Can Gerry Robinson Fix the NHS

After watching the video on the Gerry Robinson and his attempt to fix the NHS in the hospital their are many relevant themes present throughout the case study relating to an organisation having an effective strategic leadership. The main figures in the case study includes Gerry Robinson whose coming in as the consultant, Brian James (CEO), Karen Norton (General Manager), Jugnu Mahajan (Consultant physician and the rest of the staff. Each of these key figures use and implement a distincive leadership style which impacts the way in which the hospital is run and managed.

At the heart of the case study we can see that the a combination of the correct leadership style is required at the right time and place in order to manage a sucessful organisation. In the case study the lack of an assertive style of a strategic leadership by Brian James as well as other senior members is one of the contributors to the hospital poor performance. Other issues revolving around the lack of assertiveness included the lack of a concrete structure within senior managment, lack of communication as well as a need for collabration and corporation to exist and prevail. Other issues that were evident was the need for a bureaucracy as the was no chain of command present, managegment using the disengaing approach to things leaving problems to resolve themselves and postponing and procrastinating , hospital theatres not being utilised and managed properly which affected the waiting time and a lack of confidence from mangagement in Brian Jmaes (CEO). All these problems affected the way in which the hospital was run and through this we can see that effective strategic leadership means that the right style has to be implemented when needed by organisations with everyone sharing a basis for the same ideas, vision and goals all the way from the top down.

The most memorable examples of effective strategic leadership came from Gerry Robinson and Karen Norton. Robinson at first used the bridging style of leadership to first understand the problem through going thoughout the organisation from staff members to senior management and discussing and finding out the issues present.  He then solicited ideas and views giving way to an open communication. He also used the assertive approach when he summoned all the senoir members of management and highlighting all the problems and stating ways in which they need to be tackled and resolved. Karen Norton also through highlighting key issues and proposing solutions used the persuasive and assertive approach as a form of leadership but was ineffective in communicating this to the CEO. Brian James ineffective approach included using disengaging approach bringing up the issue but not doing anything to resolve it, postponing and giving excuses for the reasons why solutions could not be met which also imitated by Mahajan.

I learned that persuation is very important to an organisation and a mixture of persuation and assertiveness is important at the right time and moment in the decision making process. Persuastion through its components of proposing and reasoning allows an understanding for an action being implemented or addressed where assertiveness forces the issue. I also learned that when you propose you most have at least three reasons to help support what you've proposed, making it solid and more understandable. I also learned that Influence over others is something that is acquired over time and developed. Also the ability to influence others means that dynamism is needed to implement different styles and that different styles are dependent on different situations.

This case study was similar to Carrefeour firstly, in regards to both case studies not having strong leaders as both CEO's seemed to be underpeforming and  incompetent in executing their jobs well. Also the is a lack of collabration and corporation existent within senior management in both cases. In Carrefeour Case it was between investors and the CEO and here its between senoir managment and Brian James. Differences would be the fact that Lars Olofsson took over an already struggling organisation whereas Brian James didn't. Lastly the  management structure that exists in this case study compared to Carrefeour apperas to be completely no existent with no clear basis for any sort of chain of command.

The group work in discussing the main issues as well as devising the different strategic leadership styles used  by key figures was again very productive as it allowed me to gain different perspectives from others. It allwoed me to share my ideas as well as gain others and compare and contrast and then share them with the rest of the class. The role play between two members was also quite useful in understanding how the different styles work and knowing  what situations they can be used in. The only issue was I felt that my partner didn't have a clear understanding of the meaning of each style and therefore couldn't  demonstrate useful and relevant examples.

 

Analysis Of The Carrefeour Case Study

After carefully reading the Carrefeour Case study their appeared to be numerous issues that the company was facing which in all affected the productivity and performance. These ongoing problems meant the company needed to react and implement changes immediately in order to overcome the decline of the organisation. In addressing all the problems we first start we the position of the CEO Lars Olofsson.

I personally think that the first step for Carrefeour would be to re-appoint another CEO who can come in and immediately make drastic changes to the organisation which will help bring stability again. They need to bring in a CEO who will be able to respond to market pressures more efficently and abrupt. The new CEO should be able to tackle all the current issues the company faces at the core through implementing a selective and careful strategy dealing with each issue.

I think the company can definitely overcome their current poor performance through focusing on improving the domestic market share, updating their business model to better suit changing organisational environment, adapting and implementing a business model to also suit foreign markets. Other issues that needs to be addressed includes: moving away from a dependence on products in the long term decline, paying better attention to changing markets which can be very critical to any organisation, focusing on changing demographics in terms of customer behavior and trends, focusing on online commerce, focusing on pricing with the opportunity to cut prices and improving coorporation and colabration between investors.

Lars Olson I don't think is a bad CEO but I just think as mentioned in the case study he took over a struggling company and failed to react to all the problems quickly and failed to demonstrate any strong leadership which is very important for any new leader coming in especially for a company struggling. I don't think six months is enough time for him to fix the many issues Carrefeour faces so he needs to be replaced with someone who can. Personally I think out of all those issues mentioned Carrefeour should focus firstly on appointing a new CEO that replaces Olson  and then focus improving the domestic market share, changing the pricing and improving the the relationship with investors.

The participation this week in the semiar went really well becuase everyone got to share ideas about the case study and address the main issues and relevent themes present in Strategic Leadership in companies. We were also able to re-address the different models companies use within the organisation and relate that to Carrefeour which was very useful in drawing up a critical analysis.

From this week I want to remember all the the different models we talked about towards the end of the lecture that could be used for Carrefeour. Models which included using the SWOT Analysis, Boston Matrix, Porters 5 Forces and others mentioned as I know these are always important models to know and use.