Micromanagement: Leadership and Shelly

manage to Case of Micromanagement Q1 Is George guilty of micromanaging? Why or why non? Answer No. George hates micromanaging and even disagrees that he is micromanaging. He thinks micromanaging is an excuse that Shelly threw out to dissemble her incapability, for the reason that a no-hit manager would never micromanage those employees who are capable enough. In additional, he thought Shelly is not so gung ho and hungry-to-learn as the beginning, which costs him a lot of time to correct her mistakes. Therefore, George may be angry rather than guilty.Q2 What influence tacticss does George use with Shelly and what is her reaction to those tactics? Give an example to support your re routineee. To what degree do his tactics engender trust with Shelly? Answer George used 1) Rational persuasion, 2) Ingratiation, 3) Pressure. 1) Rational persuasion. After reading the beget away draft at the first time, George recommended a new title, and Shelly countered that she doesnt agree. To m ake Shelly align with him, George used the apt persuasion tactic to analyze the situation logically and give evidence, and argued why he consists to use such(prenominal) a strong title.The reaction of Shelly here is she pursed her lips and nodded slightly, which means she wanted to argue, but gave up and accepted his steer reluctantly. Without enough participation from Shelly, George made the decision himself, largely harming the trust between them in this situation. 2) Ingratiation. After persuading Shelly to sweep up his suggestion, George tried to encourage Shelly a little bit by flattering her Thanks Shel, you are the best(p). Ingratiation tactic was used here.However, Shelly didnt feel any happiness when hearing this, and she no yearlong like him as before. Again, the trust was failed to engender. 3) Pressure. This tactic was used many times in this case. For example, George demanded Shelly to do 2 things on the release. George also said I count on you to get these things right. Etc. Shelly had different response on the two situations I mentioned above. In the first case, Shelly accepted Georges suggestion reluctantly. In the plump for case, Shelly made up her mind nd defended herself by explaining why she wrote it in her way but not Georges way. Obviously, trust was failed to engender again since Shelly didnt pile up Georges expectation, and she was unsatisfied with George as well. Q3 employ our knowledge of the full-range of hotshotership model presented in class, how would you classify the type of leader behavior used by George to manage Shelly? Be specific and provide an example. Answer To my understanding, George manages Shelly with the transactional leadership. To be specific, he used Management-by-Exception actively.For example, once George ensnare a mistake on the unfinished release draft, he gave feedbacks and corrections immediately. Then he started to conserve the case, and tried to monitor and correct Shellys mistakes and keep thi ngs constructive in an active manner. This is exactly as Rich said, when George takes an interest, hands-on isnt the beginning of it. Hes elbow deep in the stuff. He thought he was providing guidance and necessary feedbacks to Shelly so that she would improve. This type of leadership behavior is a part of transactional leadership.Q4 The Company in this case is not meeting its goals regarding visibility, leads and sales. Shelly is responsible for this functional area of the business. What should George do to lead her much effectively to meet these business objectives? Answer George can lead Shelly more effectively in several ways. Firstly, according to the Leader-Member Exchange theory, Shelly belongs to the out-group of Georges team. In this group, the relationship between leader and members is cold and nonpersonal with formal leader authority and less effective influence on members.Under this tense relationship, eventually, members would be threadbare off to boss by bad accomp lishance and less OCBs. To make it better, George can try to give Shelly more freedom, latitude, and responsibility, give her more support, and try to build trust with Shelly. In return, Shelly would probably generate higher(prenominal) performance and satisfaction, and greater dependability, involvement, and eventually, better OCBs would occur as well. By bringing Shelly from out-group to in-group, Shelly could enhance her performance and meet companys business objectives more effectively.Secondly, George should learn how to apply efficient transactional leadership on Shelly. anyways the MBE active he uses, he should also use contingent reward and punishment. By using this tactic would help Shelly better meet Georges expectations. In this situation, George should communicate with Shelly and give her clear guidance on what would be rewarded and what would be punished, and deliver the promised rewards or punishments every time, therefore, trust would be built between George and Shel ly.Thirdly, subsequently effective application of transaction leadership, George should go beyond it and try to upgrade to transformational leadership. Transformational leadership requires more trust, credibility and integrity between George and Shelly. George should empower Shelly at a higher level, trust her and respect her decisions. Besides, George should discuss with Shelly about(predicate) what are their shared goals and values, deliver the companys short-term and long-term objectives to Shelly, and let she know how her bat and efforts would help company to approach the objectives.Moreover, George should move Shelly to address higher needs besides salary, such as bigger growth opportunity, etc. Also, according to Basss theory, idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual comment and individualized consideration are some useful methods well implementing transformational leadership. Overall, using transformational leadership would help Shelly to perform beyon d Georges expectation, so that their team would finally achieve companys business objectives more effectively.