Leadership and Organizational Behavior

  • Uncategorized


Leadershipand Organizational Behavior

FallonEngineering Company was contracted to do a project that involved thedesign and construction of a mall for a particular client. As one ofthe members of the team, I was excited about this assignment, butsome challenges came up during the initial stages. Since theorganization had started receiving many requests to work on otherprojects from clients, the top management had decided that the teammembers responsible for a task had to be as efficient as possible.However, the organization was still young, and there were sometechnological and structural challenges. Besides, some individualswere not comfortable with the management style in the organization,and conflicts between other team members posed a threat to thesuccess of the project.

Theimplementation of the project started with a meeting, where the teammembers met with the manager to discuss the way forward. During thefirst session, it was apparent that every individual was enthusiasticabout the task since it was expected to be the most important thatthe organization had ever handled. The manager assigned every personin the team the tasks that he or she was supposed to execute, as wellas the timelines for the initial sections of the assignment. However,some individuals were not comfortable with the duties that themanager had assigned to them. David, who was in the R&ampD team,acknowledged that the design of some sections in the project requiredpeople to optimize their technical field and specialty, and this wasnot the case at the moment.

Sincethe project manager gave every member of the team involved in theproject a particular task, people were expected to report theirprogress regularly and maintain communication with the group leader.However, there were challenges with the management style of theorganization that made it difficult to communicate with thedirectorate effectively. The administration used the laissez-faireleadership style, where they left the members of the team to do theirduties without providing regular feedback. Although the team memberswere competent, misunderstandings came up when some of them failed tocommunicate their progress with the project manager and othersneglected their duties.

Theorganization had just recruited new members, and some of them werepart of the team which was responsible for undertaking the project.During the second team meeting, several members expressed theirdisappointment in the structure. William was the first individual toindicate that he could not perform well in the functional roleassigned to him. He asserted that “We started working on theproject immediately after being assigned roles formally, but sincethe client changed his requirements, my position is not quite clear.”After William had expressed his opinion, four other team membersindicated that they felt the same way, but they could not have got intouch with the management due to the lack of a proper communicationchannel. Michael revealed that the same issue had caused resulted ina conflict with a colleague who could not provide data to him, yetthat was his responsibility.

Otherteam members felt that the company did not have the necessarytechnology to handle the tasks as per the client’s demands.Initially, the requirements were not as intricate as they were at themoment when the team held the second meeting. During the samemeeting, Juliet expressed her opinion on this issue, and most of theteam members agreed with her. She affirmed, “The organization wouldbe considerate if it provided technologically advanced equipment tofacilitate the success of the project since the ones which areavailable are not efficient.” When the project manager gave hisresponse on this issue, he clarified that he had already requestedthe company executives to purchase better equipment and that theywould be delivered as soon as possible.

Eventhough the availability of machinery was necessary for the success ofthat project, the team was still short of human resources. Theproject manager confirmed this when he announced that the client’schange of requirements meant that the organization had to hire morepeople with technical prowess and the appropriate skills to be partof the team. When I held a conversation with one of my colleagues, heindicated that he had doubts about the completion of the project intime considering that the set targets were not realistic.Additionally, he claimed, “I think the present organizationalstructure would not be appropriate for this project since we needseveral functional divisions in the team.” I felt the same aboutthis structural issue given that the leadership style used by the topmanagement expected us to work independently.


Theindividual with full authority over the project was the projectmanager, and he is the one who assigned duties to the team members.Some people, however, felt that they did not have the expertise tocomplete the tasks assigned to them, and this was an issue that theydiscussed during the second meeting. The use of the laissez-faireleadership style also made it difficult for some individuals tocommunicate and provide feedback to the management effectively.Besides, other team members felt that the structure was notappropriate. What contribution should I make as a team member toensure that the project succeeds?

Leadership and Organizational Behavior

  • Uncategorized

Leadershipand Organizational Behavior

Question1-Strategies for Handling Interpersonal Conflicts at Work

Differentstrategies exist for handling interpersonal conflicts at work. One ofthe strategies, as noted by Vroom (2003), is maintaining the groupleader decision-making style. Through this method, goal congruenceand reduction in conflict is achieved.

Atwork, interpersonal conflicts may arise because there is competitionfor primacy among the group members. To handle this kind of conflict,there is need to orient each of the members that are in conflict withthe other. Usually, changing the preference of individual into grouppreference remains one of the most challenging aspects. Nonetheless,the best results are achieved when the level of individual’scommitment to the group is way higher than the personal ordepartmental commitment from each of the members. Often, gettingindividuals committed to the ideals of the group is viewed aspossible by ensuring that the group is properly led rather thanformation of temporary alliance that will mainly aim to seek a singleor limited number of issues.

