Programme

BSc 24442-HTM
Subject Title and Code
Managing organisation HTM 2301
Assignment Title:
Group Report- Case 2
Students Name & Student's ID:
Cheng Hoi Lam (Karen)
14086323D
Lam Lok Yan (Jessie)
14123722D
Lo On Ki (Angel)
14089003D
Wan Hoi Hang (Heidi)
14086666D
Word count:
2055

Summary:
Charles was recently promoted as manager of the Business Services Group.
Not long after his promotion, his boss Audrey planned to implement a Service Quality
Management Program in his group even with the consistent satisfying record. Without
further consulting the others, Charles decided to raise quota by 20 % and who fail to
do so would receive a formal disciplinary action. No one commented to him directly
but many mumbling around the office. Two weeks later, Suzy failed to meet the
target, Charles issued a written reprimand to her. Later on, Suzy filed a grievance
against Charles, two other subordinates planned to transfer. The atmosphere became
hostile
and
performance
slightly
dropped.
Problems
Charles set the target abruptly led to failure in achieving goal. The increase in
quota by 20% is not based on the past results nor the other external factors. The goal
was also not time-bounded, he did not mention the deadline for raising quotas, so the
subordinates were confused and could not adjust the pace to change shortly. He called
for a big change but still hoping his subordinates could reach the goal in one-step. Not
being thoughtful enough led to disharmony among the company.
The execution of the program also resulted in unsuccessful outcome. The
whole group helped 35 businesses in two years, but Charles reviewed the results in
only two weeks after the announcement of the target in which works are still in the
initial stage, so evaluation could not be done. With the situation given, he still
reprimanded Suzy, without granting any chance nor consider external factors, so the
subordinates thought Charles was not considerate enough. As specialists are required
to be imaginative and self-driven, but pressure given by disciplinary action
discouraged creativity (Jing, 2013), and it limits the time for thinking innovative
ideas, which may adversely affect the quality of business. Meanwhile, he did not
provide any guidance or training for them to make attaining goals possible given that
the scope of change was big, which further aroused dissatisfaction towards him.
The tall organizational structure led to miscommunication between Audrey,
Charles and his subordinates. According to the case, Charles has a small team with
many hierarchies, from department manager, assistant manager, senior specialist and
specialists. Charles, the supervisor act as a middleman between his subordinates and
Audrey, is important in his informational roles. In the luncheon meeting with Audrey,
she asked him to improve the service quality by implementing a Service Quality
Management program. However, Charles might misinterpret Audreys intention and
institute the program with different goals. He switched focus from quality to quantity
and contradict to the original objectives. Due to many layers of management, Audrey
may not communicate with Charles subordinates directly and lead to further
misunderstanding.
Hieratical structured organization reduce subordinates incentive to voice out
their opinion as there is only one way communication. With the slow and indirect
communication, comments or opinions of the service quality program can only move

upwards through the management chain, if not filter by the middlemen. Since the
program became effective immediately, employees also assumed that their opinions
would not be considered. In the case, his staff left the meeting without comments, this
non-verbal communication expresses their anger towards Charles. The difficulty in
communication within organization turned out to be an unspoken barrier for Charles
and his team.
In the Business Service Group, power was centralized so Charles opinions
affected the project decisions. He did not even involve front line staff (business
development specialists) who are experienced in customer service in the decision
making process. This autocratic decision mentioned by University of Iowa Studies
could not encourage them to involve, therefore lowering their productivities and
demoralized the whole team.
Employees are also demoralized since formal disciplinary actions will be
given if they fail to meet the quota. At the beginning, they avoid communicating with
Charles, resulting in difficulty in collecting information and opinions and two staff
requested to transfer afterwards thus affecting teams productivity and further
demoralize the team. The morale problem will likely escalate into reduced
communication, increased complaints, turnover and distrust of Charles management
practices.

Planning
The first managerial function is planning. Charles should clearly define the
organizational goals and create a detailed action plan in order to provide direction
and benchmark to determine companys success. Meanwhile, through solving morale
problem, Charles could retain talents to ensure the service quality.
Charles should use strategic and long term planning in order to increase
service quality. SMART goals should be established to meet Audreys expectation.
Whereas single-use planning and standing planning should be used to solve the
morale problem so as to retain talents who planned to transfer.
A more realistic goal of increasing quota by 10% this year should be set in
which it would be revised every year. For instance, DEF company has a similar
business size had helped 22 businesses last year while the Business Service Group
serves an average of 18 businesses each year, increasing the quota by 10% indicates
that they are required to help 20 businesses to set up, which should be reasonable
without overwhelming the employees. Attaining the goal means that the efficiency
and the quality of outcome should be guaranteed.

Organising
In the short run, Charles should hold a meeting with his team. He should
apologise and admit the mistakes he made in executing the program, as well as
cancelling the original punishment. This action is done to compensate the wrong
approach he used. Besides not discussing the details of the program with his
colleagues beforehand, Charles did not take in the considerations of past records of
the number of cases they handle each year to set the 20% increase in service quota.
This poor execution caused his colleagues to be discontented. Therefore, apologizing
would show that he has taken a serious reflection of the program. Meanwhile, Charles
should further explain the details and amendment of the program so that his
subordinates could raise questions and discuss the feasibility simultaneously. In this
way, mutual communication is initiated, which aids Charles to reconstruct a more
realistic program.
In long term, the espirit de corps could be restored by revising the targeted
quota every year. Referring back to the case, Suzy failed to meet the quota while the
others planned to transfer due to the pressure as they were facing a dramatic change at
once. Revising the quota periodically provides them a period to adjust their working
method and adapt to the new goal, therefore the working atmosphere would not be
that intense as before.
Along with the amendment in the quota, Charles should evaluate customers
satisfaction through questionnaires or complaints, which indicate the degree of service
quality. A team debriefing would be done after each case to review customers opinion
and whether to adopt their suggestions. Market trend could also be analysed to enable
a continuous improvement.

