個案總覽

When a tsunami hit Southeast Asia on December 26, 2004, the leadership team at a Swedish tour company must manage a devastating crisis affecting thousands of its customers and employees in Thailand. Documents the challenges the company faced in the first ten hours of the crisis. Amid the uncertainty of those first hours, the leadership team must make a range of decisions to orchestrate the company's response and manage the rest of its business. Describes the chaotic environment of a crisis, especially when the normal course of business is interrupted, and puts students in the shoes of a range of managers, each having to make decisions on his/her own, while coordinating with one another to enable the company to respond effectively.

An abstract is not available for this product.

An abstract is not available for this product.

Rite-Solutions, a software company headquartered in Rhode Island, was founded by two successful executives that had seen innovation stifled in traditional companies. They observed that people with ideas generally had to present them to management for approval, a process that was intimidating and tended to favor ideas that were well presented, rather than those that were good. In addition, software people were often uncomfortable speaking in public, preferring communication by computer. The Rite-Solutions culture was based on trust and collaboration, with a desire to tap into the creativity of the entire organization. The founders tried a number of methods to involve employees in innovation, which became more difficult as the company grew and added remote offices. They eventually invented a stock market, called "Mutual Fun", where any employee could develop an idea and get other employees to provide their opinions, comments, or time to move the idea forward in their spare time. Communities of common interest formed around these ideas (stocks). When a stock made sufficient progress, and attracted sufficient support, top management could put corporate resources behind it, resulting in a new product, process improvement, or new technology. There were three types of stock: cost-savings ideas, product ideas that utilized technology the company already understood, and new technologies that the company should evaluate. The market began in 2004 and was very successful. By mid-2006, Rite-Solutions had begun to license it to other companies. Discusses the culture of Rite-Solutions, the operation of Mutual Fun, and asks about the application of this tool in other corporate environments.

Despite engaging with other people on a regular basis, individuals vary significantly in their willingness to trust. For some, trusting intentions are central to their conceptions of their social selves; while for others, the social world takes second place to their individually-motivated concerns. Despite these differences, extrinsic motivations (i.e., the tangible benefits that result from trusting) provide strong motivations to establish mutual trust and/or mutually-trusting reciprocal actions. The authors present the Motivated Attributions Model, with explains the conditions under which acts of trust are most likely. One immediate implication of their Model is for individuals in potentially-trusting relationships to seriously consider the effects of their motivations, their dependencies, their need to see themselves positively, and their inability to fully understand their counterparts' perceptions.

The ability to place workers into jobs with which they identify is central to what makes organizations work. The authors discuss the limits of monetary incentives and the power of an identity-enhanced economic model to encourage a new view of a variety of management policies, organizational behaviors, and employment policies. They argue that identity is the next step in the evolution of the economic modeling of organizations, and show that the simplest representation of an organization is equated to its physical capital: a more sophisticated view adds the specific human capital of employees to the description of the firm. Insofar as the firm can profitably motivate its employees through such attachments, these investments should be considered a part of the capital of the organization, its motivational capital.

In the sports arena as in the workplace, leaders can decrease counterproductive behavior by fostering organizational commitment and perceptions of fairness. Traditionally, job performance has been measured in terms of specific task-related statements and behaviors: did the employee accomplish the list of tasks set out in the job description? Current approaches pay attention to a much broader range of behaviors that, when present, can add value to an organization by helping it achieve its goals and contributing to the social and psychological work environment. By studying performance data from the NBA and NHL, the author comes to the conclusion that managers can increase organizational citizenship behavior and decrease counterproductive behavior by focusing on engendering employee satisfaction, organizational commitment, perceptions of fairness, and trust in leadership, all of which create an environment that encourages altruistic acts.

