Environmental Designs International

When Lee Keiko returned from a quick lunch, she scanned her email inbox for the message that she had been dreading. She found it$,$ labelled $$high priority$,$ among a dozen other emails and sank back in her chair as she mentally prepared to open it$.$ Lee Keiko felt a tightening in her stomach as she clicked on the message and braced herself for the assault she had grown to expect from Barry Carver, her boss at Environmental Designs International $($EDI$),$ a rapidly growing $$green$$ company that specialises in retrofitting commercial buildings to improve their energy efficiency.

The primary clients of EDI are owners of skyscrapers who renovate their buildings to reduce energy use and cut down on greenhouse gas emissions, a contributor to global warming. Within these towering skyscrapers, the largest energy guzzlers are lighting, cooling, and heating. Owners of New York City$$s Empire State Building expect to reduce the skyscraper$$s energy use by $38$ per cent within five years at an annual savings of US$$4\mathrm{.}4$m after this $78-$year$-$old building is retrofitted.

Lee Keiko had expected Barry Carver$$s scathing email and knew he would lambaste her and her team for missing last Friday$$s deadline for submitting a proposal to retrofit a $60-$story Chicago skyscraper to meet new federal green standards. Lee Keiko had warned Barry Carver of the possible delay in completing the proposal due to changing federal regulations for energy efficiency. It was truly out of her hands. She had even consulted with the client to alert them of the delay, and they had agreed to an extended deadline.

Nevertheless, Barry Carver was angry about the delay and fired off an email that was brusque and insensitive. $$I depend on you to meet deadlines and work effectively with regulatory agencies. Your ineptness may cost us this important project$,$ he exclaimed in this email to Lee Keiko. $$Why aren$$t you as committed to this project as I am$?$ I can$$t do this alone$,$ he stated. This was on more example of how Barry Carver often made life miserable for his subordinates, verbally attacking them to get results. Barry Carver had also started alienating his peers. During a recent meeting to discuss the replacement of thousands of windows in the Chicago skyscraper, Barry Carver embarrassed a colleague by accusing him of selecting a vendor without doing a price comparison among vendors. $$How can I value your recommendation, Troy, if you fail to do your homework? I need new prices by Friday!$$ shouted Barry Carver.

Barry Carver was a highly skilled architect and responsible for managing a team of designers in EDI$$s Chicago office. Although his abrupt personality had helped him climb the corporate ladder, his intimidating communication style was beginning to create problems and hamper his ability to get results. Barry Carver learned in his performance review that his work relationships were suffering and the complaints about him were increasing. Even his long$-$time peers were avoiding him as much as possible and finding way to work around him.

Sensitive to the growing animosity towards him, Barry Carver began to reconsider how he interacted with his staff and peers. He felt motivated to begin using some of the tools he had recently learned in the executive education course he had just completed. During one of the skills$-$assessment activities, Barry Carver learned that he could get better results by communicating more gently, building consensus, and working in a more team$-$oriented manner. Further, he realised that he had to find ways to handle his anger and frustration when dealing with federal regulatory agencies and the inevitable delays that hampered progress on big construction projects. As he thought about the skills assessment, Barry Carver wondered if he could soften his image and perhaps even be considered for a senior management position he was eyeing in EDI$$s Los Angeles office.

Source: Daft, R$.$L$..(2018).$ The Leadership Experience. Cengage $($pp$.130-131).$

$($a$)$At the senior management level, you get hired for competence. You get fired for personality.$$ Evaluate this statement. How does it relate to Barry Carver and his current leadership style?

$[10$ marks $]$

$($b$)$ Assess the behaviours described in this case that were damaging to Barry Carver$$s work relationships. Why would a manager behave this way? What negative consequences did these behavior have on his peers and subordinates?

$[5$ marks $]$

$($c$)$ How realistic is it that Barry Carver $($or anyone$)$ can change his own leadership skills? What kind of help might he need?