Four aspects in leadership Essay
Four aspects in leadership
Leadership is defined as senior executives who support the creation of processes (Hammer, 2007). There are four aspects in leadership including awareness, alignment, behavior, and style. According to Hammer’s PEMM and the analysis of evidence in this case, four perspectives including awareness, alignment, behavior, and style are scored from E-1 to E-4.
Leadership awareness is defined as the recognition of business process and understanding the value of the process-oriented enterprise for senior management. Bharat Dave, who is vice president of industry sales in Siemens ROLM Communication Incorporation, recognizes that they need a restructuring program to improve profitability and market share in their four disparate companies (P1). Also, ROLM senior management understands that they need to reengineer new processes and guarantee the execution of those new processes based on appropriate information technology (P4). Moreover, ROLM senior management seeks for global strategies through integrating ROLM into Siemens Private Communication Systems (P4). Finally, ROLM senior management seeks to create one company spirit, identity, and culture by establishing and reengineering processes and a new attitude that accepts innovation and continuous improvement (P4).
According to Hammer’s PEMM and case evidence above, leadership awareness at Siemens ROLM Communication incorporation is at the E-4 level where “the senior executive team sees its own work in process terms and perceives process management not as a project but as a way of managing the business”. In conclusion, this program involves in one company spirit, identity, culture, and management as a total company plan to establish and sustain world-class performance as recognized by customers, not only as a project.
The alignment of leadership concerns the coordination between management and employees in the company. A “project office” was established to manage ROLM 1 in January 1992 and was made up three senior executives and led by Dave who was vice president of logistics form ROLM (P5). It means that the senior executives are responsible for this project. Also, 60% of the field offices have accepted the new process and tools (P2). Dave reflects that 80% of approximately 6,000 person work force has been impacted by ROLM 1 in the company (P1). However, senior management still has three concerns for this project.
Firstly, whether the new processes and tools cannot be refrozen but continue to implement further changes (P2). Secondly, whether senior management continues to measure specified processes or emphasizes more traditional revenue and cost performance measures (P2). Thirdly, senior management should be how to motivate those field offices that is laggards to accept the new process (P2).
According to Hammer’s PEMM and case evidence above, the alignment of leadership is at the E-3 level where “there is strong alignment in the senior executive team regarding the process program. There is also a network of people throughout the enterprise helping to promote process efforts”. In conclusion, there is a good alignment in this project between management and employees.
Leadership behavior is whether management performs their own work as processes and strategies in order to achieve their goals. Karl Geng, who was chief operating officer at ROLM, said that the project had enjoyed relentless support from president and the president fully trusted us (P12). It means that senior management endorses in operational improvement and insures removing roadblocks in order to achieve goals including 30%-50% improvement in cost, quality, and cycle time (P6). Moreover, ten managers from field offices across United States were comprised the ILCPR design team into headquarters (P6).
These managers involved in various areas in the company, including sales, service, order administration, pricing, manufacturing and distribution, installation, MIS, and business administration (P6). These managers were brought to focus on three areas in this project: order fulfillment, inventory, and IS systems (P6). These leadership behaviors from senior management primarily assure that the project can achieve a high performance to improve profitability and market share.
According to Hammer’s PEMM and case evidence above, leadership behavior is at the E-3 level where “senior executives operate as a team, manage the enterprise through its processes, and are actively engaged in the process program”. In conclusion, senior management attaches great importance on this reengineering project.
Leadership style is a style for leader or senior management. This case does not provide much evident of leadership style for the project at ROLM Communication incorporation. In fact, senior management makes an open and free environment for communication in company, such as making frequent presentations to various audiences including training classes and meetings (P11). In addition, small group interactions also impact employees’ efforts for enterprise innovation (P11). Geng said “middle management does a lot of filtering that can only be remedied via more communication” (P12).
According to Hammer’s PEMM and case evidence above, leadership style is at the E-2 level where “the senior executive team leading the process program is passionate about the need to change and about process as the key tool for change”. In conclusion, the senior management provides a good communication to make more employees to accept the new process.
