Case Study Empowerment Sports Gear

8/10/2019 Case Study Empowerment Sports Gear

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/case-study-empowerment-sports-gear 1/8

C A S E S T U D Y

SportsGear needs change urgently.

So why is nothing

changing

The Empowerment Effort

George Marlow, a manufactur-

ing v ice president a t SportsGear,

stopped by the buffet table, scooped

up his usual breakfast of coffee and

a bagel, and headed for a seat. He

had been looking forward to this

m o n t h ' s c o m p a n y w i d e m e e t i n g .

Martin Griffin, SportsGear's GEO,

was going to proclaim a new era of

empow erment at the company.

A week before, George had attend-

ed a meeting of senior management

at which Martin had unveiled his

ideas about em pow erm ent . A dy-

nam ic 44-year-old, M artin was hired

to revive the 80-year-old publicly

held company. Once a leading man-

ufacturer and retailer of recreational

clothing and footwear, SportsGear

had a host of problems. Its market

share was declining in the face of

foreign and domestic competi t ion.

New product ideas were scarce. De-

partments l ike manufacturing and

sales barely spoke to one another.

Morale was low, and résumés had

been flying out tbe door.

Ma rtin had acted quickly to jump-

start SportsGear by install ing im-

p roved in fo rmat ion t echno log ies

and pushing for customer-service

excellence. Now, as he paced aggres-

sively in front of the auditorium,

Martin boomed out his latest mes-

sage:

As we face increasing compe-

tition, we need new ideas, new ener-

gy, new spirit to make this co mpany

great. And the source for this change

is you - he paused for dr am at ic

effect- each one of you.

Martin moved on from passionate

gene ralities to specifics: Un der our

new empow erment campaign, you'l l

be getting more information about

how th is company is run . You ' l l

work w ith your fellow employees in

new and creative way s. And, perhaps

mos t im portan t, you'll be able to fol-

low your dreams.

Not bad, not bad at all, thought

George. SportsGear needed a shot of

hope after the past couple of years.

W ha t had once been a j ob th a t

George had found fun and exciting

had tu rne d in to a g r ind . George

swallowed the last bit of his bagel

and leaned forward to catch more

of Martin 's speech. As he did, he

by Lawrence R. Rothstein

glanced at Harry Lewis, his friend

and a SportsGear veteran of more

tban 20 years. Harry rolled his eyes,

dropped his left hand near his coat

pocket, and made a subtle little cir-

cling motion with bis index finger

that always m eant be believed some-

one was crazy.

Th e M eeting at Harr y's Office. I

say it's just another pile of corporate

crap. One minute they try downsiz-

ing. The next minute reengineering.

After tbat, the y dabble in restru ctur-

ing. Now Martin's pushing empow-

erment. What in the world does em

powerment mean? If M artin really

wan ts to empowe r us, he can give us

a raise.

Harry was on a roll this morning.

Opinionated, proud, fiercely protec-

tive of his staff Harry, a manufactur-

ing engineer, was like an old-fash-

ioned craftsman ready to battle any

misguided patron who didn't under-

stand tbe artistic process. Harry was

extremely loyal to the company but

Lawrence R. Rothstein is an associ

ate editor at HER.

2

DR WIN G BY CHRISTOPHER BIN G



C S E S T U D Y

ndone

potentially a huge obstacle in any

empowerment movement .

George tried to find some ground

for a coun terargum ent. Why don't

you give empowerment a chance?

he asked. You know how hard I've

t r ied for the pas t year to make

improvements in manufac tur ing .

We're slow in delivering products to

stores and making design changes,

but I couldn't get other departments

to work with us to solve problem s. If

we don't turn things around, we all

might be out of work. Martin might

decide to go offshore or to ou tsour ce

what we do, like a lot of other com-

panies are doing.