Edward Bennett has done wonders at Astar Enterprises. In the 15 years he's been CEO, the company has more than tripled in size through product line extension and disciplined acquisitions and is now distributing its cleaning, personal hygiene, and skin care products nationwide. But Astar's chief executive is 64 years old, and while all his attention is taken up with a new strategy to expand into international markets, board members are becoming increasingly worried about the issue of succession. Bennett wants none of it, arguing that if he were to die suddenly, his second in command, Tom Terrell, could take over. Besides, after much prodding, Bennett, former vice-chairman Vincent Dalton, and longtime HR head Gail Thompson have already come up with a list of four possibilities. "When will these guys back off?" Bennett complains to Thompson. "I've told them who the candidates are. Why do we need to talk about it?" Thompson knows, however, that the board chairman, Tom Calloway, considers Terrell a nonstarter without the requisite skills to take over in anything more than an interim capacity. As for the other three candidates, only one is even known to the board, and none has any significant international experience. Calloway is well aware of how critical Bennett is to Astar. But he's equally certain that the board risks failing in its fiduciary responsibilities if it doesn't create a viable succession plan. What should Calloway and the board do if Bennett refuses to cooperate? Commenting on this fictional case study in R0609A and R0609Z are John W. Rowe, the executive chairman of Aetna; Edward Reilly, the president and CEO of the American Management Association; Jay A. Conger, a professor at Claremont McKenna College and London Business School; Douglas A. Ready, a visiting professor at London Business School; and Michael Jordan, the CEO of EDS.

Surveys reveal that 80% of Americans don't trust corporate executives and--worse--that roughly half of all managers don't trust their own leaders. Mergers, downsizing, and globalization have accelerated the pace of change in organizations, creating a crisis of trust that didn't exist a generation ago. Leaders who understand how trust is built can actively influence its development, resulting in a more supportive and productive work environment and, not incidentally, a competitive advantage in the war for talent. Building on research in social psychology, and on his 15 years of experience consulting on trust, the author has developed a model for predicting whether trust or distrust will be chosen in a given situation. The model helps managers analyze 10 factors at play in the decision-making process. Hundreds of top executives have used it to diagnose and address the root causes of distrust in their work relationships. Some of the factors in the model relate to the decision maker: How tolerant of risk, how well-adjusted, and how relatively powerful is he or she? Others relate to the specific situation: How closely aligned are the interests of the parties concerned? Does the person who is asking to be trusted demonstrate competence? Predictability and integrity? Frequent and honest communication? Sue, a relatively new VP of sales, used the trust model to manage her relationship with Joe, an employee nearing retirement who was not performing well in a new sales role. Fearing for his job, Joe wasn't initially inclined to trust her. Sue took concrete steps to communicate openly with Joe, explore other options for him, and show concern for his well-being. When Joe was transferred, he let his former colleagues know how pleased he was with Sue's handling of the situation. As a result, the level of trust increased in Sue's department, even through a major change.

Legal and cultural changes over the past 40 years ushered unprecedented numbers of women and people of color into companies' professional ranks. Laws now protect these traditionally underrepresented groups from blatant forms of discrimination in hiring and promotion. Meanwhile, political correctness has reset the standards for civility and respect in people's day-to-day interactions. Despite this obvious progress, the authors' research shows that political correctness is a double-edged sword. Although it has helped many employees feel unlimited by their race, gender, or religion, the PC rule book can hinder people's ability to develop effective relationships across race, gender, and religious lines. Companies need to equip workers with skills--not rules--for building these relationships. The authors offer the following five principles for healthy resolution of the tensions that commonly arise over differences: Pause to short-circuit the emotion and reflect; connect with others, affirming the importance of relationships; question yourself to identify blind spots and discover what makes you defensive; get genuine support that helps you gain a broader perspective; and shift your mind-set from one that says, "You need to change" to one that asks, "What can I change?" When people treat their cultural differences--and related conflicts and tensions--as opportunities to gain a more accurate view of themselves, one another, and the situation, trust builds and relationships become stronger. Leaders should put aside the PC rule book and instead model and encourage risk taking in the service of building the organization's relational capacity. The benefits will reverberate throughout every dimension of the company's work.

Edward Bennett has done wonders at Astar Enterprises. In the 15 years he's been CEO, the company has more than tripled in size through product line extension and disciplined acquisitions and is now distributing its cleaning, personal hygiene, and skin care products nationwide. But Astar's chief executive is 64 years old, and while all his attention is taken up with a new strategy to expand into international markets, board members are becoming increasingly worried about the issue of succession. Bennett wants none of it, arguing that if he were to die suddenly, his second in command, Tom Terrell, could take over. Besides, after much prodding, Bennett, former vice-chairman Vincent Dalton, and longtime HR head Gail Thompson have already come up with a list of four possibilities. "When will these guys back off?" Bennett complains to Thompson. "I've told them who the candidates are. Why do we need to talk about it?" Thompson knows, however, that the board chairman, Tom Calloway, considers Terrell a nonstarter without the requisite skills to take over in anything more than an interim capacity. As for the other three candidates, only one is even known to the board, and none has any significant international experience. Calloway is well aware of how critical Bennett is to Astar. But he's equally certain that the board risks failing in its fiduciary responsibilities if it doesn't create a viable succession plan. What should Calloway and the board do if Bennett refuses to cooperate? Commenting on this fictional case study in R0609A and R0609Z are John W. Rowe, the executive chairman of Aetna; Edward Reilly, the president and CEO of the American Management Association; Jay A. Conger, a professor at Claremont McKenna College and London Business School; Douglas A. Ready, a visiting professor at London Business School; and Michael Jordan, the CEO of EDS.

