Rob Parson Analysis
CASE STUDY – ROB PARSON AT MORGAN STANLEY
At Morgan Stanley, an investment bank, its mission or vision statement clearly defines what it values as an organization-
“exceptional performance, absolute integrity, teamwork, innovation, dignity and respect towards others”
Evaluation summary : Strengths Development areas Comments / views
Strengths
Excellent selling Highly Aggressive Professional drive Perseverance Resourcefulness Knowledge of Markets High on initiative High on CRM with HNI’s Accepts challenges Excellent on cross selling Relentless in pursuit
Development Areas
Poor team player Individualistic Arrogance Volatile temperament Low on management skills Disrespect towards colleagues Tactless Nonconformist Poor interpersonal skills Impatience Impulsive Lacks leadership skills
Views
Psychological Contract during recruitment. Paul needed someone to take on a challenging job and Parson wanted the opportunity to be creative as well as the chance to achieve a promotion to managing director
Parson is a Type “C” manager because he’s interested in his own opinion rather than those of others. The majority of the time he was right. When he was, it made his co-workers feel undermined which created animosity. Role Conflict Paul Nasr, hired Rob Parson, an aggressive individual who’ not necessarily a team
Views
Rob seemed to be exactly what they needed and wanted but now he isn’t. The company’s hiring practices should be in sync with its culture. Expectancy theory : Parson was only interested in producing results which he expected would result in his promotion to managing director. Herzberg’s Two-Factor theory of motivation is also present. Parson’s dissatisfaction (extrinsic) factor was company procedures and his satisfaction (intrinsic) factor was responsibility , possibility of growth, and advancement
Views
Everyone shouldn’t be evaluated on the same criteria and the
At Morgan Stanley, an investment bank, its mission or vision statement clearly defines what it values as an organization-
“exceptional performance, absolute integrity, teamwork, innovation, dignity and respect towards others”
Evaluation summary : Strengths Development areas Comments / views
Strengths
Excellent selling Highly Aggressive Professional drive Perseverance Resourcefulness Knowledge of Markets High on initiative High on CRM with HNI’s Accepts challenges Excellent on cross selling Relentless in pursuit
Development Areas
Poor team player Individualistic Arrogance Volatile temperament Low on management skills Disrespect towards colleagues Tactless Nonconformist Poor interpersonal skills Impatience Impulsive Lacks leadership skills
Views
Psychological Contract during recruitment. Paul needed someone to take on a challenging job and Parson wanted the opportunity to be creative as well as the chance to achieve a promotion to managing director
Parson is a Type “C” manager because he’s interested in his own opinion rather than those of others. The majority of the time he was right. When he was, it made his co-workers feel undermined which created animosity. Role Conflict Paul Nasr, hired Rob Parson, an aggressive individual who’ not necessarily a team
Views
Rob seemed to be exactly what they needed and wanted but now he isn’t. The company’s hiring practices should be in sync with its culture. Expectancy theory : Parson was only interested in producing results which he expected would result in his promotion to managing director. Herzberg’s Two-Factor theory of motivation is also present. Parson’s dissatisfaction (extrinsic) factor was company procedures and his satisfaction (intrinsic) factor was responsibility , possibility of growth, and advancement
Views
Everyone shouldn’t be evaluated on the same criteria and the