George was the head of an evaluation division whose management style caused conflicts among analysts. He became easily irritated when improvements were not made following evaluations. This ineffective approach worsened problems over time and damaged relationships within the division. To improve, George should have been more empathetic, approached analysts appropriately to understand challenges, and focused on building good working relationships rather than short-term results.
George was the head of an evaluation division whose management style caused conflicts among analysts. He became easily irritated when improvements were not made following evaluations. This ineffective approach worsened problems over time and damaged relationships within the division. To improve, George should have been more empathetic, approached analysts appropriately to understand challenges, and focused on building good working relationships rather than short-term results.
George was the head of an evaluation division whose management style caused conflicts among analysts. He became easily irritated when improvements were not made following evaluations. This ineffective approach worsened problems over time and damaged relationships within the division. To improve, George should have been more empathetic, approached analysts appropriately to understand challenges, and focused on building good working relationships rather than short-term results.
Instructor: Ladylee T. Wasit Subject: Human Behavior in Organization
CASELET: GEORGE AND HIS MANAGEMENT STYLE
1. What causes the difference in the office’s atmosphere? The attitude of Greg, the head of the evaluation division, was, in my opinion, what made the difference in the office’s atmosphere. He should not act like that as one of the company’s leaders; instead he should approach the analyst and talked to them to fix the issue.
2. Characterize George and his management style.
George became easily irritated when he noticed that there had been no improvements following the performance evaluation, and this caused a conflict between the division’s analysts. His management technique, in my opinion, is ineffective because the problem has become severe.
3. How would he have improved himself and his style?
George would have been more empathetic and approachable in dealing the problem. Instead of being irritated easily, he might have used the challenges their division was encountering to better himself and his management style by engaging the analysts in the appropriate manner.
4. What are the short and long-range problems in the case?
The problem might worsen the gap between George and the analysts, and this could lead to their division’s being ineffective in the future. I believe that in order to achieve the appropriate results we are aiming for, we should be building a good relationship with our colleagues and co-workers.