Case Study: Leadership Behaviors Analysis-Consolidated Products

This case study provides an analysis of the leadership behaviors exhibited by Ben Samuel and Phil Jones at Consolidated Products, comparing their approaches to management, specifically focusing on task-oriented and relationship-oriented behaviors. Ben, a well-liked manager, prioritized employee well-being and avoided layoffs, fostering a positive work environment but struggled with production and cost control. Phil, on the other hand, focused on cost-cutting and production targets, implementing strict performance monitoring and employee evaluations, which led to improved production but potentially at the expense of employee satisfaction. The study further explores strategies for achieving both high employee satisfaction and high performance, suggesting the implementation of positive work environments, reward and recognition systems, increased employee engagement, and continuous measurement and improvement of employee satisfaction plans. Desklib provides access to similar case studies and resources for students.

Running Head: LEADERSHIP BEHAVIORS - CONSOLIDATED PRODUCTS
LEADERSHIP BEHAVIORS - CONSOLIDATED PRODUCTS
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

Table of Contents
Answer to Question 1..........................................................................................................2
Answer to Question 2..........................................................................................................3
References............................................................................................................................6

Answer to Question 1
Managerial Behavior of Ben
Ben Samuel was the plant manager for different consolidated product and he was well-
liked production manager among operators, supervisors and workers in the organization. Ben
built fitness centre for the employees along with different programs on training. He spends time
with different employees in order to know about the different family background and know them
by their name. He has a belief that employees will perform well when the organization will treat
them in an effectual manner (Bergh et al. 2016). Ben tries to avoid any kind of lay off in
different situation of recession. Ben feels that employees are serious about their tasks and no
such targets are set for them to perform well. Ben helped in retention of good employees;
however, the record is worst in production and cost.
Managerial Behavior of Phil
On the other hand, Phil was the replacement of Ben and he has started different changes
in the style of working along with the policies of the company. Phil focuses on the cutting of
costs in the company by reducing the expenses on the fitness centers, training program on human
relations and different practices on holidays. He mainly focused on the production of the
company and he used to set daily targets for the employees. He used to check the performance of
the employees in different computer systems. He used to fire employees who were not able to
perform the targeted performance (Donate and de Pablo 2015). These different policies helped
him in raising production and cutting costs.

The specific task and relationship behaviour can be described as the component of the
leadership style of the leader and determines the manner in which the leader utilizes the cycle of
clarifying, planning and monitoring to examine the production of the employees.
Specific Task Behaviour of the managers consists of Clarifying, Planning and
Monitoring. The manager`s use of specific task and relations behaviour have been given below:
Ben Samuels- The leadership style of Ben cannot be said to be that of a task oriented
one. The given statement has been made because the manager took little or almost no
participation in monitoring the work of the different subordinates. He also did not take any steps
in order to see to it that the subordinates were making certain progress or not. He did not conduct
the planning procedures involved in leadership (Daft 2014). The manager indulged in just
delegating the decision making power to his subordinates as he believed that each of them were
trust worthy and capable of doing the given task on their own.
Phil Jones- On the other hand, Phil Jones can be said to be a task oriented leader. He
ensures that proper planning has been done and also monitors the behaviour of the subordinates.
His subordinates are aware of this point and always consider him before taking any kind of
decision for the welfare of the firm (Fairhurst 2014). The manager also monitors the performance
of the employees and the subordinates closely.
Answer to Question 2
It is the responsibility of the leaders of the given organization to create a high level
employee satisfaction which ultimately leads to a high level of productivity in the given
organization (Northouse 2015). It is the aim of a leader to make sure that the performance of the
machine as well as the man is adequate which in turn tends to improve the output, quality of

output as well as bring pride into the people. It is often stated that a motivating environment
should be such that all the workers feel extremely motivated and perform well.
To achieve employee satisfaction and performance the following steps would have been
taken:
 Providing a positive work environment whereby the workers can get good vibes
and in turn correspond in the same manner. If the environment of the is positive, it
is a proven fact that productivity increases (Yukl 2013). The business
environment plays a key role in determining the productivity and performance of
the firm. To improve the business environment, the employees can be involved in
some fun activities, in order to improve their morale. If there exists certain
transparency in the organization then the employees will feel better themselves.
 Reward and Recognition system whereby the different workers can be rewarded
as per their performance. This increases their satisfaction and in turns the
performance of the company. The employees of the firm should made to be feel
valued. Once they are encourage to perform in a better manner only then they
would give their 100 percent to the company.
 Increasing employee engagement. This is an important step to make sure that the
employees feel as a part of the organization and take decisions in a combined
manner. This can be conducted in a manner that the employees feel that their
opinion is highly valued. They can be called for various meetings to handle the
different problems and be given a chance to provide suggestions for the same.
According to Onorato (2013), engagement plays a great role in improving the
performance of the employees and the company as a whole.

 Practice is the key to success and therefore, it is suggested that employee
satisfaction needs to practiced and measured in order to improve the system. The
manager of the organization needs to plan for the various employee satisfaction
plans. It is the duty of the employee manager to see to it that the employees
working for the organization face no difficulties. They should have proper
redressal system to settle down employee grievances (Tourish 2014). The
manager should pay adequate attention to the relationships between employees in
order to identify if any problem is existent or not. Once this is done, it should be
seen to it that no bullying or red taping takes place.

References
Bergh, D.D., Aguinis, H., Heavey, C., Ketchen, D.J., Boyd, B.K., Su, P., Lau, C.L. and Joo, H.,
2016. Using meta‐analytic structural equation modeling to advance strategic management
research: Guidelines and an empirical illustration via the strategic leadership‐performance
relationship. Strategic Management Journal, 37(3), pp.477-497.
Daft, R.L., 2014. The leadership experience. Cengage Learning.
Donate, M.J. and de Pablo, J.D.S., 2015. The role of knowledge-oriented leadership in
knowledge management practices and innovation. Journal of Business Research, 68(2), pp.360-
370.
Fairhurst, G.T. and Connaughton, S.L., 2014. Leadership: A communicative
perspective. Leadership, 10(1), pp.7-35.
Northouse, P.G., 2015. Leadership: Theory and practice. Sage publications.
Onorato, M., 2013. Transformational leadership style in the educational sector: An empirical
study of corporate managers and educational leaders. Academy of Educational Leadership
Journal, 17(1), p.33.
Tourish, D., 2014. Leadership, more or less? A processual, communication perspective on the
role of agency in leadership theory. Leadership, 10(1), pp.79-98.
Yukl, G.A., 2013. Leadership in organizations. Pearson Education India.

References