As he thought about George's re-

marks, Harry puffed on his ever-

present cigar, a habit he indulged

even though it wen t against company

policies. Then he said, Yeah, that's

a danger, but emp owerm ent isn't go-

ing to save one job. All that's going

to happen is a whole lot of me eting s,

a whole lot of money being spent on

consu ltants, and a whole lot of wast-

ed time. Garbage like em pow ermen t

isn't a substitute for hard work and

a little faith in the people who have

been with the company for years. We

made it great once, and we can do it

again. Just get out of our wa y.

George knew it was no good argu-

ing with Harry when he was that

adamant. Whatever changes Martin

was thinking about would have to

win over a lot of Harrys - something

th at Georg e, for one, found difficult

to imagine.

The Self-Managed Team. Several

we eks later, at a f if th-floor con-

ference room, the manufactur ing

team's f i r s t meet ing took p lace .

George and Harry were there, along

with representatives from market-

ing, IT, design, and the retail stores.

Susan S tarr , a young con su l t a n t

from Evans Associates, would lead

the meet ing on implement ing the

e m p o w e r m e n t p r o g r a m . S u s a n

walked over to the overhead projec-

tor and began speaking , Empo wer-

ment means many things to many

people, but to me .. . Using a pen-

light she underlined each word on

the screen: Emp owerm ent is an act

of building, developing, and increas-

HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW January-Fe bruary 1995

i ng power th rou gh c oop era t in g ,

sharing, and working to geth er

Susan then began pas s ing ou t

written material while she contin-

ued her lecture. Her voice rose. As

managers , you ' l l have new roles :

coach, facilitator, resource develop-

er. You'll be involved in new rela-

tionships: you'll be helping, inform-

i n g , ev a l u a t i n g , an d m o t i v a t i n g

peop le. She pointed the penligh t

back on the overhead underneath

the word trust This is the corner-

stone of any relationship. And with-

out trust, no empowerment scheme

can work.

Susan continued, explaining that

the team's assignment was to im-

prove how retail stores got th t mer-

chandise they needed when they

needed it . George was delighted -

that was precisely the problem he

had been working on so unsuccess-

fully for the past year.

Susan then began to describe how

the team would work: In the self

managed team, you'll be trying on

your new roles. The team can struc-

ture itself any way it wants,- it can

21



C S E S T U D Y

use v^^hatever information it needs,

and it can draw on any company re-

source s . She added , You mu s t

work together to achieve a consen-

u You must believe in the solu-

tions you propose. As we consul-

tants say, 'You must own them. '

Once you've determined your solu-

t ions,

you'll issue a vorritten report,

and then you'll give an oral report to

the relevant department heads and

to Martin Griffin.

George caught Harry 's eye. He

could almost see the words coipo

late crap floating above the room

like one of those balloons in a comic

The Rangers be gan the

project in high spirits

eage r to reach its goals .

s t r i p .

Har ry , g ive i t a cha nce ,

George said to himself Please just

give it a chan ce.

George, in fact, gave the team ev-

ery chance be could and wound up

loving his assignment as the team

leader. He christened the team the

Mighty Morphin Power Rangers af-

ter his son's favorite superberoes.

The Rangers began the project in

high spirits, eager to accomplish its

goals.

The members f lourished in

the initial phase. The group was a

revelation for George. Instead of the

usual cross-functional turf fighting,

people worked together. Trust blos-

s o m e d . T e a m m e m b e r s l e a r n e d

about the business by studying mar-

keting, design, manufacturing, and

sales information; visited a number

of Spor tsGear s tores ; and talked

with salespeople and customers.

Most impor tant , they met wi th

Martin to understand better bis vi-

sion of empowerment. As dynamic

as Martin had been in the expanse of

an auditorium , be was still more per-

suasive in the intimacy of his office.

He talked passionately about bow

mucb be wanted to make Spor ts -

Gear competitive again. Martin had

used and loved the company's prod-

ucts since he was a child. He bad

even been wearing a SportsGear run-

ning suit and shoes when he first

me t his wife at a health club.

This was a great company, as you

all know , be said, addressing the

team. Empow erment can make us

great again because it puts author-

i ty and decis ion making in your

hands,

where it has to be. The world

changes too fast for companies to

function any other way.

