10
Individual Case Study - Resonus Corporation – Power and Influence MHR 505 – 031 Professor P. Hunter Larisa Saplys Student number: 500526893 1

Individual Case Study MHR 505

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Individual Case Study MHR 505

Individual Case Study - Resonus Corporation – Power and Influence

MHR 505 – 031

Professor P. Hunter

Larisa Saplys

Student number: 500526893

1

Page 2: Individual Case Study MHR 505

Power structure and the ways in which leaders influence their employees to reach

organizational goals are of great importance in creating a dynamic and productive workplace.

Power is defined as “the capacity of a person, team, or organization to influence others” (McShane et

al., 2015, pg. 245). It has five features characterizing its scope: power only gives one the potential to

change someone else’s attitude, its influence is based on the target’s perception of whether or not the

power holder has some resource or value to them, it involves a dependence or asymmetric

relationship between two parties, it is accompanied by countervailing power, and it involves a

certain level of trust (McShane et al., 2015, pg. 245-246). If managed properly, I believe power

structure to be a benefit to corporations and organizations alike. It can provide employees with a

clear sense of direction about who to go to with a problem or question, a structure for

responsibilities and duties, and stability in decision-making. However, if power is enforced for

personal advantage or misused to provide detriment to a certain party, it can get in the way of

productive company operations. I have chosen the Resonus Corporation Case Study for my analysis

of power structures within corporations, in which an asymmetric and somewhat ambiguous

structure facilitates an inefficient work unit. Resonus Corporation is a hearing aid manufacturer in

which the executives and separate departments face power struggles that affect their ability to work

together and complete a task (McShane et al., 2015, pg. 266). In analyzing this case, I will address the

sources and contingencies of power present, the influence tactics involved and whether or not they

would be characterized as organizational politics, and provide a personal recommendation on what I

would suggest as a consultant to remedy the power dynamics. My hope is that, with this paper, I am

able to provide some background knowledge on the topic and express my own insights in a

meaningful way that resonates.

As I mentioned, there are five features of power. There are also five sources of power:

legitimate, reward, coercive, expert, and referent (McShane et al., 2015, pg. 246). These are ways in

which power holders assert their authority over others. Those with legitimate power ask for a range

of behaviours from others through a mutual agreement; those with reward power have control over

the allocation of rewards; those with coercive power have the ability to directly or indirectly apply

punishment; those with expert power are valued and respected due to their unique knowledge-base

2

Page 3: Individual Case Study MHR 505

or expertise; those with referent power influence others through their identification and mutual

respect with others (McShane et al., 2015, pg. 247-250). The above sources of power are subject to

four contingencies, which can affect the degree of power one is able to enforce. First, substitutability

refers to the availability of alternatives, strengthening power when one has a monopoly over a

resource (McShane et al., 2015, pg. 251). Centrality refers to the power holder’s interdependence

with others, whereas visibility involves actively working with others and being strategically located

within the organization (McShane et al., 2015, pg. 250-251). Finally, discretion or lack-thereof can

hinder a power holder’s influence; an internal locus of control is viewed as more of a leadership

quality, and the ways in which said person exercises their judgement and discretion will in turn affect

the strength of their followers (McShane et al., 2015, pg. 253).

Bill Hunt is the CEO and primary power holder at Resonus, and therefore has considerable

legitimate, referent, reward and coercive power. His character and past managerial actions portray

his exercise of these different sources of power. Bill dislikes confrontation, and is very concerned

with preserving a family culture at the company; he fired the two previous Engineering Directors,

due to their “lack of collegiality” (McShane et al., 2015, pg. 266). Bill also favours the research group,

and endorses any changes made by Doc Kalandry due to a seemingly unlimited trust in his expertise.

His power is further strengthened by his centrality within the organization, as he overlooks all

departments and has many direct reports. However, his power is weakened by the discretion

contingency. In blindly trusting Doc, Bill puts his company in a poor position and decreases

productivity; this creates cause to question his judgement as the CEO of the company. “Doc”

Kalandry is the Research Director, and is seen as an innovative genius (McShane et al., 2015, pg.

266). He has an informal reporting relationship with Bill Hunt, and special status in organization due

to his influence of expert power and charismatic personality. Although he has made considerable

contributions to the company, Doc has also recently been causing problems in his exercise of power

over the CEO. He is seen by peers to be sometimes overly enthusiastic in that when he gets an idea

for a new product he will assert his authority and have it endorsed, regardless of what it will cost the

company and other departments. His newest design revisions have led to a massive halt in the

production of a new hearing aid product, as “by th[e] time [that the revisions for the design

3

Page 4: Individual Case Study MHR 505

specifications came in], the production director had to give priority to other jobs and move the new

hearing aid product further down the queue” (McShane et al., 2015, pg. 266). The Engineering

Services Department took the heat for this, having to work long hours and extra shifts in attempts to

speed up the process (McShane et al., 2015, pg. 266). Doc’s power is strengthened by the

substitutability, visibility, and centrality contingencies; he is not replaceable, has a central role in

delivery of outcomes for the company, and is well-liked by his colleagues. Two other important

figures hold a certain degree of power in the organization, one of whom is Jacqui Blanc, the

