Managing People

Session # 2
Case: Knowlton Roberts

Case Summary:
This case is about a Biochemist Dr. Knowlton Robert who is working at a Bio-pharmaceutical company
BioFind Laboratories. Roberts made a breakthrough discovery at the Lab and was made leader of a team
that was formed to transform this discovery into a product. Late one evening, when Roberts is alone in
his Lab, a new scientist by the name of Tim Rankle arrives and starts to get involved in the project
headed by Roberts by asking different questions. Next day, Dr. Jeffrey Kim, who is Roberts boss,
introduce Rankle as a new hired scientist and asks Roberts to include Rankle among his team. As is
evident from a performance of over 6 subsequent months, Rankle is a very learned and bright scientist
and has the ability to quickly grasp new ideas and conceptualize them for further improvement;
however, Rankle’s way of working is very different from Roberts. Robert is more of a team player and
believes every team member’s contribution should be encouraged and decisions should be made as a
group. In contrast, Rankle is more of a one-man army; he leads the meetings single-handedly and is of
the view that decisions can never be made as a group and only individual team members should finalize
their ideas and use the group meeting to just share these ideas (rather than form them).

Over the course of 6 moths, Rankle, bright and sharp that he is, has made significant headway in the
project and has changed the direction of the entire project based on his findings. Moreover, due to
Rankle’s imposing and individualistic nature, some of the team members are also demotivated and have
shared their grievance with Roberts. Roberts boss Jeffrey Kim, on the other hand, is very much satisfied
by Rankle’s performance and regards him as an excellent addition to his company.

The case ends when Roberts gets a message from a recruiter regarding open vacancy of the same nature
as his current position in a different firm and he has agreed to check that other vacancy without
discussing first with anyone at BioFinds Lab.

Case Problems:
Few of the major problems that I see in this case are:

1- Lack of communication between Robert and Ranke to bridge their difference in working styles
2- Improper decision of Jeffrey Kim to induct a new team member in Roberts Team without
seeking his opinion/getting his buy-in first
3- Lack of sensitivity on part of Ranke in terms of adapting to a new work environment and taking
all team members at-pace
Brief Critique:
Comments regarding Problem Statement 1:

There was clearly a feeling of irritation and un-easiness in Roberts developing due to the difference of
Rankle’s working style. Rankle was directly challenging norms set by the Project Team Leader (Roberts)
in weekly meetings where he repeatedly took meeting agenda as per his own mindset without caring for
inputs and buy-in of the rest of the team members. Moreover, due to aggressive and single-handed
problem solving nature of Rankle, he was unconsciously/consciously sidelining some of the team
members who previously contributed to the team’s progress; and these team members shared their
grievances with Roberts. Being the Project Leader, it was responsibility of Roberts to voice all these
concerns with Rankle to let him know of the disturbance that he was causing and to make him see how
some adjustments in his way of working will help take the whole team along. Moreover, Roberts should
also have conveyed to Kim all these feelings as well. These actions might have resulted in a better
working relationship of Roberts and his team with Rankle and would not have sent Roberts to the point
in his career where he was searching for a different job

Comments regarding Problem Statement 2:

Kim should have realized that Roberts is his key Team Member and is working on a project that might
well prove to be a jackpot for BioFind Labs. Before hiring any new scientist to work with Roberts in his
Team, he at least should have let Roberts know of his intentions (or better yet, made him a part of the
recruitment process for hiring this new scientist). This would not only have given Roberts additional
confidence and ownership about the decision to induct an additional member in his team, but would
also have ingrained in the heart of the new hired scientist (Rankle, in this case) respect for the scientist
(Roberts) who hired him.

Comments regarding Problem Statement 3:

I would refer to my answer for Problem Statement 1 above where I mentioned some of the traits of
Rankle that resulted in formation of a gulf between him and the rest of the team members. He should
have realized that he was the new member and was going to be part of a team that is already well
established and settled and has their norms and practices in place. He should have respected these
norms and should have tried to give his inputs while trying to remain in those norms.