Ma rtin wen t on to say that George's

team was vital for the success of the

change effort. He had chosen manu-

facturing to be tbe pilot team be-

cause, in most companies, that was

the a rea in wbicb empowerment

made tbe mo st rapid progress. Wh at

you recomm end w ill set the tone for

all tbe otber team s.

Martin's talk inspired

tbe Rangers. Although it

was under a strict dead-

l i n e ,

tbe Ranger s s t i l l

managed to complete its

report on time, working

many nights and spend-

ing mos t o f tbe f ina l weekend

camped out at George's bouse. The

members tbougbt their ideas were

innovat ive but eas i ly acbievable:

permit a manager to follow a prod-

uc t f rom des ign th rough sa les

to cus tomers , a l low

salespeople to refund

up to $500 worth of

m e r c h a n d i s e o n t b e

spot , make informa-

tion available to sales-

peop le about fu tu re

SportsGear products,

swap sales and manu-

facturing personnel for

short periods to pro-

vide insight into one another's jobs,

and establish a hot line so that sales-

people could keep manufacturing in-

formed about how SportsGear prod-

ucts were selling.

Hopes were h igh the Sunday

evening tbe Rangers completed tbe

report. George, in particular, was

opt imis t ic . Tbe teamwork of the

Rangers reminded him of tbe cama-

raderie of his high school basketball

team. But Harry remained skeptical.

You never know what 's going to

happen , be remarked, unt i l tbe

rubber meets tbe road.

he Watl of Resistance. Unfortu-

nately, Harry proved to be correct. A

week later, George and the otber

team members presented their oral

r epor t . Mar t in p res ided over tbe

meeting and was his usual enthusi-

astic self He again endorsed tbe idea

of empowerment and said he looked

forward to hearing the oral argum ent

of what be considered an interesting

proposal. But shortly after George

began the presentation, Martin bad

to excuse himself because of a late-

breaking deal with a major depart-

ment-store chain. Without Martin's

p r e s e n c e , t b e d e p a r t m e n t b e a d s

formed a wall of resistance. First, Liz

Fernandez of human resources wor-

ried tbat expanding a manager's re-

sponsibilities and swapping manu-

facturing and sales jobs, even for a

short time, could destroy the care-

fully crafted job categories tbat bad

just been developed. Jackie Wells of

the f inance depar tment was con-

cerned tbat allowing salespeople to

make refunds could create a gold

mine for unethical customers and

salespeople. Jim Vrabel of tbe legal

department claimed that providing

information to salespeople about fu-

ture products could invite industrial

spying. Rieb Tourangeau of strategic

planning declared that salespeople

At the presentation

department heads formed

a v^all of resistance. The

Rangers were stunned by

the reaction to the report.

couldn't appreciate bow complicat-

ed manufacturing was and tbat a hot

line would ring off the book every

five minutes and waste everyone's

t ime.

At tbe end of the meeting, the

depar tment heads concluded that

they thought tbe team bad made a

good start but that more research

and analysis were necessary before

any action could be considered.

The team members were stunned

by tbe response to their report. They

had felt confident in their sound re-

search and thoughtful presentation.

But it appeared their efforts had been

a waste of time. George tbougbt Har-

ry bad called it from the beginning.

And, as usual, Harry had the most

continued on page 26

22

HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW Janua ry-Feb ruary 1995



C S E S T U D Y

fitting remark: They beat you up

with wet noodles, he commented

as they walked back to George's of-

fice,

Finally you just fall over and

say forget it,

George shut the door to his office

and mulled over the latest turn of

events. He went through his op-

tions:

Keep his mouth shut, which

would perhaps condemn manufac-

turing to an early death. Take a

chance and confront Martin about

how sincere he was about making

empowerment work. Push slowly

for reform, maybe in a few Sports-

Gear stores, and hope for support

from the other teams. Or look for

another job, leaving a company that

he really cared about and had once

enjoyed w orking for.

No easy choices or easy answers.

But George knew that whatever he

did Harry would be making that cir-

cling motion with his index finger.

HBR s cases are derived from the

xp ri n s

of real companies and

real people. As written, they are

hypothetical, and the names used

are fictitious.

