Retail Max Study
RetailMax Study Leadership, Ethics and Policy Class Grand Canyon Univsersity The two case studies of RetailMax provided a very thought provoking situation that is very relatable to the everyday business world for leaders. The case studies displayed the decision, emotion and struggle that Kessel had to face while determining what he could offer to Archer for her to join his team. Mangini had the monetary benefit, but was not able to offer personal satisfaction that Archer had established for herself. Potential power is something that both Mangini and Kessel had in this situation.Each had different aspects of potential power, but both used it to his advantage whether positive or negative.
Mangini has some potential power as he is able to entice Archer with a monetary compensation. Mangini can offer more money with bonus potential on job performance. Kessel has more potential power because he is able to tap in to Archer’s personal career goals, room for promotion, ability to travel less and have a social life, as well as advance her long term career through his marketing ambitions.Each person has different power bases that were displayed in the case scenario. Mangini displayed reward power, through monetary compensation Kessel showed reward power through the personal gain of career goals, less travel time and leadership experience. Kessel also demonstrated referent power, because Archer looks up to Kessel and stated she had a lot to learn from him in the marketing arena.
Archer looked to Kessel as a mentor. Archer demonstrated legitimate power if she took the position in marketing as she would have direct subordinates and could use her MBA to the fullest.Stereotypical gender roles did play a minor supporting role in the case study. Mangini assumed that Archer would take the job being a stereotypical female who would want more financial compensation rather than personal reward. This was stereotypical of Mangini to assume Archer would automatically take the job that paid more money. Kessel was not stereotypical with his approach.
He was honest and up front and did not play hard ball. There were several social powers that effected the situation. Prior relationship had much to do with Archer ability to move up.Due to the relationship that Archer had with the VP of sales’ recommendation to the CEO to move Archer into a position where his talents could be used more beneficially. The CEO trusted the VP of Sales, Kessel’s and Mangini’s decision to offer both positions to Archer.
He trusted his VPs and their honest judgment as well as the decision of Archer to determine the job that Archer would take. Kessel’s reputation, loyalty and experience were a great deciding factor to Archer as he would love to learn from Kessel.This referent power was a great determining factor to Archer. This position would also give Archer legitimate power as she would have subordinates and work as a facilitator over the program managers. Each side made certain assumptions about the other.
Mangini assumed that Archer will automatically take the position that he offered due to the salary and monetary benefits. Kessel assumed that he could entice Archer with her career goals, personal goals, less travel times and other fringe benefits to the position he has offered to Archer.Each man is assuming he has the best offer for Archer. Archer should be interested in the position from Kessel. This position offers her the personal career goals that she is striving to achieve.
There is mobility, upward movement within the company as well as avenues to allow her to utilize all of her skills through her learned knowledge with her MBA. This position offers her everything that she had dreamed of in a job. This is her ideal position. Kessel should hire Archer due to the fact that she brings the most attributes to the table.Archer would be an enormous asset to the team.
She brings sales; marketing knowledge, leadership and personality traits that are needed to assure success for her and the department. An external applicant would not know of the debate and decision of deciding between the two jobs offers. He or she would not know the social structure and the company. This would be a positive benefit due to the fact that if Archer chooses one of the positions, either Kessel or Mangini will have hard feelings towards Archer or the other party who she decided to take the job.Mangini made the decision seem as a competition when he challenged Kessel to “win” Archer’s decision. Kessel should appeal emotionally to the benefits of the position to Archer.
Kessel’s position is one that is a long term career move where she would have longevity with the company with the opportunity to move upward within the organization. This position also gives her the leadership opportunity that she desires, as well as nominal travel. She would be basically stationary which would be very welcome to her after her long stint of extensive travel for RetailMax.This case study allowed for a real possible situation in the realm of leadership. I was able to analyze the situation with enough information to form an opinion, scenario and outcome for Archer, Mangini and Kessel.
I feel this was a touchy and difficult situation and the ultimate decision was Archer’s. This exercise allowed me to see how difficult some decisions are at the highest level of leadership. References RetailMax: Role for Cam Archer” by McGinn and Witter, from Harvard Business School (2006). RetailMax: Role for Regan Kessel by McGinn and Witter, from Harvard Business School (2006).
