Case Study Analysis of Debt Busters

Question: Discuss about the Current HR Issues in Debt Busters ? Answer : The given case study clearly shows that currently the biggest human resource issue in Debt Busters is its culture. In its initial days, the organization was performing well until the management decided that it will need more managers so that sufficient controllership can be gained. They also decided that increased number of departments is required support the growth of the organization (Alvesson and Sveningsson 2015). In the end, the management initiated a recruitment drive that allowed the organization to recruit a large number of employees and managers. Most of the managers who were recruited were from General Electric as the management of Debt Busters thought that they would fit well in the organization. However, it was a mistake by the HR team of Debt Busters. GE is known as a corporate company with standards, methods and policies that reflect a big multinational company. It is entirely different from Debt Busters as it was established via the spirit of entrepreneurship and do it quick now rather than do it right later. Unlike GE, in Debt Busters, employees were treated as relatives. As a result poor performance of the employees was overlooked most of the times. This culture heavily impacted the performance of the organization as it never took any action against the employees who were underperforming (Ashkanasy and Dorris 2017). On the other hand, managers such as Charles were regularly missing the work intentionally. Other managers were also delivering low quality of work along with unprofessional absence. As a result, productivity of the organization was hampered critically. Besides, the culture in the organization was decidedly visible and dominant. After change and recruitment of senior management professionals from General Electric, sub-cultures became more important in the organization. The problems and conflicts between the sub-cultures often manifested during the meetings of change management. On the other hand, concerns were also raised related to the bullying from Anthony Brown. He started to force employee to act against the direction of their managers due to mismatch of working. Human resource team of the organization failed to address these issues and as a result, 4 of the managers quit their jobs. Leadership Style in Debt Busters In any organization, leaders play a major role in developing strategic goals and objectives. Leaders not only lead his team and other employees to success, but also act as decision maker, analyst, organizer and collaborator (Rast et al. 2013). Besides, leaders also work as strategists where their vision delivers the purpose of existence to organization. Leadership also helps an organization to accomplish its goals by formulating and implementing the efficient strategies (Chege et al. 2015). However, there are several types of leadership trait and each of those traits has their own impact on human resource strategic planning (Giltinane 2013). From the given case study, it can be stated that in Debt Busters, Anthony Brown who was considered as a hero, used to follow autocratic leadership style. He was the sole decision maker of the organization and did not allow the employees to take part in the decision making method. This leadership style is considered as best for the employees who a re poor performers. In this approach, leaders are able to keep an eye on the employees who are expected to perform the task on given directions. However, the scenario is different in the case of Debt Busters. From the common theories and concepts it can be said that autocratic leadership is good for organization is most of the cases, if the leader is qualified and talented (Neumann and Neumann 2013). However, in the case of Debt Busters and Anthony Brown, the situation is absolutely opposite. Anthony always wasted to lead the organization and force his decision on the management. Anthony used to act as influencer in the organization and developed a positive relationship with the senior management team. He did it to make sure that decision making resides only with him. According to his decisions, changes were implemented in the organization where others had no voice. Employees were forced to adapt to new rules and regulations. Workers who were unable to comply had to leave the organization. As result turnover rate of the company increased significantly. Besides, after the recruitment of new managers and senior level employees in the organization, Anthony started to influence the employees to not listen to listen to their respective managers. It caused internal conflicts among the managers of the organization that resulted into 4 managers leaving the company. As a result of these incidents, the organization lost its profitability and was forced restructure the organizational culture once again. Reference List Alvesson, M. and Sveningsson, S., 2015.Changing organizational culture: Cultural change work in progress. Routledge. Ashkanasy, N.M. and Dorris, A.B., 2017. Organizational culture and climate. Chege, A.N., Wachira, A. and Mwenda, L., 2015. Effects of Leadership Styles on Implementation of Organization Strategic Plans in Small and Medium Enterprises in Nairobi.Management and Administrative Sciences Review,4(3), pp.593-600. Giltinane, C.L., 2013. Leadership styles and theories.Nursing Standard,27(41), pp.35-39. Neumann, Y. and Neumann, E.F., 2013. The president and the college bottom line: The role of strategic leadership styles.Library Consortium Management: An International Journal. Rast III, D.E., Hogg, M.A. and Giessner, S.R., 2013. Self-uncertainty and support for autocratic leadership.Self and Identity,12(6), pp.635-649.