EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP

ASSIGNMENT # 5
CASE NO.5
The Chattanooga Ice Cream Division




Submitted to: Maam Saima Naseer


Q.1) Present a summary of the case highlighting the main features of the company
and the situation faced by Charles Moore and his team?
Main Features of the Company
This case is about one of the division of Chattanooga Food Corporation (CFC) Ice
Cream Division with revenues of $150m.
Chattanooga Food Corporation (CFC) is a family controlled enterprise found in
the same name in 1936 by Charlie Moores grandfather.
In 1996 CFC comprised three divisions: Grocery Products (revenues= $245 m),
Specialty Foods (revenues= $215 m) and Ice Cream (revenues= $150 m).
It was one of the largest regional manufacturers of ice cream in US.
Its having primary supermarkets and related food chains customers, and
trading as a producer of mid priced basic flavors of ice creams products.
Current Situation
Stay & Shop, Chattanooga Ice Creams third-largest customer had decided to
replace Chattanooga with Sealtest line in its entire southeast region. But they do
have 90 days until Stay & Shop will be gone as a customer
Even though CFC performed well in recent years but from last four years its ice
cream division experienced flat sales, declining operating profitability and its
cost is increasing.
Facing aggressive competition from premium & super premium ice creams
brands especially in mix-in ice cream flavors.
Product line in dull providing just five flavors and no mix-ins
US per capita consumption of ice cream slowed.
Its 3 out of 7 members of the top management leave in five years that also upset
venerable pattern of relationship.
Not have information system to a more extensive product line.
Stores are out of stock and back ordered way too frequently.
Division is working on new project of nonfat formulation

Previous Attempts to Improve Performance

Charles Moore, who was the grandson of the founder, took over as new President and
General Manager.
It hired a new vice president of marketing, Barry Walkins, to replace Ben Wedemeyer,
who was pressured to take early retirement.
Brought in Stephanie Krane to update the divisions information system and control
function.
In 1994 they introduced new line of frozen yogurt.
In 1995 to reduce the cost they closed its original manufacturing plans and
consolidated in its two newer plants.
But they were not succeeded in returning the profitability & performance to its previous
level. Thats why division was unable to dividend cash up to its parent in 1995.
Past leader vs. New One Decision Making Style

Ideas Proposed from Several Department Heads

1. Les Holly-VP Sales
Replace the volume which was lost from Stay & Shop leaving
This idea does not work since this will not solve any problems which in the future may
arise since it does not solve the problem why Stay & Shop leaved in the first place.
2. Stephanie Krane-VP & Controller
Cut expenses by the same amount as the operating profit losing at Stay & Shop
This might work in the short run, but this solution does not solve the problem in the long-
run. Customers will again in the long run choice for the competitors who have a bigger
assortment and we will face the same problem over and over again.
3. Barry Walkins-VP Marketing& Kent Donaldson-VP R&D
Invest in expanding the product line to compete head on with competitors
The best solution to solving the problem is to invest heavily in expanding the assortment,
offer mixed-in ice-cream and increase the marketing program. As described in the case, the
market changed over the last few decades with a big increase in demand for more
luxurious ice-cream, mixed-in ice- cream etc. Chattanooga did not do anything with this
trend.
4. Billy Fale-VP Production
Eliminate chocolate chip flavor to lower the production cost
Cutting product line could have negative consequences for the companys image and the
perception of the clients.

Moore's Predecessor
Knew more about the the
business than anyone else
Well-developed network for
gathering & communicating
infromation.
Rarely felt the need to
consult his subordinates
Reserved important
decisions to himself.
Charlie Moore
Believes in the value of
group base decisions
Collaborative and bring
people together formally to
share information
Consult on decisions
Form consensus
Personalities of department Heads
Barry Walkins: He is very creative and had a good intuitive sense of what consumers
wanted but disorganized and often lacks follow through;
Billy Fale: He is a very knowledgeable and disciplined and competing,vice president of
production but a bit rigid in his thinking and anchored in the past.
Kent Donaldson: He would be classified as collaborating Vice president of research &
development and had conflicts with Walkins.
Les Holly: The divisions sales manager who has a tendency to withhold information and
sometimes does not follow through.
Stephanie Krane: She had a strong record of delivering on her promises.
Frank OBrien: He is uncooperative, avoiding and unassertive.

Q.2) According to the Fiedlers contingency model, which leadership style should
Charles Moore adopt to match the situational requirements?
Leadership Style of Charles Moore
Leadership style of Charles Moore is more relationship oriented. He believes in the value of
group base decisions, collaborative environment and brings people together formally to
share information, consult on decisions and form consensus
Situational Favorableness
1. Leader-member relations: Leader-member relations are not good as followers
are not showing respect towards the leader in morning meeting. Leader did not
build trust and department heads are reluctant to give opinions on any matter.
(pg. 2) There is high turnover of employees due to which employees morale is
down. (pg. 2)
2. Task Structure: Task structure is unstructured and ambiguous work with no
clear objectives and guidelines. Leader did not provide directions to complete
the task. (Morning meeting)
3. Position power: Charles Moore has strong position power to influence his
subordinates. He can use this power to assign projects and reward them on their
accomplishments.
According to Fiedlers contingency model appropriate style for situation is relationship,
the employee centered approach. As Charles Moores leadership style is relationship
oriented, Fiedler would suggest him to change the situation to match the leadership style.
He should build trust and confidence among employees and provide support and clear
guidelines to achieve their goals. He should assign responsibilities to each team member.
Moore needs to convey that team cohesiveness is a must and this will go a long way to help
ensure no further loss of business.



