Question.5431 - CASE STUDY ANALYSIS: Erik Peterson at Biometra (A) Case Study AnalysisCase Study Analysis InstructionsInstructions (Mountain Standard or Mountain Daylight Time), submit a persuasive, well-constructed written case study analysis. The case study analysis should clearly state your position, include supporting evidence from the case study, and demonstrate your mastery of the material by appropriately applying concepts from the reading assignments. The case study analysis should be at least 600 words, but no more than 750 words, in length. Please include the word count as part of your written case study analysis. Use proper grammar, spelling and punctuation. Please include your name on the assignment.Grading of AssessmentGrading will be based upon the attached rubric below. Refer to this grading rubric in preparing your case study analysis assignment.Please note that the grading rubric is divided into the following sections:Quality of Response (25 points)Application of Principles (50 points)Clearly Stated Course of Action (15 Points)Grammar, Spelling, Punctuation and Including the Word Count (10 Points)Descriptions of each of these four sections are provided in the grading rubric. The written case study analysis will be worth a maximum of 100 points. Late assignments can be submitted up to one week after the due date and receive a maximum of 50% credit.BackgroundPLEASE NOTE:Before beginning to work on this assignment, please carefully read "Kirby's Tips and Guidelines for the Case Study Analysis" (included in Module 1) and the announcement "Erik Peterson - Guidance for Written Case Study Analysis Assignment". Also, please carefully review the detailed descriptions of each section of the assignment grading rubric. (See below) In this assignment you will need to explain what Erik Peterson should have done differently to have more effectively applied the leadership principles in this module to have achieved a more successful outcome and not have been let go. For this assignment, please feel free to apply facts and examples from the case study (Erik Peterson at Biometra (A)) to the principles and theories discussed in the reading (Organizational Behavior 12.0 - 12.5, and Kotter's "What Leader's Really Do").As we learned with the Contingency Approaches to Leadership, the most appropriate leadership style depends, or is contingent, upon the specific situation. Thoughtfully consider situation at SciMat and Biometra as you determine which leadership principles would have been most appropriate for Peterson to apply. Consider what Richard Jenkins expected Erik Peterson to do when he promoted him to acting general manager (GM) with overall authority for Biometra's operations.There were a lot of open positions, both in the executive positions at SciMat and with the Biometra team. The "vice president who would have overseen the catheter product launched had left abruptly to join a startup device company" and a "number of key Biometra managers had departed as well." There were also "many other SciMat product launches in progress" that Richard Jenkins and the SciMat executives were overseeing. However, with the acquisition of Biometra, this was an urgent, "high profile," product launch that was critical for SciMat's entrance into a new market. Strategically, it was extremely important for SciMat, and if the launch failed, most likely there would not be a second chance. This was an intense, high pressure, very important start-up situation.Richard Jenkins hired Erik Peterson to get the Biometra start-up back on track and to successfully launch the new product. For Erik Peterson, this was an opportunity of a lifetime and he was "both excited and daunted by this opportunity to have general management experience so early in his career."One caution as you approach this assignment. Please do not fall into the trap of blaming others for Erik Peterson's failure. This is a course in managing people and organizations and in each module we will study how to become a better manager and leader. Unexpected things do happen - key people leave, problems arise, personality conflicts surface, competition changes, etc. It's true that that personnel issues and problems throughout the company resulted in Erik Peterson not having the mentoring he expected. However, there was so much more that Erik Peterson could have done to have successfully launched the new product on time. He could have at least picked up the phone and asked Richard Jenkins for help. Assignment What should Erik Peterson have done differently to have provided the leadership and management required to have successfully launched the new product on time? Clearly state which two (2) principles from this module Erik Peterson should have employed, providing at least three (3) specific examples (courses of action) that demonstrate the application for each of the two principles.(Please see 'Kirby's Guidelines and Tips for the Case Study Analysis' (in Module 1) for additional details on the structure of the Case Study Analysis, application of principles, and the course of action (specific examples). Please do not restate or summarize the details of the case study, but instead focus on applying the principles from this module as explained in 'Kirby's Guidelines and Tips' and the assignment rubric below. See the Objective section of the Module 1: Overview - Leadership page for a list of the main principles in this module.)
