Case Study Response
Mark exhibits characteristics of laissez faire leadership because the case study describes him as “hands off”. Laissez Fair Leadership is defined by almost this silent partner mentality where someone believes that their team members can create the highest quality output when given opportunities to do so on their own. This philosophy is fine but could create a big disconnect from the leader and the people they are trying to influence. It also could develop an environment of low expectations and flexible deadlines therefore not allowing team members to actually produce work to their best ability.
Andy shows characteristics of an authoritarian leader. This may be because he recently was given the role of art director and is trying to find his place within that however the way he communicates tasks is very demanding. He definitely seems to be sympathetic to the needs of his team members as they were his colleagues and seems to react with sensitivity to Charlie’s outrage. However, he seems to think that “upper management” will take care of Charlie’s attitude. Additionally, when he communicated that all further meetings would be in his office, it was like he was flexing his new position. While I have grace for Andy in him being a new leader, I hope that he does not seek to lead like this for the duration of his role with the company.
I think that when a new leader assumes a role it is very easy to get too caught up in what they think they are supposed to do. If Andy had come to this meeting with the perspective of humility and gratitude of having this new position he would have been received with a much different attitude. Charlie’s response as well as the silence from the rest of the team sort of said that he was already creating a somewhat hostile environment. If he had come into that meeting and asked the team more about what they’d like to change and what they’d like to stay the same, he could have led from a more transformational standpoint. I know that this type of leadership is not simple or the most natural always but if Andy implemented it he would see greater results. Also, because he has the position of art director, he really could be using that as a platform to inspire the marketing team to be their most creative selves.
Andy shows characteristics of an authoritarian leader. This may be because he recently was given the role of art director and is trying to find his place within that however the way he communicates tasks is very demanding. He definitely seems to be sympathetic to the needs of his team members as they were his colleagues and seems to react with sensitivity to Charlie’s outrage. However, he seems to think that “upper management” will take care of Charlie’s attitude. Additionally, when he communicated that all further meetings would be in his office, it was like he was flexing his new position. While I have grace for Andy in him being a new leader, I hope that he does not seek to lead like this for the duration of his role with the company.
I think that when a new leader assumes a role it is very easy to get too caught up in what they think they are supposed to do. If Andy had come to this meeting with the perspective of humility and gratitude of having this new position he would have been received with a much different attitude. Charlie’s response as well as the silence from the rest of the team sort of said that he was already creating a somewhat hostile environment. If he had come into that meeting and asked the team more about what they’d like to change and what they’d like to stay the same, he could have led from a more transformational standpoint. I know that this type of leadership is not simple or the most natural always but if Andy implemented it he would see greater results. Also, because he has the position of art director, he really could be using that as a platform to inspire the marketing team to be their most creative selves.