This paper will focus on two personal experiences that are connected to theories in the Organizational Behavior book. The aim is to highlight the relevance of these theories in our everyday lives. Rather than following a chronological order, the criterion for this self-reflection paper is based on the significance of these experiences and their influence on my personal and professional development. Starting with the situation that had the greatest impact on my professional life, I will begin this self-reflection.
It is important to provide a detailed description of the most challenging situation encountered in work. To clarify the context, a case study format was used for presenting the first situation involving ESPM Junior, a marketing consultancy company where I worked in Brazil four years ago.
Junior is a student-led company operating as a regular consultancy in college. Each project is overseen by at least two experienced professors, who possess strong academic backgrounds and extensive market experience. The inclusion of these distinguished faculty members makes the service enticing for businesses, as junior companies charge significantly lower fees than “real” firms while benefiting from the support of valuable professionals.
These companies provide services to large businesses and have a hierarchical structure similar to other companies. Promotions in the “Junior” company depend on the employee’s time in the company and passing exams that assess their knowledge of company policies and marketing concepts. Managers, who are typically students with about a year and a half of experience in the company, negotiate with clients alongside guiding teachers. The employees who will actually execute the project do not participate in these negotiations.
During a meeting, students, guiding teachers, and company managers come together to comprehend the client’s requirements and discuss project details. The current scenario involves me being employed by the company for approximately six months and recently being appointed as a project manager. As a result, I am accountable for overseeing both a project and a team consisting of four members. However, due to the timing of the project conclusion and the recruitment process for new students, my team primarily comprises individuals who have recently joined.
Out of the four members, three were newcomers while only one was an “old” employee with a similar tenure as mine. What’s intriguing is that one of the new recruits was actually older and had more experience in academia than me. In other words, I supervised someone who theoretically possessed more knowledge about marketing. The project involved conducting research for a college that wanted to comprehend how students (including those from other universities) perceived this particular institution. Our task was to gather data, organize it into tables, and then conduct an analysis.
The teachers raised the questionnaire questions. After meeting with directors and teachers, it was decided to conduct interviews with three different colleges. Each sample would consist of approximately 300 participants. The interviews were scheduled to take place when the students from these colleges are leaving. However, since the interviewers were also students, it became clear that we would have to skip some classes because our departure time coincided with other colleges’. As a result, we determined that we would need to be present at these distant colleges even before the students left their classrooms.
At first, the team was filled with excitement and enthusiasm for the project. But soon, their initial excitement transformed into frustration as they embarked on the search. The challenge became even more daunting due to students’ eagerness to depart, grab lunch, or attend post-lunch classes. Moreover, they faced the tight constraint of only having one week to interview a grand total of 900 individuals. It wasn’t until later that they discovered an issue with the project’s description, which appeared perplexing. Until that point, all their actions had been fueled by speculation given their collective status as novices in this particular field.
Realizing that the desired results were not being achieved, I decided to convene a meeting with my team. Before the meeting, I pondered the individual qualities of each team member at home and wrote them down. Additionally, I restructured some of our duties in an effort to reignite lost motivation. At the meeting, I actively communicated my ideas and asked for feedback while also acknowledging and highlighting each team member’s strengths. Afterward, I held individual meetings with each of them to express my unwavering belief in their abilities and explain why they are indispensable to the team.
I also completed an activity for each point to show why having a team member on your side is important for the success of the project. The outcome was just as I anticipated – everyone fully embraced the project, working late nights and making sure everything was on track. However, as the project manager, it was my duty to oversee everything. Once I recognized that even with our efforts, finishing the project within a week would be impossible, I had a strong argument to discuss with the directors.
I discovered that the sample set for two out of the three chosen schools did not match the actual number of students in those colleges. Hence, the project was deemed unfeasible. Fortunately, after the meeting, the board rectified the issue by reducing the incorrect samples and extending our deadline by an additional 2 weeks. I then informed my team about this positive development, and they responded with enthusiasm and increased motivation, except for one member.