Can Empowerment Work at SportsGear

Five experts examine the process of empow ering em ployees.

J. RICHARD HACKMAN is the

Cahners-Rabb Professor of Social

and Organizational Psychology at

Harvard University in Cambridge,

Massachusetts.

Mariin Griffin and Susan Starr

have their causes mixed up with

their hoped-for effects. The aspira-

tions for empowerment that Martin

articulated sound great: generating

new

ideas,

new energy, and new spir-

it; working with colleagues in new

and creative ways; following one's

dreams at work. The process of

achieving empowerment, as Susan

told the Rangers, was inspiring be-

cause it involves building, develop-

ing, and increasing power through

cooperating, sharing, and working

together, The cornerstone of such

relationships, Susan added,

was

trust,

without which no empowerment

scheme can work,

If an organization aspires to

fundamental change

it

must

change the fundamentals.

But trust isn't something you can

mandate,

a

lever you can simply pull

to improve an organization. Trust is

an outcome, something that devel-

ops gradually in organizations that

are well designed and well led. To

say, Now you're empow ered, or

Now you're a coach, or Now we

must all trust one another is to say

nothing at all.

What was actually done at Sports-

Gear, beyond Martin's speeches and

Susan's seminars, was to create

problem-solving teams. The Rang-

ers,

like many such teams in organi-

zations that have adopted TQM or

empowerment programs, is off-line.

That is, its purpose is to develop so-

lutions that help other people do a

better

job

of carrying out the compa-

ny's work. For George's team, those

other people included department

heads, and they weren't having any

of it. This is not unusual. Groups in

organizations often resist sugges-

tions made by another group about

how they should

do

their

work

Such

resistance is particularly prevalent

when the problem-solving team has

been granted status and recognition,

elevating it above those employees

who continue to toil in the organiza-

tional trenches.

Management made several tac-

tical errors in implementing em-

powerment at SportsGear, Martin

should not have left the meeting at

which George's team presented its

recommendations. He made it easy

for the department heads to build

their wall of resistance, Susan

should have provided managers with

real training that included actual

practice and feedback in empower-

ing subordinates instead of merely

exhorting them to behave different-

ly. And George should have brought

the department heads into the loop,

soliciting their ideas and reactions,

long before the formal presentation.

But the main problem at Sports-

Gear is that the empowerment pro-

cess is an add-on. The program has

not fundamentally changed how the

company uses its human resources

to conduct its business. If an orga-

nization aspires to fundamental

change, it must change the funda-

mentals. To gauge whether or not

this is happening, I use a simple

four-question checklist: Who de-

cides? Who is responsible? Who

learns? Who gains? If a change pro-

gram alters the answers to those four

questions, then it just may make a

real difference in

how,

and how well.

26

HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW January -Februa ry 1995



C S E S T U D Y

the organization operates. If it does

not, then things are likely to remain

about the same after the change pro-

gram has run its course.

Unfortunately, SportsGear 's em-

powerment program has not gener-

ated new answers to the four diag-

nostic question s. The distribution of

decision making authority has not

changed. The design of work and as-

signment of responsibility for work

outcomes have remained unaltered.

Except for the handful of managers

asked to serve on the problem-solv-

ing teams, employees' opportunities

for learning and professional growth

have not expanded. And there has

been no revision of com pensation ar-

rangem ents. Harry Lewis was wrong

wh en he s a id , If M ar t in r ea l ly

want s to empower us , g ive us a

raise. Handing out raises does not

em pow er anybo dy , bu t o f f e ring

members of an organization a piece

of financial action can do wonders.

E m p o w e r m e n t p r o g r a m s l i k e

SportsGear's are safe in that they

do not throw an organization into

chaos.

But they are unlikely to gen-

erate large or endur ing improve-

ments. Harry, who has been around

the block a few times, saw the pat-

tern: One minu te they try downsiz-

ing. The next minute reengineering.

After that it was restructuring. Now

Mar t in ' s push ing empowerment .

