Meatpack Case Study Analysis: Leadership and Organizational Structure

This case study analyzes the leadership challenges faced by Meatpack, a fourth-generation meat processing company aiming for significant growth. The analysis focuses on CEO Derek Bison's hands-on approach and the company's shift towards a horizontal organizational structure. The assignment explores the effectiveness of leadership development programs, the impact of communication gaps between the CEO and senior management, and the consequences of a lack of employee empowerment. The study highlights the importance of consistent leadership, open communication, and the need for middle management in a flatter organizational structure. The analysis also examines the structural changes, including the creation of new leadership teams and their impact on accountability, employee retention, and conflict. The assignment concludes with recommendations for improving leadership, promoting open communication, and adapting the organizational structure to foster growth and address the challenges identified.

Running head: MEATPACK CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
MEATPACK CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
Name of the student:
Name of the University:
Author's Note:

1
MEATPACK CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
Answer to question 1.
According to the present situation of Meatpack, the founder and CEO, Derek Bison must
be taking a more hands-on approach to the business. This is due to the fact firstly, he is currently
running the fourth generation of the business that needs more competitive advantage. Secondly
the company is currently aiming to become a 1-billion-dollar company by the year 2020.
Meatpack therefore, needs a more cautious strategies to outperform the rival companies that have
increased the competition level in these three generations of the business of Meatpack. The CEO
of the company is more capable to identify the needed changes in the workplace more effectively
as he has pointed out that the company now needs immediate changes in the senior leadership in
one hand and the cultural or performance changes on the other.
In order to bringing changes, the company had needed most effective support of the CEO
and founder himself but he did not take any hands-on approach but introduced his company to
Human Synergistics Circumplex that would be helping the human resource of the company to
increase more collaboration in the workplace. Meatpack has been seen to have aggressive or
defensive behaviors as pointed out by the Human Synergistics Circumplex in terms of culture
which needs to be changed into the constructive one. Therefore, Bison has aimed to change the
company structure complete by changing it to horizontal organization rather than a hierarchical
one. Therefore, he has started to provide trainings to the employees and expecting that the
change will be impending. However, it has not been understood by the CEO that no company
can completely change its organizational structure through only training but it needs more time
to make the employees understand the new advantages of the new structure and what are the
problems with the previous one (Barney 2014, p.224). The CEO has decided to change the
structure of his organization without understating whether there are any other possibilities to
make the organization more constructive rather changing the organizational structure completely
which is one of the toughest initiatives (Carlson, Harris & McLeskey 2013).
The head of the company does not ask for any incorporation from his fellow managers
but decided to bring such changes. This is the reason why the managers in one hand do not know
anything how the changes will be improvement not the employees have any idea why they need
to change themselves or what will be the impact of such change. The plan and strategies all are
formed by the CEO himself who only know how to reach the goals. As the theories of leadership

2
MEATPACK CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
relates that the leaders need to share their ideas with the senior management and ask for ideas so
that the changes in the organization but in this case, the leaders are not ready to share any idea
with the senior management rather believe in imposing changes from the top to bottom level.
The head of the company, Derek Bison has described himself to have some ambitious
qualities of leadership which has helped him to dream big and soar high in the competitive
business setting of Australia. These qualities include his interfering, competitive, obsessive,
restless and visionary aspects (Ethiraj, Gambardella & Helfat 2018). However, these qualities are
themselves not constructive rather aggressive. This is the reason why the organizational culture
has become aggressive. Hence it can be stated that the leader himself need to be more
constructive in his thought process but is implementing changes in the behavior of the senior
management team with the help of an executive coaching and senior leadership development
company.
Another aspect of effective leadership is related with the consistency of the leader. The
leaders of a successful company take more hands-on approach to implement changes in the
organization built in the case of Meatpack, the leader Bison has limited consistency in his job.
Biron initially was quite enthusiastic about the executive coaching program in the company but
gradually he lost his attraction and stopped direct involvement in this particular program. He
himself was the person in the company who needed this training to become more constructive as
he makes all the decisions in Meatpack. Bison has stated that the impact of such employee
development training he felt to be effective for the progress of the human resource but found
himself to be struggling with this particular transition. Therefore, it can be stated that the
leadership problem in which the company had been previously, had no change now. He is not
being able to intervene or direct others even if he is feeling that sufficient changes are not being
made.
The communication gap among the senior managers with the leader of the company is
not very supportive. As the leaders of the organization has never supported or invite the ideas of
the others in the decision-making process, the members of the senior management also feel
reluctant to question the leader’s decision but follow those mutely. The inability of the leaders to
work hands on in the business the members of senior management of the company have been
changed several times. Moreover, the reporting factor in Meatpack where the managers are to

