Innovative Leadership and Culture Matrix and - Research Paper Example

 Innovative Leadership and Culture Matrix and Paper Introduction This report presents an examination of innovative leadership and culture importance for the success of two private sector organizations Dell and Hewlett Packard (HP). Conversely, this paper examines where a lack of innovative leadership and culture has resulted in the organization’s inability to satisfy its stakeholders. The four frames model by Bolman and Deal (2003) is selected to provide the theoretical framework for the examination of Dell and HP. The four frames model focuses on the dimensions of the structural, political, symbolic, and human resources for the evaluation of innovative leadership and culture for Dell and HP. The matrix diagram provides a relationship diagram of Dell and HP organizational leadership and culture with regard to the four frames model. Lastly, an explanation is provided for the significance of comparing Dell and HP using the selected dimensions with regard to innovative leadership and culture for those organizations. Dell’s Innovative Leadership According to Jones (2007), Michael Dell of Dell Computer, “adopted a very different approach to managing his company. Dell developed a participative management approach, involved employees in decision-making, and fostered a spirit of comradeship and cooperation among team members to encourage top performance. His management style engendered intense loyalty from his employees, who liked his hands-on approach, and his close attention to managing his company” (p.10). The author noted that “Michael Dell was careful to watch the teams’ progress closely. When a project seemed not to be working out or was costing too much, he would quickly end it and transfer engineers to other projects” (p.10). The author further noted, “Dell’s knowledge management system, which gives them real-time access to its changing input demands, allows them to forecast demand for their products months in advance, and enables them to redesign their products so they will fit better with Dell’s future needs. The cost savings that have resulted from this system have been tremendous and have made Dell and its suppliers the low-cost leaders in the PC industry” (p. 346). Dell’s leadership model emphasizes organizational development, promotes individuals from within, creates organizational alignment, develops core capabilities and managerial effectiveness (Jones, 2007). Dell ‘s Culture Change Dell Corporation had experienced a decline in growth in late 2000. The company began to focus on redesigning its culture in a way that would emphasize new values, new rituals and traditions, a new entrepreneurial spirit, and a willingness to invest substantially in improving the knowledge and skills exhibited by workers (How Dell got soul, 2004). As a result, of this organizational cultural change process Dell began to experience dramatic improvements in employee satisfaction and worker retention, leading to greater productivity and performance improvements (How Dell got soul, 2004). Jones (2007), stated “Dell’s new innovative organizing approach fosters a different kind of company culture” (p.10). This kind of organizational culture provides a work climate where people cooperate to improve their performance. Career management programs also enhance the company’s ability to retain and develop Dell Team members (Jones, 2007). Dell (2012), noted “people are its most important asset. From a focus on growth and domestic market dominance to one of leadership, talent management and a global outlook, Michael Dell has created a “Winning Culture” that includes promoting best practices among its global workforce. HP’s Innovative Leadership According to Quinn and Poletti (2006), HP began to experience a leadership crisis after having grown at a rate of 18 percent a year for 60 years under the leadership of Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard and their record of innovative product development. However, beginning with the leadership of John Young, who served HP as CEO from 1978 to 1992, a leadership vacuum. When Carly Fiorina took over in ( add year), said Sims (2011), it was increasingly apparent that HP had forgotten how to learn; additionally, employees at the firm described a culture of fear, risk aversion, limited innovation and an overwhelming emphasis on cost cutting. One of the major mistakes in HP innovative management was poor succession planning that influenced company performance. ( add example/s ) , HP didn’t consider customer interests to the extent that their competitors were doing. Today, said Sims (2011), HP’s board is in shambles, experiencing turnover, and also applying an imperial approach to leadership that ignores customer focus, invention, and innovation and also the value of people over profit (Sims, 2011). HP‘s Culture Change The Structural frame embraces the goal of coordination to link goals with roles, relationships, rules, and policies. The Human Resource frame promotes individual job fulfillment and structures the organization to meet human needs. The Political frame seeks to increase political skills by developing bargaining and coalitions and maximize the use of scarce resources. The Symbolic frame seeks to manage symbols, myths, and traditions through the use of rituals, myths, ceremonies, and beliefs (Bolman & Deal, 2003). Matrix Design Basing on the foregoing analysis, and using Bolman and Deal’s (1989) Four Frames Model, the following matrix can be used to directly compare Dell and HP on critical aspects of the organization and its internal reality. Rationale for choosing Four Frames Model This particular four-frame model is useful, according to Bolman and Deal (1989), because each frame has its own vision of reality letting organizations exhibit elements of each of the four frames and their own corresponding goals. Such a model lends itself to a precise comparison of Dell Corporation and rival Hewlett Packard (HP). Generally, as noted by Sims (2011), HP has faced a leadership crisis and a leadership deficit, despite its early dramatic successes, whereas Dell continues to grow and advance, due to the dramatic cultural changes that company has undertaken in the last decade or so. HP and Dell are two