This case describes the managerial behavior and behavior effectiveness of Ben Samuel and Phil Jones, each manager apply actions on common scenarios showing the difference on each personality and leadership style.
Ben Samuels is a people (relations)-oriented boss, he shows more empathy when approaching his employees. This type of leader tends to have more tact when it comes to the needs of the people they manage by simply giving them support and motivational encouragement. Phil Jones is a job- oriented leader that is more concerned with productivity and task performance. This type of leader tends to criticize poor work, focus the actions towards efficiency and emphasize on meeting deadlines. Taking the Ohio State leadership …show more content…
Answer to Question N# 2.
Ben’s charismatic touch with his employees have a positive influence on their attitude making them loyal towards him on a personal level, mostly because of the empathy that has grown over the years. This has accomplished a very low turnover rate for the company. Yet his behavior towards task planning has evolved into low productivity, basically because for his employees, their performance it’s supposedly perfect the way it is; this is the result of not encouraging them for improvement. Another fact is that he believed that no one should be fired, so he had a lot of people on the payroll that were not supposed to be there. The company had more costs under his management and never tried to reduce them.
Phil’s employees do not look up to him and are not loyal. I could even be said that he was seen as the “bad boss” by looking at the company’s high turnover rate. Employees do not like to be taken for granted when it comes to participating on decision making and of course, no one likes to be humiliated and pressure on an Autocratic way. Yet his behavior towards task and planning translated into high productivity, not to mention that he also managed to lower the production costs.
Answer to Question N# 3.
Before answering what actions should be done to achieve both high employee satisfaction and