This milestone is designed to continue the critical analysis in Milestone One with a shift in lens to leadership and organizational culture. This short paper assignment is the second milestone in the analysis of the company within your final project. It should begin with a brief description (one paragraph) to transition the reader to the new analysis lens. The largest component of this short paper should focus on the leadership approach and any shifts through the course of the case study example, including any aspects of the culture that influenced the organization. Lastly, the final aspect of the short paper is to connect the analysis into insights and conclusions. This assignment will be submitted in the form of a 750-word minimum paper.
Prompt
Use the following case study to do your organizational analysis: The GM Culture Crisis: What Leaders Must Learn From This Culture Case Study.
After reading the case study, answer these questions:
Evaluate Leadership Theory
Describe a leadership style used in the case study and why there was a shift in leadership style throughout the case study.
Explain the characteristics and decisions of management in the case study that help explain the shift in leadership style.
Identify the internal and external influences on the organization that may have caused the shift in leadership style. Be sure to explain your choices.
- Describe the relationship between a leadership style used by the organization in the case study and the decision-making process.
Assess Organizational Culture
Discuss the internal culture present within the organization. Be sure to utilize terms relative to organizational behavior.
- Identify specific examples from the case study that demonstrate the internal culture present within the organization.
Insights and Conclusions
Explain why the leadership style(s) and internal culture of the organization complement each other or do not complement each other.
- Explain whether or not the changes in leadership style or internal culture of the organization influenced each other.
Explain how the leadership styles and internal culture of the organization may have influenced the behavior of the employees within the organization. You could consider providing specific instances or examples from within the case study to support your response.
Expert Solution Preview
Introduction:
This analysis focuses on the leadership approach and organizational culture within the case study “The GM Culture Crisis: What Leaders Must Learn From This Culture Case Study.” Throughout the case study, there is a shift in leadership style, and we will evaluate the characteristics and decisions of management that contributed to this shift. Additionally, we will explore the internal and external influences on the organization that may have caused the change in leadership style. Furthermore, we will discuss the internal culture present within the organization and provide specific examples from the case study to illustrate it. Finally, we will assess how the leadership style(s) and internal culture of the organization complement each other or not, and determine whether changes in leadership style or internal culture influenced each other and the behavior of employees within the organization.
1. Evaluate Leadership Theory:
In the case study, the leadership style used initially can be described as autocratic. The shift in leadership style occurs when new management takes over, transitioning towards a more democratic and inclusive leadership style. This change is potentially a response to the culture crisis at GM, where transparency and employee empowerment became essential for addressing the organization’s challenges.
The characteristics and decisions of management in the case study that help explain the shift in leadership style include:
– Lack of accountability and transparency in decision-making: The previous leadership style was marked by secretive decision-making processes, leading to a failure to address safety issues and prioritize customer welfare. The new management recognized the need for a more participatory approach to decision-making to restore trust and transparency.
– Failure to prioritize employee engagement: The autocratic leadership style neglected employee input and failed to create an environment that encouraged innovation and collaboration. The new leadership recognized the importance of empowering employees and involving them in decision-making processes.
The internal and external influences on the organization that may have caused the shift in leadership style include:
– Internal pressure for change: The organizational culture crisis and the subsequent public scrutiny and legal action served as internal pressures for the shift in leadership style. The need to rebuild the reputation and regain trust necessitated a change towards a more inclusive and ethical leadership approach.
– External environmental changes: The external influences on the organization, such as increased competition and changing customer expectations, demanded a transformation in leadership style. To adapt to the evolving market and regain a competitive edge, GM needed a leadership style that embraced innovation and employee engagement.
2. Assess Organizational Culture:
The internal culture present within the organization, as depicted in the case study, can be characterized as hierarchical, siloed, and resistant to change. These characteristics are typical of a traditional bureaucratic culture, where decision-making power is concentrated at the top, communication is limited, and employees are functionally specialized.
Specific examples from the case study that demonstrate the internal culture present within the organization include:
– Siloed departments: The focus on departmental functions rather than cross-functional collaboration limited communication and knowledge sharing within the organization.
– Lack of accountability: The hierarchical culture deterred employees from taking ownership and accountability for their actions. This contributed to the concealment of safety issues and delayed response to problems.
– Resistance to change: The resistance to change within the organization was evident in the reluctance to address safety concerns and in the normalized practices that perpetuated the culture crisis.
Insights and Conclusions:
The autocratic leadership style used initially in the organization’s culture crisis did not complement the internal culture present within the organization. The hierarchical and resistant culture required a more inclusive and transparent leadership style to address the underlying issues effectively. The shift towards a democratic leadership style aligned with the need for open communication, employee empowerment, and collaboration.
The changes in leadership style and internal culture influenced each other. The shift in leadership style towards a more democratic approach enabled a cultural transformation by breaking down silos, fostering collaboration, and promoting accountability and transparency. Conversely, the new internal culture created opportunities for the leadership style to be more inclusive and participatory.
The leadership styles and internal culture of the organization may have influenced the behavior of employees within the organization. The autocratic leadership style and hierarchical culture may have contributed to a lack of employee engagement, limited innovation, and a culture of silence. However, the shift towards a democratic leadership style and a more inclusive culture opened avenues for employee empowerment, collaboration, and a willingness to address safety issues. Specific instances from the case study, such as the formation of the Global Vehicle Safety organization, highlight the positive impact of leadership and cultural changes on employee behavior and organizational outcomes.
