Case Study: SolarEx Sylvia Adamson has developed a breakthrough solar panel technology which rapidly and efficiently transforms solar energy into electricity for household use. Not only that, but her panel technology allowed the solar energy to be stored for up to one year - something no other technology could currently achieve. Six months out from university she started her own business, SolarEx. She launched with a $2000 contract to build two solar panels for the house of an elderly couple near her home. Word of mouth resulted in her receiving other small contracts. But the interest in her product, from both residential and commercial buyers, meant that demand was soon exceeding her capacity to supply. After approaching her local bank manager, she received a generous 'early start-up' loan. She moved to larger premises, set up a better and more professional office space, and bought more reliable equipment to manufacture her panels. She now employed 15 staff who shared her enthusiasm for the product and assisted with its manufacture. While Sylvia's drive, passion and confidence were unquestioned, her work practices, and working for her, were a different story. Even though her business was expanding - moving into new markets, requiring more suppliers, and employing more staff - the design of the organisation didn't really change. Sylvia trusted that because she worked hard, was competent and got things done, everyone else would do that too. As new solar panel work came in, Sylvia placed a summary of the orders on a notice board in the office and expected individual employees to pick up the work and get it done on time. While this system worked well for a while, things soon became a little chaotic. Some contracts and orders were not met, resulting in lost revenue and angry clients. Sylvia was increasingly avoiding what she viewed as the 'mundane tasks of administration', such as managing finances and managing payroll, which meant no formalised rules and procedures were put in place to manage the workload. While Sylvia wanted to continue to innovate her product and wanted staff to think creatively, she put rigid restrictions around them. They had to start and finish at strict times during the day, lunch breaks were only half an hour, people weren't encouraged to talk to each other and she was quick to pointedly criticise staff ideas. Sylvia was also the sort of person to focus on getting things done. She often said that the work day 'is not for sitting around and chatting about your weekend, we're here to work'. While she was good at setting goals and performance standards for the team and directing what to do, she didn't seem to want to hear what her staff had to say or even give them a 'thank you' for the long hours they worked. As a result, her staff just tended to agree with whatever she said. While Sylvia recognised that she wasn't a natural people person', she knew her staff were unhappy and that her business was at risk of failing to reach the heights that she believed it could reach. She knows things have to change, but what, why and how? You are to analyse this case study using the four-step case analysis process utilised in your case study report assessment piece in MGMT6051/6008 this semester. To analyse this case, given the information above, you must draw on the knowledge, theory, and examples from our unit, with a particular focus on the Organisational Structure, Organisational Culture, and Group and Team Dynamics topics. Present your case analysis through the following four steps: 1. Provide a brief Background understanding of the case; 2. Identify (approximately) 3-4 key workforce management issues (these can be positives or negatives or both) relevant to the topics noted above (i.e., Organisational Structure, Organisational Culture, and Group and Team Dynamics); 3. Analyse those key issues through application of relevant theory; and 4. Offer brief and targeted Recommendations