Cheetah and Whynne Law Firm: Management Case Study

This case study analyzes the Cheetah and Whynne law firm's challenges related to an open-plan office design, including employee resistance stemming from perceived loss of status, a poor online booking system, concerns about privacy, and a lack of consultation. The analysis explores how the partners could have minimized resistance through consultation and participatory leadership. It also identifies barriers to communication, such as workplace design problems, lack of attention, source credibility issues, status differences, and the use of the grapevine. The study further examines the partners' sources of power, including legitimate and reward power, and the influence tactics employed, such as legitimating tactics and rational persuasion. The case study underscores the importance of effective leadership, communication strategies, and organizational change management to foster employee satisfaction and improve firm performance. The document highlights the use of specific leadership approaches and communication channels to overcome the challenges faced by the firm, demonstrating practical solutions for similar organizational issues.

CASE STUDY 1
Case study
By
[Student’s name]
Course
Institution
Date

CASE STUDY 2
Question 1
Cheetah and Whynne law firm has been doing well, and due to the growth, there was the need to
change the location of the law firm and also change the interior structure of the firm. The change
was not received well by some staff members, and they were against the change. The reasons for
the employees resisting the open plan office approach include;
Lost status.
The senior associates in the firm claim that they have lost their status in the organization because
they do not have their offices. This makes the senior associates feel that they are not given the
much respect they deserve and this will affect their performance and even force others to move
to other firms where they will feel more valued. This will affect employee retention and lead to
increased employee turnover (Marr, and Thau, 2014, p.230). The status in the office enables
members to get the needed respect and to lose the offices and to work in the same environment
as the rest of the employees is causing fear to some members that they will not be respected as
when they had their offices.
Poor online booking system.
The online booking system was to be used to book meeting rooms to hold a confidential meeting.
The online booking system employed to be used sometimes failed and this affected the
operations of the business as the senior associates were not able to discuss confidential matters
with their clients. They argued that if they had their offices, such problems could be avoided
because if the system does not improve, the business may lose clients.
Encourage grapevine in the office.
The new open office plan approach according to the senior associates in the organization will
encourage conversations that may affect the operations of the business. This is because friends in
the office will have all the time to discuss whatever they wished and this might affect the
performance of the business (E. Smith, et al.2014, p.117). The senior associates claim that law is
a serious business and such an office setup will not provide the needed environment to improve
the operations of the business.
Erosion of privacy

CASE STUDY 3
This is where people are not able to talk freely because of fear of other people or authority
(Acquisti, et al.2015, p.118). Open plan office approach introduced by the younger partners
prevented the employees from freely conversing with their loved ones because everyone in the
office was able to hear the conversation. The employees claimed that one had to go outside to
pick a call and this wasted a lot of time. The employee also claimed that they usually feel as if
the younger partners are spying on them and this affects their operations as they are not
comfortable when performing their duties. Some lawyers also claimed that they cannot discuss
private matters over the mobile phones with their clients and this was affecting their operations.
Other employees claim that Cathy made all the decisions for herself and they were not consulted.
Lack of consultation encourages change resistance, especially where the employee does not like
the new setup (Joseph-Williams, et al.2014, p.302). The employees claim that they are too far
from shops and that cafes on that side of the town are very expensive and this will affect their
finances. Other employees claimed that they the new open office plan cannot allow them to see
outside.
1b.
To minimize the resistance, the partners should have consulted the employees. Consultation is a
method that could have been used to ensure that the partners do not face the resistance from
employees being experienced (Thornberg, 2014, p.196). The consultation could have given the
employees a chance to participate in the decision-making process. This could have enabled the
employees to give their opinions about the anticipated change of office setup. The employees
feel valued and that the partners cared about their work environment. The feedback provided by
the employees could have enabled the partners to come up with an office plan that favored all the
employees and this could have helped to minimize the resistance (Klonek, et al.2014, p.348).
Through consultation, the partners could have had an opportunity to explain to the employees
why they wanted such an office set up and clarify issues that could encourage resistance.
The partners also should have used participatory leadership. This refers to a managerial style that
enables the employees and the leaders to make decisions together (McKnight, 2013, p.103). The
input of employees in this kind of leadership is highly valued and must be considered before
making the organization decisions. The employees are briefed on the issues affecting the
companies and then they provide their feedback. The partners should have practiced this kind of