In conclusion, as analyzed each of perspective evidence above, awareness is at E-4 level, alignment is at E-3 level, behavior is at E-3 level, and style is at E-2 level. Consequently, total score of leadership is E-3 level.
According to Hammer (2007), enterprise’s organizational culture must focus on the teamwork, customer, responsibility and attitude toward change. According to Hammer’s PEMM and the analysis of evidence in this case, four perspectives including teamwork, customer, responsibility, and attitude toward change are scored from E-1 to E-4.
ROLM 1 is a project as functional, cross-functional, and field impact projects (P6). There are ten managers brought to establish a professional team to manage three areas for this project into headquarters, including order fulfillment, inventory, and IS systems (P6). This project emphasizes on the customer and install what customers want, when customers want, and no matter what the cost (P7). It shows that ROLM’s employees and customers have an optimal relationship as teamwork. Moreover, Dave and three senior executives established a “project office” to manage ROLM 1 in January 1992 (P5). As evident showed above, teamwork is commonplace among senior management, field manager, employee, and customer.
According to Hammer’s PEMM and case evidence above, teamwork is at E-3 level where “teamwork is the norm among process performers and is commonplace among managers”. In conclusion, the enterprise has a optimal teamwork to focus on the project.
Customer focus is a customer-oriented strategy for a company. Karl Geng said that “ our strength has always been our customer focus” and “ it is easy to implement the project because customer is focused from start to end” (P2). Also, Dataquest and Datapro ranked ROLM as the number one PBX vendor for customer satisfaction (P1). ROLM allows customer a great deal of flexibility for making the installation happen, no matter what the cost (P7). As the case said, the goal of ROLM is to install what the customer wants, when the customer wants, and no matter what the cost (P7).
According to Hammer’s PEMM and case evidence above, customer focus is at E-3 level where “employees understand that customers demand uniform excellence and a seamless experience”. In conclusion, the employees of ROLM understand the importance of customer.
Responsibility is a duty or obligation to satisfactorily perform or complete a task. In this case, Dave and three senior executives establish a “project office” to be responsible for the process in three ways: to coordinate the various ROLM 1 activities, to help projects overcome barriers, and to identify cross-functional and cross project opportunities (P5). Senior management has three responsibilities to manage the project. Also, the project office organizes meeting every 4-6 weeks for deciding whether to start a project, to review project status, to redirect priorities and resources, or to create policy decisions by the design team (P5). Moreover, 60% of the field offices have accepted the new processes and tools and most offices and customers agree that this project creates a much better way of doing business (P2).
According to Hammer’s PEMM and case evidence above, responsibility is at E-3 level where “employees feel accountable for enterprise results”. In conclusion, the responsibility of senior management makes accountability for employees and customers.
Attitude Toward Change:
Attitude toward change means that employees are willing to accept the development of project in a company. 60% of the field offices have accepted the new processes and tools (P2). Also, installation personnel feel that design-early is an outstanding innovation and makes easier for them to complete a quality “on time” installation, as like “a breath of fresh air” (P8). However, some employees are growing tired of change because they are required to accomplish their goals (P2). Moreover, one key difference for employees’ attitude toward change is whether they see the change to help them to attain a world-class status in the eyes of their customers (P2).
According to Hammer’s PEMM and case evidence above, attitude toward change is at E-2 level where “employees are prepared for significant change in how work is performed”. In conclusion, attitude toward change has a huge impact on whether the project succeeds or not for the company.
In conclusion, according to the analysis of teamwork, customer focus, responsibility, and attitude toward change from culture, teamwork is at E-3 level, customer focus is at E-3 level, responsibility is at E-3 level, and attitude toward change is at E-2 level. Consequently, the total score of culture is E-3 level.
Expertise consists of the skill and methodology to redesign the process. People and methodology are the subcategories of expertise (Hammer, 2007). According to Hammer’s PEMM and the analysis of evidence in this case, two aspects including people and methodology are scored from E-1 to E-4.