3
MEATPACK CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
report directly to Bison, has created conflict and misunderstanding among the managers. Finally,
it can be stated that Bison wanted to implement a flatter structure of the company to empower
the managers and supervisors so that they can take more responsibilities. In such case, he himself
had to take responsibilities to understand the expectation of the managers and respond them
accordingly so that the retention rate of the managers in the organization could increase.
Therefore, it can be concluded that the regulations he had established in the company, showed
positive impact no doubt but the employees will be more encouraged if they had direct
connection with the leader of Meatpack so also reduce cross-cultural conflicts within limited
period of time (Meyer, Neck & Meeks 2017, p.20).
Answer to question 2.
Meatpack has bring some changes in the senior leadership structures. Over the past two
years the leader has been aiming to develop the leadership competencies for the senior strategy
team. In order to strengthen the abilities of the managers in the organization he has arranged for
executive coaching and senior leadership development company. Through this exposure, the
team members are gaining huge insights. Based on the Human Synergistics Circumplex,
MeatPack has initiated to change itself to become more constructive in nature so that the growth
plan can be implemented effectively. In order to reach the goal by 2020, the company is
changing its organizational structure completely and trying to be flatter so that the
communication criteria can be fulfilled and the excess layers of management can be removed.
This also aims to elevate the responsibilities of the employees as well as their accountability
regarding their individual job. Fewer levels of management encourage the employees to take
interest in the decision-making process of the organization.
However, in Meatpack, no such position situation had been seen. First of all, the
company-wide leadership development program which was arranged for the senior strategy team
only affected positively to the senior managers and this had no effect on the leader of the
company himself. Moreover, the company in its older structure had some different departments
like IT, finance which used to operate separately and the whole structure was composed of the
CEO, COO, CFO, head of People, head of Sales and head of Business Development. Despite the
fact that the company had a collaborative culture in the workplace and the senior strategy teams
indulged in the open communication for solving any issue or operate effectively, there were

4
MEATPACK CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
issues leading the company to have an aggressive culture. After the change issues by Bison, the
company does not have this hierarchical structure when the employees of different departments
used to report to their respective managers and these managers’ report to Bison.
The new changes to gain horizontal structure of the organization, have created some
uncertainties regarding the composition of the senior strategy team. This is due to the fact that
the team did not have any proper information that who would the part of new team and who
would not. In addition to this, there had been confusion as there was a separate senior leadership
team including all the senior strategy team members as well as the senior line managers (Gorran
2013). The purpose of these teams was not very clear but the members are not ready to question
the decision of the leader. As mentioned before, different teams had different focus area hence
there were confusion regarding accountability of the managers, employee retention and reduction
of the conflict among these managers.
The chief financial officer of Meatpack had identified the problem regarding the power
equation of Bison and the board member and questioned their accountability. The chief
operational officer had pointed out that due to direct report method as well as personality conflict
among the managers and the leader of the company many of the potent leaders had left
Meatpack. Another reason includes the over involvement of Bison in the operations of the
company. This however created issues in the positive impact of the previous managers in one
hand and affected the relation of the company with the suppliers and customers losing the
business of Meatpack to the competitors (Pană 2013, p.579).
The structural changes have also not effective in mitigating functional problems as the
existing COO has become CEO of meat section making two CEOs ion the company reporting
directly to Bison. This had reveled the desire of Bison to become CEO to executive chairman
and then the chairman of the company. The strategy meetings of the company were full of
confusion and the lower level employees did not understand the actual benefits of the changes as
they were not empowered and made responsible for their jobs as the flat structure of the
organizations guarantee. As the CFO of the company showed his concern about the benefit
derived by the decentralized structure of the company, the business head was also concerned
with the effect of the new structure in the operation of the company.

