right boss wrong company
In this case study we will discuss managerial and leadership styles. How the two managers differ in their leadership styles and managerial practices and how each of their managerial styles effected the employees of fancy footwear.
2.1 Max Worthy had an autocratic leadership style (linked to theory X) the manager might allow group involvement but decision making remains at the top of the organisation. Max Worthy was leading directing, determining what must be done in a situation and getting people to do it. He had a decisional role, which requires decision making. He also had discipline, this was effective in creating a confident, well managed business. This effected the employees in a way that the employees knew where there place was and want to do, or though they did not communicate or see much of Max Worthy this system was working well at fancy footwear business environment. Brenda Hogan had a democratic leadership style associated with M.C. Gregor’s theory Y, will guide and advise, but will also involve the group in decision making. This was a very different leadership style then Max Worthy, it effected the employees in a big way as it was a change of from want they were used to for so many years under Max Worthy, they did not want to contribute to any other new function due to the lack of motivation from when Max Worthy was leader, they felt so used to his leadership style. They never saw Max Worthy much but they felt at least he did not get in there way.
2.2 The managerial practices that is evident from a theoretical perspective in the case study. In my view they had scientific management, by getting things done through others. The contingency the characteristics of the environment to determine the design of the organisation’s structure and control systems had a stable with mechanistic structure centralised authority, vertical communication flows, control through strict rules and procedure.
References: Schultz & Schultz psychology and work today (2010) pg. 201-202 David Floyd Letts Business Studies (2011) pg. 197-199