Case Summary

...

Having mentioned the action plan, there are some important insights that the sequence of how the things were actually delivered reaffirms the analysis I did on how the plan was lacking motivation. Based on the director’s experience, the plan was designed with a time frame and sequence for success. However, things were delivered earlier than what she expected it to be, and the case tells us that just few adjustments were made in their brochures and methodologies. They addressed the new market with a similar strategy and as the facts were presented in the case none of the units in charge of designing the program was working as hard as they were expected.

As I said at the beginning, I think that the director’s effort to allocate the necessary things wasn’t bad at all, and that there were some good things she understood were necessary based on her experience. However, there was an important aspect that should have been anticipated and analyzed before implementing the plan, and that was the major difference between mid- level managers and senior managers. Daniel Isenberg, a writer from the Harvard Business Review did research on how senior managers really think and concluded that “approximately two-thirds of the senior managers studied were preoccupied with a very limited number of quite general issues, each of which subsumed a large number of specific issues. This preoccupation persisted for anywhere from a month to several years and, when in effect, dominated the manager’s attention and provided coherence to many of his or her chaotic and disorganized activities.” So the important fact here to understand from Mr. Isenberg research is that senior managers do not have a large amount of free time to think about things that are outside their tasks. And it is why I do consider that it was necessary for the people managing the inquiries to provide an excellent service giving accurate and valuable information about the program.

However, even lacking motivation, innovation and external research, the program seemed to be appealing for senior managers displaying an increase of a 100% compared to last programs they’ve launched. So the market itself didn’t present a lot of barriers to enter and their company recognition helped them get the attention needed. The case tells us that the plan was a complete failure, and the goal of getting at least 18 managers to cover the cost wasn’t accomplished. Again and I don’t mean to be repetitive, they greatest weakness was not being able to transmit the real value of the product, and understand that it had to be done by trained personnel motivated towards the goal and also well informed about the new program they were going to offer when answering the inquiries from senior managers.

The company has already built brand recognition through their years of operation, and based on the facts they are well recognized for providing people with high quality programs. Not running the senior program is one of the options that the training director is considering, and it may look logical to shut down something that will not generate enough revenue to cover the costs. However, shutting it down would harm them more than alleviate. By doing that, they are risking the reputation their programs have earned through the years and cancelling to a senior manager, may have a much more sensitive response in the long term if they perceived the company lacked responsibility and seriousness. So I believe the program should be run at a loss in the short term, expecting that in the long term manager’s valuation of the program would lead to an increased amount of applications on the mid-level, which was their strategy from the beginning, and another important fact is that the company invested 50% of their contingency budget on it, so shutting it down would cause them to be on a very problematic financial situation because they would not be able to recuperate this money in the long term. They must stay firm to the strategy, and provide senior managers with a great quality program that will not only enhance mid-level manager’s applications but will also position them in a new market and balance their losses in the long term.

task

start date

end date

duration

instructors and faculty director selection

22-Jan

25-Jan

3

content design

25-Jan

14-Feb

21

brochures design and printing

14-Feb

6-Mar

21

brochure delivery

6-Mar

13-Mar

7

application response

13-Mar

23-May

84

application due date and fees collection

23-May

13-Jun

21

assembly of materials

30-May

13-Jun

7

program starts

13-Jun

13-Jul

30

APPENDIX I

Gantt chart

[pic 1]

Works Cited

Isenberg, Daniel. 2007. How Senior Managers Think. November 18. https://hbr.org/1984/11/how-senior-managers-think.

Michael