Actual ly, the t rai l of hope for

t h e m an ag em en t co m m u n i t y ex -

tends back much farther than that.

Rem emb er Theory Y , Theo ry Z ,

T-groups , management by objec-

tives,

job enrichme nt, wo rk simplifi-

cat ion, employee involvement , or

quality circles? All those programs,

and more, have had their day. At

first , everything looks bright and

promising. But evening inevitably

comes; the brightness fades; and the

wait, which is usually not long, be-

gins for a new dawn to bring yet an-

other program.

The events at SportsGear help us

understand the reasons for the seem-

ingly endless cycle of management

fads.

They remind us that managers,

to keep from falling victim to that

cycle, mu st take far more fundamen-

tal actions than making speeches,

running seminars, and creating off-

line problem-solving team s.

ELIOS PASCUAL is the chairman

and CEO of Mack Trucks Inc. in

AUentown Pennsylvania.

Martin and George must see the

Rangers' proposal for what it is: an

opportunity to improve the compa-

ny's empowerment process and en-

sure its success.

If Martin truly sup ports em power-

m e n t , h e m u s t m ee t s o o n w i t h

Empowerment implies

accountability and team

members must accept

responsibility for what they do.

George's team and with his depart-

ment heads. There, Martin can dis-

cuss the Rangers' recommendations,

the process that led to those recom-

m en d a t i o n s , an d t h e d ep a r t m en t

heads' reactions. In order to begin to

understand some basic lessons, he

should allow - even encourage - the

team's frustration and the depart-

ment heads' resistance to surface at

this meeting.

Like Spor tsGear , Mack Trucks

faced serious challenges in the late

1980s. We had seen our N orth Amer-

ican market share fall from more

than 20% in the early 1980s to 13%

in 1989. Over the same period, em-

ployment fel l by more than 60%,

and in 1989, Mack Trucks suffered

the first in a string of nearly five

years in the red.

Somewhere along the way, the

company had become a segregated,

rigid organization that discouraged

co m m u n i ca t i o n an d c r ea t ed th e

kind of disconnection and frustra-

tion that SportsGear seems to be ex-

periencing. We realized that in order

to turn things around, we would

have to change the corporate envi-

ronment radically and foster an en-

vironment in which employees had

the information and the authority

they needed to make things happen.

Because empowerment is new at

SportsGear, it is critical that all the

players understand the rules-and, in

an empowered organization,

every-

on e

is a player. It is not eno ugh for a

GEO to understand and be commit-

ted to an empowerment process. A

GEO must engender understanding

and commitment through continu-

ous t r a in ing and communica t ion

across the

entire

organization. The

whole o rgan iza t ion mus t under -

stand how the company defines em-

pow erm ent , how team s funct ion,

what their missions are, and how

those missions relate to the overall

bus ines s s t r a t egy . Empowerment

impl ies accountabi l i ty , and team

members must accept responsibility

for what they do. But first, they must

understand the company's expecta-

t ions. Moreover, because empower-

ment spreads the responsibility for

decision making throughout an or-

ganization and across functional dis-

ciplines, top-level managers, in par-

ticular, must be committed to the

compa ny's new values. Regardless of

the quality or quantity of training

the Rangers receive, the team can't

be effective without the support of

senior managem ent.

Spor tsGear must keep in mind

that one round of training, however

comprehens ive , cannot pave the

way for a wholehearted embrace of

a new corporate culture. At Mack,

we are continually trying to create

a culture in which corporate specta-

tors - people like H arry wh o work

HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW |anu ary- Feb ruar y 1995



C S E S T U D Y

hard but are disillusioned and don't

feel part of a larger team - can be-

come players. A key to achieving

this kind of involvement has been

maintaining a complete, consistent,

and accurate flow of information

about our business, from monthly

performance indicators to ongoing

strategies. We give some of this in-

formation to managers at quarterly

meetings so that they can share it

witb tbe ir staffs. Still mo re informa-

tion is posted monthly on bulletin

boards and distributed through cor-

porate newsletters, videos, and let-

ters . If employees are to become

stakeholders in tbe success or failure

of a company, com mu nicatio n is ab-

solutely necessary. Without it, mis-

understanding, mistrust, and resis-

tance will block the efforts of

team

like the Rangers.

