Usually, their next action is to issue another set of orders reinforced by penalties in case of further disobedience. Meanwhile, the discussion of the problems initiated often helps better and saves the nerves of both managers and their subordinates.
Dick Spencer, the plant manager at Modrow from the case study obviously has faced the same problem as stated above. When ordering a foreman to bent the scrap strips instead of cutting them, he did not listen to contradictions of a foreman. Moreover, the agreement of a foreman was forced. Dick Spencer uses an authoritative leadership style, demanding obedience and being deaf to alternative opinions. Of course, this type of managerial behaviour pays well when a manager has a clear vision of the problem, and knows how to deal with it. Nevertheless, authoritative managers think they have a clear vision way to often compared to cases when they really have it. In this case, his management style failed him, as once again he saw workers cutting the strips, and therefore disobeying his orders. And for once more, he refused listening to the opinion of a foreman. No wonder, that his order was disobeyed for the third time.
Let us imagine, how would another manager with different leadership style reacted to solve the problem. Bill Gates seems to be a proper candidate, as his managerial style is renowned for encouraging suggestions from all ranks and debate all ideas. His participative behaviour would lead to the discussion of the problem with the foreman, which is that cutting strips of scrap is less efficient and costs more than bending them. The contradictions of a foreman would have been listened, and compromises would have been reached. As can be seen, listening to foreman complaints and criticism seems to be not a bad idea in the end. Of course, it would have taken more time than assigning an order, but in this case the assignment would have been completed without further reminders more likely.
Of course, the discussion may have turned into the other way: it is impossible to bend scrap strips for some reason of technological matter; - therefore no cost reduction can be expected in this activity. Still it would have brought the useful knowledge. Bob Eckert, a successful manager at Mattel can serve as a useful comparison of managerial styles. Like Dick Spencer, Eckert never changed his management principles. However, when reviewing the annual incentive plan at Mattel, he found that targets were set unrealistically high: employee bonuses were clearly unattainable. The dilemma he faced was: should he stick to his management principle of never altering targets once they had been set, or instead adjust them, make them attainable and perhaps win employee commitment Eckert has chosen the second way and won in the end: employers realised that he was on their side and re-doubled their commitment to the company's turnaround. (Eckert, 2001)
Another aspect of Spencer's leadership style is his habit to roam the factory and listen to his employees. True, this gives a senior manager additional information about their organisation and shortens the distance between executives and workers. However, this characteristic does not go in line with manager's authoritative style of issuing orders. Workers may be clam because they do not interact with the top manager directly, but middle managers are very