Case Study Analysis on Management Issues in D7 Displays

Running head: CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
Case Study Analysis
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author’s Note

1CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
Q 1
The first identifiable management issue in the case is the leadership style
autocratic leadership represented by Frank. As put forward by Metcalf and Benn (2013),
autocratic leaders involve themselves in taking all the decisions by themselves and
provide little or no opportunity for the subordinates to present their opinion. This limits
the possibilities of exploring fresher perspective held by the subordinates.
Motivation can be considered as the second most critical management issue in
the case, which can again be linked with the autocratic leadership (Fu and Deshpande
2014). Tom getting restricted from presenting his opinion for increasing the sales acts
as de-motivator, which again reduces performance expected.
The third identifiable issue in the case is the communication gap between the
managers and subordinates. The low level communication practiced in the organisation
restricts the flow of idea, which further reduces the performance level of the
organisation (Den Hartog et al 2013).
Risk analysis skills developed by Frank are another management issue in the
organisation. Environmental knowledge and risk identification ability is of primary
importance of a manager, in which Frank is lacking (Hwang and Ng 2013).
Problem solving skill is the last limitation identified from the case. It is evidenced
that Frank tends to neglect the issue put forward by Tom and stick to his idea for
directing the project. This, as considered by Hwang and Ng (2013) is a clear lack of
problem solving ability held by the manager.
Q 2
Use of autocratic leadership will reduce the satisfaction level of the employees
that can supplement in increasing employee turnover. This will also cause motivation
issues among the employees and reduce the performance level of the organisation all
together (Metcalf and Benn 2013).
Reduced motivation will again have adverse effect on employee performance (Fu
and Deshpande 2014). The extreme results of de-motivation can result in causing
issues in employee retention of the company.
The communication gap between the manager and subordinates in the D7
Displays restricts the flow of idea throughout the organisation. Frank provided limited

2CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
opportunity for Tom to communicate the identified risks and the potential outcome using
the solution put forward by Tom. The rigid structure of the organisation restricts the
subordinates to communicate the idea with the manager, which in turn will limit the
opportunity to explore greater possibility for increasing the profit (Den Hartog et al
2013).
Lack of risk assessment skills will endanger the complete project, as it will limit
the ability of the manager to take necessary precautions for avoiding threats (Hwang
and Ng 2013). It will not only restrict the company from increasing their profit margin,
but can also pose threat for disrupting the current business of kiosk in the target market.
Lack of problem solving ability of the manager as identified by (Hwang and Ng
2013) is likely to increase the risk factors involved in the project, hence, contribute in
reducing the organisational performance due to project failure.
Q 3
Various scholars over time have proposed different motivation theories for
encouraging the employees involved in an organisation for increasing and attain greater
performance. However, the problems identified in the case are different from the regular
cases of motivational issues and can be addressed using the following motivational
theories proposed. The motivational theories applicable in this particular case for
retaining Tom as a efficient resource of the organisation are Vroom’s expectancy
theory, Herzberg’s motivational theory and Maslow’s need hierarchy theory.
Vroom’s Expectancy theory
Motivation according to the theory proposed by Vroom depends on the expected
outcome of the task performed. The level of dedication is directly related to the
expectation perceived by the individual. Tom’s situation mentioned in the case is failing,
as the expected outcome is not being provided to him (Parijat and Bagga 2014). Tom’s
recognition of the market condition is not being acknowledged by Frank, which is
facilitating in de-motivating him. Considering this theory will help Frank identifying this
issue and resolve it accordingly to divert Tom’s dedication toward the project.
Herzberg’s Motivational Theory
Herzberg’s Motivational theory on the other hand categorises motivation under
two broad divisions that are hygiene and motivators. Lack of hygiene contributes toward