個案總覽

The purpose of this exercise is to explore the challenges of information collection and analysis. Students will, experientially, gain insights into how information is used, and be exposed to a framework for identifying and evaluating information. In addition, the exercise will enable students to explore the processes and dynamics of teamwork in decision-making, the challenges of group decision-making, and the strategies for engaging team learning skills and attitudes to improve both the quality of and commitment to group decisions.

The human resources manager at the Alice Saddy Association (Alice Saddy), a non-profit agency in London, Ontario, Canada, supporting people with developmental disabilities who lived independently rather than in group homes, informed the executive director that some of the support workers believed that the current organizational structure caused confusion, slowed decision making and created potential risk for the people served by Alice Saddy. The executive director agreed that there were some problems related to the structure of the organization. However, the structure reflected the mission of Alice Saddy and changes were likely to be resisted by the management team for that reason. The executive director had to decide how to proceed.

Susan Reynolds, a successful auditor with a big-six public accounting firm, was hired as controller in the accounting department of a medium-sized, highly profitable motion picture company. Believing that she had been performing adequately, Susan found herself in a complete state of shock upon receiving her first annual employee evaluation. Although during her evaluation interview, Anita Lockwood, Susan's immediate supervisor, had acknowledged that Susan was a valuable addition to the department, a written review that accompanied the interview indicated that she was severely lacking in the interpersonal skills she needed to experience continued success in her present position as controller. The case ends with a hurt and highly dissatisfied Susan wondering whether she should make an effort to achieve the level of interpersonal skills needed to function effectively in her current managerial position, or to simply seek employment elsewhere.

The case covers Bob Nardelli's 6-year tenure at Home Depot from 2000-2006. During this time, he posted impressive numbers as well as changed Home Depot's strategic orientation. He failed however to improve the company's share price. This difficulty, allied to Nardelli's pay package (negotiated at a time of economic euphoria when he was one of the two most wanted executives in America), severely strained his relationship with the company's shareholders. The case traces their deteriorating relationship through the lens of the annual general meetings. These were transformed from "lovefests" under his predecessor into increasingly fractious occasions - culminating with a disastrous meeting in May 2006 that indirectly led to Nardelli's resignation at the beginning of 2007. The case considers Nardelli's relationship with two key stakeholders - the board and the shareholders - as well as issues of self-management. At first view, this case can be read as a story of greed and weak corporate governance - an excessively greedy CEO/Chairman who manipulates the board into giving him high compensation and reducing performance pressures. While acknowledging some of these aspects, we are proposing a different take on the situation, focusing instead on the self-fulfilling and self-reinforcing nature of the dysfunctional dynamic between the CEO and the shareholders - and on the inability of the board to offset it. We concentrate on the psychological and behavioral processes that drove the parties toward a perfectly avoidable collision. Learning objectives: The core issue is Bob Nardelli's growing difficulties in dealing constructively with the company's shareholders - and their misunderstanding of his role (as a change agent) and motivation (assuming it is only about money). It is also a case about a board that does not understand how to help a CEO that it rates very highly. The case allows discussion of the role of the board in helping the CEO to overcome such problems.

Despite their lofty job titles and impressive pay, many high-achieving executives feel professionally dissatisfied and unfulfilled. Looking back, they wish they'd accomplished more or even chosen a different career altogether. Often they feel trapped in their jobs. In this article, Kaplan, a Harvard Business School professor, examines why people arrive at this impasse-and offers them guidance on how to break through it and reach their full potential. That goal isn't about getting to the top, he says. Rather, it's about taking a very personal look at how you define success in your heart of hearts, and then finding your own path there. To discover your way, you need to step back and reassess your career, recognizing that managing it is your responsibility. Many people feel like victims when, in fact, most career wounds are self-inflicted. Taking control begins with understanding yourself: seeking frank feedback about your strengths and weaknesses from colleagues above and below you, and figuring out what you truly enjoy doing. That understanding-not other people's definition of success-should guide your career choices and goals. Next, it's critical to identify the three or four tasks central to your business and make sure you excel at them; otherwise, success is likely to elude you. Once you've chosen the right enterprise, you must show character and leadership. Great executives put the interests of their company and colleagues ahead of their own. They're willing to speak up, even to voice unpopular views. Many managers hit a plateau because they play it too safe. But those that identify their dreams, develop the skills to realize them, and demonstrate courage will find fulfillment-even if they hit bumps along the way.