The Rang ers' problems began w itb

its composition. Key functional ar-

eas - for exam ple, bu ma n resources,

legal, and finance - were not repre-

sented. The team should have dis-

cussed recommendat ions that af -

fected individual departments with

those departments before finalizing

and presenting its report.

Emp owerm ent can not exist in a

vacuum. It requires involvement at

every step of the way -fro m identify-

ing problems to analyzing them to

proposing and implementing solu-

tions. While the Rangers correctly

focused on SportsGear 's external

customers, it neglected many inter-

na l customers.

The new era of empowerment can

work only with Martin's involve-

ment and unconditional support. No

GEO truly committed to empower-

me nt would discourage team leaders

from talking about tbeir frustration

wi th tbe p roces s . Employees , in

turn, should not judge corporate

commitment to empowerment until

tbey give tbe company a chance to

respond to their frustrations. The

fact that everything hasn't worked

out ini t ial ly does not mean tbat

Martin is not sincere or tbat tbe or-

ganization won 't change. But change

at SportsGear, l ike change at any

other company, will inevitably en-

counter temporary setbacks.

S ince 1991 , Mac k Truck s has

formed nearly 400 employee teams

to s tudy and improve everything

from workstation design to order-cy-

cle times. Along the way, we've re-

duced tbe number of bours required

to build a truck by 37 and slashed

in half both our inventories as a per-

centage of net sales and our break-

even sales point. Thanks to the work

of the teams, we are on track to gain

market share for tbe second consec-

utive year and to celebrate our first

profitable year since 1988. Results

like these have confirmed our faith

in teamwork and empowerment.

MARY V. GELINAS AND ROGER G.

JAMES

are the principals of Ge linas-

fames a consulting firm ba sed in

Oakland California that special-

izes in collaborative approaches to

organizational redesign.

Organizational improvement ini-

tiatives, such as the one at Sports-

Gear, succeed only if a CEO and

depar tment beads work toge ther

to bui ld a s t rong foun dat io n for

change. Wben they do, company lead-

ers make informed and conscious

choices about the purpose, scope,

and approach to change, and they

take an active role in

leading the effort. Im-

provement initiatives

fail when consultants

lead them. Under such

conditions, senior man-

agers never own the

i m p r o v em en t i n i t i a -

t i ve . In other words ,

they don't have a vest-

ed interest in seeing

the process succeed. Change ceases

to become a priority.

At SportsGear, it was Martin and

the department beads' job, not the

consultant's, to define wbat empow-

erment meant and wbat was expect-

Improvement initiatives fail

when consultants lead them

ed of the Rangers. Ironically, Martin

disempowered bis senior managers

by going around them to invest au-

thority, however poorly defined, in

tbe teams. In so doing, Martin sig-

na led tba t tbe depar tment heads

had nothing of value to add to the

Rangers' research process. Not sur-

prisingly, the department beads re-

if senior ma nag ers do n t

ha ve a vested interest in

seeing empovs^erment

succeed, chang e w ill cease

to be a priority.

sponded negat ively to the team's

recommendations. Managers won't

empower others if tbey feel disem-

powered themselves.

Consider a recent change effort in

which we served as consultants to

HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW [anuary -Fcbrua ry 1995

29



C S E S T U D Y

the in ternatio nal division of a global

apparel company. Tbe president of

the division and his leadership team

asked tbe i r genera l manager s to

gather customer-service data from

retailers around th e world. Tbe pres-

ident, his leadership team, and tbe

general managers then used this in-

format ion to under s tand tbe gap

between tbe company's current per-

formance and tbe retailers' require-

me nts. For example, they discovered

that it often took 150 to 200 days to

move from developing an apparel

idea to delivering it to stores. To re-

main competitive, retailers tbought

tbe tim e should be cut to 90 days.

