Case: Erik Peterson Essay
Sorry, but copying text is forbidden on this website!
Do you think Erik Peterson was an effective leader? Why or why not? I do think Erik Peterson was an effective leader.
Erik Peterson was definitely represented good leadership from every aspect of his work. Though at the very beginning, there were a great many problems exsiting in the GMCT and had negative effective on operating, Erik Peterson was trying his best to solve these problems and to some extend, gain some outcomes which revealed Erik Peterson was an effective leader. First Erik Peterson found the chief engineer, Curt Andrews, had a plenty of problems.
Erik Peterson noticed that Curt Andrews was lack of administration skills which were required to start up new operation. Erik Peterson made every effort to solve Curt’s problem, such as replaced Curt by someone more capacitive in this position. Eventually, to help Curt improve the planning and coordination, Erik Peterson held one-on-one counseling sessions to show Curt how to plan better.
Erik Peterson showed good leadership for the reason that Erik Peterson’s work-facilitation behavior indicated that Erik Peterson was willing to provide mentoring, coaching and counseling to assist employees in developing their skills.
Also, Erik Peiterson believed high moral and understanding would encourage people to work as a team and participate more in organization, thus, he held meeting every week in order to let employee to communication and exchange of ideas. Under the Leader- Member exchange Model of Leadership, it was the so called “in group exchange”. Most employees said the meeting was effective, they found from the meeting, they developed respect, mutual trust and a sense of common partnership.
This kind of leadership was effective, employees tended to increase job satisfaction and build more trust for company and coworkers. From the part “key personnel assignments” we could conclude that Erik Peterson was kind of transactional leadership. He clarified employee’s role, such as he found that Trevor Burns was very bright, knowledgeable and sophisticated and assign him in the management group of GMCT. He found the out what people’s the capacity and strength was and assigned them to the right position.
This definitely increased efficiency of the daily work. Meanwhile, Erik Peterson gave positive rewards —-promotion for his secretary based on her good performance on work. As to the salary problem of Trevor Burns, Erik Peterson showed the empathy which was an essential part of emotional intelligence according to the article “what makes a leader”. Erik Peterson felt uncomfortable when he was hearing Trevor’s salary was 25% less because he believed Trevor deserved it. Then Erik Peterson had a conversation with Trevor concerning the decrease and Trevor, finally accepted the cut of 20%. Erik Peterson was thoughtfully and considering employee’s feeling-along with other factors –in the process of making intelligent decisions. After noticing the initial construction of cellular the not that GMCT’s relationship with four of the towns in the license area, Erik Peterson made every effort to solve these problems.
At the same time, Erik Peterson revealed self-aware during his work, which was another important part of emotional intelligence. Erik Peterson recognized the problems about the local utility in getting it to make ready its telephone lines according to the promised schedule. What’s more, Erik Peterson realized the bad relationship between Curt and Trevor. Feeling unable to deal with these problems, Erik Peterson was looking forward to talk with Knight who w the executive to figure out the solution to the problems.. Erik Peterson knew when to ask for help.
Also, he had a firm grasp of himself and he would not let him overstretching the assignment. Knight arranged a two day meeting with Erik Peterson, discussing the problems Erik Peterson were facing in his organization. This process may stated in the article “tipping point leadership” as breaking through the cognitive hurdle. From the meeting, Erik Peterson provided Knight, the executive with the opportunity to had a face-to-face with the problems. In this case, Erik Peterson may be more likely to get help from Knight since Knight might get a profoudining understanding of how serious the problems were and gave Erik Peterson support to overcome these problems in the organization.