CASE NOTE: JOE SCHULTZ - Essay Example

Case Joe Schultz THE MAIN PROBLEM IN THE CASE The main problem in the case is fall in the departmental drop in productivity by the draftsmen when Joe applied his basic “active, controlling and task oriented” leadership style in the new job position as a supervisor in the drafting department. WHAT THE CASE IS ABOUTThe case presents the variations in employee behavior and how their preferences affect their response to a leader. According to the case, there are two groups of employees who respond differently to the same leadership style by Joe.

In one group, Joe is trusted as a model leader and one that they easily interact with as a peer. This is a near perfect leader-employee relationship in which the individuals freely shared their feelings about one another. The element of trust in the group was built on the fabric of ethnic relationship they shared. In the second group, the employees seem to be taken by surprise when Joe is appointed in the first place because they had their own expectations about the supervisor to lead them: Fred Keen.

Although some people in the group did not like Keen, they did not readily adapt to the new leadership style brought in by Joe. This anti-trust response is considered as a major contributor to the employee fall out and the subsequent fall in the productivity of the department. ABOUT JOE’S SUPERVISOR DECISIONThe decision by Joe’s supervisor to transfer him to the drafting department was based on what Mineo commented on and said, “…the trust that leaders place in those they lead allows both the leader and her/his followers to excel.

It is not a momentary event but a series of investments over time that truly allows success.” (4). What is apparent is that the decision was based on the momentary event of Joe’s success rather than the long term influence he would have over the employees in the new department. What is missing in the decision is the understanding of the supervisor about trust as a relationship between the employees as trustors and Joe as the trustee. The supervisor missed to understand that it is two who trust in interpersonal trust needed in leadership, as well as in the trust shared between employees and the institution of the employer.

The functional role of the employees in the drafting department was to take the risk of believing Joe’s new leadership style, while that of Joe as the trustee is to maintain his trustworthiness. Joe might have missed his role when he tried to impose the ’active, controlling and task oriented” leadership style. IMPROVING THE SITUATION IN THE DRAFTING DEPARTMENTJoe should consider combining leadership styles adaptable to different relational situations. In this case, it is best that he exercises a relationship-oriented leadership in combination with his task-oriented style (Van Fleet, Van Fleet ‎and Seperich 360).

Such combination of styles should be in response to the situational elements intervening between his behavior and the motivation of the members including their personal and environmental characteristics. Works citedMineo, David L. The Importance of Trust in Leadership. Research Management Review. 20(1). Pp. 1-6. 2014. Van Fleet, David, Ella Van Fleet and George Seperich. Agribusiness: Principles of Management. New York, NY: Cengage Learning, 2013. Print.