THOMAS GREEN: POWER, OFFICE

THOMAS GREEN: POWER, OFFICE

DISCUSSION

Thomas Greens situation. 1. The differences in work styles, personalities, and expectations of Green and Davis. Analysis of Greens o! performance to date. #ossi!le underlyin$ a$endas of Davis and %cDonald. #otential plan of action to correct the pro!lem.
2. ". &. '.

(oncludin$ thou$hts ) Tips for effective !oss* su!ordinate relationships.

1 2 "

+oun$, am!itious, a$$ressive, arro$ant individual

,uccessful track record as an account executive

&

'

Dealin$ with a variety of personal -e.$., movin$, physically distant $irlfriend. and professional chan$es in a short period of time /eceived dou!le promotion and felt he was on the fast track to a promisin$ career Durin$ first five months on the o!, $iven two poor performance reviews Disa$rees with sales pro ections made !y his !oss and now !elieves his !oss is tryin$ to fire him

DIFFERENT WORK STYLES, PERSONALITIES, AND EXPECTATIONS OF DAVIS AND GREEN?

1

Green is am!itious, -a$$ressive pursuit of a dou!le promotion to senior market specialist.. ,eems overconfident and !rash. %ost of the people workin$ around him have si$nificantly more experience, and many have %1As. 2snt insecure a!out !ein$ the youn$est in this position and without $raduate trainin$. 3ork style* independent in nature, not overly concerned with detailed plannin$, was successful in his previous sales positions which allowed him a $reat deal of autonomy. 4xpects rapid advancement and not to have to adapt his work style to his new role.

"

&

'

Davis is very detail*oriented, a team player, who went alon$ with %cDonalds hirin$ of Green even thou$h he was not involved in the selection.
1

"

&

5ikes to !e informed a!out the activities of su!ordinates and prefers to have thin$s in writin$. 4xpects documented pro$ress, commitments to !e kept, and follow*throu$h on his su$$estions. Greens management style -freewheelin$, !usy, seemin$ly unor$ani6ed., personality -!rash and a !it arro$ant., and lack of commitment to deadlines are the opposite of his !osss. Greens and Daviss personalities and styles are at odds. There is also a disconnect !etween their respective expectations.

GOALS IN CONFLICT
1

3ilmot and 7ocker have stated in the Seventh Edition of Interpersonal Conflict that 8conflict is more than a disagreement; it is when people believe that another interferes with their interests and goals. 3hen considerin$ conflict, focus is on interests and $oals. There are four $eneral types of interests and $oals which are topic o co!t"!t, "#$tio!$#, i%"!tit& 'o ($c")o *+, $!% p oc",,9 these to$ether are easily remem!ered !y usin$ the acronym T/2#-3ilmot, 2::;..

T+#4, <= G<A5,

1

Co!t"!t o Topic ) 3hat does each person want> Davis is concerned with follow throu$h and short*term results. Green wants the freedom to explore relationships with his clients and lon$* term $rowth opportunities such as software development. R"#$tio!$# ) 7ow does each person want to !e treated> Davis wants loyalty, support in pu!lic, and to !e kept in the loop on Greens pro$ress. This is incompati!le with Greens desire for independence and not to !e micromana$ed.

T+#4, <= G<A5, (<?TD.

1

I%"!tit& o F$c"-S$.i!/ * This $oal has to do with parties strivin$ to protect their identity or character. 3ith Greens open and vocal challen$e to Daviss pro ections, Davis may see this as a potential threat to his reputation. This can !e a ma or source of conflict. P oc",, ) 7ow can work $et done> Davis prefers fre@uent updates in a written format and tan$i!le work products such as #ower #oint presentations. Green does not see the merit in this kind of process.

ANALYSIS OF GREEN0S ACTIONS AND 1O2 PERFORMANCE TILL DATE

1

"

&

Green spends his time in a predicta!ly hi$h*ener$y fashion, meetin$ account execs and market specialists, visitin$ clients, participatin$ in development of a marketin$ plan, and movin$ to 1oston* 2?A##/<#/2AT4 =</ 72, (A//4?T #<,2T2<?. Green seems to i$nore %cDonalds reservations a!out his lack of experience and su$$estion to seek out $uidance from more seasoned mana$ers in the $roup. Green has taken no responsi!ility to esta!lish any relationships in his immediate work $roup durin$ his first months. %ost important, he has failed to cultivate his relationships with Davis and %cDonald. These relationships would !e crucial in providin$ Green with !est practices for his new role, and in helpin$ him navi$ate throu$h the political environment.

Greens openly ne$ative attitude in the 1ud$et #lan meetin$ perhaps si$nals to others that he is not a team player and is not as positive as the rest of the $roup. After the initial 1ud$et #lan meetin$, Green makes no further attempt to prove to Davis or %cDonald his !elief that the sales forecasts are overstated. Green does not provide his !oss with specific information a!out the forecast inaccuracies. ,o far, we have no evidence that Greens suspicions are valid.

Greens strate$y for dealin$ with the pro!lem is avoidance and dissociation. The alliances he !uilds with

"

8mana$ers outside the $roupB are accepta!le, $iven this o!, yet he has not esta!lished any in his own department where he really needs them. Green missed a !i$ opportunity !y not reachin$ out to %cDonald to develop a deeper connection. %cDonald promoted him !elievin$ him to !e capa!le. Green could have translated this initial relationship into somethin$ stron$er. Daviss second email a$ain points out Greens independence, lack of enthusiasm, and a!sence of tan$i!le work product. Green had done nothin$ yet to improve these areas, althou$h they are o!viously important to Davis.

