1
ABSTRACT: The Vidsoft case deals with an interpersonal conflict created by a business-wise decision by Babatunde to promote one of his brilliant female staff given her hard work and devotion to work. But whose leadership is highly contested by Hsu who felt uncomfortable with his demotion and the decision placing him as direct report to Li. His resentment to Li’s promotion is motivated by the fact that she did not have a technical background like he did and he could not see himself reporting to a nontechnical manager who would not understand the hardships of his tasks. This antipathy is aggravated by Hsu’s lack of respect for Li and his sudden ambition to learn from Babatunde. The conflict and its resolution are particularly complicated because of Hsu’s individual oriented behavior and probably his demotion after the change in structure.
ANALYSIS The VidSoft Triangle case involves f our main protagonists working at Vidsoft Technologies, an Internet based company in Sunnyvale, California, USA. -
The first character is Alaji Babatunde, a relatively fresh MBA graduate originated from Nigeria, who rapidly became a senior technical support manager (second line manager) at VidSoft based on his performances.
-
The second is Jennah Li, a female worker of Chinese descent, holder of a university degree in environmental management. She’s a very good team player and also reputed for her excellent client relationship management and her capacity of adaptation (she diligently overcame her English communication trouble) and was hired by Babatunde initially as a third line manager (direct report to him) with the expectation “ to learn a lot from her commitment to and her handling of customers”.
-
The third is Alex Hsu, a former technical support engineer of Chinese origin too, engineer by background. He was also hired by Babatunde with an expectation to “ bring varied experiences into the team especially from a foreign culture”. Hsu is reputed an individual performer (with non-team player attitudes). He has reported directly to Babatunde as a third line manager, same as Li until three weeks ago.
A part from these three protagonists the fourth determinant person involved in the decision-making is James White, the technical director and Babatunde’s coach. He has been at VidSoft ever since its commencement.
What is the problem identified in this case?
“Decision
making is arguably the most important job of the senior executive and one 1 of the easiest to get wrong.” Babatunde had learnt it to his cost as in what could verify to be his defining moment because of his important decision to reorganize his 1 David
A. Garvin & Micheal A. Roberto, Harvard Business review(September 2001): ‘What you don’t know about making decisions’ p.1 2
department and promote one of his support engineers to be a manager; Babatunde is facing a crucible in the form of an unexpected interpersonal conflict in one of his multicultural teams. This conflict is certainly mooted by Hsu’s selfishness. If this conflict has the merit of bringing issues into spotlight, allowing leaders to discern its origins and consequences on both individuals and group, it needs Babatunde’s quick but well-thought decision in order to avoid negative impact on the working climate in his department in a one hand and in the other hand not to put in jeopardy the integrity of a bright management decision he just made. ‘ Would creating a triangle (“Hsu, Li, Babatunde”) of relationships and working together solve this problem ?” Not so sure! Understanding the conflict’s origins and consequences and looking for appropriate solutions will help Babatunde not only t o overcome the problem, but also to prevent such predicaments in the future.
How can this situation be best resolved?
I believe the situation is very though and would demand a good strategy in order to preserve the integrity of the decision made and to avoid such predicaments in the future. So identifying good strategies to reach possible solutions would help in choosing the best answer to respond to the crucible situation. My approach of the situation is based on J. Brett, et al. (2006:4) advice in “Managing Multicultural Teams” which recommends four options: adaptation, structural intervention, Managerial intervention and exit. In this framework, Babatunde’s first option will be to get both Hsu and Li adapt to the current situation. It is very important to provide Li some time to settle down in her new role and address these issues with every teammate. babatunde should ask them to give the situation more time like three to six months for them to adapt to their respective new situation. By acting this way, Babatunde and Li should for example jointly work out a three to six months improvement plan covering the areas where Li presents some weaknesses. It might even come that both Li and Hsu get adapted positively to their new positions by the end of this period. He should advise both parties to continue to show their usual strengths while working on their weaknesses to adapt to their new conditions. The second possible option to consider is altering structural variables that brought the conflict by working out alternate to structure like creating a new role and assign Hsu (who proved to be an individual performer) for him to lead that step up and take directions from Babatunde but still reporting to Li. Or simply apply job rotation and move Hsu from one sub group and switch with a member of that team with whom Babatunde would have communicate effectively prior to this decision. This complies with Dr. Spencer Johnson (1998) who one wrote: “ movement in the new direction helps you find new cheese”. Babatunde should manage to be careful for that minor structural adjustment not to create new problem within the other team as “ if team members aren’t carefully distributes, sub groups can strengthen preexisting differences” J. Brett, et al. (2006:4).
3
The third option in case the problem persists is to take note of the fact that there’s a violation of the hierarchy resulting in Babatunde looses face and have the first line manager James White whose authority over them is still recognized by both Hsu and Li involved and solve the problem without any team involvement . His decision should then be final. If Hsu is willing to work with the company, then he will bend down to White decision. If after all these solutions there’s no way to solve the problem because of Hsu’s selfishness, which mean individual interest is overlapping that of the group, it will be time for Babatunde to have a straight talk on Hsu’s weaknesses on teaming and to consider Hsu’s exit as final decision.