Fiedlers Contingency Model


Q.3) According to Hershey and Blanchards situation leadership which leadership
style Charles Moore is currently using? Is there a proper match between his current
Leadership style and followers readiness and is it successful? Which other
leadership style could Charles Moore adopts which matches followers readiness and
makes him successful as well?
According to Hershey and Blanchards situation leadership, Charles Moore is currently
using the participating style. In this style, leaders focus more on the relationships and
less on the direction. The leader works with the team and shares decision making
responsibilities. Moore believed in the value of group based decisions and liked to bring
together formally to share information, consult on decisions and forge consensus. This
belief has been reinforced by his early experience at National Geographic magazine where
writers, photographers and editors worked in small teams to plan and execute stories for
the publication. Working that way produced a great product, he thought. But through this
leadership style, He found out that every individual was blaming to other individual and
began to conflict arise.
His current leadership style does not match with the followers readiness and this is
not successful. In this situation, followers have the ability to do the job but may be
unwilling to start or complete the task. Moores predecessor as a general manager had
worked directly for the companys founder as far back as 1947 and been the undisputed
leader of the division. He knew more about the business than anyone else and had a well-
developed network for gathering and communicating information. Confident that he knew
what was best in most situations, he rarely felt the need to consult his subordinates and
reserved important decisions to himself. With the business doing well, there seemed no
reason to question his leadership. In Moores weekly staff meetings, he found that the
department heads were reluctant to opine on any matters outside of their own functional
domains. In private, however, they questioned the competence and trustworthy of one
another, were defensive when things went wrong and almost always laid the blame for
errors or problems at the feet of another department.
Recommended Styles
Moores should adopt the telling leadership style. In this style, leader emphasizes task
oriented behavior and be very directive and autocratic, because in this current situation, he
hired two now employees so members are new and inexperienced, and needs a lot of help,
direction, and encouragement to get the job done. All the head of departments have low
relationship among themselves and task is high that the increasing the profits. Moore
should just tell the decisions that what to do and how to accomplish the task.
Barry Walkins readiness level was 3 because he was able but unwilling to take the
responsibility of current issue as Charlie Moore said (Page :4) Walkin was highly
creative and had a good intuitive sense of what consumers wanted but he was not
well organized and often lacked follow through.
Managers Readiness level Recommended Style
Barry Walkins R3: Able & unwilling Participating
Billy Fale R3: Able & unwilling Telling
Stephanie krane R1: Unable & Unwilling Telling
Les Holly R4: Able & Willing Delegating
Kent Donaldson R2: Unable & Willing Selling
Frank OBrien R3: Able & Unwilling Participating

Then there was Billy Fale, his readiness level was R3 though he worked more than
30 years for CFC and Moore said Billy Fale, A knowledgeable and disciplined
executive but bit rigid and anchored in his thinking.
Les Holly the only right guy in this situation he got his readiness level 4 because he
was able and willing to do his task and he didnt blame any other department for
this failure.
StepheneKranes readiness level is R1 she was unable and unwilling to do any job
as she was not even aware of her new MIS systems deadlines and was blaming new
hiring of his IT officer.
Kent Donaldsons readiness level is R2 because he was Unable somehow but
willing to do his job but he was not admitting his fault of stemming products and put
blame on Walkin that he pressurize him to release the product before it was
adequately tasted and recommended style for him is selling.
Frank OBrien is Able and Unwilling to work with group so his readiness level is R3.
And recommended style for him is participating.
Q.4) According to the Path-goal of leadership explain and justify which Leadership
style should Charles Moore adopt which matches subordinate and environment
characteristics?
The Path-Goal model is a theory based on specifying a leader's style or behavior that best
fits the employee and work environment in order to achieve goals (House, Mitchell, 1974).
The goal is to increase an employee's motivation, empowerment, and satisfaction so that
they become productive members of the organization.
It generally follows these basic steps as shown in the graphic below:
I. Determine the employee and environmental characteristics
II. Select a leadership style
III. Focus on motivational factors that will help the employee succeed
Currently Charles Moore was using participative style of leadership which does not match
the situation. According participative leadership style, follower should have internal locus
of control, and ability should be high. But according to the case study ,there exist external
locus of control, everyone is blaming one another for the failure, ability as a group is also
low ,task structure was also complex and non repetitive and at authoritarianism they were
high, they want to be told that what to do and how to do the job. Charles Moore has
position power and according to the situation, he should make the important decision
himself and should use directive style of leadership which is more appropriate for the
situation.
PARTICIPATIVE
(Current style)
DIRECTIVE
(Suggested)
S
u
b
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
e

Authoritarianism low High
LOC Internal External
Ability High Low
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t

Task Structure
Complex /
non repetitive
Complex /
non repetitive
Formal Authority Both High
Work Group Strong Week