THOMAS GREEN: POWER, OFFICE

POLITICS, AND A CAREER IN CRISIS

Learning Objectives

The case has four primary learning objectives:

1. Explore the role that personal work styles and politics

can play in a corporate environment.

2. Explore the concepts of power and influence.

3. Evaluate strategies for constructive conflict resolution.

4. Consider a framework for developing a productive

relationship with one’s boss.

DISCUSSION

Thomas Green’s situation.

1. The differences in work styles, personalities, and expectations of Green and Davis.

2. Analysis of Green’s job performance to date.

3. Possible underlying agendas of Davis and McDonald.

4. Potential plan of action to correct the problem.

5. Concluding thoughts – Tips for effective boss-subordinate relationships.

Young, ambitious, aggressive, arrogant individual

Successful track record as an account executive

Dealing with a variety of personal (e.g., moving, physically distant girlfriend) and professional changes in a short period of time

Received double promotion and felt he was on the fast track to a promising career

During first five months on the job, given two poor performance reviews

Disagrees with sales projections made by his boss and now believes his boss is trying to fire him

DIFFERENT WORK STYLES, PERSONALITIES,

AND EXPECTATIONS OF DAVIS AND GREEN?

Green is ambitious, (aggressive pursuit of a double

promotion to senior market specialist).

Seems overconfident and brash. Most of the people working

around him have significantly more experience, and many

have MBAs.

Isn’t insecure about being the youngest in this position and

without graduate training.

Work style- independent in nature, not overly concerned

with detailed planning, was successful in his previous sales

positions which allowed him a great deal of autonomy.

Expects rapid advancement and not to have to adapt his

work style to his new role.

Davis is very detail-oriented, a team player, who went

along with McDonald’s hiring of Green even though he

was not involved in the selection.

Likes to be informed about the activities of subordinates

and prefers to have things in writing.

Expects documented progress, commitments to be kept,

and follow-through on his suggestions.

Green’s management style (freewheeling, busy,

seemingly unorganized), personality (brash and a bit

arrogant), and lack of commitment to deadlines are the

opposite of his boss’s.

Green’s and Davis’s personalities and styles are at odds.

There is also a disconnect between their respective

expectations.

GOALS IN CONFLICT

Wilmot and Hocker have stated in the Seventh Edition of Interpersonal Conflict that “conflict is more than a disagreement; it is when people believe that another interferes with their interests and goals”.

When considering conflict, focus is on interests and goals. There are four general types of interests and goals which are topic or content, relational, identity (or facework), and process; these together are easily remembered by using the acronym TRIP(Wilmot, 2007).

TYPES OF GOALS

Content or Topic – What does each person want? Davis is concerned with follow through and short-term results. Green wants the freedom to explore relationships with his clients and long-term growth opportunities such as software development.

Relational – How does each person want to be treated? Davis wants loyalty, support in public, and to be kept in the loop on Green’s progress. This is incompatible with Green’s desire for independence and not to be micromanaged.

TYPES OF GOALS CONTD.

Identity or Face-Saving - This goal has to do with parties striving to protect their identity or character. With Green’s open and vocal challenge to Davis’s projections, Davis may see this as a potential threat to his reputation. This can be a major source of conflict.

Process – How can work get done? Davis prefers frequent updates in a written format and tangible work products such as Power Point presentations. Green does not see the merit in this kind of process.

ANALYSIS OF GREEN’S ACTIONS AND JOB

PERFORMANCE TILL DATE

Green spends his time in a predictably high-energy fashion, meeting account execs and market specialists, visiting clients, participating in development of a marketing plan, and moving to Boston- INAPPROPRIATE FOR HIS CURRENT POSITION.

Green seems to ignore McDonald’s reservations about his lack of experience and suggestion to seek out guidance from more seasoned managers in the group.

Green has taken no responsibility to establish any relationships in his immediate work group during his first months.

Most important, he has failed to cultivate his relationships with Davis and McDonald. These relationships would be crucial in providing Green with best practices for his new role, and in helping him navigate through the political environment.

Green’s actual job performance is questionable. He seems to

have positive responses from client meetings, there is little

evidence of any tangible work product, which is highly prized

by his boss. We are not aware of any reports/findings from his

software development project. In addition, no new marketing

strategies have been documented (e.g., power point

presentations or memos).

Green’s openly negative attitude in the Budget Plan meeting

perhaps signals to others that he is not a team player and is not

as positive as the rest of the group.

After the initial Budget Plan meeting, Green makes no further

attempt to prove to Davis or McDonald his belief that the sales

forecasts are overstated. Green does not provide his boss with

specific information about the forecast inaccuracies. So far, we

have no evidence that Green’s suspicions are valid.

Green’s strategy for dealing with the problem is avoidance and dissociation. The alliances he builds with “managers outside the group” are acceptable, given this job, yet he has not established any in his own department where he really needs them.

Green missed a big opportunity by not reaching out to McDonald to develop a deeper connection. McDonald promoted him believing him to be capable. Green could have translated this initial relationship into something stronger.

Davis’s second email again points out Green’s independence, lack of enthusiasm, and absence of tangible work product. Green had done nothing yet to improve these areas, although they are obviously important to Davis.

