company at large is experiencing.
Reference
Bratton, J. (Ed.). 2020. Organizational leadership. London: SAGE Publications.