Production Director. Jacqui follows a formal structure and strict guidelines in her work unlike the

flexible and laid-back organizational culture at Resonus, but is valued due to her expert power with

numbers and precision. She recently cleaned up fraudulent activity, earning Bill Hunt’s respect and

loyalty. The second power holder is one recently employed by Bill Hunt to fill the position of

Engineering Director, Frank Choy, whose job is to oversee the Engineering Services and Research

Departments (McShane et al., 2015, pg. 266). Frank, unlike his predecessors, will not stand up to Bill

about Doc Kalandry’s changes slowing down production. Frank holds some legitimate power over

his departments, as the Department Head figure, however his power is substantially hindered by the

discretion contingency. He does not feel as if he has the freedom to exercise judgement and speak up

for the good of Resonus Corp. in knowing that he could be terminated for being seemingly difficult to

work with. All of the power structures, put together, have created an environment that does not

promote efficiency but inter-departmental conflict.

There are eight distinguishable influence tactics, as every different person has preferences

as to what they choose to alter someone else’s attitudes (McShane et al., 2015, pg. 257). Of those

eight, I recognized six as being pertinent to the Resonus Case Study, and four as having the potential

to be organizational politics. Silent authority is prevalent here due to a higher power distance

present. Workers, specifically Frank Choy, are reluctant to contradict their boss for fear of losing

their jobs; Bill Hunt would therefore assume silent authority. Doc Kalandry could also be considered

to have this authority over Hunt, as he is eager to agree with all of Doc’s ideas and support his

innovation. Due to the fact that the application of this tactic is based on self-serving goals that

increase work-related stress of others, decrease job satisfaction, and pose harm to the organization’s

4

Page 5: Individual Case Study MHR 505

overall success, organizational politics would likely be determined (McShane et al., 2015, pg. 262).

Assertiveness is demonstrated by Jacqui Blanc, in her checking of work and confronting any issues

that may arise within the workforce, however this is purely to support the company and its goals of

maintaining a fair and equitable position in the industry. Doc and Hunt exercise coalition formation

to see their personal efforts through, and have posed another poisonous tactic on the business in

doing so. They pair up to create a team with unrelenting power in decision-making through Bill’s

legitimate authority and Doc’s central position in company operations. Closely linked to this are the

upward appeal and persuasion tactics Doc Kalandry uses to his advantage in his close relationship to

Bill Hunt. Doc calls on Bill for support in his ideas, and no matter their merit he reciprocated with

authoritative reinforcement. He also persuades Bill that his ideas are worthy to the point where he

himself is persuading Frank Choy of Doc’s genius. All of the above characterize organizational

politics. Impression management is used to a certain degree by Doc in his charismatic behaviour in

dealings with others, although this would most likely not be seen as organizational politics, rather an

expression of his inherent being.

In my opinion, the complexity of internal working relationships and lack of enforced time

restraints at the corporation must be addressed in order to remedy the company dynamic. Working

relationships are always encouraged, if they are to create a more positive and open environment. As

at the corporation in question, these relationships can alternatively become a means to different

ends, in that they can provide more of an alliance for egotistical desires. I believe that implementing

a formal reporting structure would be a benefit for the employees at Resonus. I would create a chart

and post it in a public area for all workers to access at their whim that would outline authority

figures’ subordinates. I would also consider creating a system in which two sets of eyes are required

to approve any idea or revision that may come about, to increase trust in management and decrease

prejudice. Frank might, for example, be more inclined to raise his issues if he had someone else to

report them to and all of Doc’s revisions would not be so blindly ratified. Such a system may also

help maintain timelines, as a more organized flow of operations makes for greater ease in execution.

To further ensure that timelines be kept, I would split up the responsibilities of those departments

where production losses are happening and inquire about hiring talent to lessen the workload. For

5

Page 6: Individual Case Study MHR 505

example, in the Research Department where Doc works, it seems as if he is the only person in his

role. For such a crucial and central role in determining the outcomes of the corporation, I would

think it would be wise to have an extra set of hands; one person could make sure to maintain

timeliness for urgent projects, while the other explores innovative ideas less imperative at the time.

In changing the reporting relationships and increasing accountability for punctuality across the

organization, the dynamics of power and influence at Resonus Corporation should lift to become less

exclusive and encourage openness amongst colleagues.

I do not believe that Bill Hunt deliberately facilitated an environment with deep-rooted

power struggles; he seems to have a passion for maintaining integrity and harmonious relations.

Resonus Corp. just goes to show how easily power and influence can be misinterpreted and taken

advantage of by others in a company to the point of changing the entire culture. Pinpointing the

sources and contingencies of power helped me to recognize where the issues were and how they

could be overcome. Restructuring the hierarchy and flow of information would likely decrease the

use of organizational politics, and would provide a more reliable network for producing desirable

outcomes. It is in the best interest of both the company and the employees to elevate their success as

a whole, to adopt a more competitively advantageous position in the market and therefore create

potential for further growth and opportunity at all levels of the organization.

6

Page 7: Individual Case Study MHR 505

References:

McShane, S.L., Steen, S.L. & Tasa, K. (2015). Canadian organizational behaviour: 9th edition. Toronto:

McGraw-Hll Ryerson.

7