Managing the tension between performance and people is at the heart of the CEO's job. But CEOs under fierce pressure from capital markets often focus solely on the shareholder, which can lead to employee disenchantment. Others put so much stock in their firms' heritage that they don't notice as their organizations slide into complacency. Some leaders, though, manage to avoid those traps and create high-commitment, high- performance (HCHP) companies. The authors' in-depth research of HCHP CEOs reveals several shared traits: These CEOs earn the trust of their organizations through their openness to the unvarnished truth. They are deeply engaged with their people, and their exchanges are direct and personal. They mobilize employees around a focused agenda, concentrating on only one or two initiatives. And they work to build collective leadership capabilities. These leaders also forge an emotionally resonant shared purpose across their companies. That consists of a three-part promise: The company will help employees build a better world and deliver performance they can be proud of, and will provide an environment in which they can grow. HCHP CEOs approach finding a firm's moral and strategic center in a competitive market as a calling, not an engineering problem. They drive their firms to be strongly market focused while at the same time reinforcing their firms' core values. They are committed to short-term performance while also investing in long-term leadership and organizational capabilities. By refusing to compromise on any of these terms, they build great companies.

Most executives believe that relentless execution-efficient, timely, consistent production and delivery of goods or services-is the surefire path to customer satisfaction and positive financial results. But this is a myth in the knowledge economy, argues Edmondson, a Harvard Business School professor. She points to General Motors, which for years has remained wedded to a well-developed competency in centralized controls and efficient execution but has steadily lost ground, posting a record $38.7 billion loss in 2007. Such an execution-as-efficiency model results in employees who are exceedingly reluctant to offer ideas or voice questions and concerns. Placing value only on getting things right the first time, organizations are unable to take the risks necessary to improve and evolve. By contrast, firms that put a premium on what Edmondson calls execution-as-learning focus not so much on how a process should be carried out as on how it should evolve. Since 1980 General Electric, for instance, has continued to reinvent itself in every field from wind energy to medical diagnostics; and it enjoyed a $22.5 billion profit in 2007. Organizations that foster execution-as-learning provide employees with psychological safety. No one is penalized for asking for help or making a mistake. These companies also employ four distinct approaches to day-to-day work: They use the best available knowledge (which is understood to be a moving target) to inform the design of specific process guidelines. They encourage employee collaboration by making information available when and where it's needed. They routinely capture data on processes to discover how work really happens. Finally, they study these data in an effort to find ways to improve execution. Taken together, these practices form the basis of a learning infrastructure that makes continual learning part of business as usual.

The rapid rate of change in the world of management continues to escalate. New government regulations, new products, growth, increased competition, technological developments, and an evolving workforce compel organizations to undertake at least moderate change on a regular basis. Yet few major changes are greeted with open arms by employers and employees; they often result in protracted transitions, deadened morale, emotional upheaval, and the costly dedication of managerial time. Kotter and Schlesinger help calm the chaos by identifying four basic reasons why people resist change and offering various methods for overcoming resistance. Managers, the authors say, should recognize the most common reasons for resistance: a desire not to lose something of value, a misunderstanding of the change and its complications, a belief that the change does not make sense for the organization, and a low tolerance for change in general. Once they have diagnosed which form of resistance they are facing, managers can choose from an array of techniques for overcoming it: education and communication, participation and involvement, facilitation and support, negotiation and agreement, manipulation and co-optation, and both explicit and implicit coercion. According to the authors, successful organizational change efforts are characterized by the skillful application of a number of these approaches, with a sensitivity to their strengths and limitations and a realistic appraisal of the situation at hand. In addition, the authors found that successful strategic choices for change are both internally consistent and fit at least some key situational variables.

Henry Ford's stubborn refusal to admit the changeability of consumer demand allowed Chrysler and GM to horn in on his market. Half a century later the whole U.S. auto industry made the same mistake: Enter the Japanese. But denial comes in many forms, as Sears, Digital Equipment, and Bear Stearns can attest.

Living alongside the roughnecks and roustabouts on two offshore oil platforms, the authors learned that when the men abandoned their macho behavior, they maximized the safety of their coworkers and did their jobs more effectively.