Carla *, a new student in the company, has been in college longer than all the members and is one of the oldest. During the meeting, she showed unhappiness and did not respond positively to the news. In the days after deciding on the new project, she started skipping or leaving early, citing appointments such as doctor visits, dentist appointments, or therapy sessions. Unfortunately, I ignored these signs and failed to look into what might be going on.
The day after, I spoke with a director at the company who is one of Carla’s classmates. He expressed worry about my team’s lack of control and their high level of demotivation. I defended myself by saying that I was unaware of these problems and thought everything was going smoothly. I mentioned that most team members were fully committed to the project, except for one person possibly. However, despite my attempts to justify myself, the conversation remained tough and unpleasant.
I left the situation feeling deeply wounded and questioning my abilities as a leader, but also harboring a suspicion that the director’s behavior was related to his relationship with Carla. With this realization, I made the decision to have a team discussion where I could share what had occurred and gain insight from everyone’s perspective. Remarkably, every team member except Carla voiced their disagreement with the director’s statements and went so far as to suggest drafting a letter outlining the company’s project flaws and highlighting the team’s positive contributions that had transformed a seemingly doomed venture into a successful one.
Carla did not agree with the rest of the members, expressing her discontent about the situation. She also mentioned her dissatisfaction with my leadership and complained about not being present for the second project meeting. As she continued to voice her frustration, I discovered that her annoyance stemmed from the fact that only one team member was allowed to participate in meetings with managers, according to company policy. I acknowledged her concerns and reminded everyone that this was a standard procedure. I agreed that if anyone from the team should have attended, it should have been me, as I am older and closer to graduating. Carla shouted and looked at everyone, hoping for their approval. However, all the other members defended me, stating that they had always known Carla was envious of my position and would often criticize and invent arguments to justify my supposed incompetence. They also mentioned that they had refrained from sharing their thoughts with me earlier because they feared it would hinder the project’s progress.
Carla attempted to convince them that she was more experienced than me, citing her previous work in large companies and her superior academic performance. She used various other arguments to assert her desire for greater respect within the company. Despite feeling humiliated, I acknowledged that this was her opinion. Despite my surprise and anger, I calmly explained that my intention was for all team members to be present in meetings. Unfortunately, company protocol dictates that there is a designated representative for team meetings, and this role is typically assigned to the project manager.
Regardless of the company, managers are responsible for leading, coordinating, and managing a team. Age or theoretical knowledge of team members does not change the manager’s role. Despite Carla’s reluctance and frequent tardiness, the conversation motivated me to continue progressing the project with the team. In the end, our customer highly praised the project as we accomplished it with excellence and execution.
Three members of the group, without my knowledge, drafted and submitted a letter to managers and teachers. The letter emphasized the significance of my leadership and management during the project, as well as highlighted the company’s failures. In conclusion, Carla attempted to utilize her “expert power” by referencing a concept from chapter 13. She drew upon her knowledge and previous experience in large organizations to persuade other team members.
Carla’s desire to compete has caused a conflict within the group, which is in line with the information discussed in chapter 14: Conflict and Negotiation. In this chapter, it was noted that Carla prioritizes her own interests and does not support the team’s participation in meetings. This uncooperative behavior contradicts the best interests of the team as outlined in this chapter. Additionally, I acknowledge that I mishandled this conflict.
Perhaps, if I had utilized the BATNA (best alternative of a Negotiation Agreement), the situation could have been resolved in a more favorable manner. However, due to feeling offended and hurt, I chose to ignore the issue, inadvertently allowing her to remain excluded and leaving the conflict unresolved. In conclusion, although I am not entirely satisfied with my performance in conflict resolution, I believe I exhibited good leadership skills by successfully engaging and motivating over 70% of the team. I also provided frequent feedback and coaching to my subordinates. Additionally, one of the points mentioned in the letter sent by board officials regarding my performance pertains to chapter 8: Motivation. They emphasized that a significant positive aspect of my management was my ability to motivate the team by individually and collectively demonstrating their motivations for successful job completion. Finally, referencing chapter 11: Communication, I recognize that there was a miscommunication when I noticed that Carla seemed disinterested and frequently made excuses for arriving late or leaving early. Despite the signs, I chose not to address the issue, and Carla also did not make an effort to communicate her discontent and dissatisfaction with the project’s execution.
