With the principal-agent model, the actuality of these situations are day-in and day-out situations, but often times the triangle agent model is one that is more factor based. One that sticks in my mind as a situation that I saw from afar was this summer while I was working for large corporation in Chicago. The group that I was with had a main manager, with her reporting to the department head. The group used to be co-managed before another department needed a manager. With the change of a single manager, the manager implemented unofficial teams to include senior members of the team as team leaders, helping her workload in terms of assisting the group. While everyone still reported to the main manager, they unofficially were under the leadership of the two senior group members. With these two senior members, while it was not an official triangle principal agent with direct reports, there was an unofficial triangle situation.
I noticed this from the people on the team that I was working with, as they were the younger members of the team. They would often go to their team leaders for questions and direction, with most of the interactions positive. However, there were a few that caught my attention in which the senior leader did not agree with the manager or were disappointed with the younger member, but had to make it clear that the manager's decision was the one that counted. I think that this caused some changes in actions by the younger team members in terms of their actions. Younger members were free to go to the main manager, but were suggested to go to the senior members first.
I think that my understanding of the implications of the triangle principal agent situation without knowing what it actually was gave me the insight into rationale for actions taken. The main manager valued the insight of the two senior members of the group, which meant that younger members not only had to make sure that they were in the good graces of the manager, but also as well with the more senior members. The group that I worked with had a good dynamic, but I could see the challenges that a situation such as was implemented here could have some challenges. There could be undue influence by the senior members, even though they are not in a managerial role. There are a lot of different ways that this triangle situation could cause confusion in the power and decision making, as well as the implications of having multiple leaders.
In the first portion of this post, I will do a bit of reflection on the last week of class. Learning about the insurance model was very interesting to me as I have a connection to the insurance industry. Last summer, I interned at AIG, American International Group, one of the leading insurance carriers in the world. Within my internship, I worked in the executive liability group, which focused on the pricing on insurance for companies. Through this experience, I learned a significant amount regarding the insurance industry. I learned a lot about the factors that affect insurance pricing, a significant amount regarding the corporate industry, and a lot about organizations on the whole. Learning about the insurance model from an economic standpoint was very interesting to me as it put the pieces together in terms of connecting the dots from my summer. Being able to put it all together was something that really helped me to make sense of the model. -------------------------------------...
Before getting into the subject of your post, do note that something weird happened with the formatting, where the text has white background, which is distinct from the page background. This hasn't happened on your previous posts, so I wonder what caused it.
ReplyDeleteThe story you told was about creating more hierarchy in an unofficial way with the team leaders above the other group members but below the manager. Such a hierarchy makes it easier for the manager in that the direct lines are less.
I believe I described something similar to the class earlier in the semester, when I first became Director of the Center for Educational Technologies. We needed something similar but didn't yet have a line for an Assistant Director. So I appointed one of the staff as office manager, without an official title and without a pay increase. It made my work life bearable, though the staff challenged the structure, particularly at first.
You didn't comment on the gender of the various participants in your example as a factor affecting the outcomes, but my guess is that it mattered. So I wonder if in your response you might reflect on that.
The other thing that might matter, and it probably was invisible to you, is how much the manager interacted with the leaders and practiced Model 2 with them, so that their ideas impacted office decisions. If the manager was more Model 1, then some of the disagreements you described are predictable (and then something other than gender was the cause). So if you have thoughts on the manager's style, that might help in explaining out the triangle played out.
Let me add one additional factor, which is experience and know how as a manager. The situation you described was a new structure. So it should have been expected that there'd be some bumps along the way till those got ironed out. Usually, you have to put in more effort in a new situation to keep things working. On the other hand, the new structure was designed to economize on the manager's oversight. So there is the question of whether she balanced that well or not. I can't tell from reading this, but maybe you have some thoughts on the matter.
Hello Professor,
DeleteI'm not sure what happened with the formatting but I have fixed it. I put it in HTML form instead of compose and it seems to have fixed it.
In regards to gender, the main manager was female, with the two team leads one being male and one being female. They were all great to work with, the experience came solely from observations on my point. I would say that she balanced it well, although that was the only way that I had seen it. Additionally, I would say that she more practiced Model 2. They had all worked together for some time and I could tell there was a strong sense of trust.
Thank you for your questions and additional factors, I appreciate the further thought on the situation.
I agree with that authorizing senior members could bring some challenges for the management. However, I also think that proper authorization might be a good idea to make group members more manageable. If the manager finds out that senior members are trustworthy, the manager can count on those members to supervise younger members. On the other hand, the manager can focus on other more important decisions or strategy making.
ReplyDeleteWith the size of the group and the scope of the work, I think that authorizing these senior members unofficially was the correct move for the team. They had all worked together for some time and there was a definite sense of trust that I could tell. You hit it on the nose when you talked about strategy aspects as my manager (the top manager of the team) was often in meetings with office management and the other leaders of the department.
DeleteMr Pedro Loan Offer has been a key partner in our success, and an invaluable asset for the growth and future of our company, Mr Pedro and his loan company invested in my business with a loan of $1000000 at the rate of 2% in return and it's was really nice working with him because I do not know what I would have done without the help of Mr Pedro and his loan company,
ReplyDeleteMr Pedro Jerome contact Email: pedroloanss@gmail.com And WhatsApp: +1-8632310632.