Next, tbe president, the leadership

team, and the general managers de-

termined tbe targets for a cbange ini-

tiative (one of which was dramati-

cal ly reducing the t ime required

from product conception to deliv-

ery).

We tben spent a numb er of days

witb tbem explor ing a var iety of

change approacbes. After tbese ses-

sions,

they defined tbe limits of tbeir

initiative-desired outcomes, bound-

aries,

and guiding principles - and

which model of change best fit tbe

division. Finally, they introduced

the cbange effort to all employees.

T b e p r e s i d en t s en t a v i d eo t ap e

tbroughout the divis ion. Manage-

ment included tbe plan in the divi-

sion newsletter. General and senior

managers attended all-day meetings

to discuss tbe plan. Senior managers

and employees be ld meet ings in

groups of about 100. After that ini-

t ial explanat ion, senior managers

formed small groups in which they

could listen to employees' reactions

and sol ici t tbei r comments about

tbe cbange initiative. Such meetings

continued on a regular basis there-

after. Tbroughout tbe initiative, we

provided division leaders with guid-

ance,

information, and alternative

approaches to so lv ing prob lems .

However, the leadership group held

i t s e l f accountab le fo r managing

tbe change effort from inception

through implementation.

Organizational leaders must take

responsibility for establishing a solid

foundation before introducing any

change effort. Creating tbat founda-

tion includes developing a consen-

sus about the initiative's purpose.

scope, and process. They must also

stay involved at key decision-mak-

ing points tbrou ghou t th e change ef-

fort , not just when recomriienda-

tions are being made. Consultants

must help their clients understand

and carry out tbeir leadership roles.

The SportsGear case demonstrates

tbat when the consul tant and tbe

leadership team do not do this suc-

cessfully, everybody loses.

W. ALAN RANDOLPH is a professor

of managem ent and the director of

Leadership and International Pro-

grams at the University of Balti-

more s Meriick School of Business

in Maryland. He is coauthor with

Ken Blanchard and John Carlos of

Empowerment Takes More Than a

Minute (Del Mar, California: Whar-

ton Publishing, 1994).

Empowerment

is not

about

increasing the power of

employees

Martin Griffin's empowerment ef-

fort got off to a rocky start, but a few

important adjustments can put the

challenging process of transforma-

tion back on course.

First, Martin needs to recognize

tbe enormity of the task in front of

him and the company. After many

years,

managers and employees have

to shift from believing in tbe effica-

cy of a hierarchical, command-and-

control organization to one that is

egalitarian, open, and team driven.

Because it requires a fundamental

cultural transformation, empower-

m en t is a long and difficult journey .

Res is tance to i t i s f requent , pre-

dictable, and often fierce. Martin

must involve himself in tbe process

and provide ongoing direction and

encouragement.

Second, Martin and SportsGear's

senior managers need to realize tbat

empowerment is not about increas-

ing the power of employees; ratber,

it is about releasing tbe knowledge

and motivation that employees al-

ready bave. Harry Lewis, for ex-

ample, bas higb standards, passion,

and internal motivation: We made

[SportsGear] great once, and we can

do it again. Just get out of our way.

He could have a significant impact

o n S p o r t s G ea r if em p o w er m en t

works correctly.

How does Martin tap the knowl-

edge and en thus iasm of a Har ry

Lewis? He needs to do three things:

Sharing Information. Employees

need full information about com-

pany performance. Without it, tbey

cannot take responsibility for tbeir

performance because they do not

know the dimensions of the compa-

ny's problems. For example, employ-

ees cannot cut response rates to cus-

tomer compla in t s i f they do no t

know ho w long it currently takes for

the company to respond.

Martin sbould supply bis employ-

ees witb information sucb as sales

figures, percen tage of rejects, p rofits,

and product turnover. He sbould al-

so keep tbem abreast of sensitive in-

formation such as sell-off options

and tbe possibili ty of downsizing.

He should present tbis information

on a frequent basis and in a variety

of ways , including companywide

meet ings , wr i t ten documents , and

E-mai l messages . Wben manage-

ment provides complete informa-

tion, trust grows and tbe empower-

me nt process moves forward.

