Typical problems with top executive teams
It has become a trend for organizations to create executive teams and hand them the power of decision-making and projects authorization. Although the contribution of the executive teams to the company is important, they have limitations.
- They lack common goals. Each individual has his or her own idea as to how the organization should be run, and this delays the decision-making process as it becomes hard for the teams to reach a mutual agreement. To solve this problem, I would ensure that all the members in my team are conversant with the company’s mission and vision. Moreover, I would ensure that they have worked in that particular field before.
- Lack of communication: – Communication is paramount in all aspects of decision-making. Poor communication leads to poor decision-making (Burnes, 1996, p. 65). In this case, I would ensure that all company information is communicated personally to the members of the executive team and that the team is constantly polished with the latest information.
- Irrationality; – Some members of the executive teams choose to be influenced in their decision-making by the peer pressure and at times by friendship so as not to be seen as valuing the company over their friends. I would introduce a secret ballot during voting sessions, so that individuals are driven by critical thinking and not by outside influences or pressure.
- Lack of commitment: – Some members of the executive teams also belong to committees from other companies. Therefore, their commitment is divided and at times, they are not able to attend company meetings as they are attending other meetings elsewhere. I would choose my executive team based on commitment; therefore, only those members who have no other businesses elsewhere qualify to be in the team.
- Lack of experience: – Some executive members are too young to handle such positions in their company. Some are in the teams probably because the company’s owner is either their relative, or friend. To tackle such an issue, I would appoint an independent panel to conduct interviews thereby ensuring that only people, who merit, will be part of the team.
Conflict Management and Resolution
Conflicts occur in organizations on a day-to-day basis, and how individuals choose to react to them solely depends on their personal character. Existence of conflict in organizations is not always bad as at times it leads to professional, if not personal, growth (Miller, 1998, p.145). Therefore, managers should make the working environment bearable by resolving these conflicts. Some of the conflict management and resolution methods include; negotiation- refers to a formal discussion between the conflicting parties aimed at reaching an agreement that is satisfactory to them. There is no outside person involved as the parties themselves make the decisions.
Mediation is a process that uses a neutral person to solve conflicts between parties. Once the conflicting parties have come up with a solution, it is put into writing, and they are required to sign the document. This method is preferred because it is relatively a cost-effective process. Arbitration is a process where a third party, who is independent, decides on the outcome of the disputes. It is a private process and is used by parties that want to remain confidential. The parties may choose a panel or an individual, depending on what they prefer. Finally, litigation is the process where the conflicting parties defend their claims in court. A judge presides over the case and makes his/her decision according to the laws that govern the land. It is transparent, and the resolutions are binding.
Requirements for Success of a change initiative
For any major changes to occur in an organization, and be successful, there are certain trends that need to be adopted by the involved members. These trends include among others:
- Effective and motivational leadership: – Organizations need to motivate their employees to work with enthusiasm altogether. If the management is not motivated, chances are that the employees would not be motivated, as well (Randall, 2004, p.80). The management has the responsibility of boosting the employees’ morale coupled with engaging them to drive their strategies into actions to produce the intended results.
- Strategy formulation: – It enables management to exploit various opportunities and manage threats in the environment, in light of corporate strength and weaknesses. Employees can also learn from the formulated strategies (Viljoen, 1997, p.121). By so doing, the management ensures that all the executed actions are pulling in the same direction, towards achieving the intended goals. A company, which does not have a strategy, lacks vision.
- Create a team; – When management has already formulated its strategies, it has to build teams that will initiate the changes (Stace & Dunphy ,1998, p.176). These teams should include the most passionate and committed staff members in the organization and a few outside sources. The team should be manageable; it should include the right number of individuals or else the process will be too hard to be executed effectively.
- Bring about change; – Change is inevitable to an organization as it is a key aspect in the development and achievement of organizational goals and objectives. Achieving real and enduring change is a difficult task (Miller, 1998, p. 40); therefore, the management should critically analyze the organization and decide whether it is satisfied with its current position. Change management and evaluation is a subset of strategy.
- Create a good working environment; – A manager is almost guaranteed good results from his/her employees in the day-to-day activities, by creating a good working environment. Employees are empowered when allowed to make decisions freely without people breathing down their necks (Mitchell, 1978, p.64). Moreover, employees are able to take responsibility for their actions. Therefore, managers should encourage social interaction between colleagues; these interactions underscore how employees generate ideas and get to know more about each other and their roles in the organization.
Jackson was right to let go of Dennis; it shows that the company did not value people undermining each other. However, it was wrong for him to impose his opinion on the rest of the staff when he did not know whether they were against the implementation.
When Dennis yelled at Mary, she did not respond rudely. On the contrary, she showed her uttermost respect for authority by referring to him as “sir”. In addition, she kept calm and went on with the debriefing. Her decision to keep quiet was the right thing to do. However, instead of rushing to Joseph, she should have approached Dennis after he calmed down. This would offer a good opportunity for Mary to establish if there was anything wrong with Denis. Maybe personal issues that she did not know about influenced his reaction at that time; maybe he was just depressed.
Burnes, B. (1996). Managing Change: A Strategic Approach to Organizational Dynamics. London: Pitman Publishing.
Miller, A. (1998). Strategic Management. Boston: McGraw Hill.
Mitchell, T. (1978). People in Organizations:Understanding their bahaviour. Kogakusha: McGraw-Hill.
Randall, J. (2004). Managing Change/Changing Managers. London: Routledge.
Stace, D., & Dunphy, D. (1998). Beyond the Boundaries,Leading and Recreating the Successful Enterprise. Sydney: MC-Graw Hill.
Viljoen, J. (1997). Strategic Management, Planning and Implementing Successful Corpoprate Strategies. Melbourne: Longman.