Analysis of Leadership Theories in Relation to the Bob Knowlten Case

Posted: January 4th, 2023

Analysis of Leadership Theories in Relation to the Bob Knowlten Case

Student’s Name

Institutional Affiliation

Analysis of Leadership Theories in Relation to the Bob Knowlten Case

Question 1

The managerial-leadership problem experienced at Simmons Laboratories was the lack of capable team leadership. The team at the laboratory was dysfunctional because it lacked trust among the members, along with the fear of conflict. These are two of the five dysfunctions of a team advanced by Lencioni (Lencioni, 2006). The manager-leaders at Simmons Laboratory had not created a conducive environment for functional teams to thrive. Therefore, team cohesion was undermined by self-interests, and unwarranted fears were let to flourish. This is because the egos of team members were left to interfere with team cohesion. Firstly, the team leader, Bob Knowlten, feared to be vulnerable when encountering a team member who appeared to be more knowledgeable and organized than he was. Secondly, the team members feared conflict by preserving false harmony and secure their upward mobility in the company. In this regard, the leadership at Simmons Laboratory had not created a team culture that encouraged team members to disclose their fears and vulnerabilities, and address concerns and conflicts whenever they arose.       

Question 2

The expectancy theory of motivation explains the behaviors of the team members at Simmons Laboratories. The theory posits that individuals choose one behavior over another intentionally based on the expected outcomes (Purvis, Zagenczyk, & McCray, 2015). In this regard, people opt for behaviors that advance the achievement of desired goals. This theory is applicable in the Simmons Laboratory in two ways. Firstly, it explains the behavior of Bob Knowlten, who expects to be rewarded and recognized for his innovative work. Already, Knowlten has been rewarded with the project leadership position because of his productivity and innovativeness. Therefore, his behavior was directed towards securing this position, while targeting further upward mobility in the company. Secondly, the theory explains the behavior of the team members who fear to offend the team leader to maintain harmony and secure their work at the company. The members avoided openly discussing their fears and concerns, hoping to remain in good books with the company’s management.

Question 3

I recommend the nurturing of functional team behaviors to avert the problems experienced at Simmons Laboratories. The company leadership should create a corporate culture that enhances trust among the employees at all levels and encourages open communication. All employees should feel safe to express their concerns and vulnerabilities because it would contribute to their performance and the overall success of the company. In this regard, while effort and high performance are encouraged, the relation between performance and retention should not be emphasized above teamwork and cohesion. Therefore, Bob Knowlten should express his fears and vulnerabilities to avoid looking and feeling dissatisfied. Similarly, his subordinates should be encouraged to address conflicts openly and constructively to avoid stifling their opinions and input. Moreover, Knowlten’s peers should value team cohesion and outcomes over personal ambitions and achievements. Altogether, this would lay more emphasis on having functional and high-performing teams rather than prioritizing individualized behavior and its influence on upward mobility at the company.     

Question 4

To avoid Knowlten’s resignation, Dr. Jerrold, who heads the laboratory, should have disclosed the company’s plans to the laboratory members. Specifically, Jerrold should have informed the members of the upcoming Air Force project and the plans to source for a team leader for it. Moreover, Jerrold should have introduced Simon Fester officially to the team members. This would have provided the company’s leadership the opportunity to explain the role that Fester would play at the company. It would also have given Fester the chance to disclose his capabilities and experience, and explain the contributions he would make to the ongoing projects. This information would have dispelled Knowlten’s fears of being replaced as a project head, a position he had acquired recently, and in turn, dissuaded him from resigning.    

References

Lencioni, P. (2006). Overcoming the five dysfunctions of a team. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Purvis, R. L., Zagenczyk, T. J., & McCray, G. E. (2015). What’s in it for me? Using expectancy theory and climate to explain stakeholder participation, its direction and intensity. International Journal of Project Management, 33(1), 3-14. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.03.003.