Paul s strategy for success in New York, why didn t it succeed in Dallas?

Paul's strategy for success in New York, why didn't it succeed in Dallas?

Bounty Points: 0 - 14 days and 23 hours until the end of the question.

Paul began his career in 1971 with a bachelor's degree in accounting from a prestigious university in the Midwest and then worked in the Chicago office of a large accounting firm. Nine years later, he became one of the youngest partners in the firm. Recognizing his leadership potential and enterprising spirit, the company's executive committee assigned him to open a new office in the suburbs of New York in 1983.

The main focus of its work is auditing, which requires a high degree of judgment and self-control.

Although Paul was quite task-oriented, he adopted a democratic style of leadership. He advocated direct address among staff by name and encouraged subordinates to participate in decision-making. Everyone knows the long-term goals, but the way to achieve them is quite unclear.

The office is growing rapidly. By 1988, the number of professionals had reached 30. Paul is considered a successful leader and manager.

In 1989, Paul was promoted to managing partner in Dallas. He adopted the enterprising management style that led to his remarkable results in New York. He immediately replaced almost all 25 professionals and developed short- and long-term customer development plans.

In order to ensure that there was a sufficient number of employees to handle the expected increase in workload, he expanded the workforce. However, the expected new business did not follow. So the workforce was reduced again.

With these two layoffs, the remaining employees felt unsecured and began to doubt Paul's leadership. When the company's executive committee learned about the issues, they transferred Paul to an office in New Jersey. There, his leadership style still shows good results.

1. As a leader, Paul has two powers: one is the statutory power, that is, the management position power granted to him by the company's executive committee, which gives him decision-making power, organizational power, command power, personnel power, and reward and punishment power to his subordinates; One is his own influence, that is, the image and status of his own morality, morality, knowledge, and talent in the minds of the leader.

2. This case illustrates the contingency theory of leadership. The same way of leading, but the different working environment and the different leaders produce different results. Paul was successful in New York, but defeated in Dallas and good in New Jersey.

So, the leadership approach is not a one-size-fits-all approach.

3. The reasons for Paul's failure are roughly as follows:

1) The method of achieving the company's goals is not acceptable and understood by employees; (2) Improper employment, too frequent replacement of employees, lack of relative stability; 3) In terms of social environment, the social environment and background of New York and Dallas are different, so success in New York does not necessarily mean that success in Dallas can also be successful.

Dallas is different from New York.

Didn't understand the local culture.

All the professionals were replaced at once, and the solid foundation of the business collapsed, and the development of the business was misestimated.

Failure to do a good job of the ideological work of employees in a timely manner.

I advise you not to place your hopes on the re-admission, very few universities will make up the re-admission, most of the good 2A universities can be full, only some colder majors, or less famous schools will make up the re-admission. Your score is more advantageous to go to a 3A school, so it is recommended that you go to a good 3A school. I also have similar scores as you, so that's my choice as well.

Lack of flexibility leads to excessive internal friction and high communication costs.