5
MEATPACK CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
In order to solve these problems, the senior leadership of Meatpack can make some very
important decision associated with the human force of the company. First the senior leadership
must recruit employees who already have the experience in working in a flat organization. This
will increase the innovative mindset of the people (Jacobs, van & Christe-Zeyse 2013). These
new recruitments will be advanced in their career path, collaborative in nature ad proactive to
serve the goal of the company. Secondly, these new employees along with the existing ones need
to know the actual mission statement of the company so that focus on the overall goal and get the
support of the self-managing system. This will be resulted in the complete breakdown in the
coordination as well as planning of the company.
Thirdly, the senior leadership need to instigate the employees to indulge in the open
communication within the work space which will help in maintaining internal communication to
ensure that the company to have a companywide strategy as well as operations transmitted within
the departments as well as the different parts of the business. Open communication and feedback
method will help the senior leadership to incorporate the ideas of the lower level employees in
the decision-making process (Lundin & Söderholm 2013, p. 587). Finally, it can be stated that
the importance pf middle managers which Meatpack previously needed for smooth running of its
business can be reduced as the horizontal structure of the organiostioanl will not need them.
These managers can be made team leaders so that productivity increases and cost of the company
get reduced. Bison is no doubt a good leader but he needs to be more support to change and keep
the lower level employees more motivated that the employee retention can be increased and
Meatpack and effectively reach the goal of becoming 1 billion company within 2020.
Answer to question 3.
With the change in the structure of the company, Meatpack has introduce ERP initiative
through which the multiple divisions can be integrated into one structure. Through this measure
the company aims to build the most organized and efficient workplace where finance team,
production, management and investment team can work collaboratively to hit and exceed the
target each time. Through these changes, the communication of the mangers with the lower level
employees had been checked. As revealed by the report of Human Synergistics Circumplex, the
work culture of the company was quite aggressive where the shouting, dominating and other
aggressive forms of communication was quite usual in the organization.

6
MEATPACK CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
After the implementation of the changes in the structure of the organiostioanl, the
management had shared positive response that they were having effective impact. The leaders of
the company were encouraging the managers to take more responsibilities to recruit the
employees as well as the matter of performance appraisals. The flatter structure of the company
has positively motivated the management to lead rather than to manage only. In order to achieve
this, Bison had selected only six to eight people to attach with a report. The company is
perceived to be trustworthy and honest by the employees and grown a family atmosphere among
the employees. Many of the employees are recruited via word of mouth as they belong to the
same family and responded the company having a more organized and collocative workplace
that woks methodically in operating in the market.
With the new changes and introduction of the programs for the development of the
employees, the managers are increasing their skills in one hand and growing their work ethics on
the other. This have increased the possibilities for the talented employees to work and flourish.
These changes also have effectively introduced the culture of accountability for each and
position. By enhancing the skills of the line staff, the company has made them feel values and
important for the growth of the company (Waddell et al. 2016). The main motto of Bison was the
change the managers into the leaders as the leaders are more effective in their communication
and decision making. This is the reason why, the discussion process with the employees that
used to be problematic in the previous work culture, has become more systematic as well as
organized. The management of the company is encouraged to reflect upon their tool box rather
than making immediate reaction on the situation.
The company is now following the business culture of Standard Oil in which its founder
Rockefeller had implemented some new and effective principles. Bison in order to get the best
result in this situation has also built three pillars of priorities, data and rhythm. In the context of
Meatpack, the priorities are the strategic goals of the company, performance feedback has been
the data and accountability has become the rhythm. The leadership training has changed the
work culture of the company including its recruitments, development and mentoring process.
Some times of the removing and confronting have been granted as necessary for growth. All
these are appreciated by the managers of the company who are thinking themselves importance
than in the previous time when the leader was the only most important person of the company.

