24/7 writing help on your phone
Early 2017 our company established a subsidiary company for the sale of Cayman Islands Real Estate. The subsidiary company offers a similar concept as the parent company with a more diverse portfolio of real estate including holiday resort ‘ style developments apposed. During the formation of the new company shareholdings and senior positions were offered to long standing staff members. Prospective Agents each submitted a shareholding proposal. Two people were selected based on their knowledge, exceptional proposals highlighting how the company could be successful and their ongoing commitment.
Two Agents where awarded shareholdings one of whom this assignment relates to who will be named Agent ‘ the Agent was given position of Sales Director. The Agent seemed like the propitious choice who had worked for the mother company for over 9 years and was very successful in terms of sales revenue. The Change Scale. The scale of the change was significant, it included a new product concept, developments, company procedures and all new sales materials which was the biggest change from a sales point of view.
The Launch. The new company launch was exciting throughout the company, XXX notices were given and meetings were held covering the launch and how the new development was going be the flagship development for the company. Arrangements were made to fly all of the staff and agents throughout the company to the UK head office.
A buzz could be felt throughout the company. The Agents were excited to market a brand new development and the overseas staff were excited to travel to England and be part of a big team, the XXX could be felt.
The company was growing from strength to strength and the launch was part of a 10 year plan set by the company in 2006 which was a massive millstone to reach. Change in Leadership. The change in leadership at this time was considerable, it was the first time a sales agent was promoted to C-suite level and given the opportunity to run a division of the organisation which had previously been ran by the same CEO since 2006.From experience and extensive knowledge in the sales industry the company was well aware that a change of this scale is subject to decline before improvement also how people can be sensitive to change. The company appointed the Agent to Sales Director with significant experience in sales, extensive knowledge of the product and company also close connections with other salesmen. The Agent was considered as the best person to create the new sales materials (the core part of the sales operation).
The change in the internal environment was strange, along with all of the excitement it soon became apparent that there was another force-field and the change of leadership was not being well received throughout the company. Past leadership styles included team building, employee engagement and bringing people together to create strategic business goals (the more heads the better). The new leadership style became the opposite resulting in a change of attitude from the other sales teams. There was no reciprocal trust between the leader (Agent) and the followers (other staff). As explained by ((D. Pendleton & A. Furnham)) the active and dynamic reciprocal influence process between leaders and followers was said to be essential to team success which was studied as far back as 1949. Several of the other salesmen have also worked at the company for many years who were also very successful. The CEO’s awareness that the ability to work with others is more powerful than working alone was common XXX. A common company slogan used throughout the company team work makes the dream work’. The new leadership style the Agent adapted was to work in isolation to retain full ownership thus penalising himself from the potential benefits and advantages of working with a team. During several meetings the company provided the Agent with guidelines for the new sales materials which was delegated to the Agent and Sales teams. The guidelines advised the Agent to seek recommendations from peers and to delegate some of the work to internal staff for maximum impact.
A summary of the advise;
The Agent did not discuss the materials with anyone. After some time it became apparent that the peer-resistance could be a result of not being able to participate in the creation of the tools which would be used by all salesmen, the salesman often offered support and assistance which was rejected. The agent retained as much ownership as possible which wasn’t well received, this lead to a forcefield of resistance. During this change the companies CEO (who has over 32 years of successful sales background) was in regular communication via several weekly calls with the Agent to discuss the process and progression of the new materials. The calls included specific direction from the CEO on the flow of the presentation, content and context. During the calls the Agent became defensive without any openness to suggestions, over-talking and not agreeing to any recommendations given. This taken into consideration constraints should have been place onto the management of the Agent to avoid further behaviour. A further example of the leadership change and the impact on the companies internal environment.
The organisation operated throughout three provinces in China, Shanghai, Chengdu and Beijing. The sales performance in Chengdu and Shanghai where poor compared to Beijing with losses being made on an annual basis. The Agent was responsible for overseeing the success of all salesmen throughout China. Discussions were made to increase utilisation and relocate the salesmen from poor performing provinces to Beijing which was refused by the Agent suggesting Beijing didn’t have the capacity or functionality for more salesmen, at the time the advise was accepted. Several months later the decision was made by the CEO to relocate all of the staff to Beijing to maximise utilisation of our most successful market. The Agent provided no agreement and the decision was made despite objection. Within days the companies sales increased and all salesmen achieved regular sales activities. The External Factor. The changes within the internal factor had a direct impact on the external factors. For the first time in company history the company recorded zero sales over a 6 month period. Temporary decline was expected with the change, in this case more factors where involved to the decline. The salesmen didn’t take to the new sales presentation and had no trust in the processes therefore started to use create their own sales methods, customers didn’t take to the presentation and the system failed.
