The Leadership Development GE-Style case study offers a glimpse in to the management and leadership training provided by General Electric to its seasoned executives (Kreitner, 2008). The history of General Electric dates back to the days of Thomas Edison, with the formal company forming in 1892 (GE, 2010). General Electric is a successful company, which spans a history of over a century of time. They have grown from a company primarily concerned with electricity to one that competes globally in diversified markets such as finance, television production, aircraft engines, medical imaging, and power generation (GE, 2010). In addition, they employ roughly 300,000 people in over 100 countries (GE, 2010).
Accomplishing such success requires a diverse management team knowledgeable in the different aspects of their product and production lines. The John F. Welch Leadership Center at Crotonville provides General Electric the avenue for grooming its managers to meet the changing goals of the company. Whether GE’s approach to teaching leadership, as described in this case study, is effective or not is truly dependent upon application. If the application applies internally, within the GE organization, GE runs a very successful leadership-training program. However, whether the same training practices are successful outside GE’s application seems to be a topic of controversy. What works for one may not work for all.
First, let us look at GE from an internal perspective. In the article, Bob Corcoran: The Power of GE Education, Corcoran is quoted as saying, “The DNA of any organization rests with its leadership and talent pipeline, and what better way to strengthen how we operate and work in the world as a responsible corporate c...
... middle of paper ...
...ol of business, some of its content also works externally. GE has trained many S&P 500 executives. I think Jeffrey Immelt, current Chairman, and CEO of General Electric sums it up pretty well when he says, “Our whole system is to educate people for the GE system, not any other company’s [system]. When executives leave the GE bubble, it’s up to them to figure out what travels and what doesn’t” (Kratz, 2005).
Works Cited
GE. (2010, December 5). Fact sheet. Retrieved from http://www.ge.com/company/factsheets/corporate.html
General Electric. (n.d.). Leadership and learning. Retrieved from http://www.ge.com/company/culture/leadership_learning.html
Kreitner, R. (2008). Foundations of management, basics and best practices. New York, NY: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Soshe, T. (2004). Bob Corcoran: The Power of GE Education. Chief Learning Officer, 3(3), 34-36.
General Electric Corporation is a multi-billion dollar conglomerate founded in 1892. The company was founded in Schenectady, New York to capitalize on the patents of Thomas Edison and the use of electric power through generation and distribution. Now a blue chip publicly traded company that has branched out beyond its core into arenas such as aircraft engineering, television, and home appliances to name a few. Over the years the corporation has been through different management models that have brought innovation in many forms that have allowed them to be envied by companies around the world. Despite great success since its conception, like many companies who can withstand the test of times, it’s natural for them to become self-absorbed, which can have a negative impact on the company structure as a whole. Coming across someone like Jack Welch who can think out of the box and in a manner that doesn’t strain the resources of the company but expands the thinking of the company as a collective unit is needed to continue the legacy of innovation in all aspects of business.
General Motors (GM) has been a staple of American culture since 1908. GM represents the best of American ingenuity, with brand names such as GMC, Cadillac, and Chevrolet. According to GM, “Our unyielding mission to earn customers for life has led to a healthy balance sheet and world-class products that are wining in the marketplace” (GM, 2015). At GM’s height, the company was the largest employer in the world. In addition, GM has been an integral company during the wartime efforts, and has capitalized on the American spirit. GM is of the longest tenured American brands.
General Motors became a “centralized organization, so decision-making authority is concentrated in the hands of top-level managers, and little authority is delegated to lower levels” (Ferrell et al., 2015, p. 199). Centralized organizations have little upward communication and top-level manager may not be aware of problems and unethical activities. According to Ferrell et al., (2015), it has been noted that “centralized organization may exert influence on their employees because they have a central core of policies and codes of ethical conduct” (p. 201). Conversely, to survive at GM employees praised the CEO intelligence and carried out their orders by keeping a low profile, and never made waves. GM rewarded employees who followed the old traditional ways and those that challenged their thinking lost promotion opportunities or their jobs. However, General Motors experienced conflict between corporate management responsibility and social responsibility. Consequently, General Motors “attempted to implement a new mentality upon its management in a short period of time” (Goussak, Webber, & Ser, 2012, p. 49) by changing the company’s environment, but
GM had experienced a level of success that developed a reputation as the world’s preeminent producer of automotive products. Because of its success, which produced substantial fiscal resources, the company was awash in cash flow, cash reserve, and lines of credit. GM’s management was the victim of 50 years of industry success. Management was characterized by a bloated, bureaucratic structure that impeded any attempt to improve the corporation. Top management established a fixed objective in the closed decision-making process towards GM’s strategic objectives. There was little to create a realistic Gap analysis, which made is easy to overlook the need to reinvent its management before undertaking the reinvention of the entire corporation.
