Republic of the Philippines

Camarines Norte State College

COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Daet, Camarines Norte

Title: CASE STUDY: George and His Management Style

Student: UMBAO, MARGIELYN T. Date: July 17, 2017
Course: BSA 3
Professor: Corazon S. Fajardo, Ph.D

1. Compare the psychological atmosphere in the office before the

performance evaluation was conducted with that after the results of the
performance evaluation were out. What caused the difference?

Answer:

Before the performance evaluation was conducted, the whole office

was one big happy family composing of different professional workers with
varying experiences. And then the sequel happened, the atmosphere
become negative and has undesired feeling for everyone in the office. Once
was a room of a laughter becoming a space of silence and then there was
the air of hostility or an unfriendly approach between workers and
management.

This was happened when Cecile, one of the senior analysts ended up
the lowest in the evaluation, surpassed by the younger ones in spite of the fact
that she was much more experienced with necessary training and
background to be able to perform her tasks as a project evaluator and took
Mr. Georges impression indifferently and disappointedly.

2. Characterize George and his management style.

Answer:

George, a man with full of expectation, is the head of the evaluation

division of a lending institution with an attempt to encourage his group to give
their best output and effort for their work. His managing style Is good in a sense
that he encourages his colleagues to work better. He is a competitive one
thats why he got disappointed when one of his group failed and ended up in
the lowest level. Subsequently, upon noticing that there is no improvement in
the past periods after evaluation, George got easily irritated, hot-tempered,
become unapproachable which producing an undesirable ambiance and
feeling of hostility and uneasiness among workers and management.
3. How would he have improved himself and his style?

Answer:

In order to improve himself and his style of management, he should

analyze the situation and make judgements concerning the workers point of
view. Eliminating the air of hostility by way of personal arrangement with his
group so as to have clarification of the things that had happened with the full
cooperation of the group and having the ability to deal with the feedbacks of
the persons perception and feelings obtained from the arrangement.

As a head, he should initiate professionalism by corresponding rules and

regulations to compel the group in giving their best to contribute to high
productivity and improvement. One of the most important functions of
leadership is morale boosting which is associated with morale and productivity.
Thus, elimination of the air of hostility by way of personal arrangement with
Georges group is necessary to build and gain trust confidence to work out
every essential job responsibility as well as the best way to attaining desired
morale and productivity.

4. What are the short and long-range problems in this caselet. Suggest
resolutions for them.

Answer:

In this case, it is then believed that the situation rooted and become a
problem of this case analysis are the misinterpretations and impressions nearly
aggravated the once intimate relationship of the people in the division. The air
of hostility as a result of the subsequent events of project evaluation took its
place and in order to solve the situation, hostility elimination is believed to be
accurate. As the saying goes, prevention is better than cure this must be true
to the succeeding events happened in the division. As the head of the
evaluation division and the believed cause of aggravation, George is
responsible for bringing back the prior atmosphere in the office.
George must do these ways to accomplish objectives and solve the
situation. He must first sequence the events happened to determine the
reasons behind low productivity and lack of improvement. He must bring back
his jolly appearance and make an apology to his group especially to Cecile.
He must also initiate a one-on-one personal arrangement to his group and try
hard to encourage everyone to uncover their hidden feelings, thoughts and
emotions towards him and his way of leading. Evaluate his groups
performances to find out whether he took the right steps. Highlight all the
feedbacks and criticism made by his group and research and take the steps,
strategies and style to better lead his group. And by constituting a group
conference to find out the groups point of view and give sincere apology as
well as take positively all the groups criticism and gather necessary advices to
have an idea on how to lead in a better way.