companies with ultimately the same goal, to stay in the competition and generate potential market share. Their case especially on the ongoing competition between them is common among organizations especially those belonging to the same industry. Structural, HR, Political and Symbolic are important dimensions that can be used in analyzing the existing differences between Dell and HP. These two companies are required to have these dimensions in order to substantially operate in their industry and continue to gain considerable market share and profit. For instance, as these two organizations become more complex in their operation, their corporate structure is necessary to be identified as this would completely organize them into one unified entity. Furthermore, human resource management is necessary as the people should be considered as one of their best assets as they would be used for the actual implantation process. By using the Four Frames Model, it is found that Dell and HP are strongly competing with each other primarily on how the former places pressures on the latter and vice versa. As a result to this competition, customers are significantly given with high value as there was strong strategic innovation for both companies on their product offerings. Not only that, Dell ensures strong brand identification by integrating its product on one’s cultural experience. There is therefore a strong touch of social and emotional appeal between the part of Dell and its customers, which primarily could not be directly observed from HP. The latter just primarily focuses on improving its products as it aims to achieve strong brand loyalty and strong cultural transformation within. In great detail, the Four Frames Model is an advantage especially in citing potential differences of two organizations in the same industry. There is a better picture that can be grasped by considering the four dimensions. For instance, as these two organizations become more complex in their operation, their corporate structure is necessary to be identified as this would completely organize them into one unified entity. Furthermore, human resource management is necessary as the people should be considered as one of their best assets as they would be used for the actual implantation process, and so on. Four Frames Matrix: Dell and HP Frame Dell HP Structural Highly coordinated Pro-employee rules Group leadership Fractured leadership Centralized mgt. HR Strong commitment Company and personal interest conjunction Losing staff Low personal commitment Political Networking Customer-driven innovation Outside information Poor team focus Lack of outside participation Symbolic Many traditions Devotion to the company Cultural diffusion No brand loyalty Four Frames Question Matrix Question Dell Answer HP Answer Is individual commitment/contribution essential for the company success? Yes (Human Resource, Symbolic) No (Structural, Political) Are the technology specifics important for decision making? No (Human Resource, Political, Symbolic) Yes (Structural) Are the levels of uncertainty and ambiguity high? No (Structural, Human Resource) Yes (Structural, Human Resource) Is it significant to use conflict and scarce experience? Yes (Political, Symbolic) No (Structural, Human Resource) Are the work processes moving from the bottom up? No (Structural, Human Resource, Symbolic) Yes (Political) Source: Bolman & Deal (1989), p. 271 Conclusion HP tends to use the Structural framework more often and a strong tendency to apply traditional (?) Political and Human Resource frameworks. That choice means that HP is highly influenced by a lack of clarity and chaos, collision of interests, power washouts, and a general lack of self-confidence, certainty and stability among what groups? Indicate the outcomes of this choice as a comparison point. Dell, on the other hand, uses Symbolic, Political and Human Resource frameworks, meaning that the company incorporates traditions, brand loyalty and individual commitment to ( do what? Again, indicate the outcomes of this choice by Dell). It is recommended that HP change its established formal connections and rules, improve inside communication, and realign that ( just communication or the entire corporate structure?) structure, so it fits the demands of the IT development field, where creativity and group leadership for better innovation are effective and usually encouraged. The company should invest in more psychological support, personal participation, involvement and discovering new skills in the self. Meanwhile, Dell Company manages to celebrate the future without forgetting its past successes and company traditions. It also creates comfortable platforms for discussing innovation, and negotiating not merely with employees, but also with suppliers, customers, and other interested stakeholders. In essence, the Bolman and Deal (1989) models, as briefly summarized and discussed above, leads one to the conclusion confirmed in the literature that Dell has succeeded in navigating an important cultural transformation with the Human Resources, Symbolic, and Political frames predominating. Conversely, at HP, fractured leadership at the top has created a culture in which employees do not feel valued, stakeholders are not being satisfied, and the company has retreated from its former history of innovation (Sims, 2011). Overall, the four-frame model helps explain Dell’s success, due to its clear emphasis on people rather than ( what?). References Bolman, L.G., & Deal, T.E. (2003). Reframing Organizations Artistry, Choice, and Leadership (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Culture shift invigorates Dell. (2006). People Management, 12(6), 14. Dell. (2012). Culture and best practices. Available at www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx.... Accessed online January 20, 2012. How Dell got soul. (2004). Available at http://news.cnet.com/2030-1069_35366494.html (Accessed online January 20, 2012). Quinn, M. & Poletti, T. (2006). HP board chair’s leadership in question. San Jose Mercury News, September 8, A1. Sims, P. (2011). As Hewlett Packard goes, so goes the world. Available at http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/2011/09/28/as-…. Accessed online January 20, 2012. Read More