Developing Self-Managed Teams.

The Rangers were far from a self

managed team wben it presented its

report. Self-managed teams are capa-

b le o f making and implement ing

tbeir decisions, and they are held ac-

countable for results . Martin gave

the Rangers too much responsibility

too quickly and not enough tim e and

direction to develop into a self-man-

HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW Janua ry-Febru ary 1995



aged team that could deal effectively

with diversity.

Teams pass through several stages

before they can manage themselves.

A team begins as simply a collection

of individuals. It must learn how to

work together, make decisions, re-

solve conflicts, and de legate roles. In

the next stage, as team effort starts

to pay off, members usually become

exci ted and enthus ias t ic . But the

team's identity remains in an em-

bryonic phase. If the team runs into

obstacles, members can quickly be-

come disillusioned. But with prop-

er guidance and support, tbe team

moves on to self-management. At

tbis stage, team members support

and encourage one another, believe

fu l ly in the i r r ecommendat ions ,

work together to overcome obsta-

cles, and effectively make decisions

and take action.

Creat ing Autonomy Through

Boundaries Because empowerment

involves a radical dep arture from

past behaviors, Martin needs to cre-

ate

more

structure for the teams and

sen ior management in tbe ear ly

stages of emp owerm ent, not less. As

tbe teams and management evolve,

he can grant tbe teams more free-

dom and responsibili ty. Structure

enables people to handle tbe uncer-

tainty they may feel as they try out

new behaviors. Martin can create

s t r u c t u r e b y e s t ab l i s h i n g c l ea r

boundar ies concern ing wbat tbe

teams can and cannot do. For exam-

ple, Mar t in should s e t l imi t s on

where a team's responsibilities end

and where tbe department beads' re-

sponsibilities begin. At future meet-

ings of tbe Rangers and tbe depart-

men t heads, Ma rtin can reaffirm the

boundaries and encourage and sup-

port the empowerment process.

Although the Rangers were dis-

mayed and tbe depar tment heads

res is tant , empowerment can s t i l l

develop at SportsGear. Martin needs

to learn f rom - and help others

learn f rom - these ini t ial exper i -

ences. Sharing information, allowing

teams to manage themselves , and

creating autonomy through bound-

aries are tbe three keys to turning

around the empowerment process at

SportsGear. Ç

Reprint

95

U l

Souml all too familiar?

How do you deal with llie V.P. who's

l«)th hrilliant nd anT)f>;ant? The CFO

whii nianuf^cs lliimi^h iiilimidation?

Tlie sullen plant manager? All

Ux)

often,

their negative liehavioi-s can deprive

them - and you - of their full potential.

Here's when' David Frances

AsstK'iates can make a difference. Since

1982,

David F rances, Ph.D. and his col-

leagues have helped change big egos

into hig assets through an innovative

coachin g progi-ain which em ploys video

feedback and cognitive-ljehavioral pio-

giammitig lechniiiues. Peniiaiient results

usually are achieved within 6

to 12

weeks.

DFA's clients include corporate o(Ti-

cei-s and top managers from Fortune .^(K)

and other well known companies. For

I'lirther iiiroinialioii. call 617-935-.5423.

DAVID FRANCES

ASSOCIATES

Face the global issues of our time.

Achieve answ ers for difficult

questions. Work together at...

Penn State Executive Programs

Powerful onnection

Penn S tate Executive Programs recognized

by

BusinessWeek

the

alt

Street Journal

and US News and

orld Report

consistently

ranks as one of the world s

foremost providers

of

executive

education.

Penn State Executive Programs means 38

years of experience in executive education.

Years of assessing the issues facing global

business years of translating those issues

into a developmental educational process and

years of

delivering

a superior

educational

experience. Connect with us through one of

our general or

functional

management

programs or

through

a custom-designed

program for your company.

PENNSTATE

For more information:

Phone: 814) 865-3435

FAX: 814) 865-3372

Intemet: [email protected]

HBR

Case Study Empowerment Sports Gear

Documents

Transcript of Case Study Empowerment Sports Gear