Description of the Group
The setting of the video is a factory, but the depiction is that the firm has a large workforce with 100 shop floor workers. Scenes of employees at different work stations can be interpreted to mean multiple number of staffs performing their roles. For instance, Richard highlights the case of four onsite engineers who were absent in their stations because they went to have tea. The feeling that one gets following the observation from one of the employees that there was no friendship anymore in the company, is that of a firm with employees in need of social life at work. The interactions between Richard and his employees depict a strained relationship, which can be attributed to the rigid job roles. Putnam, Myers and Gailliard (2014) posited that workplaces flexibility initiatives are potential remedies for work-life conflicts. It is likely that given the size of the team at the plant, employees took it upon themselves to solve work related tension by adopting workplace flexibility through enhanced social cycles.
The composition of the group can be noted to be diverse with a mixture of young and old blood with each apparently bringing a different level of expertise to the plant. This is evident during the proposal to affect redundancies where experience among the older employees is given preference. However, there appears to be gender bias because majority of the employees featured are male. The purpose of the group can best be described as disjointed. As Gerry noted, there is evident lack of trust between the manager (Richard) and employees. The two have conflicting believes about how the factory can be brought to its maximum potential. Employees appear to be wary of Richard’s autocratic leadership, and the first impression they create for any viewer of the film is that the whole plant cries out for change in leadership and management style.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Analysis of the Team Dynamics
The most evident obstacle to communication in the film is Richard’s leadership style that gives employees no room to contribute towards decision-making. In the initial meeting where Richard lays out their concerns about the future of the business that they have invested every penny they had. In this scene and many others, Richard appears to do most of the talking locking other participants out. In fact, one of the employees at the table appears disgruntled and disinterested in the proceedings. There is evident animosity in the relationship between the management and employees, which contrasts sharply to the observed socially amiable interactions between employees. Whenever employees encountered either of the Chaplins, they keep their distance. In one instance, the engineers appear shocked when they find that Richard is standing in their path; they squeeze past without a word of acknowledgement. Such behavior may be an outcome of the management failure to recognize and respond to employees concerns. Richard is particularly accused of not returning feedback on important issues raised by employees. Bull and Brown (2012) established that effective communication is instrumental to employee satisfaction, hence the need to provide timely and relevant information and communication to give everyone an opportunity to participate in meaningful feedback.
Generally, the team communication strategies were poor to the extent that everyone, including the managers, developed negative perceptions about their workplaces. Such is the reason Gerry’s first proposal was to challenge Richard, the manager, to change their communication strategy and behavior. The objective was to improve the manager’s interpersonal communication competencies that Hynes (2012) attributed to the positive relationship between employee engagement and business success. Prior to the manager’s realization of the need to change tact in communicating, avoidance was the strategy used by employees who held back expressing their concerns for fear of backlash from the manager. Some of the effective techniques used by the leader included employee engagement through consultation and adoption of amicable approach to interpersonal relationships. On the other hand, the change of attire was unlikely to inspire change if it were to be deployed as a strategy on its own.
Robinson’s plan was justified because they recognized the team leader to be the leading obstacle to employee engagement through their aggressive approach to leadership and management. Therefore, to ensure that change at the plant was successful, the change process had to start with Richard. Robinson recognized the benefit of making the manager the change agent by inspiring them to approach change from a personal perspective. This way, employees recognized the manager’s commitment and support towards the change and were likely to offer less resistance.
References
Arsenic and old lace: A study in turnaround management [Video file]. (2003). Retrieved February 6, 2019, from https://digital.films.com/PortalPlaylists.aspx?wID=103647&xtid=33754
Bull, M., & Brown, T. (2012). Change Communication: The Impact on Satisfaction with Alternative Workplace Strategies. Facilities , 30(3/4), 135-151.
Hynes, G. E. (2012). Improving Employees’ Interpersonal Communication Competencies: A Qualitative Study. Business Communication Quarterly , 75(4), 466-475.
Putnam, L. L., Myers, K. K., & Gailliard, B. M. (2014). Examining the Tensions in Workplace Flexibility and Exploring Options for New Directions. Human Relations , 67(4), 413-440.