Edward Bennett has done wonders at Astar Enterprises. In the 15 years he's been CEO, the company has more than tripled in size through product line extension and disciplined acquisitions and is now distributing its cleaning, personal hygiene, and skin care products nationwide. But Astar's chief executive is 64 years old, and while all his attention is taken up with a new strategy to expand into international markets, board members are becoming increasingly worried about the issue of succession. Bennett wants none of it, arguing that if he were to die suddenly, his second in command, Tom Terrell, could take over. Besides, after much prodding, Bennett, former vice-chairman Vincent Dalton, and longtime HR head Gail Thompson have already come up with a list of four possibilities. "When will these guys back off?" Bennett complains to Thompson. "I've told them who the candidates are. Why do we need to talk about it?" Thompson knows, however, that the board chairman, Tom Calloway, considers Terrell a nonstarter without the requisite skills to take over in anything more than an interim capacity. As for the other three candidates, only one is even known to the board, and none has any significant international experience. Calloway is well aware of how critical Bennett is to Astar. But he's equally certain that the board risks failing in its fiduciary responsibilities if it doesn't create a viable succession plan. What should Calloway and the board do if Bennett refuses to cooperate? Commenting on this fictional case study in R0609A and R0609Z are John W. Rowe, the executive chairman of Aetna; Edward Reilly, the president and CEO of the American Management Association; Jay A. Conger, a professor at Claremont McKenna College and London Business School; Douglas A. Ready, a visiting professor at London Business School; and Michael Jordan, the CEO of EDS.

Predictions made by large groups often turn out to be right, but sometimes they're dead wrong. Here's when not to trust the majority.

According to surveys conducted in 1965, 1985, and 2005, attitudes about executive women have improved, but not as much as men think.

Supplements the (A) case.

Work groups are the building blocks of organizations. They are found in all areas of an organization, from research and development to customer service, and at all levels, from the executive suite to the factory floor. Some are incredibly successful, while others are dismal failures. Team work is hard work, and all too often groups do not live up to their potential. Provides a framework for analyzing work groups so that group leaders and members can identify actions that will enhance their effectiveness. Helps provide insight into the factors most profoundly shaping the development, dynamics, and effectiveness of task-performing groups and, in particular, group culture, its antecedents, and consequences. To illustrate how the framework is used, it looks at and analyzes an actual work group: the new product team of the Merit Corporation. Examines the impact of leadership style on group culture and outcomes and describes how one leader's individual style can affect the way teams operate and perform.

What does it take to build a successful career over time? Describes Amy Schulman's career progression and role as a star senior litigator and top executive at one of the world's largest law firms. It focuses on different stages in her career and what she did to be successful at each stage. The demands on her time--client development, casework, firm leadership responsibilities, mentoring her people, managing her team, spending time with her family--were changing over time. After being chosen to sit on the firm's Global Board as well as its Executive and Policy Committees, Amy Schulman feels that there are things that are being left undone. She must decide how to allocate her time.

In 2005, Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) leadership decided to take a hard look at issues of race and institutional barriers impeding the progress of African American and Hispanic students. Examines how a large, urban public school district attempts to systemically address and eliminate the district's minority student achievement gap. The (A) case gives an overview of MCPS' past efforts to address the district's minority student achievement gap leading up to July 2005. It shows how a school district with a long history of dealing with racial issues and the minority achievement gap continues to grapple with many of the same issues related to access, equity and belief systems. Picking up where the (A) case ends, the (B) case examines MCPS' new approach and specific efforts to narrow the district's achievement gap through data utilization, accountability mechanisms, and professional development after July 2005. The (B) case also details the leadership team's challenges in communicating about race. It is accompanied by a video supplement of MCPS Superintendent Jerry Weast speaking explicitly about race and the achievement gap to MCPS administrators.

Examines the ways in which a leader can create, influence, and manage a school district's organizational culture to support continuous improvement of student achievement outcomes.

An abstract is not available for this product.