Also,when conflict arises between individuals, then there is need to comeup with a common goal that will make the individuals agree. Thecommon goal should be from the inputs of the members. With most ofthe firms currently restructuring and focusing on small work groups,there are more decisions that are reached at by groups as compared tolone members. When there is democracy embraced within the company,there are high chances that individuals will achieve consensus andminimize the conflict. Usually, when decision are reached afterongoing negotiation between members of the group, there is a highprobability that motivation level, as well as productivity ofindividuals, will increase and consequently there will be a reductionin conflict among individuals at work.

Atthe time, the conflict may arise due to the difference in theleadership style and individual group members. Minimization of thiskind of conflicts can occur when the judge or the decision maker ishelped by members in getting the required information to help themmake rational decisions. This means that leadership which isparticipative in a way or another can be instrumental in minimizingor resolving the conflicts that arise between members. Throughincorporating participative leadership, the leaders make the finaldecisions after getting inputs from all the members affected.

Question4: Vroom-Yetton model

Asthe head of the family, the situation noted below involves a decisionthat must be made. Family members want to go for a vacation and twoconflicting interests exist. Some of the family members want to go toEurope while some want to go Camping in the Bahamas. For those whowant to go to Europe, they are not decided whether to visit Germanyor Spain. On the other hand, for those who want to go Camping in theBahamas have conflict on whether to camp on land or by the ocean.

  1. Vroom-Yetton Model

Throughthe Vroom-Yetton Model, there will be a contingency approach todecision making that is meant to help the leaders come up with thebest decision. The leader, in this case, is the head of the family.Through the model, there will be a consideration of the manner inwhich decision will be made. The decision made will largely be guidedby the degree of follower participation. Therefore, a right approachwill be made using this model to ensure that individuals go forvacation.

Inreaching out for the decision, as the leader, the decision willlargely be guided by the Group-based Type 2 (GII) method. As theleader, the problem (where to go on vacation) will be discussed aswell as the conflicting situation with the followers (members of thefamily). In doing so, the ideas and suggestions of the members willbe sought through brainstorming. Through this, the leader will haveto acknowledge the decision reached and will not in any way try andforce his/her idea. The decision that will be accepted by the familymembers will be final. In using this approach, the yes or no questionwill be used. The final decision will be made after following the“yes” path.

  1. I) Decision Making Approach

Inmaking the decision, I applied the step-step mechanism right fromidentifying the decision that I have to make, gathering informationand then evaluating the alternative solutions that exist. Throughthis procedural decision-making process, an individual gets to apoint where they are deliberate, thoughtful of their decisions andultimately capable of coming up with alternatives.

Thefirst step was to identify the decision that is where to go for thevacation. At this step, I clearly defined the nature of the decisionthat I had to make. This step was very critical in the entiredecision-making process.

Thesecond step I went on to collect the relevant information regardingthe places of vacation. While collecting the information, I soughtsome of the best sources, which included the reviews of the placesonline, the yellow pages information, the climate condition and muchmore. I also did an assessment of the persons (family members) whowanted to go to their place of choice. The assessment was to helpestablish the information these members had in regards to theirplaces of choice.

Foreach of the suggested place by any member, I keenly assessed thealternatives. The alternatives were to help in identifying thepossible paths of actions. Also, I applied the additional informationthat I had obtained to get new alternatives. At this point, I listedall the possible and desirable alternatives.

Uponcollecting the information, I proceeded to weigh the evidence thatwas existing. I described each situation to members and weighed ontheir emotions on how a vacation would have been in each of thechosen places. It is at this point that I then placed thealternatives in order of priority.

Uponweighing the evidence available, I then opted to choose from thealternatives that seemed best for the case. I was also open to choosea combination of alternatives. I then proceeded to take action byintroducing members to the alternative that I have chosen. The laststep entailed reviewing the decision and existing consequences. Incase, the action or the chosen idea does not meet the needs of themajority then the steps are likely to be repeated.

b)II) Decision on Two Approaches

Ofthe two approaches, it is evident that I would apply the Vroom-YettonApproach. The approach is evident on how to go about the process.Further, the Vroom-Yetton Approach has different alternatives alreadyset out that can be applied (Vroom, 2003). For the approach that Iapplied, the decision-making process is lengthy and entails numerousprocesses that can as well be confusing.


  1. Leadership Style

Iexhibit the autocratic leadership. In most cases, I prefer to collectinformation from followers then make a decision without consultation.I often do not rely on problem or decision to be made by followers.Any of the followers are just in place to help in provision ofinformation.

  1. Weakness

Oneof the evident weakness is that I do not consult with members. Itrust my instinct when making a decision and leading individuals. Theother weakness is that I do not like being questioned on thedecisions that I make. I prefer my decision to be final at the end ofthe day.

  1. Leadership Skills Lacking

Oneof the leadership skills that I lack is the ability to consult andengage other individuals in the entire decision-making process. I amnot also very accommodative to divergent views. There is a need toimprove on them. I will improve on the two by ensuring that I involveothers as much as possible in making decisions, that is, incorporatethe views of others in the process.


Vroom,V. H. (2003). Educating managers for decision making andleadership.&nbspManagementdecision,&nbsp41(10),968-978.

Close Menu