Ricardo Semler: A Revolutionary Model of Leadership

A Case Study Analysis of:

“Ricardo Semler: A Revolutionary Model of Leadership”

Kristine Stevens

22 February 2017

Professor Irina Cojuharenco

ORGB 3201

Richard Semler decided it was time to radically change the organizational structure and leadership style of his family business, Semco. The company was on the verge of going bankrupt and employees were disengaged and dissatisfied, so he decided it was time to take a different approach to managing the business. Semler initially thought it would be beneficial to remove top level management and shift the bureaucratic leadership style to one that was more hands-off and provided employees with autonomy (Maddux et al., 2014). To see the difference between early and late Semco, please refer to Exhibit 1.

Semler was cognizant that he needed to identify his employees’ needs for and factors of motivation because at the time, their needs were not aligning with the Maslow’s Need Hierarchy Theory (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2013). Employees may have had basic, lower level needs fulfilled, but there was not a sense of affection and belongingness among the employees. There was not frequent recognition or desire for self-fulfillment. To see how Semler exemplified that of a 21st Century Manager, refer to Exhibit 2(Kreitner & Kinicki, 2013). Semler needed to foster relationships and focus on job enrichment to engage employees and motivate them to strive to better themselves.

There were several personal and organization factors that encouraged Semler to make such radical changes. He was aware that his employees were dissatisfied and unmotivated. They did not desire self-fulfillment, deadlines were missed, deliveries were late and his employees overall had low morale and self-esteem. As Ricardo took over the family business, his goal was to build on his fathers’ organization. He was so preoccupied with his work that it became his only priority and he never stopped to worry about his physical health. This eventually caught up to him when he collapsed and was brought to the realization that he needed to take a step back and make changes to his lifestyle (Maddux et al., 2014).

The changes perpetrated by Ricardo Semler were beneficial to the organization because he was able to intrinsically motivate his employees (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2013). Employees were engaged and motivated to improve because he made core job characteristics present. Employees experienced more skill variety as they had the opportunity for job rotations. They experienced more task identity as they saw their projects from start to finish and task significance because their work and contributions were being valued and recognized. Employees had autonomy to choose their salary and to work hours most conducive to them. They also had a say in who their manager was and even provided their input on preferred holidays and days off(Maddux et al., 2014). Employees received beneficial and constructive feedback that they could utilize in bettering themselves.  Ricardo was able to intrinsically motivate and satisfy their needs. To see examples of Ricardo meeting Maslow’s Need Hierarchy Theory in respect to his employees, refer to Exhibit 3.

If I had the opportunity to work with Semler as my manager, I would prefer the late Ricardo leadership style. He was a democratic and hands-off leader. This is important to ensure employees feel constantly valued, engaged and motivated. He was a transparent leader and offered incentives and recognition. It is important to have a transparent leader so you can receive honest feedback and proactively utilize the constructive criticism. Semler placed tremendous trust in his employees, which fostered relationships and personal growth, resulting in more future successes. I prefer a transparent, democratic and empowering leader to a tough-minded, micro-managing leader.

If I had the opportunity to manage Ricardo, I would prefer early Ricardo. He was very hard-working, goal driven, focused and motivated (Maddux et al., 2014). He dedicated all his time and effort to his work. When you have a dedicated, hard-working employee, it is easier to foster a relationship with them and be transparent. Late Ricardo was very hands-off and in a sense, less infatuated with his work. Being the manager of late Ricardo would stress me out because of his style, I would feel like he was unmotivated and didn’t value the work he contributed. I would get the sense that I wasn’t respected as his boss and that I was not in complete control of the situation. Late Ricardo appeared to be less motivated, because he was no longer as focused on the business as he was when he was early Ricardo. I believe he would be easily disengaged, ineffective, and unmotivated to make improvements. This would be detrimental to the organizational structure of the company because his peers might see his behaviors and think it is acceptable to be disengaged, resulting in a failing organizational structure.

In conclusion, I would value to opportunity to work with late Ricardo as my boss, because I prefer when managers do not micro-manage and can provide sufficient feedback. Early Ricardo would be easiest to manage as he was highly engaged and motivated. His passion and effort would be recognized by his coworkers and would create an intrinsically motivating effect throughout the organization.

Sources

Kreitner, R., & Kinicki, A. (2013). Organizational behavior (page -). New York: McGraw-            Hill/Irwin.

Maddux, W.W., Swaab, R.I., Tanure, B., & Williams, E. (2014). Ricardo Semler: A                 

Revolutionary Model of Leadership. INSEAD Case #04/2014-5982.

Exhibit 1:  Comparison of Old vs New Semco

                                                                Old Semco                New Semco