ORG E502 Managing People

Workshop 4 – Individual assignment

Essay: HR theories on Dick Spencer case

By: CN

UOP –MBA program

Dick’s evolution paradox

The morale of human relations

Dick Spencer’s dazzling career development is not matching his evolution as a person or a manager. We can use his case to identify the different situations Dick is encountering throughout his ordeal. Theories on Human Relations can help us to label them for a better understanding. We see our character engaged in a very dualistic forward movement. He is achieving professional success on one hand and loosing total control of the situation, including his life, on the other. We as HR specialists and spectators are able to see what is happening. We are able to deduce what he should or shouldn’t do. We might even think we are able to make a few suggestions. Human Relations (HR) is not an exact science, there are no straight formulas to implement, and there is no right or wrong answers. HR is indeed about humans in their relations, no surprises here. The problem is that we often tend to forget this; we cover it with a lot of theories and related names. A part of being human is the ability to empathize, deduct and learn from our experiences.  

What type of ‘human’ is Dick Spencer and how does it reflect on his actions? He is clearly very task and result driven. Following McClelland’s theory of needs, which I quote in my book OBEA, we can place Dick in the n-Achievement corner. Also his attitude towards n-Power is strong, judging from the way he wants to control his environment. A great profile for a sales rep, as he proofs to be in his early years at Tri-American. But what about a business manager?  As I proceed in my book; ‘successful managers of large organizations exhibit self-control and a strong need for power that is greater than their need to be liked’. It still fits the average profile, but is that is that what he needs as a people manager? The answer is no. He has a lack of n-Affiliation preferring competitive situations above collaborative situations. He tends to forget or neglect the human factor that drives industries at the end. We should put Dick to a test to find out his learning style type. Judging from his actions and reasoning I tend to think he is the Converger type, according to D. Kolb. Lewis and Margerison would call him “Practical” and again Woods would call him one of his “HOW?-people”. As a manager he relies on factual data and results. He likes to be in control solving problem. Nevertheless, his lack of self-awareness and low empathy are not compensated by his achievements. Because of his lack of trust towards his subordinates Douglas McGregor would label him as a traditional manager, inclined more to his X-theory assumptions. As a manager he puts a lot of energy to get things done, his way. Using the Competing Values Framework I deduct his style to be more on the Open Systems and Rational Goals. His overemphasis and lack of touch with his environment drives his activities into the negative zones, towards the ‘sweat shop’. Dick is starting to see the negative impact of his own drive.

Join now!

What is driving Dick, what keeps him motivated? Behavior is a function of the person and the environment (McClelland). To understand Dick’s behavior we will look at the setting in which he performs. Tri-American is a typical US company, driven by achievement and performance. As a person he seems to be driven by the same factors. Dick gets motivated by the challenge and the sense of accomplishment. The president of the company feels that and in a way uses it to lure him into this new ‘challenge’. He is relying on the Goal-Setting theory to trigger Dick’s motivation to make ...

This is a preview of the whole essay