Case Study-mary Roberts

CASE STUDY : Mary Roberts Mary Roberts had been with the company three years when she was promoted to be the manager of the tax department which was part of the controller’s division. division. Rober oberts ts star starte ted d with with the the comp compan any y when when she she grad gradua uate ted d from from coll colleg ege e as an accounti accounting ng major major. She entered entered the organizatio organization n as a management trainee, and during the one-year program she demonstrated considerable leadership ability as an informal leader her peers. ary also impressed many senior managers in the company with her sense of responsibility and her willingness to work hard. !ll of her training assignments were completed on time with considerable s"ill for an inexperienced inexperienced person. Since she was very interested in tax accounting, Roberts Roberts was assigned to the tax department to be developed further as sta# accountant. sper!is isor or of ten sta# members as a sta#  $ithi $ithin n four four months months she became became a sper! accoun accountan tantt to %ll %ll a vacanc vacancy y creat created ed by an unexpe unexpect cted ed early early retir retireme ement. nt. &er superior believed her to be the most 'uali%ed individual to %ll the position even though others in the department had more experience in tax accounting. (one, leadersh rship ip abili ability ty or the "ommi "ommitme tment nt to work work that however, however, demonstr demonstrated ated leade ary possessed.  )he tax department manager was promoted to %ll a vacancy in the %nancial planning department eight months later, and he recommended to the controller that ary Roberts be promoted to %ll the position he was leaving. &e mentioned that her wor" was excellent and that she was a very e#ective supervisor.  )he tax department had *+ employees including  supervisor supervisors, s,  clerical employees, and  typists. Several people in the department were senior personnel with  to  years of experience in tax wor". Some of these were more technically "nowledgeable in taxation than ary.  )here was some resentment in this group that so young a person was made a department head, and three of these people were particularly upset because they desired the promotion and felt they deserved it. $hat made them even more upset was the fact that the tax manager did not discuss the promotion with them.

 )&0(12 $efore an answ swer eriing th the e 'u 'ue est stio ions ns be belo low w or discus dis cussin sing g the cas case e wi with th oth other ers, s, try and wor wor" " thr throug ough h systematically. mana nage gers rs ma"e de de"i "isi sion ons s withi 34() 34 ()56 56) )2 !l !lll ma within n their "onte% te%tt of the own ow n un uni' i'ue ue "onte%t& 0de 0denti ntify fy the "on the key manag ma nager' er'sp sper! er!iso isor r de" de"isi ision( on(ma make ker r in this cas ase eDis"ssion #estions: . $hat can ary Roberts do about the resentful senior employees/

7. 3an higher management do anything to help Roberts ma"e the transitions to greater responsibility/ . $ill her lac" of technical "nowledge hinder ary’s managerial e#ectiveness/ *. Should ary’s superior have discussed the promotion with the senior employees before announcing it/ +. 3ould some of the resentment be based on the fact that ary Roberts was a young woman/ 8. Should she have turned down the promotion to gain more technical experience/ 9. 3an a person turn down such promotion without hindering her career in the company/