These two omissions resulted in a conflict that occurred. This situation, which took place during my second job about 9 months ago at AB INBEV, a leading global brewer and one of the world’s top 5 consumer products companies, exemplified elements of leadership and teamwork. Initially, I was highly enthusiastic about my activities, especially since I was warmly welcomed by all my colleagues and particularly my boss, Rodrigo *. Rodrigo was a person with a great heart, easygoing nature, exceptional competence, and strong work ethic. He also excelled at mediating conflicts.
However, as time went on, I observed a flaw in his leadership abilities. He struggled to inspire or engage his team members in the projects they were assigned to. While he was undeniably efficient in executing tasks, he lacked certain crucial qualities that define a true leader. Although he achieved success and consistently delivered positive outcomes, his approach was excessively centered on himself and he would often spend nights at the company working on everything alone before important events such as project deliveries, major meetings, or conferences.
Becoming overwhelmed seemed like an option for him. To worsen matters, just days before the deadline, he would often get overwhelmed and realize it would be impossible to complete everything alone. As a result, he would assign all tasks to his team members, without providing any explanation of the content, implementation, or goals. This caused the employees to interrupt their daily activities, resulting in extreme stress as they had to work under pressure without prior guidance.
However, when Rodrigo was transferred to another city, we were informed that a new manager had been selected. This new manager, Caio*, had a similar personality to Rodrigo’s but followed a different approach to management. One major difference was that Caio insisted on all employees being present at company meetings. He also made a point of checking each employee’s schedule before scheduling any meetings so he could be confident that everyone would be available. Additionally, Caio shared tasks among the team and regularly checked in with each staff member to ensure everything was going smoothly and if they had any questions or required assistance.
Every week, Caio would meet with the team to assess the progress of the project and offer individual meetings for employees who felt uncomfortable discussing problems in a group setting. This resulted in the team surpassing their goals and their management system being adopted by the company as part of a program called “best practices”. In this program, the company promotes the dissemination of the most effective methods to encourage all employees to utilize these techniques.
Moreover, employees who achieved median evaluation marks experienced a minimum increase of two grade levels and, without exception, became more valuable to the company. They received offers from other areas and venues as a result. Consequently, it can be concluded that Rodrigo was an ineffective boss. Not only did he pressure his employees and subject them to highly stressful situations without proper preparation and guidance, but his main flaw was his tendency to centralize activities. As a result, he lacked the time to develop and invest in the professional growth of his staff.
By distributing the tasks among employees, not only would overload be avoided, but also everyone would have the chance to learn and derive personal satisfaction from feeling engaged in important work for the company. However, the manner in which he managed the project resulted in the exclusion and disregard of the staff, who observed employee participation in all aspects of projects in other departments. As a result, they became disheartened and failed to reach their full potential, as they were forced to undertake unplanned and disorganized work instead of following a planned and organized approach.
Quoting the 10th chapter: Understanding work teams, I noticed that Rodrigo lacked understanding of team formation aspects. For instance, he was unaware of the distinction between groups and teams. As a result, we operated in a group format where no one was familiar with each other’s tasks or acknowledged the significance of their colleagues’ work to their own. Unlike effective teams that possess a meaningful purpose, a vision, direction, and commitment for all members, our team didn’t exemplify this. Instead, we worked towards specific goals.
However, the new boss was an exemplary leader who took on the responsibility of creating a cohesive team. With his unique management style, which included a combination of technical expertise, interpersonal skills, problem-solving abilities, and decision-making skills, he was able to transform the pace of work for the employees. As a result, they started to grasp the significance of their projects and received regular feedback on their performance from an effective coach. These changes ultimately led to achieving better results.
