Brookfield Case Study

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s) : 33
  • Published : April 3, 2013
Open Document
Text Preview
|
The Brookfield Properties Case Study|
Hawks United|
|
Siobhan Leonard, Gary Hieber, Jason Barton, and Yikuan Zheng| February 21, 2013|

Contents

The Decision2
The Three Priorities3
Handling Crisis7
Recognize7
Prioritize9
Mobilize11
Leadership Style12
Stakeholders13
Managers and Management14
Teams and Teamwork15

The Decision
Bruce Flatt should not leave Toronto in order to go to the scene of the attacks. This option was chosen for two reasons: safety and leadership duty. First, in regards to safety, there are many reasons why Bruce should stay in Toronto. These include the facts that the airport is closed, the New York Port Authority closed all bridges and tunnels, and the area around the attacks is cordoned off. Since these measures were taken, it shows that travel is unsafe and not recommended. The likelihood that Bruce could even get to the scene of the attacks is slim, for these same reasons, so he should focus his time and energy on figuring out a course of action. The fact that Bruce is in Toronto, where there is access to communication tools and company equipment, is an advantage to Brookfield. Bruce is in a position to reinsure other clients and stakeholders that all measures are being taken to assess and fix this crisis.

As President and CEO, Bruce Flatt has a responsibility to all of his employees. He has other subsidiaries that he must ensure are kept running smoothly, especially in this time of crisis, and him staying safe is vital to that. He has a duty to other employees, tenants, and investors that cannot go without his leadership. Ric Clark, the President and CEO of Brookfield’s U.S. commercial operations, told Bruce to stay in Toronto because it was unsafe and they were handling it. As a leader, in this situation, Bruce should be a delegator (PowerPoint slides: Leadership Theory). Ric Clark is willing and able to take charge of the situation at hand; he showed that by evacuating all employees and tenants immediately, so Bruce should let Ric carry out the task.

On the other side of this argument is to choose to go to New York. This option would make sense for a few reasons. First, this is a time of crisis for the entire community at Brookfield Properties. The leader of the company should come to the site of this disaster to have the latest and most accurate information, especially since the information the media was reporting was inaccurate. If Bruce did not go to New York, he could be misled by unreliable information, including the extent of building damage and the number of casualties. This information will affect Bruce’s decisions and could lead to a bad decision being made. Second, in a time of crisis, a leader should stay with his subordinates, employees, and tenants. This will show that Bruce has the courage to face difficulties, will give the employees a feeling of pride and strength in their leader, and will ensure investors of Brookfield Properties that the company is there for them, which will help retain their business. Finally, since Bruce lost communication with Ric Clark, he has no idea if he’s okay or if anything happened to him. Therefore, as the CEO, Bruce Flatt should be there, in person, to fill the leadership position.

Overall, the best decision is for Bruce Flatt to remain in Toronto. This decision keeps Bruce safe and puts Bruce in a position to communicate with media and other employees and put a plan of action together to get Brookfield Properties back up and running. The Three Priorities

Bruce Flatt has three definitive priorities that he is facing. These three are, in order of importance, the employees, the accounts or tenants, and the media. All of these are of the utmost importance to Bruce and the Brookfield Properties in general. However, some have a greater impact on the corporation as to whether it will forge through this devastation or not. Bruce must first turn to the employees of...
tracking img