Zappos organisational issues

70-311: Organizational Behavior
Case proposal Workshop
Pessoa, Mitchell, Gomez-Laich
1
Sample Case Proposal: M University (MU)
[Problem & Opportunity Section Only]
1. Problem and Opportunity Analysis
In this section, the analysis of an anticipated problem is provided and
positioned as an opportunity for MU to uphold their reputation. First, the
general problem with MU’s leadership is introduced. Then, an in-depth
analysis of MU reveals that changes in the leadership are not aligned with
the university’s values and culture. This has caused significant cultural
changes that may jeopardize the future of the university as a world-wide
institution. The leadership team’s lack of diversity, changing priorities,
and leadership style have affected the culture of the university and the
motivation of the faculty, with direct implications for employee retention.
These changes need to be examined in detail for MU to return to its roots.
[State your main problem claim here: Insert a paragraph on why leadership is the main
problem at MU. Include the definition of leadership and a key case observation as an
example of misaligned leadership and the need for leadership and culture alignment related
to the definition. This is addressing requirement (a) of the instructions – where you identify
your main problem. The remainder of this section is addressing requirement (b) – where you
analyze and expand on your main problem.]
The leadership team’s lack of diversity is not well aligned with MU’s
values of diversity and inclusion. Diversity and inclusion contribute
significantly to an organization’s ability to make good choices, relate to
diverse clients, and innovate within their industry (Konopaske et al., 2018,
p. 60). This commitment to diversity, while certainly an institution-wide
value, needs to be reflected in the leadership. With its entire leadership
now composed of male academics from economics, MU’s commitment to
diversity seems compromised. In the last two years no female professors
have been promoted and only one of the ten new hires is non-white (MU
2019 Annual Report). Research on higher education internationally
(Peterson, 2012) shows that a more diverse leadership would contribute to
maintaining MU’s culture and vision of a world-class university that
prides itself on appreciation for diversity and inclusive values.
In addition, the leadership’s shifting priorities have caused a change in
organizational culture that has not been well received by faculty and stuff.
According to focus groups with faculty and staff, the leadership’s efforts to
maintain the quality and reputation of the institution seem to be directed
more at community partnerships and funding opportunities for MU rather
than on upholding the culture of high standards and achievement of the
university. While not all cultural change is necessarily negative, leaders
This is the part of your case
proposal that will show your
professor that you understand
relevant OB knowledge and can
apply it to your case. That’s why
it is important that you show
your OB knowledge but, most
importantly, that you use it to
make claims based on negative
evaluations about your case.
Introduce the main problem and
its sub-parts (supporting
claims/reasons) using OB
concepts, often using cause and
effect relationships between them
(referring to causes and
consequences, like “This has
caused”). This is similar to your
main argument and supporting
claims in a traditional
argumentative essay. Note the
use of colors for the key words
and their repetition in the body
paragraphs.
70-311: Organizational Behavior
Case proposal Workshop
Pessoa, Mitchell, Gomez-Laich
2
who seek to change organizational culture need followers to “see the
inherent worth in behaving in a new way” (Konopaske et al., 2018, p. 40).
A faculty survey conducted by Gallinger (2019) shows that the faculty are
concerned about recent budget cuts for special research projects and
MU’s increasing budget for invited speakers, alumni dinner parties, and
trips on private jets by the leadership team. The faculty and staff resist the
cultural change because they do not believe in the new direction the MU is
heading.
Not only has the leadership changed its priorities, it has also changed its
leadership style which has negatively affected the culture of high
achievement at MU. Leadership style, using Hersey-Blanchard’s
Situational Leadership Model (1988), depends primarily on three factors:
follower readiness, relationship behavior, and task behavior. At MU, the
leadership had developed a culture that made the faculty and staff “able
and willing” to do their jobs and fulfill the university’s mission. The
faculty taught high quality classes as evident in student evaluations,
secured competitive research funding, and published in high tier journals.