General Electric is a state-of-the-art company that specializes in building excellent appliances from lighting fixtures to kitchen appliances along other products. You will find many of these products in millions of homes and offices, factories, and retail facilities around the world work better. GE has a training and development program that employees can use. This program has enabled GE to remain prosperous since 1892. The General Electric was established by J. P. Morgan and Charles Coffin, G. E. has developed a management strategy that has penetrated the complex boundaries between management stages. Not only does GE have training programs available for its managers and employees, but for their customers as well. G.E’s entry-level leadership and experienced leadership programs have allowed this company to excel. G.E. also believes in having a learning culture. Learning is accomplished at G.E.’s John F. Welch Leadership Development Center. These programs and center have greatly contributed to the success and longevity of G.E.
John P. Kotter, a worldwide famous expert on leadership at Harvard Business School, was a graduate of MIT and Harvard. He joined the Harvard Business School faculty in 1972 and who was voted tenure and a full professorship at the age of thirty-three in 1980. Kotter's honors include an Exxon Award for Innovation in Graduate Business School Curriculum Design and a Johnson, Smith and Knisely Award for New Perspectives in Business Leadership. He again gained the title as the #1 ¡§Leadership Guru¡¨ from a survey for 504 enterprises that was conducted by Business Week magazine. Outline of this book
Kouzes, J., & Posner, B., (2007). The leadership challenge, (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Lincoln Electric Company is a great example of how a successful organization creates successful employee satisfaction. Company founders are the key stakeholders in making the organizational culture a success. They are the leaders with the vision of how they want to promote their company and they have to present the values to their employees so that the employees also do understand that the success of an organization is a success for themselves. It was not an easy task for Lincoln Electric Company to plant the foundation of organizational culture. There were many obstacles that Lincoln Electric Company had to overcome to succeed. Lincoln Electric Company strongly believed that the customer satisfaction should be their main goal. The value on the return of the happy customer was significant that it directly impacts the success of the business. Lincoln Electric Company was very much coined on the term of customer satisfaction and they strive their best to provide the
Leadership at times can be a complex topic to delve into and may appear to be a simple and graspable concept for a certain few. Leadership skills are not simply acquired through position, seniority, pay scale, or the amount of titles an individual holds but is a characteristic acquired or is an innate trait for the fortunate few who possess it. Leadership can be misconstrued with management; a manager “manages” the daily operations of a company’s work while a leader envisions, influences, and empowers the individuals around them.
Rosen, R. H. (1997). Learning to lead. In F. Hesselbein, M. Goldsmith & R. Beckhard (Eds.), The Organization of the Future. The Drucker Foundation Future Series (p. 306). New York, NY: Jossey-Bass Inc Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership. (4th ed., p. 13). San Francisco: Johan Wiley & Sons, Inc.
The company’s approach to motivate employees has been working in a positive way. The employees are satisfied with the family style community, and the productivity has increased as well. The company’s style of treating employees as important partners has been successful in other manufacturing companies too. For example, when Honda opened its first factory in the U.S., the CEO and employees shared the same cafeteria, just like Lincoln.
This case study demonstrates a young woman leader, Toby Johnson, who used to serve in the military as a pilot and attended Harvard Business School, joined PepsiCo’s Leadership Development Program (LDP), and was working in the management team at the Williamsport plant. She determined to forge ahead, and led the plant to achieve the Level 3 CI and also won the Doolin Award, which the Williamsport plant had never achieved before. The problem that Johnson encounters currently is that if the plant should continue to forge ahead and achieve the ultimate Level 4 CI, which will cost huge amount of money and efforts with the risk of her sudden leave of plant.
Robbins, S., Decenzo, D., & Coulter, M. (2013). Fundamentals of management. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
The corporate culture of Google is same as other organizations except for a few unique leadership positions like Chief Culture Officer and Chief Internet Evangelist. Rest all remains the same, where the information passes from higher management to the lower – level employees of various departments. Despite the standard corporate organizational structure, Google has developed a corporate culture based on giving employees way to develop new ideas without excessive oversight.
Smith, T. (2008). "Leadership: theory and practice (4th ed.)." Engineering Management Journal. Rolla, MO American Society for Engineering Management. Retrieved July 20, 2011 from HighBeam Research: http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P3-1480702701.html