Dave, who is vice president of industry sales in ROLM Communication Incorporation, understands that ROLM 1 can improve profitability and market share for company (P1). Ten managers with different skills are brought from field offices across the United States to establish the ILCPR design team (P6). These managers involve in diverse areas of the company, including sales, service, order administration, pricing, manufacturing and distribution, installation, MIS, and business administration (P6). They have their own skills to make a large-scale change and enterprise transformation for the company. Furthermore, Dave and three senior executives create a “project office” to manage the program (P5). They also have their own skills to make an impact on the process.
According to Hammer’s PEMM and case evidence above, people is at E-3 level where “a cadre of experts has skills in large-scale change management and enterprise transformation”. In conclusion, people with skills are significant for the reengineering process.
Methodology is the use of one or more methodologies for company to solve problem and improve process. In this case, ROLM implements a new parts distribution methodology that allows the company to cut the field parts inventory by over 60% (P10). Moreover, the senior management of ROLM uses 80/20 rule, as showed in this case “ if a package existed for 80% of the requirements, we would buy it and ROLM would change to make the remaining 20% work” (P10). These two methodologies provide assistance for the company to solve execution problems and improve the fluency of the process.
According to Hammer’s PEMM and case evidence above, methodology is at E-1 level where “the enterprise uses one or more methodologies for solving execution problems and making incremental process improvement”. In conclusion, the part of methodology is required to get better for the program.
In conclusion, expertise includes two aspects: people and methodology. As analyzed two aspects evidence above, people is at E-3 level and methodology is E-1 level. Consequently, the total of expertise is E-2 level.
According to Hammer (2007), governance is a mechanism that manages complex projects and changes plans. According to Hammer’s PEMM and the analysis of evidence in this case, three aspects including process model, accountability, and integration are scored from E-1 to E-4.
Process model is process of the same nature that is classified together into a model. Ten managers were brought from field offices across the United State, then they implement three process models: order fulfillment, inventory, IS systems (P6). The order fulfillment includes two projects: design-early and standard design, both of them result in significant cost savings (P6). Inventory model can reduce inventory at manufacturing locations and in the field (P10). IS system can decrease costs and simplify business processes (P10). These process models have been accepted to implement in the reengineering program and have made business value for the company. However, these process models are not connected to enterprise-level technologies and data architecture and are not extended to customers and suppliers for the company.
According to Hammer’s PEMM and case evidence above, process model is at E-2 level where “the enterprise has developed a complete enterprise process model, and the senior executive team has accepted it”. In conclusion, although senior executives accept these process models, it is not linked to enterprise-level technologies or data architectures. E-2 is the best on the evaluation of process model.
Accountability is the responsibility of performers for enterprise performance. In this case, the reengineering team members as steering committee members set up many presentations for training classes and meeting at headquarters and field offices (P11). These presentations share accountability for the enterprise’s performance. Geng said middle management makes more communication with employees to share accountability during the reengineering time of the program (P12). Geng also said he spent 1/3 of each day on listening and talking (P12). The accountability of senior executives reflects the company emphasizes on this program.
According to Hammer’s PEMM and case evidence above, accountability is at E-2 level where “process owners have accountability for individual processes, and a steering committee is responsible for the enterprise’s overall progress with processes”. In conclusion, E-2 level is best at accountability because the company has not established steering committees with customers and suppliers to drive enterprise process change.
Dave, who is the vice president of logistics, established a “project office” with three senior executives to manage ROLM 1 (P5). This is a formal program management office to administer the reengineering process. Moreover, ten managers are brought into headquarters from different field offices and they are responsible for three areas: order fulfillment, inventory, and IS systems (P6). These managers allocate most processes improvement techniques and tools and coordinate and integrate all process projects.
According to Hammer’s PEMM and case evidence above, integration is at E-3 level because the vice president of logistics establishes a formal program management office and the project office endorses and supports the operational improvement techniques for the enterprise. The company uses an integrated manner to improve all processes techniques.
In conclusion, governance is involved in process model, accountability, and integration. As analyzed these three perspectives above, process model is at E-2, accountability is at E-2 level, and integration is at E-3 level. Consequently, the total score of governance is E-2 level.