This is indicative of the high follower readiness (Konopaske et al., 2018).
In such a situation, Hersey-Blanchard’s model predicts an appropriate
leadership style would have low task behavior, either leaving much of the
direction of the faculty and staff to themselves or sharing in governance of
the institution. In contrast, the new leadership at MU seems to have
adopted a Telling leadership style. According to Konopaske et al. (2018),
this leadership style results in high task behavior such as placing many
demands on employees and low relationship behavior such as the
employees not having time to develop interpersonal relationships. This
style is evident in the required monthly performance reviews and the
proliferation of new and detailed policies and procedures at every level of
the organization. One faculty member commented that, “With the monthly
performance reviews and all the paperwork that I need to do has created
extra stress. I notice that my colleagues and I rarely have time for daily
conversations that make coming to work more enjoyable” (Ali, 2020, p.
3). The mismatch between the high readiness of the employees and the
high task behavior of the leadership has created a tension between
management and labor while also doing damage to the culture of high
achievement that had already been established.
This leadership-directed change in the culture has impacted the motivation
and retention of MU’s highly accomplished and diverse faculty. As
Konopaske et al. (2018) explain, motivation is the employee’s “desire and
willing[ness] to exert effort toward attaining job performance” (p. 103).
Before the leadership change, the faculty and staff demonstrated high
motivation, as shown in their regular output of publications and numerous
awards. For instance, the work by the Computer Science and the
Humanities divisions netted 53 publications and 12 national or
international awards in the year before the leadership change (Gallinger,
2019). However, with the leadership change, and in particular the Telling
The body paragraphs start with a
topic sentence that makes a
claim based on a negative
evaluation of the case. This is
often done by joining two OB
concepts through logical
relations, often of cause and
effect, (e.g., “the leadership’s
shifting priorities have caused a
change in organizational
culture).
The major key words are
repeated through the paragraphs
to show elaboration and
development of the same idea.
The paragraphs wave in OB
knowledge from the textbook
and from your own research
(underlined) with evidence from
the case (in italics) to make
conclusions throughout the
paragraph. To ensure that you
are indeed analyzing, remember
that it’s important to form a
wave that moves between OB
knowledge and case knowledge.
The OB knowledge that you
bring in doesn’t necessarily have
to be basic definitions of
concepts such as “leadership” or
“team work,” unless it relates to
your key problem. The OB
knowledge needs to be specific
and needs to help you advance
your argument.
The paragraphs need to be
brought to an end, usually to
show how current practices (the
problem) or changes to the
current practice may impact the
company.
70-311: Organizational Behavior
Case proposal Workshop
Pessoa, Mitchell, Gomez-Laich
3
leadership style implementation, the ability of faculty to participate in
goal-setting became more limited. One departing faculty commented in
her exit interview that, “before I used to be able to publish 3 papers per
year and now with all the time that I have to spent on bureaucracy I can
barely get one paper written” (Smith, 2017, p. 8). Research on employeeparticipation in organizational goal-setting (as cited in Konopaske et al.,
2018) has shown that the more involved employees are in organizational
goal-setting, the more likely they are to be motivated. This explains why,
after the leadership change, motivation decreased, publication and award
numbers dropped, and many faculty left (Gallinger, 2019). This had other
consequences, such as a loss of diversity among the faculty, which further
contributed to the inability of MU to benefit from multiple perspectives.
The culture change also contributed to lower motivation, as the leadership
priorities did not align with the priorities of the longstanding faculty,
which created the culture clash. In short, the leadership change negatively
affected participation in goal-setting, diversity, and a culture of high
standards, which in turn materially damaged MU as an institution.
All of these changes represent an opportunity for improving the University
by upholding the reputation of the University and more effectively
managing faculty and student motivation and retention. In the next section,
an evidence-based recommendation is provided that show how M
University’s leadership can seize the opportunity presented for
development and progress at the institution.