Free The Points Of Differences Are As Follows: Case Study Sample

House, Hearth and Home is a large furniture and hardware centre. The owner and general manager of the company is Mark Coglin. Wesley Simpson is the manager of the furniture house. Over the years, customer service and giving importance to the customers have become one of the important considerations as there are too many competitors around. In order to keep their position intact in the market, they provided an excellent shopping experience to the customers. Although there are powerful competitors all around, but their shopping experience was so intimate that it helped them gain a different and unique position in the market. Outstanding customer service and competitive prices helped them hold their place in the market. The business made a sale of $20 million annually. This fact proved that the business of House, Hearth and Home is competitive. In order to maintain this competitive position, keeping commitments to the customers was one of the important things that the business should do. Sometimes, when deliverables are not delivered at the right time to the supplier then the image of the business is hampered. Mark Coglin used to get calls from one such supplier who complained about things not reaching him at the right time. If things were not delivered at the right time, his people had to sit and wait for the things to come and then the job could be finished. It was a loss of resource, money and energy (Grönroos, 2007).
Dan Body and Wesley Simpson had different approaches with employees who performances were not at par. Wesley Simpson was a yard manager for a long time and ran the yard quite well, however he was not as involved as Boyd was with the employees. He had good managerial skills but he preferred to stay away from the employees and be his own self. Boyd made everybody understood about the significance of work and keeping up to the commitments of the customers. He made them understand that customer service and satisfaction is the most important factor and living up to their commitment can never be compromised with. The old approach of Simpson was ‘stuff happens’ while Boyd made everybody realize every action leads to a reaction. Any delayed or messed up order went against the reputation of the organization and the customers also had a negative feeling about the company. So Boyd made the employees realize that each and every order was the most important order of the day. Each and every order needed to be treated as the first order of the day and given the equal importance. Now under Boyd’s leadership, they paid attention to minute details related to their work.
Under Simpson, the underperformers were never confronted and never asked to justify themselves for not following some instructions or not doing their work properly. If an order was messed up by any employee, Simpson never got into any kind of confrontation. He simply sent another employee and got the work done. So under Simpson, the underperformers were given a chance to live in recluse however Boyd’s approach was to confront with the employee who failed to follow the instructions. If the employee could justify his position, he would change the procedure of the work so that the changed procedure met the requirement of the employee otherwise if the employee wasn’t able to justify himself he was warned to work with the rest of the team (Norton, 1995). Confronting with employees is never an easy task to do. He had terminated two employees from the yard who could not follow the instructions and work accordingly.
Boyd’s new approach is more effective. The new approach helped employees understand that everybody is equally important to the company and company’s growth leads to the growth of the employees.
There is certainly a difference between being a manager and being a leader because a manager is a person who plans and coordinates to get the work done while a leader inspires, influences and motivates employees to get the work done.

Simpson was a good manager but Boyd became a leader in a short span of time. Mark Coglin understood that the yard needed a leader like Boyd. Boyd’s leadership qualities helped the yard grow and made it a favourite place for the customers. In order to stay competitive, the yard always desired for a leader like Boyd. Boyd made employees realize the importance of what they do. He understood that the Simpson’s capabilities were not enough to manage the employees and get the work done on a timely basis in such a competitive environment. Coglin could understand Boyd became the leader while Simpson still continued to be the manager. According to me, if Simpson was asked to leave the company, then Coglin would lose a long term loyal employee who had worked for the company in times of need and had really cared for the company. Simpson would also be deeply hurt if Coglin took such a harsh decision. Coglin would also be hurt if he had to terminate such a long term loyal employee. The other employees who had worked with Simpson would certainly be hurt and might protest against such harsh decision of the management. On the other hand, Boyd who had become the leader of the company can replace Simpson and the company should compensate him accordingly. Coglin should make the employees understand that Boyd is an asset for the company and he is the right person to take over. He should make the employees realize that he is not doing any favouritism to a friend. Boyd should be given his deserved title and pay. I would advise Coglin to get Simpson trained by Boyd.
In the end I would recommend, that Boyd should train all the employees including Simpson on the leadership qualities that he possesses. If the yard needs to stay competitive, it has to choose the right person who can take care of his responsibilities and help stay the firm competitive in the market.

References:

Grönroos, C. (2007). Service management and marketing: customer management in service competition. John Wiley & Sons.
Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1995). Putting the balanced scorecard to work.Performance measurement, management, and appraisal sourcebook, 66.