Case Study Luxor. What is wrong with George?

? First, George is resisting to make changes accordingly due to the needs of the organization. Change is important in any types of industry to cope up with the competition and it is also claimed that a leader is an agent of change. This has been proved that a manager must be able to change for his/her followers to change. This is consistent with the change in customers preferences, wants and needs. George is also does not emphasize on team works and he is always feel the needs to do everything himself. Without team work, doing things are more difficult and this might be why George is unable to meet the top managements expectation. George is also always boasting about his achievements in the past to others and at the same time do not give encouragement, recognitions and rewards to his subordinates. These qualities of George have huge potential to demoralize and de-motivate his subordinates. He is also competing with his own followers which is not a quality a good leader should have. George is also unable to create a good working environment and working culture which is essential to ensure employees job satisfaction. According to Hertzbergs two factor theory job satisfaction falls under hygiene factor. Besides that George is also unable to provide on the other factor which is motivator. Simply put, George is not up to challenge and he is more on risk adverse person and the style of his thinking is not up to the standards of those young new workers in his company. What Do You Do With George? The action should be taken would be to immediately terminate George and quickly find someone to replace him. This is done because George is already given a chance before but he does not seem like he can deliver the required results. The second reason would be that company is facing serious problems and competitive disadvantage in the market. However, the action taken must proceed carefully for example electing new leader to replace George. The new leader must be able to turn the tide around. By using this option, the leadership approach used is heads, hearts and guts. This is done for the sake of company benefits (Heads), George has already been given chance (Hearts) and Guts are used to fire George despite his past contribution to the company and the relationship he had with the top management.

What Could Have Been Done? First of all, the top management should have revised job description for George post and let him go out more instead of just working in the office. The top management could have provided more enjoyable and comfortable working environment for George and other employees. This can be done to provide job satisfaction to George and this will lead to his followers job satisfaction also. The top management a leaders of an organization should be able to influence George and make him love his job. In this case scenario, George is working towards rewards only and there is no sense of family in the organization. The second approach is to provide George with leadership development training as he jumps from lower position to higher position in the company. In this whole case, we can see that not only George is incompetent but also the top management as they also fail to influence George to work towards the common goals. The practice of teamwork should be more emphasized in the organization because it give the followers the sense of belonging and will motivate them to work harder. What could have been done was to promote team building within the organization. The top leader could also just hire an external consultant to resolve this problem. Use the Sustain Development through Change Leadership (SDTCL) approach where the leaders are always looking for the potential leadership quality among their followers. Using SDTCL a team consisting of potential leader character are trained to resolve the problem so that they know how to do it in the future if the same problem/crisis ever occurred again.