Our Company culture is when something doesn’t work don’t change it, as it is just amatter of time and changing the process will lead to continued change and therefore continued decline. The salesmen didn’t agree and refused to work with the new sales presentation which resulted in no sales. After 6 months and zero sales, a considerable amount of fixed costs and variable costs to create the launch a rapid improvement plan was actioned and the company disregarded the Agents sales materials and reintroduced the old processes with an updated concept. Within 4 weeks revenue increased from zero to $1 Million Dollars. With the latter part of 2017 being the most successful half year on Company record to-date. It is important to point out at this point, although the company achieved record revenue from the reinstated processed the Agent refused to go back to the old process and experienced his own worst performance on record. The Agent was not the right candidate for this role, with previous behaviour experiences a characteristic test would be performed to analyse the suitability of the Agent.B. The Ultimate Goal. The new leadership approach by the Agent was profoundly romanced which was clear to all peers and subordinates with the pursuit of popularity being the main agenda. During demonstrations of the new sales processes the agent stood anticipating a round of applause’ which wasn’t received. The initial feedback from sales staff was that the new sales presentation could not sell.
The Agents ultimate goal was considered to be strategic. The Shareholding proposal detailed how the Agent would bring success to the company and was very well demonstrated. The Agent achieved no aspect of the proposal and latent quirks started to emerge. There was no planning on how the changes would be received in the market or how the changes would be be received by the customers. The company requested regular feedback which was vaguely given, after three months in production the company insisted the agent provide sufficient feedback and asked how customers where reacting to the presentation, the Agent replied he had created the presentation without any testing on customers or peers. The lack of input and creativity resulted in a non-performing presentation. The company takes responsibility for the outcome as measures where not put into place to monitor the progression of the processes. Assumptions where made with the proven sales history that the Agent would be-able to create an efficient sales process, this was not the case. The company would have benefited from more regular communication and face-to-face coaching techniques to allow the Agent to see the full reasoning behind the guidelines and why they were given. If the agent fully understood the reasons the guidelines where put into place a broader understanding would have been achieved. The diversity of the staff throughout the company which consisted of many different cultures and leadership styles meant a more subtile and sensitive leadership approach should have been adapted in this context. By allowing more staff to be involved in the XXX of the new company would have allowed more time to be taken to look at individuals values.
The Paradoxes of leadership became apparent. The concept adapted by (Mant 1997) details key traits of leadership de-railers. When a leader becomes overexposed and romanisation plays part in a leadership change emotional intelligence takes a back seat which is a key trait to become successful.A further model (Hersey-Blanchard’s Leadership framework) identifies key traits which would compliment this leadership change. Relationship behaviour is the extent to which the leader engages in two-way or multi-way communications. This includes listening, facilitating, and supportive behaviours. In relationship behaviour the leader engages in two-way communication by providing socio- emotional support. Maturity is the willingness and ability of a person to take responsibility for directing his or her own behaviour. People tend to have varying degrees of maturity, depending on the specific task, function, or objective that a leader is attempting to accomplish through their efforts. Outcomes of Leadership. The outcome of the leadership change resulted in a force-field of areas including splits within the company and XXXX which was once a whole. What does the company need to do now.C Grow from Good to Great. It takes a certain type of leader during the creation stage of a business to become successful and a collection of certain traits to grow the company from good to great. The Agent was considered to have the same traits as a high powered individual which wasn’t fitting within this position; ( van Kleef & Cґt©, 2007 ) As Chief Executive I would firstly to create a team who are t he best in each of their fields a power team ‘ including the best in sales, marketing, administration and so on.