Despite knowin$ that Davis prefers to have information in writin$, Greens ne$lectin$ to do so results in Daviss assessment that he has not produced. Daviss assessment, in fact, seemed to !e accurate. Green shows lack of definitive output, and had documented no new marketin$ strate$ies in four months. 4ver independent, Green feels that Davis is out to $et him and does not try to reach any common $round. 7e doesnt try to understand his !osss needsC pressures, and to help him with these issues. Green neither perceives nor understands Daviss needs, nor does he develop the relationships re@uired to survive at Dynamic Displays.
1 2

4xpert power and referent power could have !een used to Greens advanta$e.

Referent Power ) Greens main failin$ was to not exploit this power !ase. As we can infer from his impressive sales record and positive impression made on %cDonald, Green has the a!ility to persuade others and is charismatic. Green could have made vital linka$es !etween himself and %cDonald, key clients, and others in the or$ani6ation. Legitimate Power ) As Greens superior, Davis has utili6ed this !ase of power to evaluate Greens performance. Coercive Power ) 2f Daviss ne$ative performance evaluation is a direct result of Greens disa$reement with the 1ud$et #lan forecasts, then Davis is utili6in$ this power !ase to try to keep Green in line. Reward Power ) This did not come into play in Greens situation. 7owever, Davis could have formally offered Green an independent special pro ect assi$nment to explore the software development opportunity as a reward for developin$ innovative marketin$ strate$ies for his re$ion and workin$ throu$h the forecast issues.

"

&

THE POSSI2LE UNDERLYING AGENDAS FOR DAVIS AND MCDONALD?

1

As with any real*life situation, one can never !e sure of what another persons a$enda truly is. 3e can analy6e the !enefit in analy6in$ various scenarios in a political situation. The a!ility to keep your options open and 8cover yourselfB is sometimes vital to survive. Davis ) Daviss motivation for writin$ the emails could !e constructive or destructive. Davis could possi!ly !e tryin$ to develop Green, knowin$ he is %cDonalds protD$D.

"

Alternatively, Green could !e ri$ht in thinkin$ that Davis is tryin$ to make a case to fire him !ecause he spoke out a$ainst the pro ections. The case does not tell us whether Davis does really perform 8creative accountin$.B 3e have only Greens o!servation on this. This could mean that if Davis did u$$le the fi$ures, he could !e afraid of exposure and would do anythin$ he could to discredit Green -e.$., writin$ the emails to %cDonald.. 2f, on the other hand, Davis has not overestimated the fi$ures consciously, Green should tread very carefully and try to help Davis throu$h his error.

McDonald ) 3e can speculate that she aspires to a o! with more responsi!ility at Dynamic Displays, so her su!ordinates performances are very important to her. 4xactly why did she promote Green. 2s she impressed with Greens style and sales track record> Did she suspect Davis was up to somethin$, and did she put Green into the position to help expose 8creative accountin$B> 1 %cDonald has left Green on his own to perform. %cDonald spoke candidly a!out reservations she had promotin$ Green. %cDonald may have in fact contri!uted to the pro!lem !y failin$ to provide ade@uate supportEmentorin$ for Green. 2 %cDonald was responsi!le for creatin$ a hi$hly char$ed political climate. ,he certainly did not help the relationship !etween Green and Davis $et off on the ri$ht foot. 1y !ypassin$ Davis and $ivin$ Green a senior o! that should have !een DavisFs to !estow, she created a difficult situation for Green to enter. 2t is possi!le %cDonald has reali6ed she was out of line in usurpin$ Daviss authority and will try to rectify the situation !y supportin$ his ud$ment of Greens performance. " 7as Green !een totally a!andoned>

1oth elements of compromise and colla!oration can !e hi$hli$hted for Greens situation.
Competition ) (haracteri6ed !y a$$ressive and uncooperative !ehavior. This could entail Green secretly $atherin$ documentation to prove Davis is either incompetent at his o! or deli!erately tried to inflate num!ers. Greens $oal would !e to destroy Daviss career. This is dan$erous for Green !ecause it is extremely risky and he has few allies in the $roup at this point.

"

Compromise ) This results in some wins and some losses. 7ere Green could adapt his work style more to fit Daviss ideals. 7e could retain some of his independent style in areas Davis is less concerned a!out. This may !e a wise move, !ecause as lon$ as Davis is his superior, Green will need to find a way to work with him. Avoidance ) Green could continue his strate$y of dissociation. This strate$y will only serve to further alienate him from Davis. Green must en$a$e to resolve this conflict.

&

Accommodation ) This is a harmoni6in$ approach in which Green mi$ht 8avoid rockin$ the !oat and do what Davis tells him.B 2f Green does not think he can find data to support his perspective on the forecasts, this mi$ht !e a style to consider. Collaboration ) This takes into account !oth parties $oalsEperspectives and works toward an inte$rative solution. Green could work with Davis to sort throu$h the forecasts. #rovidin$ Davis with information is the key for $ettin$ alon$ with him. After all, he could !e unaware of the pro!lem. 3orkin$ to$ether, they would arrive at a solution and this would allow Davis to save face.