Could Babatunde have done differently to avoid this situation?
I think this situation could have been avoided if Babatunde had been more proactive to the effects of change to his team. Especially to Shu who is suffering a demotion as he is moving to a “dissatisfactory” position having been at the same level with Li his henceforth head. Babatunde could also have communicated directly with each and everyone of his team about the change. He could have explained to each and everyone why they had been chosen for their position. It’s certainly for their task expertise, their skills and performances, their ability to play in a team …. and not because of their race, gender, culture and religion or age. He could also have avoided this situation if he had planned ahead the promotion of Li. At first place, if Li had benefited a sort of in-office-training, she could have gained valuable experience to build up her self confidence to lead a team as well as the respect of her co-workers. Babatunde could have given Li an early heads up by giving her some “acting responsibilities” during his absence from work instead of pushing her suddenly to unfamiliar field. He could have explained to his team the positive outcomes that the change in structure would bring to the entire team’s efficiency and profitability compare to the challenges they had in the existing reporting structure. By acting proactively this w ay, he could have caught Hsu’s frustration or that of any other member ahead of its demonstration within the team.
What can the company do to avoid this type of situation in the future?
Managing is to prevent! In order to avoid this in the future, management needs to change this ways: -
Mixing their transactional leadership behavior with some transformation‐ nal leadership behavior to get selfish people like Hsu going beyond self interests for the good of the whole group.
4
-
Being proactive and planning ahead of the situation instead of reacting when the conflict has already risen.
-
Keeping ahead of the situation by regularly conducted company wide survey oriented human resources management
-
Using all the components of an effective communication to avoid misunderstanding that turned to conflict.
-
Organizing more coaching within the group to get followers familiar to leadership skills as “when leader and led values are in sync, followers don’t have to be supervised -- they will know what to do when the time come”. Colonel Mark A. Homrig, (2001)
What are the principal distinctions between transactional and transformational leadership?
Transactional leadership can be defined as “ give something to get something”. Its fundamental nature is translated into the win‐win approach of management. Transactional leadership is based on an exchange/transaction of something of value the leader possesses or controls that the follower wants in return for his/her services. Transformational leadership can be defined as “the ability to get people to want to change and to lead change”. At the heart of transformational leadership is the commitment of the leader to make a change or produce transformation in an organization or system. Its fundamental nature is to get people going beyond self interests for the good of the whole group. Transformational leaders focus on stimulating, motivating, and empowering their followers to achieve company directives by “appealing to higher ideals and moral values” (history of leadership Research: 5). By these caricatured definitions, it appears that the distinctions between transactional and transformational leadership lies mainly in their process of motivating followers. Transactional leadership is based on the concept of exchange between leader and group members. A transactional leader provides resources and rewards in exchange for motivation, productivity, effective goal, or task accomplishments. That’s exactly the management style that prevails at VidSoft. In contrast, “Transformational leadership” is based on more than the compliance of followers; it involves shifts in beliefs, the needs, and the values of followers. Transformational leaders use their charisma and proactive communication to inspire their followers to superiority. They are required to gain the confidence of their followers so that the followers will make suitable sacrifices for their group. Transformational leaders seek opportunities for
5
change in order to grow, innovate, and improve their environment. That is also part of Babatunde’s thinking while implementing the change.
How does transformational leadership create a higher level of moral aspiration for followers and leaders alike?
By producing higher level of consciousness within the individual and the group, leaders are able to produce transformation within the organization. In the book ‘The Leadership Challenge’, the authors suggest that when transformational leadership exists, people "raise each other to higher levels of motivation and morality" (153). Then higher level of moral aspiration for followers is created when within a group there’s a dynamic which builds relationships with others and fosters community building, the transformational leader who helps others to develop their skills. The chemistry improves productivity within the group/organization and followers believe that they have the ability to make a difference in their organization which enhances morale. Transforming leadership becomes moral when it rises "the level of human conduct and ethical aspiration of both the leader and the led, and thus has a transforming effect on both" (153).
Bibliography: J. Brett, K. Behfar, M.C Kern.(2006) ‘Managing Multicultural Teams’ Harvard Business Review (P.4) David A. Garvin & Micheal A. Roberto (September 2001): ‘What you don’t know about making decisions’ Harvard Business Review (p.1) Colonel Mark A. Homrig (21 Dec 2001) ‘Transformational Leadership’. http://leadership.au.af.mil/documents/homrig.htm
Burns, James MacGregor. Leadership. N.Y.: Harper and Row, 1978. (P.4) Johnson, S. (1998) ‘Who moved My Cheese? USA: Putnam Adult Kouzes, James M. and Barry Z. Posner. The Leadership Challenge. 3rd Ed. San Fransico: Jossey‐Bass, 2002.
6