The company did not direct this leadership change into greatness with the same theory by (Collins 2011) emphasising the importance of the right team ‘ – rather than the right project. The company had the perfect project but not the right team to make the project great. The company didn’t have the right management teams or staff to be able to delegate roles too, leaving just the CEO to make every decision who runs several global companies the scope was to great for one person to manage. In this case a senior executive team would need to consider the implications of the leadership change including the internal and external problems and the dramatic decline in sales as a result of the changes. Consideration would include if the Agent was to continue in the same position or to be demoted to non-senior position.
Using the Framework Figure 1.2: The domains of leadership Source: Pedler et al. (2000) the leadership characteristics would have been assessed. Figure 1.2 The Leadership module has taught me there is an suitable place for everyone in a business cycle and businesses as a whole. Consideration and analysis’s of a persons behaviour and leadership traits can identify where they are best positioned in a business cycle. Thought the the broad studies which have taken place over many years people can be clearly identified through certain characteristics, which can almost pinpoint where their ability to succeed in certain areas. Coaching has made me more aware of how to deal with different people in different situations and how to manage different types of people differently by their traits and be more aware of their identities. Characteristics Not using appropriate behaviour for good leadership and sales Context The company is facing a decline stage with zero sales. No harmony between teams. Challenges Address critical issues of XXX team, no sales, leadership styleChief Executive. As Chief Executive of the company I would still offer the Agent Sales Director position which was awarded for many years in the company and exceptional sales performance. Andrew Ward leadership lifestyle supports the theory that the company required an accelerator, someone with a high degree of focus and direction who was able to utilise the resources of the internal and external environment to build a robust system and clear understanding of the companies market. (Page 10. The Leadership Lifecycle. Andrew Ward) In this case the company did not oversee the progress the Agent was making closely enough for it to become successful or choose the correct person based on characteristics. The difficulties to be expected in the leadership change could have been identified and avoided using the McKinsey 7’S framework (Figure 1.7s Framework), outlining soft and hard factors and potential problems. As McKinsey identifies by adequately addressing all the core factors of value in an organisation in a harmonious manor in order to drive success ‘ which is required in this change, this same concept forms part of this argument.
Figure 1. 7-s Framework During the change several weekly video and/or face-to-face meetings would be made compulsory with all staff members involved in the change of processes, with satisfactory updates and reporting. Virtual communication is now vital in the success of international markets. Strategy was the key to success in this leadership change and strategy lacked. All salesmen throughout the company who were actively in communication with clients on a daily basis should have an input into the design process and would be delegated tasks relating to the new sales presentation for a number of reasons; Benefits of Delegation;
Adapting coaching and visionary leadership to create harmony within all divisions new processes would mean all the teams could work in sync together with an equal input into the changes and not work against each other. Yet as Chief Executive still being able to make final and necessary decisions to successfully execute an efficient change. Ethos, Logo’s and Passos was absent in the Agent, the company took too long to reveal the true traits of the Agent.
As seen in Framework 1.3 Theory of change model would be used in the planning and development of the change, detailing the aims, directions, resources and outcomes of the change as a whole; Framework 1.3 Who we will work with to achieve aims; All sales sta, senior sta and front oce sta. Aims; To provide a eective sales platform and company systems. How; Carry out throughout research. Create storyboard between sta. Receive real feedback. Create Innovation.Resources; Develop sta ethics. Retain company culture. Improve customer satisfaction.Exploit Core Competencies Outcome . Create a division which stands out in the market providing the correct ethics and provides a good customer and sta experience.Conclusion . The Assignment shows the importance of delegation when running a large scale business.
Delegation is key to a successful company aligning goals throughout the company and having the right team. Once effective staff have been chosen for delegation in the right areas the company would experience forceful growth, a do it right the first time’ lean approach would have been used and a network structured so strong influence was pushed up from the bottom to the top cresting a team of leaders instead of a leader’. In order to executive the change successfully directive and no-directive scales would have been used. Thus being assertive in all areas but not patronising or commanding. A laid out strategy determining the companies vision and purpose would have been asserted throughout all areas and correctly managed. Placing the wrong people into the wrong position can be harmful in any company, companies should take into consideration individual traits and analysis models which have been clearly demonstrated during this module.
👋 Hi! I’m your smart assistant Amy!
Don’t know where to start? Type your requirements and I’ll connect you to an academic expert within 3 minutes.get help with your assignment