High interpersonal congruence-meaning alignment between team members' self-assessments and their appraisals of one another-improves the performance of diverse teams. And 360-degree feedback can help.

Because board meetings involve two groups-directors and managers-and because directors play a difficult dual role as both cops and advisers, boardroom communication can suffer. Executive sessions and active in-meeting leadership will help.

Idea brokers are good at sparking cross-divisional innovation through their broad social networks. But implementation-marshaling resources and getting various stakeholders on board-requires dense webs of strong interpersonal relationships.

Employees who spend some or all of their bonuses on others-thereby creating what the authors call a "prosocial" workplace-are happier as a result. Managers can enhance that effect by providing opportunities to share the wealth.

The manager of occupational health and safety services at the London Health Science Centre (LHSC) is a member of a team developing a plan to prepare LHSC to manage various issues in the event of an influenza pandemic, particularly in its hospitals. Such an event would place severe strain on LHSC's employees and on the organization's ability to provide health care to the public. The manager has to resolve several ethical concerns while ensuring compliance with the Ontario Health and Safety Act. She also has to recommend how best to communicate the plan to the LHSC staff.

Marc Buoniconti is the co-founder of the Miami Project to Cure Paralysis, a nonprofit medical research organization. The project was founded in 1985 by Marc and his father Nick, a former Hall of Fame football player, when Marc suffered a spinal cord injury. In 2007, Marc was still confined to a wheelchair, but the Miami project had developed into the world's largest spinal cord injury research and treatment center. It had 250 employees, operated from a $37 million state of the art facility located on the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine campus, and had raised in excess of $275 million since its inception. However, there was still no cure for spinal cord injury, and many of the project's supporters were becoming anxious for a substantial clinical breakthrough. Fundraising was always a concern, particularly as government spending on research was declining. Marc and his father were keenly aware of the challenge of maintaining the enthusiasm and financial backing of the Miami Project's supporters. Yet they needed to avoid over-promising regarding the likelihood of potential breakthroughs, which required painstaking research and stringent clinical trials. The leadership also questioned whether the mission should remain focused on spinal cord injury, or whether it should broaden to include brain trauma and other neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer's and Parkinson's. Case provides an opportunity to discuss the challenges of non-profit management, medical research, and to debate appropriate strategy for the Miami Project in 2007.

The director and chair of the governance committee at MacDonald, Dettwiler & Associates Ltd. (MDA) considered how to advise the company's chief executive officer (CEO). As a company in the space industry, MDA relied on its exports to the United States. Joint ventures were helpful in securing contracts from the U.S. government but they were not always advantageous in other ways because these ventures required partnerships with competitors. At this time, MDA had no long term strategy to address this issue. The supplements MacDonald, Dettwiler & Associates Ltd. (B) and (C) look at subsequent events that were unforeseen at this particular time.

Pat Pratt Cook joins Minneapolis Public Schools (MPS) as the Chief Human Resource Officer after the Superintendent Dr. Bill Green convinces her that HR will take on a more strategic role in the District. Pratt Cook arrives to find an HR department dramatically affected by recent budget cuts and limited by a bureaucratic culture focused on the basic employment transactions. Furthermore, the MPS is in the middle of contentious teachers' contract negotiations,and Pratt Cook is expected to take a leading role. The MPS negotiating team secures a school-based hiring program, called "interview and select," and District administrators work with union leaders to implement the program. A new, collaborative union president is elected andPat Cook looks forward to better working relationships. However, with each success, Pratt Cook finds that new challenges emerge.

Treadway Tire's plant in Lima, Ohio must confront strong job dissatisfaction and high turnover among its line foremen. The foremen are caught in the middle of an adversarial relationship between the union and management, and they must cope with the needs and interests of both. They also perceive limited opportunity for career advancement. Solving the problem requires rethinking the philosophy that guides workforce management and changing the Treadway culture that has grown up around that philosophy. Facing mounting pressure to reduce costs and increase productivity, director of human resources Ashley Wall must work quickly to analyze the root causes of the problem and provide an action plan to reduce turnover of the line foreman segment.

Nokia's chief technology officer is helping the company find growth by going in a radical new direction. Because Nokia has been down the reinvention road before, Iannucci believes it has the mind-set, structure, and strategy in place to realize its "deep future."