Despite knowing that Davis prefers to have information in writing, Green’s neglecting to do so results in Davis’s assessment that he has not produced. Davis’s assessment, in fact, seemed to be accurate. Green shows lack of definitive output, and had documented no new marketing strategies in four months.

Ever independent, Green feels that Davis is out to get him and does not try to reach any common ground. He doesn’t try to understand his boss’s needs& pressures, and to help him with these issues. Green neither perceives nor understands Davis’s needs, nor does he develop the relationships required to survive at Dynamic Displays.

Expert power and referent power could have been used to Green’s advantage.

Expert Power– Green could have utilized this power base to some degree by

becoming an expert in market forecasts. By providing tangible data, detailed

market studies, and complex models, Green could have gained some power

as an authority in this area.

Referent Power – Green’s main failing was to not exploit this power base.

As we can infer from his impressive sales record and positive impression

made on McDonald, Green has the ability to persuade others and is

charismatic. Green could have made vital linkages between himself and

McDonald, key clients, and others in the organization.

Legitimate Power – As Green’s superior, Davis has utilized this base of

power to evaluate Green’s performance.

Coercive Power – If Davis’s negative performance evaluation is a direct

result of Green’s disagreement with the Budget Plan forecasts, then Davis is

utilizing this power base to try to keep Green in line.

Reward Power – This did not come into play in Green’s situation. However,

Davis could have formally offered Green an independent special project

assignment to explore the software development opportunity as a reward for

developing innovative marketing strategies for his region and working

through the forecast issues.

THE POSSIBLE UNDERLYING AGENDAS FOR

DAVIS AND MCDONALD?

As with any real-life situation, one can never be sure of what another

person’s agenda truly is. We can analyze the benefit in analyzing various

scenarios in a political situation. The ability to keep your options open and

“cover yourself” is sometimes vital to survive.

Davis – Davis’s motivation for writing the emails could be constructive or

destructive. Davis could possibly be trying to develop Green, knowing he is

McDonald’s protégé.

Alternatively, Green could be right in thinking that Davis is trying to make a

case to fire him because he spoke out against the projections. The case does

not tell us whether Davis does really perform “creative accounting.” We

have only Green’s observation on this. This could mean that if Davis did

juggle the figures, he could be afraid of exposure and would do anything he

could to discredit Green (e.g., writing the emails to McDonald). If, on the

other hand, Davis has not overestimated the figures consciously, Green

should tread very carefully and try to help Davis through his error.

McDonald – We can speculate that she aspires to a job with more responsibility at Dynamic Displays, so her subordinates’ performances are very important to her. Exactly why did she promote Green. Is she impressed with Green’s style and sales track record? Did she suspect Davis was up to something, and did she put Green into the position to help expose “creative accounting”?

McDonald has left Green on his own to perform. McDonald spoke candidly about reservations she had promoting Green. McDonald may have in fact contributed to the problem by failing to provide adequate support/mentoring for Green.

McDonald was responsible for creating a highly charged political climate. She certainly did not help the relationship between Green and Davis get off on the right foot. By bypassing Davis and giving Green a senior job that should have been Davis's to bestow, she created a difficult situation for Green to enter. It is possible McDonald has realized she was out of line in usurping Davis’s authority and will try to rectify the situation by supporting his judgment of Green’s performance.

Has Green been totally abandoned?

WHAT SHOULD THOMAS GREEN DO? Both elements of compromise and collaboration can be highlighted for

Green’s situation.

Competition – Characterized by aggressive and uncooperative behavior.

This could entail Green secretly gathering documentation to prove Davis

is either incompetent at his job or deliberately tried to inflate numbers.

Green’s goal would be to destroy Davis’s career. This is dangerous for

Green because it is extremely risky and he has few allies in the group at

this point.

Compromise – This results in some wins and some losses. Here Green

could adapt his work style more to fit Davis’s ideals. He could retain

some of his independent style in areas Davis is less concerned about.

This may be a wise move, because as long as Davis is his superior, Green

will need to find a way to work with him.

Avoidance – Green could continue his strategy of dissociation. This

strategy will only serve to further alienate him from Davis. Green must

engage to resolve this conflict.

Accommodation – This is a harmonizing approach in

which Green might “avoid rocking the boat and do what

Davis tells him.” If Green does not think he can find data

to support his perspective on the forecasts, this might be a

style to consider.

Collaboration – This takes into account both parties’

goals/perspectives and works toward an integrative

solution. Green could work with Davis to sort through the

forecasts. Providing Davis with information is the key for

getting along with him. After all, he could be unaware of

the problem. Working together, they would arrive at a

solution and this would allow Davis to save face.

Specific influence tactics can also be employed to help the situation. Coalitions, rational persuasion, and personal appeal would be particularly helpful in Green’s situation.

Green should recognize the value placed on written information. He should use his response email as an opportunity to express his enthusiasm for the job and explain his work on the software development project and how he believes it will help long-term projections (perhaps with a power point presentation and excel model).

Taking the time to form relationships with people inside his group must become Green’s priority.