Answer Below:
Case xxxxxxxx Erik xxxxxxxx at xxxxxxxx A xxxx Managing xxxxxx and xxxxxxxxxxxxx Word xxxxx With xxx list xx principles xxxxxxxxx Erik xxxxxxxx can xxxxx two xxxxxxxxxx after xxxxxxxxx the xxxx study xxxxxx effectively xxxxxxxxx the xxxxxxxx catheter xx time xxxxx two xxxxxxxxxx are xxxxxxxxxxx Leadership xxx Path-Goal xxxxxx These xxxxxxxxxx are xxxxxxx that xxxxx have xxxxxxxxx some xx the xxxxxxxxxxx issues xxxxxxxx encountered xxxxxxx providing xxxxxxxxx strategies xxxx can xxxx with xxx team's xxxx of xxxxxxxxxx the xxxxxxxxxx causing xxxxxx in xxxxxxx launch xxxxx Principle xxxxxxxxxxx LeadershipSituational xxxxxxxxxx as xxxxxxxxx in xxx text xxxxxxxx leaders xx be xxxxx of xxxxx followers' xxxxx of xxxxxxxxxxx to xxxxxxxxx what xxxx of xxxxxxxxxx style xx apply xxxxx the xxxxxxxxx of xxxxxxxxx is x factor xx consider xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Behavior x Peterson's xxxx is xxxx of xxxxxx with xxxxxxxxx levels xx motivation xxx experience xxxx implies xxxx not xxx will xx motivated xx the xxxx style xxxx situational xxxxxxxxxx could xxxx guided xxx into xxxxxx the xxxxx action xxxxx a xxxxxxxxx leadership xxxxx may xxxx been xxx better xxxxxx regarding xxxxxx application xx Curt xxxxxxx Organizational xxxxxxxx p xxxxxxx was xxxxxxx having xxxxxxxx accepting xxxxxxxxxxx and xx the xxxx time xxxxx not xxxxxxxx issues xxxxx pre-launch xxxxxxxxxx Peterson xxx better xxxxxxx the xxxxxxxxx by xxxxxx out x step-by-step xxxxxxxxx for xxxxxxx and xxxxxxxxx him xx make xxxx that xx works xxxxxxx aligning xxxxxxx with xxx launch xxxxxxxx Peterson xxx make xxxxxxxx visits xx witness xxx himself xxx Andrew xx coping xxxx validating xxx Costa xxxx facility xx the xxxxxxxx time xxxxxxxx because xx Andrew's xxxxxxxx What xxxxxxxx should xxxx done xxx to xxxxxxxxx adopt xxx coaching xxxxxxxxxx style xxx both xxxxxx Burns xxx Jim xxxxxxx to xxxxxx the xxxxxxx between xxxx and xx improve xxxxx cooperation xx terms xx the xxxxx and xxxxxxxxx plans xxx instance xx could xxxx the xxxxxx mediation xx align xxxxx activities xxx show xxx importance xx their xxxxxxxxxxxxx in xxxxxxxxx success xx the xxxxxxx For xxxxxxx Peterson xxxxx have xxxxxxxx Burns xxx Wescott xx make xxxxx progress xxxxxxx in xxxx meetings xx a xxx to xxxxxxx communications xxx mutual xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Third xxxxxxxx should xxxx adopted x delegating xxxx of xxxxxxxxxx Organizational xxxxxxxx p xxx the xxxxxxxx training xxxxxxx Stephanie xxxxx who xxxxxx to xx reliable xxx capable xxx way xxxxxxx which xxxxxxxx could xxxx given xxxxx more xxxxxxxxx was xx giving xxx more xxxxxxxxx in xxx planning xx training xxxxxxxx with xxxx This xxxxxxxxxx by xxxxx Hanes' xxxxxxxxxx to xxxx vital xxxxxxx from xxxx would xxxx freed xxxxxxxx to xxxxxx to xxxxxxx priority xxxxxxx If xxxxxxxx had xxxxxxx on xxxxxxxxxxx different xxxxxxxxxx strategies xx address xxxx member's xxxxxx needs xx could xxxx resulted xx an xxxxxx and xxxx efficient xxxxxxx launch xxxxxxxxxx Second xxxxxxxxx Path-Goal xxxxxxxx the xxxxxxxxx theory x leader xxxxxxx hindrances xxx motivates xxx team xx achieve xxx goal xxxxxxxx could xxxx used xxxx principle xx address xxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxxxxxxx challenges xx Biometra xxxxx Peterson xxxxx have xxxxxxxx stepped xx during xxxxxxxxxx issues xx Costa xxxx this xxxxx have xxxxxxxxxx hindrances xx the xxxxxxxxxxxxx process xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Behavior xxxxxxxx could xxxx have xxxxxx the xxxxx to xxxxxx s xxxxxxxxxxxx and xxx relied xx Andrew xxx local xxxxxxxxxxx he xxxxx have xxxxxx more xxxxxxxxxxx manufacturing xxxxxxxxxxx from xxxxxx to xxxxx the xxxxx and xxxxxxx the xxxxxxxxxx timeline xxxxxxxx the xxxx s xxxxx and xxxxxxxxxxxx should xxxx been xxxxxxxxx in xxxx with xxx department xxxxxxxxxxxx Peterson xxxxx have xxxxxxxxx a xxxxxxxx schedule xxx timetable xx clarify xxxxxxxxxx jobs xxx expectations xxxxxx the xxxxxx April xxxxxx Timely xxxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxx updates xxxxxxx could xxxx also xxxxxx achieve xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Third xxxxxxxx incentives xxxxx have xxxxxx Peterson xxxxxxxx the xxxx Organizational xxxxxxxx He xxxxx have xxxxxxxxxx bonuses xxx short-term xxxxxxxxxxxx towards xxxxxx milestones xxxxx he xxxxxxxx that xxxxxxxxxxx in xxxxxx and xxxx expectations xxx causing xxxxxxxxxxxx in xxx team xxxxxx bonuses xxx hitting x target xxxxx create x synergy xxxxxxx organizational xxxxx and xxxx efforts xxxxxxx being xxxxxxxxx Application xx Path-Goal xxxxxx could xxxx helped xxxxxxxx synchronize xxxxxxxxxxxxxx goals xxxx the xxxx s xxxxxx limit xxxxx and xxxxxx a xxxxxx friendly xxxxxxxxxx ConclusionConclusively xxx main xxxx of xxx delay xx launching xxxxxxxxxx and xxxxxxx on xxxxxx from xxx fact xxxx Peterson xxx not xxxxx Situational xxxxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxxx Theory xxxxxx taken xxx leadership xxxx under xxxx theories xxxxxxxx in xxxxxxxxxx efficiency xxx team xxxxxxxx would xx resolved xxxxxxx structured xxx adaptive xxxxxxxxxx If xxxxx principles xxxx adopted xxx problem-solving xxxxxxxxx leadership xxx team xxxxxxxxxxx the xxxxxxxxx of xxx Biometra xxxxxxxx product xxxxx be xxxxxxxxx and xxxxxxMore Articles From MGMT 6100 Managing People and Organizations
.ico)
.ico)
.ico)