Leading
As the short meeting would be treated as ice breaking session between Charles
and his subordinates, it may not run smoothly. To improve the efficiency of the
meeting, Charles needs to promise that there would be no punishments given to any
suggestions to encourage them to voice out their opinions. To foster the discussion, he
should make promise of considering any feasible suggestions or creative ideas.
Besides, during the meeting, Charles should pay attention to the facial expression
from subordinates and whether there is mumbling because this is the body signs
showing that the person is uncomfortable or disgruntle towards Charles or his
decisions. By doing so, Charles could understand the problem through one-on-one
meeting, which would not only allow him to have better execution of the program, he
could have a deeper understanding towards the value or attitude of his employees so
that he could allocate more suitable work task accordingly.
As a follow up action of the meeting, Charles should hold face-to-face
meeting with each subordinate. As there may be colleagues that would still be
dissatisfied with Charles even after his apology or they may be too shy to voice out
their opinions openly. This individual meeting enable Charles to understand the
discontent from his subordinates and listen to the insights of each worker, which
would show that he values his team as colleagues and friends and help him to regain
his authority as well.
Yet, if workers were so discontented that they did not even attend the one-onone meeting, Charles should ask Audrey to offer help. As Audrey is not directly in this
dilemma, she could act as a middleman between Charles and his team. Guidance
could also be given to Charles in handling such problems so that he could improve his
managing style as well. Eventually, before introducing any changes, Charles should
consult Audrey to show his respect. Also, Audrey has more experience and could
point out any bugs to maximize the effectiveness of the program.
After settling the dissatisfying emotion of the employees, Charles should
adopt Soft Human Resources Strategies to manage his staff (Gupta & Singhal,
1993). This approach suggests that employees are perhaps the most important assets
in a business and their value should be maximised.
In order to retain experienced staff and increase the whole team spirit, Charles
should create and lead a friendly and interactive work environment (Heathfield,
2009). An enjoyable workplace is essential to increase their creativity in solving
problems. Charles should take an initiative to be an extroverted leader. This would
develop relationship with his subordinates outside of work such as having meals or
travelling together in order to strengthen their bonds, which enable them to work in
unity and improve their morale and work performance. Satisfied employees are more
likely to be friendly and responsive, which customers appreciate.
Charles ought to get more involved in his subordinates' work by employee
oriented approach. According to Mayos Hawthorne experiment, employees tend to
appreciate the attention from their managers (Mayo, 1930). The employees would be

more willing to voice out their opinions, which could avoid mumbling and discontent
among colleagues. Research also shows that leaders who are employee oriented are
strongly associated with high group productivity and high job satisfaction (Katz,
Maccoby, & Morse, 1950). If his subordinates refuse to let Charles get involved,
Charles should take up the role to observe and show authority that he has the final
approval of the work.
On the other hand, through operation involvement, Charles could have a better
understanding towards the strengths and weaknesses of his subordinates, in which he
could aid his subordinates accordingly such as offer more trainings. By Path-goal
theory, he could have a clearer understanding on the progress of the team to ensure
that their goals are compatible with the set goals (House, 1971). If the progress is not
on the right track, Charles should investigate the underlying reasons, for example,
whether it was the economic downturn externally lowering their working performance
or their individual skills which adversely affect their quality of service. In contrast, if
performance exceeded the goal, then Charles should adjust to a more challenging
goal. At the same time, he should continue to encourage and reinforce their goals by
creating teams jargon to boost their morale and motivation
Regarding the form of praises and punishments, Charles ought to adopt a
participative approach and discuss with his subordinates beforehand, so they would be
more likely to accept them. Praising and punishments would not merely based on their
outcomes but also their working attitudes and daily performance. For example,
Federal Express granted rewards and punishments to the entire team instead of
individuals, this could illustrate mutual supports and increase their team spirit in
striking for the same goal with collaboration (Barsky & Labagh, 1992). If the current
punishment could not alert them, Charles could give a more harsh punishment such as
giving a warning letter after verbal warning. However, Charles should evaluate
extreme cases such as conduct issues before punishing the entire team.
Conclusion
As managers make different decisions every day, it is important to predict the
likely consequences of the selected choice to avoid further morale and communication
problems. Regarding to Charles' case, the chain results could have been prevented if
he made a thorough decision at the beginning. Yet, in reality it is unlikely to encounter
no problem, after all, leaders should take an initiative role to analyse the problem and
provide an appropriate solution for each specific case.

Reference
Barsky, J. D., & Labagh, R. (1992). A strategy for customer satisfaction. The Cornell
Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 33(5), 32-40.
Gupta, A. K., & Singhal, A. (1993). Managing human resources for innovation and
creativity. Research Technology Management, 36(3), 41.
Heathfield, S. M. (2009). Top Ten Ways to Retain Your Great Employees. Lab
Manager Magazine, 1-2.
House, R. J. (1971). A path goal theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative science
quarterly, 321-339.
Jing, L. (2013). Workplace Pressure Moderates Perceptions of Threat or Opportunity
and Employee Creativity after Downsizing. Social Behavior & Personality: An
International Journal, 41(6), 957-969.
Katz, D., Maccoby, N., & Morse, N. C. (1950). Productivity, supervision, and morale
in an office situation. Part I.
Mayo, E. (1930). The Hawthorne Experiment. The Human Factor.