Introduction
The case study focuses on the organizational culture of General Motors (GM) and its failures that eventually led to the GM ignition switch recall crisis and resulted in 13 deaths. Multiple violations of safety regulations, a lack of accountability from senior managers, and conflicting communication within the company were key attributes of the poor culture. Nevertheless, the case study revealed several strengths, such as the competencies of engineers and the desire to make a positive change in the company. Ultimately, the organizational culture examined in the study is flawed and requires an urgent transformation.
Current Organizational Model
The current behavioral organizational model is characterized by a lack of accountability on multiple levels of management. It resembles an autocratic model due to people shifting the responsibility to seniors, who, in theory, should have sufficient competencies to resolve the problem (Mamgain, 2022). However, the organizational culture is flawed, leading to a dysfunctional cycle of complaints and a lack of action. As the case study shows, this problem persisted for more than eleven years until it eventually resulted in an accident (Kuppler, 2014). In summary, the current behavioral model mostly resembles an autocratic model, but it fails due to cultural flaws within the company.
Other Models
Some of the other models in the automobile industry prioritize collaboration, teamwork, and focus on customers. For instance, custodial, supportive, and collegial frameworks are systems that focus more on the well-being of employees, stimulating accountability (Mamgain, 2022). These models are extensively used in the automobile and related industries. For instance, Toyota is one of the leading manufacturers globally that practice lean management with an emphasis on effective communication between managers and employees (Yamamoto et al., 2019). This approach heavily resembles a collegial model – it prioritizes customer value and unites all stakeholders with a common objective.
Differences
Different models might be effective depending on the company’s objective and established organizational culture. For a model to work, the model must be closely intertwined with the organization’s vision, mission, culture, and overall objectives. GM’s crisis was a result of deeply rooted cultural problems, but this approach was an intentional decision of senior management. In general, autocratic models emerge from the desire for complete control of all operations. Hence, the primary reason for selecting this approach over others was the initiative of senior management and their desire for authority.
Culture Impact
GM’s autocratic model could have been effective in the past, but it had a notable adverse impact on organizational culture. A lack of accountability on all management levels negatively affects employees’ autonomy and motivation (Yamamoto et al., 2019). The organizational culture has resulted in a history of failures persisting for more than 11 years due to the inability of the personnel at GM to address the challenges facing the organization. However, based on the case study, GM’s CEO, Mary Barra, is attempting to change the organizational culture (Kuppler, 2014). If she succeeds, it might have a positive impact on the current organizational behavior, and people will be more likely to be held accountable for their decisions.
Unique Organizational Models
One of the unique organizational models that emerged in the automobile industry is lean management. This model prioritizes customer value and effective communication on all management levels to achieve the set objectives (Yamamoto et al., 2019). GM is not following these major principles, which is evident from the safety violations and conflicting statements of senior managers. Hence, the company should assess the frameworks used by its rivals in the industry and reconsider its organizational culture. The organization should also be on the lookout for better frameworks that will result in a competitive advantage and also help improve the organizational culture.
Motivational Models
The motivational models have changed after the investigation and Barra’s supervision. The trend toward more detailed safety regulations and additional accountability is a positive sign for GM’s organizational culture, but it is uncertain whether the changes are sufficient. The company will have to adopt new managerial styles that emphasize effective communication and reward systems to motivate employees. Ultimately, GM is making a positive change in its organizational culture with associated changes in motivational models and behavior theories.
Leadership Theory
Lessons from the Culture Case Study
The GM Culture Crisis is a case study highlighting the leadership challenges General Motors, or GM, faced during the early 2000s. The case study is an actual example of how a company’s leadership style and organizational culture can impact its decision-making process, the behavior of employees, and, ultimately, its success. The case study focuses on the change in leadership style and the influence of organizational culture on the company’s decision-making process and employee behavior.
Evaluation of the Leadership Theory
The leadership style used in the case study is authoritarian leadership. During the early 2000s, GM faced a crisis, and the company’s CEO, Rick Wagoner, took a top-down approach to decision-making and imposed strict rules and regulations on employees (Kuppler, 2015). However, as the crisis worsened, there was a shift in leadership style towards a more participative leadership style, where the CEO involved employees in the decision-making process and encouraged collaboration.