7
MEATPACK CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
In order to get the best result of the employee development process, the young managers
are being focused. They are considered to be fresh and open minded therefore., can help the
company to reach what exactly Bison has aimed to. They have codified the process and reached
effectively to the line managers so that the set target can be hit. Along with the changes in the
development process of the managers, the company has invested in the technological
development, the targets in the whiteboard are shown in the floor where each and every
employee can see and set their goals to reach those targets efficiently.
However, these changes have some barriers as the leadership cannot terminate the
unproductive employees are many of them are the family members. Moreover, there is a strong
bond among the employees that affect the human resource management effectively. this is the
reason why the recruitment process has been hampered. Due to good connection among the
employees working together for more than ten years, the company does not have any cross-
cultural issue. However, Meatpack develops problems in implementing cultural change sue to
one particular reason that is connected with the shift timing of the employees. Generally, there
are two shifts, one is in the morning starting from 5.30 am to 2.30 pm and the night shift starting
from 2.30 pm. The target however is same for the both shift but the day shift proves to be more
productive. This is due to the fact that the cultural norms of these two shifts are significantly
different from one another.
The day shift takes up gung-ho approach to have the higher yields but the night shift
cannot as there is a specific cut-off times when the lorries arrive and pick up specific products to
deliver to the super markets. This is the reason why the priorities that Bison had built like the
three pillars of Rockefeller cannot be effective. The priorities of the employees working in the
morning and night shifts are different where the morning shift aims to increase the productivity
and the night shift on the method of becoming more time sensitive so that the lorries can deliver
the products to the supermarket without any problem. This is the reason why the management are
feeling utmost pressure to increase their own line of productivity and fulfil the expectations of
their employees. However, to conclude, the flatter structure of the company has effectively
supported the culture of the workplace in Meatpack by increasing the skills of the employees in
one hand and reducing any type of conflicts among the lower level of human resource. Though

8
MEATPACK CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
there are issues among the management which are not yet solved but with time this will be
mitigated and the company will reach its target.

9
MEATPACK CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
References:
Barney, JB 2014, Resources, capabilities, core competencies, invisible assets, and knowledge
assets: Label proliferation and theory development in the field of strategic management. The
SMS Blackwell handbook of organizational capabilities, 422-426.
Carlson, SL, Harris, M & McLeskey, N 2013, Strategic planning for organizational effectiveness
during dynamic change.
Ethiraj, SK, Gambardella, A & Helfat, CE 2018, Theory in strategic management. Strategic
Management Journal, 39(6), 1529-1529.
Gorran Farkas, M 2013, ‘Building and sustaining a culture of assessment: best practices for
change leadership’ Reference services review, vol. 41, no.1, pp.13-31.
Jacobs, G, van Witteloostuijn, A & Christe-Zeyse, J 2013, A theoretical framework of
organizational change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 26(5), 772-792.
Lundin, RA & Söderholm, A 2013, ‘Temporary organizations and end states: A theory is a child
of its time and in need of reconsideration and reconstruction’ International Journal of Managing
Projects in Business, vol. 6, no. 3, pp.587-594.
Meyer, GD, Neck, HM & Meeks, MD 2017, The entrepreneurship‐strategic management
interface. Strategic entrepreneurship: Creating a new mindset, 17-44.
Pană, L 2013, Social efficacy by responsible change management. Systemic Practice and Action
Research, 26(6), 579-588.
Waddell, D, Creed, A, Cummings, T & Worley, C 2016, Organisational change: Development
and transformation. Cengage AU.