CASE STUDY 4
leadership to minimize the resistance. This could have allowed the employees to vote on whether
they wanted such change or not. The decisions are made based on the opinion of the majority and
this helps to minimize employee resistance.
Question 2.
The barriers to communication in the law firm are due to various factors which include;
Workplace design problems.
The employees claim that the open plan office approach is affecting communication in the firm
(Titi Amayah, 2013, p.463). The lawyers in the organization cannot discuss confidential matters
with their clients because other employees in the office are listening. This affects communication
between the lawyers and their clients, and this will affect the operation the law firm because,
during the discussion, the lawyer may not be able to acquire all the needed information to serve
the client effectively. The online booking system employed in the firm is not working properly,
and this is affecting the allocation of meeting rooms to discuss private matters with the clients,
and this will affect the operations of the firm.
Lack of attention and interest.
The senior partners in this firm do not give their employee the needed attention that will enable
them to discuss matters affecting them. The employees calm that they do not even know what is
expected from them because they are not given feedback concerning their performances. The
lack of attention and interest by the partners makes it very hard for the employees to
communicate to them the issues affecting them which affect their performances (Bargiela-
Chiappini, et al.2013, p.26). This prevents Mr. Wynne from telling Mai the specific mistakes she
makes so that she can try not to repeat them.
Lack of source credibility.
The partners in this firm tell jokes and the employees do not seem amused because they do not
understand the source of the joke. The partners also try to engage female employees in the office
on rugby test match and they could not communicate because the women in the firm do not
watch rugby matches. This makes it very hard for the conversation to take place because the

CASE STUDY 5
participants are not conversant with the source of the conversation (Bargiela-Chiappini, et
al.2013, p.26).
Status differences.
This barrier is brought about by differences in organizational hierarchy (Leonardi, and
Rodriguez-Lluesma, 2013, p.487). In the law firm partners do not interact with their employees
well and they even refused to share the workspace with the rest of the employees and this
becomes a barrier to communication. The senior members of the firm are invited to the club by
the partners and the other employees are ignored. This makes it very hard for the employees to
communicate their grievances to the senior partners. The senior partners do not advise the
employees on how to perform their tasks, they just dump the work on their desks and go on to
play golf. This makes it very hard for information to flow to employees in a different
organizational hierarchy because the status differences prevent downwards or upward
communication.
Grapevine.
This firm has no established channel of communication and this forces employees to result to
informal means of communications between themselves (Mitchell, G., 2013, p.35). Grapevine is
being used in this firm as a way of communication, and this prevents employees and the partners
from using formal means of communication to communicate their grievances and concerns that
could affect the operations of the business.
2b.
There are various ways to overcome barriers to communication, and they include
Establishing communication channels
This will make it easy for the employee to communicate their grievances to the relevant parties.
The company should also place suggestion boxes in strategic areas where employees can give
their opinions which can be considered during the decision-making process (Weller, et al.2014,
p.152). The communication channel will encourage the communication in the organization and
help streamline matters that could lead to poor performance.
Having empathy.

CASE STUDY 6
The partners should develop empathy and show concern for the welfare of the employees. This
will help the employee to feel comfortable when communicating and this will improve the flow
of the information. Empathy will enable the partners to want to know the needs of the employee,
and this will trigger conversations which will encourage communication in the organization
(Singer, and Klimecki, 2014, p.R877).
Providing specific feedback.
The partners should provide feedback to their employees so that they can be aware of the aspects
of their work which they need to improve on (Weller, et al.2014, p.152). This will make the
employees comfortable when communicating with their seniors as they know the partners want
them to be perfect in their duties. Being specific will enable the employees to improve on the
specified area. Providing the feedback will also enable the partners to communicate with the
employees, hence improving communication in the firm.
Question 3.
The partners in this firm possess various sources of power which include;
Legitimate power.
This is the power that is acquired as a result of the position a person holds in an organization
(Pierro, et al.2013, p.1128). This is evident where the senior associates of the firm feel that their
status in the organization will be lost because they do not have their offices. The person holding
this kind of power is supposed to lead his subordinates, and if he makes poor decisions, the
organization will fail. The employees follow the instruction given by their manager like in this
case where the young partners decided that the firm should move to a new location and have a
different office set up. Such decisions can improve the performance of the firm or demotivate the
staff like in our case and lead to poor performance.
Reward power.
This is the power that is gained because of one’s ability to reward employees, improve their
compensation and incentives (Pulles, et al.2014, p.22). The senior partners in the firm hold this
kind of power to increase the salary of the employees who register good performance. Some
employees have received two percent while others have received an increase of four percent. The