Characteristics and Decisions
The characteristics and decisions of management that helped explain the shift in leadership style include the willingness to involve employees in the decision-making process, a focus on collaboration, and an openness to new ideas. With organizational management open to employee ideas and contributions during the decision-making process, the needs of the employees can easily be solved avoiding conflicts in the organization. Additionally, having employee representatives on the decision-making board facilitates easier communication in the organization. This increases cohesiveness within the organization and upholds a strong work culture.
Internal and External Influences
The change in leadership style was also influenced by external factors such as changing market conditions, increasing competition, and declining sales. Changes in market circumstances, greater competition, falling sales, and the need for a more participatory leadership style to enhance employee engagement and motivation are some of the internal and external pressures on the company (Kuppler, 2015). The rise in the number of competitors in the market offering competitive prices results in customers opting for alternative cheaper dealers of the product resulting in a decline in total sales. Employees also prefer organizations with a positive and motivating work culture. In addition, that may have prompted the shift in leadership style.
Relationship
The relationship between the leadership style used by the organization and the decision-making process was significant. The authoritarian leadership style imposed by the CEO during the early 2000s resulted in a rigid decision-making process with little room for employee input (Kuppler, 2015). Authoritarian leadership also results in lowered interactions and work performance among teams in an organization. However, the shift towards a participative leadership style allowed for more collaboration and increased employee engagement in decision-making. Employee inclusiveness in decision-making increases employee motivation, ultimately improving organizational performance and work culture.
Organizational Culture Assessment
The internal culture present within the organization was hierarchical and bureaucratic, with a focus on top-down decision-making and strict rules and regulations. The rigorous decision-making process, the emphasis on rules and regulations, and the lack of employee engagement in decision-making are specific instances from the case study that reflect the internal culture. The work culture barred employees from raising their concerns creating tension within the organization. The bureaucratic work culture has also placed strict rules and regulations on the employees making it difficult for open communication streams between the employees and the organization’s management.
Insights
The organization’s leadership style and internal culture complement each other, as the hierarchical structure of the internal culture supports the authoritarian leadership style. It is evident from the case study that leadership style and organizational culture can have a profound impact on a company’s success and growth. However, as the company shifted towards a participative leadership style, the internal culture also shifted towards a more collaborative and participative culture. The changes in leadership style and internal culture influenced each other, as the shift in leadership style towards a more participative style resulted in a more collaborative internal culture. Employee conduct is controlled by the organization’s leadership styles and internal culture. The hierarchical and bureaucratic internal culture, combined with the authoritarian leadership style, resulted in a lack of employee engagement and motivation. However, the shift towards a participative leadership style and a more collaborative internal culture led to increased employee engagement and motivation.
Conclusion
The GM Culture Crisis case study highlights the importance of leadership style and organizational culture in determining a company’s success. The shift from an authoritarian leadership style towards a participative manner, combined with a change in the internal culture from a hierarchical and bureaucratic structure to a more collaborative and participative one. This significantly impacted the behavior of employees and, ultimately, the company’s success. This example highlights leadership and organizational culture’s critical role in determining a company’s performance and the need to adjust to changing market conditions and be open to new ideas and methods. The GM Culture Crisis highlights the interplay between leadership style and organizational culture and how changes in one can impact the other. The case also serves as a cautionary tale for companies and leaders, emphasizing the need to continuously assess and adapt leadership style and organizational culture to ensure continued success and growth.
References
Kuppler, T. (2014). The GM culture crisis: What leaders must learn from this culture case study. WebArchive. Web.
Mamgain, G. (2022). Model of organizational behavior: Autocratic, custodial. Edukedar. Web.
Yamamoto, K., Milstead, M., & Lloyd, R. (2019). A review of the development of lean manufacturing and related lean practices: The case of Toyota Production System and managerial thinking. International Management Review, 15(2), 21-90.
Kuppler, T. (2015). The GM culture crisis: What leaders must learn from this culture case study. WebArchive. Web.