(3 pages single spaced)
Refer to the Hy Dairies, Ltd.” case (at the end of this page) and answer the following three questions.
1. What symptoms exist to suggest that something has gone wrong?
2. What are the root causes that led to these symptoms?
3. What actions should the organization take to correct these problems? Case Study Guidelines:
The purpose of case studies is to help develop your analytical skills.
The three questions above are meant to guide you in the direction of clear, systematic assessment.
In question # 1, you need to consider the symptoms of the case. In other words, what are the observable signs that things have gone wrong? What are the “red flags”?
In question #2, you will take what you’ve learned in the course, and your own experiences, to reflect on what might be the underlying root causes to the issues you identified in the first question. This will provide some potential “whys” for the observable symptoms. (I actually don’t have any work experience you can just give examples from random daily life situations. We pretty much learned about organizational behavior, how to cope with other employees by understanding different cultures, personalities, different generations(millennials etc.) and whatnot. How employees need to be more effective and efficient. Motivated….how companies should have the same purpose. Its pretty much common sense. If you have any questions please send me a message)
Based on your considerations for question # 2, you will then formulate suggestions or solutions to the case. This will formulate your response for question # 3.
This three-‐step process helps develop a logical approach. It helps ensure the analysis isn’t “short-‐ circuited” by looking at the symptoms and immediately go into making recommendations.
Before allowing you to make recommendations, the process pushes you to consider the underlying root causes. This process can be called the “iceberg effect”
Imagine the problem is an iceberg. It is the tip above the water that is the easiest to see (the symptoms). If you try to solve a problem based on what you see above the water, you will not be developing a solution based on the whole problem. Question
# 2 pushes you down into the problem (below the water’s surface) by having you ask the question, “Why might this be happening?” Your solution, when based on the entire problem (both observable symptoms and root causes), is more likely to be on target.
It is valuable to remember that the responses to case studies are somewhat subjective. It is more important to provide your reasoning and ideas in a concise and thoughtful way than to be absolutely correct.
Your assignment should be approximately 2 -‐ 3 pages in length, single spaced. Consider the use of formatting such as point form, subheadings, etc to help organize your ideas and recommendations.
Case Study: HY DAIRIES LTD.
Syd Gilman read the latest sales figures with a great deal of satisfaction. The vice-president of marketing at Hy Dairies, Ltd., a large Canadian milk products manufacturer, was pleased to see that the marketing campaign to improve sagging sales of Hy’s gourmet ice cream brand was working. Sales volume and market share of the product had increased significantly over the past two quarters compared with the previous year.
The improved sales of Hy’s gourmet ice cream could be credited to Rochelle Beauport, who was assigned to the gourmet ice cream brand last year. Beauport had joined Hy less than two years ago as an assistant brand manager after leaving a similar job at a food products firm. She was one of the few nonwhite women in marketing management at Hy Dairies and had a promising career with the company. Gilman was pleased with Beauport’s work and tried to let her know this in the annual performance reviews. He now had an excellent opportunity to reward her by offering the recently vacated position of market research coordinator. Although technically only a lateral transfer with a modest salary increase, the marketing research coordinator job would give Beauport broader experience in some high-profile work, which would enhance her career with Hy Dairies. Few people were aware that Gilman’s own career had been boosted by working as marketing research coordinator at Hy several years before.
Rochelle Beauport had also seen the latest sales figures on Hy’s gourmet ice cream and was expecting Gilman’s call to meet with her that morning. Gilman began the conversation by briefly mentioning the favourable sales figures, and then explained that he wanted Beauport to take the marketing research coordinator job. Beauport was shocked by the news. She enjoyed brand management and particularly the challenge involved with controlling a product that directly affected the company’s profitability. Marketing research coordinator was a technical support position—a “backroom” job—far removed from the company’s bottom-line activities. Marketing research was not the route to top management in most organizations, Beauport thought. She had been sidelined.
After a long silence, Beauport managed a weak “Thank you, Mr. Gilman.” She was too bewildered to protest. She wanted to collect her thoughts and reflect on what she had done wrong. Also, she did not know her boss well enough to be openly critical.
Gilman recognized Beauport’s surprise, which he naturally assumed was her positive response to hearing of this wonderful career opportunity. He, too, had been delighted several years earlier about his temporary transfer to marketing research to round out his marketing experience. “This move will be good for both you and Hy Dairies,” said Gilman as he escorted Beauport from his office.
Beauport was preoccupied with several tasks that afternoon, but was able to consider the day’s events that evening. She was one of the top women and few minorities in brand management at Hy Dairies and feared that she was being sidelined because the company didn’t want women or nonwhite people in top management. Her previous employer had made it quite clear that women “couldn’t take the heat” in marketing management and tended to place women in technical support positions after a brief term in lower brand management jobs. Obviously Syd Gilman and Hy Dairies were following the same game plan. Gilman’s comments that the coordinator job would be good for her was just a nice way of saying that Beauport couldn’t go any further in brand management at Hy Dairies.
Beauport now faced the difficult decision of whether to confront Gilman and try to change Hy Dairies’ sexist and possibly racist practices or to leave the company.