CASE STUDY 7
firm’s accountant was promised to assume the role of a general manager of the organization but
that has not been the case. The partners in this firm have misused their reward power as they just
promise and they never fulfill their promises. This has adverse effects as it demoralizes
employees leading to an increase in employee turnover which can result in disruption of the
operations of the firm.
3b.
Partners and employees in the firm have used various influence tactics which include;
Legitimating tactics.
The influence is based on the positional power someone holds in the organization (Ura, 2014,
p.118). The partners have used this kind of influence to ensure that they accept to work in an
open plan office approach which has been implemented in the organization. Although the
partners have faced some resistance from the employees, the influence has been effective except
for some few challenges affecting the employees.
Rational persuasion.
This occurs where the person uses logical arguments and facts to convince other people that the
taken point of view is the best option (Clarke, 2013, p.32). The young partners in the firm led by
Cathy decided to ensure that the company moved to another location and changed the interior
design of the office. Cathy convinced the employees and the other senior staff the open plan
office approach was the best alternative because it was going to encourage teamwork and
collaboration that could enable the creation of positive organizational culture. The influence was
effective as the firm moved to the new location and implemented the open plan office approach
although some employees and staff felt that the changes were not needed.

CASE STUDY 8
References
Acquisti, A., Brandimarte, L. and Loewenstein, G., 2015. Privacy and human behavior in the age
of information. Science, 347(6221), pp.509-514.
Bargiela-Chiappini, F., Nickerson, C. and Planken, B., 2013. What is business discourse?. In
Business Discourse (pp. 3-44). Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Clarke, S., 2013. Safety leadership: A meta‐analytic review of transformational and transactional
leadership styles as antecedents of safety behaviours. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 86(1), pp.22-49.
E. Smith, G., J. Barnes, K. and Harris, C., 2014. A learning approach to the ethical organization.
The Learning Organization, 21(2), pp.113-125.
Joseph-Williams, N., Elwyn, G. and Edwards, A., 2014. Knowledge is not power for patients: a
systematic review and thematic synthesis of patient-reported barriers and facilitators to shared
decision making. Patient education and counseling, 94(3), pp.291-309.
Klonek, F.E., Lehmann-Willenbrock, N. and Kauffeld, S., 2014. Dynamics of resistance to
change: a sequential analysis of change agents in action. Journal of Change Management, 14(3),
pp.334-360.
Leonardi, P.M. and Rodriguez-Lluesma, C., 2013. Occupational stereotypes, perceived status
differences, and intercultural communication in global organizations. Communication
Monographs, 80(4), pp.478-502.
Marr, J.C. and Thau, S., 2014. Falling from great (and not-so-great) heights: How initial status
position influences performance after status loss. Academy of Management Journal, 57(1),
pp.223-248.
McKnight, L.L., 2013. Transformational leadership in the context of punctuated change. Journal
of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics, 10(2), p.103.
Mitchell, G., 2013. Selecting the best theory to implement planned change: Improving the
workplace requires staff to be involved and innovations to be maintained. Gary Mitchell
discusses the theories that can help achieve this. Nursing Management, 20(1), pp.32-37.
Pierro, A., Raven, B.H., Amato, C. and Bélanger, J.J., 2013. Bases of social power, leadership
styles, and organizational commitment. International Journal of Psychology, 48(6), pp.1122-
1134.

CASE STUDY 9
Pulles, N.J., Veldman, J., Schiele, H. and Sierksma, H., 2014. Pressure or pamper? The effects of
power and trust dimensions on supplier resource allocation. Journal of supply chain
management, 50(3), pp.16-36.
Singer, T. and Klimecki, O.M., 2014. Empathy and compassion. Current Biology, 24(18),
pp.R875-R878.
Thornberg, R., 2014. Consultation barriers between teachers and external consultants: A
grounded theory of change resistance in school consultation. Journal of educational and
psychological consultation, 24(3), pp.183-210
Titi Amayah, A., 2013. Determinants of knowledge sharing in a public sector organization.
Journal of Knowledge Management, 17(3), pp.454-471.
Ura, J.D., 2014. Backlash and legitimation: Macro political responses to Supreme Court
decisions. American Journal of Political Science, 58(1), pp.110-126.
Weller, J., Boyd, M. and Cumin, D., 2014. Teams, tribes and patient safety: overcoming barriers
to effective teamwork in healthcare. Postgraduate medical journal, 90(1061), pp.149-154.