Jamie Dimon and Bank One

Jamie Dimon and Bank One An executive who comes into a failing business with the goal of helping that business become successful again faces a number of significant challenges. First, the biggest strength of an existing business is that it already exists, but that also happens to be its biggest drawback; established businesses not only have established customer bases and successful work habits, but are also likely to be entrenched in failing habits.

In addition, someone who is brought in to fix a failing business is going to be perceived as a threat to those already working in the business, because almost every successful reorganization will result in some loss of employees. Therefore, an executive in this position is likely to face resistance. This case study demonstrates how Dimon attempted to deal with the problems inherent in coming in to fix a failing business and approach it with an entrepreneurial spirit, so that the business could be reinvigorated.

Discussion When Dimon initially came to Bank One and began to restructure it, he was trying to do more than learn about the situation at Bank One. He wanted to be sure that people understood he was invested in the process. For example, "Dimon purchased 2 million shares of Bank One at a cost of $57 million" when he became the new CEO (Marshall & Thedinga, 2006). This was somewhere in the neighborhood of half of his net worth.

This investment helped demonstrate his motive, which is one of the three necessary characteristics for a leader identified by Forbes contributor John Baldoni. According to Baldoni, "motive is purpose, the why of your life and the why you want to be in charge of other people's lives" (Baldoni, 2012).

In Dimon's case, money was not the motive, but his financial investment sent a signal to the employees in the company that he believed in Bank One and that he believed that he could turn the company around and make it successful again; in fact, he had staked much of his fortune on it. In fact, the idea that Bank One could be successful was the primary signal that Dimon was sending to the organization. He did this by investing financially in the company.

He also sent the signal that the was not going to be rushed into any hasty decision making; rather than replace other executives without appropriate vetting, he took on additional work until he could find the executives he wanted for the organization (Marshall & Thedinga, 2006).

This also demonstrated his willingness to work; not only was he asking other people to work hard, he was visibly present at all levels of the organization, so that all of the employees could understand that he was actively and personally committed to turning Bank One back into a successful company. He also wanted to avoid the notion that he was a stand-apart CEO, which is why he took an office in the midst of the other executives, rather than isolating himself in a corner office.

He was also concerned about the signals that he was sending to Wall Street. He understood that anything he did would be interpreted as a sign of the company's potential success or failure, which would, in turn, impact the business's likelihood of actual success. While Dimon was actually trying to turn around a failing company, in many ways he was approaching the venture as if he was an entrepreneur.

According to Amy Sterling Casil, the top ten characteristics of an entrepreneur are: 1) discipline and organization; 2) great reputation; 3) passion; 4) balance; 5) technology savvy; 6) great negotiation skills; 7) accessibility; 8) sales ability; 9) positive attitude; and 10) imagination (2012). Looking at Dimon's behavior when he went into Bank One, it is clear that he was demonstrating many of those skills. He had a well-established great reputation in this industry, but Bank One was larger and fundamentally different from his previous ventures.

He made himself accessible to people in the company so that they knew he was there, they knew he was available for them, and they understood he was open to suggestion. Perhaps most importantly, Dimon had a positive attitude; he was committed to the success of the corporation and consistently sent the message that he believed it would be successful. His positive attitude was probably critical to the employees at Bank One.

It is important to keep in mind that Bank One, while it was one large organization at the time that Dimon came in, had been consolidated from a number of smaller organizations. As a result, one would imagine that all of the employees had experienced the loss of coworkers and changes in management in prior reorganizations and mergers. As a result, I believe that, had I been an employee at Bank One when Dimon came in to try to save the company, I would have been apprehensive.

I would have worried that my job was in jeopardy. As a result, I believe that I would have been defensive if Dimon approached me to ask my opinion about how to improve processes. I would be worried that if I suggested improvements that might eventually improve productivity and increase profit, I might actually help work myself out of a job.

Moreover, because Dimon was an outsider to the organization and did not come from any of the smaller banks that had previously been merged with Bank One, if I were a member of upper management, I think I would have felt resentful that Dimon had been hired to handle the turn-around. The feelings that I would have had seem to be what the feelings of the Bank One employees were when Dimon arrived.

The case study describes a much fractured organization, with people committed to the ways that they had operated while employed at the smaller banks that eventually formed part of Bank One. As a result, they were not working as a cohesive unit. This led not only to a loss of productivity, but also to people in the organization working against one another's interests. In other words, the entire corporate culture was dysfunctional at the time that Dimon arrived.

In order to create and maintain an entrepreneurial culture at Bank One, it would be critical to get the employees all committed to the idea of Bank One as a new organization. Rather than trying to preserve the distinct elements of the organization that were vestiges of its prior incarnations, I would recommend starting from scratch and determining the optimal technological systems, accounting systems, and ways of determining credit-worthiness, and then implementing them across the entire organization.

I would also suggest a significant change in management, perhaps moving even successful managers to different branches, in order to convey the idea that the organization was basically a new one. I would also encourage innovation in the employees.