The application of Organizational Behavior (OB) theories allows for the understanding and explanation of the behavior of ASC employees who are involved in making important decisions that guide ASC’s business practices and strategic initiatives. The consultants evaluated ASC’s method of identifying, articulating, and resolving business challenges, as well as the communication practices displayed by leadership and decision makers. According to Hellings (2007), the findings identified three key areas – conflict, closure, and commitment – that need to be addressed in order for ASC to enhance its decision-making processes and employee integration (p. 8).
The consultants found that ASC’s initiatives typically involve Don Barrett, the division’s president, and 12 other senior management team members who are functional area vice presidents appointed by Barrett. Barrett is credited with leading All-Star Express to become ASC’s most profitable business before his promotion to division president. He achieves this by making decisions on strategies and investments through consensus building and seeking input from his management team on objectives. Barrett is the clear leader of ASC, and he fosters trust among his team members by utilizing the Rational Model of Decision Making. This model emphasizes consistent, value-maximizing decision-making within specified constraints. Barrett conducts weekly two-hour management team meetings where concerns are reviewed and discussed, updates on key projects are shared, and decisions on specific issues are outlined. Although all members of ASC’s management team participate in these meetings, decisions are not made collectively in this forum.
Instead, the group engages in a decision-making process that combines team interaction, subgroup discussions, and one-on-one meetings with Barrett (Hellings, 2007, p. 62). The staff perceives Barrett as “non-confrontational” because he discourages disagreement among team members during meetings, leading to many “offline” discussions when there are differing strategies (Hellings, 2007, p. 60). This case study focuses on the All Star Sports Catalog Division. At ASC meetings, there are various stages of the decision process. The group first discusses areas that require attention within individual business units or the division as a whole, exchanging concerns and inconsistent opinions on possible solutions. Then, subgroups of two-to-four self-appointed senior team members are formed to discuss more challenging issues and analyze strategies (Hellings, 2007, pp. 2-63).
According to Robbins (2005), the three-component model of creativity is valuable in solving complex problems, as it relies on expertise, creative-thinking skills, and intrinsic task motivation (p. 87). Kate Walton, ASC’s Director of Strategy, frequently chairs offline subgroups that develop action plans based on suggestions from middle managers who collect input from their respective organizational units affected by the problem (Hellings, 2007, p. 3). The subgroup conducts a thorough analysis of potential solutions to provide Barrett with rationalized approaches for deciding on a course of action. However, while this approach gains support and commitment from middle management, some managers argue that it fosters territorialism and empire-building when individuals advocate for their areas over others (Hellings, 2007, p. 63).
The subgroups thoroughly examine options in the decision making process, known as the third stage, using a cost-to-benefit approach that considers both qualitative and quantitative factors. They then create a recommendation that outlines potential risks. Barrett holds meetings with the subgroups to collectively review the analysis, address concerns, request further information if needed, and decide on the optimal solution (Hellings, 2007, p. 63).
Except for Barrett, the senior management team is not involved in the decision-making process of the off-line subgroups. However, Barrett does listen to concerns expressed by proactive senior management. The final phase of ASC’s decision-making process occurs when the subgroups seek approval of their decisions at weekly senior management meetings. If there is disagreement, the subgroups gather feedback and meet off-line again, away from the larger group. They then present a revised plan of action to the senior management team, focusing on implementing the solution.
These stages of decision-making highlight four key attributes of ASC’s organizational culture. These traits include a strong emphasis on analytical processes, consensus among staff and teams regarding division and organizational goals, intolerance for employees who prioritize self-promotion over team contribution, and opportunities for broad participation during meetings. (Hellings, 2007, pp.4-65)Stuart Levine discusses in his book on success that ASC’s culture and communication patterns create a rhythm among employees, allowing them to stay aligned, increase productivity, and generate energy and momentum (Levine, 2004, pp.57-58). However, consultants point out challenges in ASC’s processes that may affect team cohesiveness and hinder the senior management team and subgroups from considering alternative problem-solving approaches.
Although Barrett encourages active participation in meetings, Hellings shows that his comments sometimes target specific individuals, creating an unequal environment where staff feel that their participation is not valued equally (Hellings, 2007, p. 65). This is consistent with the consultants’ discovery of three main concerns in ASC’s decision-making processes: lack of sufficient debate during group meetings, inconsistent resolution of issues, and lack of commitment from group members on important decisions (Hellings, 2007, p. 6). Levine emphasizes the importance of satisfied employees in ensuring satisfied customers (Levine, 2004, p. 180). Furthermore, Robbins defines emotions as intense feelings directed towards someone or something and highlights the impact of employee emotions on individual job satisfaction. The consultants’ findings demonstrate the potential for decreased productivity and increased turnover among ASC employees if these significant concerns are not addressed (Robbins, 2005, p. 41).
Simultaneously considering employee basic personality types – described by the Big-Five Model as extroversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability, and openness to experience – may help ASC leadership to maximize employee efficiency within the dynamics of the ASC organizational structure (Robbins, 2005, pp. 35-36 and p. 46). Case Study: All Star Sports Catalog Division Upon conclusion of the consultants? review of ASC, Barrett delivered the findings to the senior management team for discussion. The team identified three possible approaches for ASC’s decision- making processes that would address the consultants? findings: 1) increase employee buy-in for decisions by eliminating subgroup and off-line meetings, which would define senior management team as the entity for all decision-making; 2) create “a small „top management team? ” with the responsibility for all key strategic division decisions, which would increase dialogue and debate; or, 3) adjust the existing decisionmaking process to minimize weaknesses without changing the overall structure or creating an impression of an elite team that limits input from the larger group.
Redesigning ASC’s decision-making process would initially cause uncertainty for senior management, including Barrett, as they adapted to the changes. To ensure effective decision-making within the team, it would be necessary for senior management team members to engage in self-monitoring behavior. This entails adjusting their actions in response to changing situations while remaining sensitive to external influences (Robbins, 2005, p. 37).
Recognizing and limiting the impact of different biases such as overconfidence, anchoring, confirmation, availability, and representative can support senior management team members during this transition. It is important to value all employees and their contributions, including consultants, which can help minimize conflict, build commitment, and reach a successful resolution.
Barrett, despite his own aversion to conflict, must allow senior management team members to disagree with each other just as he allows them to disagree with him personally. According to John Maxwell’s book on biblical leadership, leaders possess the capacity to observe and comprehend not only the past and present actions of themselves and their team, but also the future direction they are heading towards – almost as if they can detect impending change (Maxwell, 2007, p. 90). Case Study: All Star Sports Catalog Division 6
References
- Hellings (2007). Prentice Hall Custom Business Resources. Boston: Pearson Custom Publishing. Levine, Stuart R. (2004).
- The Six Fundamentals of Success: The Rules for Getting It Right for Yourself and Your Organization. New York: Doubleday. Maxwell, J. C. (2007).
- The Maxwell Leadership Bible: Lessons in Leadership from the Word of God, NKJV, Second Edition. Nashville, TN: Maxwell Motivation, Inc. Robbins, Stephen P. (2005).
- Essentials of Organizational Behavior (4 ed. ). Boston: Pearson Custom Publishing. th
