solution

Course

-learned

concepts

and

theories

covered:

Hersey

and

Blanchard

Situational

Leadership

Theory

Using

the required course reading by Lussier, R., Achua, C. (2015). Leadership: Theory, Application, &

Skill Development (6th Edition), Texidium version, students are to apply

these course-

learned concepts

and theories

(

Hersey

and

Blanchard

Situational

Leadership

Theory

)

.

Course

-learned concepts and theories covered:

Hersey and Blanchard Situational Leadership Theory

Application

of

these

course

-learned

concepts

and

theories

(Hersey

and

Blanchard

Situational

Leadership

Theory

) as noted in the required course

readings

“Visionary,” “ideology maddened,” “unfairly criticized,” “notorious for a brusque, I

-know-

best

style.” If there’s some disagreement as to how to characterize CEO and President Katharina

Weber

, there

is little

disagreement

about

the

sheer

force

of her

personality,

or the

impact

she

continues

to have on

the

farm equipment

industry

in Germany.

Weber

was,

and

is, a sharp

-elbowed,

impolitic

street

fighter

with

an

absolute

belief

in the

rightness

of her

cause:

to transform

the

Duetz-

Fendt

farm

equipment

business.

Katharina

Weber

started

working

at Duetz-

Fendt

GmbH,

a leader

in the

distribution

and

merchandising of replacement parts and accessorie

s for farm equipment on the shop floor,

becoming

a machine

operator and

eventually

a plant

supervisor.

Eight

years

later,

she

was

made

a vice

president

of German

plants

for

Duetz-

Fendt

GmbH

, and

put

in charge

of the

company’s

Tractor

Parts

Division.

Before

she

arrived

at this

division,

plant

modernization,

reengineering,

reorganization,

and

total

quality management were doing nothing to help the company turn a profit. The division that

was in the company’s original plant, had a culture that was almost as old, and its employees

who had just returned to work after an eight-

month strike were unhappy. As competitors were

making

great

headway

in the

industry,

the

division

was

facing

tough

times.

When

Katharina

was promoted to head the Tractor Parts Division, she had spent the past few

years working for, she jumped into the opportunity with a lot of enthusiasm and ideas of how

she

would

like

the department

to operate under her leadership.

However, for many durin

g Katharina’s tenure as a leader and manager at Duetz-

Fendt, she had

a reputation as a meddlesome, overbearing boss who got in the way of people doing their jobs.

She got involved in every detail of the departments, even making decisions on shift changes

herself.

ASSIGNMENT

2

3

Although she has many employees that respect and treat her as a very important, brave and

forward

-thinking business executive who led the modernization of the company, others have

found

her dismissive and

confrontational.

Given how Weber was career

-driven and had her eyes on playing a bigger role in the

organization,

she

was

determined

to not

only

prove

her

ability

to lead

this

department,

but

to

get her former colleagues to view her as executive material, in order to support her efforts to

move

up

in the organization.

In no time, Weber was sending out memos detailing new approaches she wanted her former

colleagues to employ in order to make thing

s more efficient or efforts more aligned with

corporate

policy as

a way

to prove her

technical

prowess.

She used team meetings to inform her direct reports of her interactions with various groups of

executives and VPs to highlight her growing familiarity with those at the executive level in order

to prove her comfort level with senior executives.

Nobody felt committed to and a part of

Weber’s

vision. Team

spirit

was

not-

existent.

Katharina

wanted to be both a boss and a friend to her employees.

Her leader

ship style

stressed teamwork and participation, and she spent a lot of time running ideas by workers on

the factory floor.

However, the low-

skilled workers were more concerned about getting clear

direction

and

consistent

standards

so

they knew

what

was

exp

ected

of them.

Also some workers started to be more and more absent or late without calling, showed up

under the influence of alcohol or drugs, and started fights on the factory floor.

Many

employees that wanted to a good job were frustrated by Katharina’s approach.

“There is no

order.

She lets

people get

away

with

anything,”

said

one employee.

Katharina

became so focused on building her rising star status that when one of her team

members expressed concern about the growing number of delays in getting vital data from her

to complete their work, she dismissed their concerns because it was not a critical iss

ue that

those in senior management would care about.

After a few more similar instances, the team

members

gave

up

because

Katharina

was

not

listening

to them,

and

felt

little

support.

Katharina

also checked closely on the performance of the plant supervis

ors.

She set demanding

objectives for each department, and held weekly meetings to review department performance.

She said that she wanted employees to come up with new ways to solve departmental

problems that impacted production; however,

Katharina

insist

ed that she must approve any

deviations

from established

plans

and

policies.

She challenged data findings her team members presented at department meetings –

results

the senior VPs had already signed off on –

as a way to publicly demonstrate that she was not

letting

anything

get

overlooked

on

her watch.

ASSIGNMENT

2

4

The engineers are professionals, paid well, and did not need direction or support and were

doing

a good

job

according

to their

prior

supervisor

Marcus

Kasner.

As

Katharina

observed

the

engineers in her usual manner, she realized that all of the engineers d

id their work differently.

So she closely observed their work and looked for good ideas that all her employees could

follow. It was not long before she was telling the engineers how to do a better job of designing

the

custom

specifications.

Unfortunately

for

Katharina

, she did not understand that in her quest to demonstrate her

authority in leading this division, she was also showing her team how little she trusted their

ability

to understand

what

matters,

not

to mention

their

ability

to do things

right.

It became very clear to everyone in

Katharina’s division that she viewed leadership as

something one achieves because of their title or position. That she expected people to throw

their

support

behind

her

simply because she was

the boss.

“She has an absolute certainty that she’s correct,” said Maren Heinzerling, the vice

-president of

the harvesting equipment division who has clashed with Ms. Weber over modernization plans.

“I guess it’s

nice

to go

through life

with that kind

of certainty,

but I don’t

know if it’s

appropriate

in business.”

Inside the company, Ms. Weber developed a reputation as a difficult colleague who resisted

oversight,

according

to current

and

former

managers

who

spoke

on

the

condition

of anonymity

because

of Duetz-

Fendt’s

distaste for

public

discussion

of internal

business.

By the end of her first year as vice

-president of the Division, she has a team that is suffering

from decreased productivity levels, a recent history of missed deadlines and mistakes, and

crumbling

lines

of communication

between

the

various

team

members.

In her zeal to prove her ability to lead and step up into the executive circle, Katharina

ended up

making a number of missteps which, though seemingly minor, spoke more about the nature of

her

leadership

than

those actions

she

often

tried

to put

in the

limelight.

The matter has reached the senior management level.

Although they consider Ms. Weber a

brilliant innovator with a sharp mind for data and details, senior management have noticed she

stumbled repeatedly on influencing her followers to achieve the company’s goals, making

errors

that,

some

senior

manages

fear,

threaten

her

ability

to pursue

her

department’s

agenda