Minicase: You Can’t Make Stuff Like This Up
Minicase: You Can’t Make Stuff Like This Up: located in textbook (Hughes, Ginnett, & Curphy, 2022, p. 660).
Please review the Minicase and answer the following questions: (format paper in proper APA, no title page, Abstract, Introduction, or reference page needed, but use proper APA citations to demonstrate your use of our course materials; each question response should be about 200 words in length; be sure your name is on the paper)
- Use the research of Chapter 17: The Dark Side of Leadership (Hughes et al., 2022, pp. 612-660) to describe Jim’s personality and leadership (please use proper APA citations)
- Use the research of two other Chapters in Hughes et al. (2022) to describe Jim’s positive and/or negative leadership processes, activities, or attributes, etc. (use proper APA citations to note the location of the two chapters utilized)
- What decisions could or should Steve have made to help his sales team in response to Jim’s negligence and abuse? Base your answer on the principles from any of our course readings or materials (use proper APA citations)
- As the CEO of Anthum, what decisions would you make to remedy the negative factors of this situation? Base your answer on the principles from any of our course readings or materials (use proper APA citations)
- This question is not related to the minicase, but is a summary of effective decision-making: List and briefly explain your top five (5) decision-making tools you will use in any leadership position you have now or might attain in the future. Base your tools on our course readings or materials (use proper APA citations)
Minicase
You Can’t Make Stuff Like This Up
One day Jim asked Steve to arrange a meeting with a broker at 9:00 p.m. The broker was from a large benefit house and was older, and the meeting time was late. However, he was a longtime personal friend of Steve’s and as a courtesy agreed to the meeting. Jim did not show up for the appointment and would not answer Steve’s calls to his cell phone. After an hour, Steve and the broker went home. When Steve asked Jim why he missed the appointment, he said he was drinking with a friend and did not think the meeting with the broker was important. Jim refused to apologize to the broker and was surprised when business with the broker’s organization came to an end.
Jim loved working on high-visibility projects and landed an opportunity to convert the membership of another acquired company to Anthum. This was an important project for Anthum, and shortly thereafter Jim set up an elaborate “war room” in which all sales planning and action would take place. He asked Steve to lead the conversion project, repeatedly announcing that the acquisition was to garner new contracts and to bring quality page 659employees into the organization. At this point Steve had over 70 direct reports in five different locations across the state and some aggressive sales targets. It would be impossible for Steve to hit his revenue numbers and run the conversion project. But Jim cut Steve no slack, and the computer system intended to convert the contracts did not work. Jim spent no time with any of the newly acquired sales team members, and as a result they showed no interest in working for Anthum. Yet Jim made grandiose statements about the quality of the sales force at the acquired company, which implied the current sales employees were unsatisfactory and fostered a sense of mistrust in both sales organizations.
Because of Jim’s shoddy treatment, the long hours, and poor sales and invoicing processes, the morale of the sales team began to plummet. Tantrums and tears occurred frequently, and Steve spent a lot of time smoothing ruffled feathers and telling team members that things would get better over time. But there was only so much Steve could do, and as team members began to quit, Jim blamed Steve for the decline in department morale. As the situation continued to deteriorate, Steve requested that Jim meet with the remaining staff to talk about their frustrations with Anthum. Jim opted to set up an all-employee breakfast at a local restaurant to address their concerns.
The night before the meeting a major snowstorm hit the city, and the streets were covered with a foot of snow. Some employees had to drive 40 miles to attend the meeting, but everyone made it to the restaurant. The only person missing was Jim, and Steve started calling him 10 minutes before the meeting start time to check on his status. Jim did not answer, so Steve began to call and leave messages every five minutes. Jim finally answered his phone 30 minutes after the meeting start time and told Steve that the reason he was not at the meeting was that he decided to go skiing and people would have to meet with him another day. He also asked Steve to quit bugging him by leaving messages every five minutes. Steve could do little to put a positive spin on this message, and the employees left the restaurant bitter and hurt. Of the 60 people who showed up for the meeting, only one was still with Anthum six months later. Jim never acknowledged his behavior and was “shocked” at the turnover in the sales group. Despite the turnover and declining sales revenues, Jim was still considered the company’s darling, and it was commonly believed that the CEO tacitly condoned his behavior.
Was Jim Blaylock a destructive, incompetent, successful, or effective leader? What data would you use to make this determination?
Why do you think Jim was seen as a high-potential candidate? Why did the CEO still think he was a high performer?
What would you do if you were Jim’s boss and heard about the information described here?
What would you do if you were Steve?
Are you overwhelmed by your class schedule and need help completing this assignment? You deserve the best professional and plagiarism-free writing services. Allow us to take the weight off your shoulders by clicking this button.
Get help