Wells Fargo and Coach

¶ … Successful and Unsuccessful Leaders Coach K. and John Stumpf are leaders that have used differing styles of leadership. On one hand, Coach K. uses a transformational leadership style whilst Stumpf uses an authoritative style of leadership. Stumpf employed a controlling and intimidating technique whilst Coach K. uses a more interactive and relational approach. Coach K. has been a successful mentor and coach over the years by having good and healthy relation with his subordinates.

Employees in Wells Fargo had a poor relation to John Stumpf as he failed to consider the perspectives of the employees. John Stumpf utilized his power and influence within Wells Fargo to change the behavior of personnel to conform to his controlling and authoritative culture. Coach K. uses his influence to not only be a leadership teacher and also coach, but also in people development. Taking these aspects into consideration, Mr. Stumpf is considered to be an unsuccessful and ineffective leader while Coach K.

is deemed a successful and effective leader.

Table of Contents Introduction 2 A comparison of the techniques used by each leader to gain power in their role within the organization 3 A comparison of how subordinates relate to each leader, including how much influence the subordinates have on each leader 3 An analysis of how each leader uses influence to change the behavior of other leaders, coworkers, and subordinates within the organization 4 A comparison of the techniques used by each leader to influence employee motivation 5 An analysis of self-destructive tendencies of each leader, and how these tendencies affect the organization 6 A comparison of how each leader rewards employees, and how effective the reward systems are 7 An analysis of which leadership theory best describes each leader and the reasons that you selected the leadership theory based on research 8 References 10 Introduction Leadership is a vital aspect taking into consideration organizations and groups are enduringly in an incessant tussle to be all the more competitive.

Leadership aids in taking full advantage of efficiency and to attain the set goals and objectives (Keskes, 2013). This portfolio will analyze and discuss two leaders. One would be considered effective and successful whereas the other would be considered ineffective and unsuccessful. In turn, these two leaders will be compared and contrasted against with respect to their leader characteristics, use of power, and use of influence, and the manner in which these elements are in relation to their effectiveness or lack thereof within their respective organization.

The effective and successful leader is Coach Mike Krzyzewski whereas the ineffective and unsuccessful leader is John Stumpf. Brief Background and Organizational Framework for each Leader John Stumpf is the former Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Wells Fargo. He was in charge of this position between June 2007 and October 2016. The industry of operation was the banking and financial services industry. Being the CEO of the company, Stumpf held the executive level within the organization and supervised the entire workforce that comprised of 265,200 subordinates.

In the course of Stampf's tenure, Wells Fargo had been overwhelmed with penalties, litigations, congressional hearings, public criticism, and dismissal of personnel. The disentanglement of the corporation emanating from lack of oversight, unethical practices, rogue employees, and a nurtured unethical culture has added to the resignation of John Stumpf as CEO of Wells Fargo (Egan, 2016). During his time of control, the organization had been entangled and involved in scandals and unethical actions.

For instance, the corporation's personnel for the past five years clandestinely formed millions of unsanctioned bank and credit accounts devoid of consumer permission and knowing. As a result, the repercussion and consequences have been substantial. Just about 5,300 workers have been instantaneously dismissed. Stumpf has also been forced to resign, and just lately went in front of Congress to address the fiasco that has taken place at Wells Fargo. Taking these aspects into consideration, Mr. Stumpf is considered to be an unsuccessful and ineffective leader. Coach K.

has been a staple in men's basketball. He has orchestrated a successful program at Duke University. Coach K. claims winning seasons since 1983, numerous NCAA national championships, authored five books, mentored and trained present-day and preceding basketball players. He has obtained inspiration from his past and present day college students, the National Basketball Association (NBA) players from the Olympic teams he has trained, fellow associates and acquaintances in the sports field, business mavens, as well as educators. I chose coach K. because he has inspired and influenced so many people.

To this day, past players speak highly of him. Jay Bilas who was his second recruiting class at Duke and current college basketball analyst for ESPN stated that he feels as though he played for the best coach ever (Davis, 2015). A comparison of the techniques used by each leader to gain power in their role within the organization Coach K. and John Stumpf employ dissimilar techniques to attain power in their role within their respective organizations. On one hand, Stumpf employed a controlling and intimidating technique.

In particular, to obtain more authority within Wells Fargo, Stumpf insists that personnel cannot determine the activities and decisions made by the managers and therefore subordinates have minimal influence on the decisions made, thereby handing him even more authority and influence in his role as a leader (Egan, 2016). On the other hand, Coach K. uses a more interactive technique to gain power in the organization. He has a healthy interrelation with the players, assistant coaches, peers and other members within the organization.

In turn, this has elevated him all the more as he has obtained greater respect from all of them (Pendergrass, 2016). A comparison of how subordinates relate to each leader, including how much influence the subordinates have on each leader Coach K. has been a successful mentor and coach over the years by having good and healthy relation with his subordinates. What is more, the players, assistant coaches and other personnel within the organization have a great deal of influence on him.

Both the USA basketball players and Duke University basketball players have a great relationship with Coach K. He has been able to motivate and inspire employees and most of all enabled them to have a trusting relationship with him. Over the years, the Duke Basketball team has been comprised of different players. They have had a significant influence on Coach K. as they have forced him to change, adapt, connect and win, and this has made him become all the more successful as a coach and leader.

He has been able to be malleable to the changing eras and personnel that have come along (Krzyzewski, 2011). On the other hand, employees in Wells Fargo had a poor relation to John Stumpf. What is more, subordinates have minimal influence on John Stumpf as a leader. This can be perceived in the fact that he failed to consider the perspectives of the employees.

For instance, as pointed out by Shen (2016), despite the fact that branch managers reported multiple instances of their peers illegally opening deposit and credit card accounts devoid of consumer approval, as a leader, Stumpf ignored these perspectives as such personnel obtained promotions and salary increases. An analysis of how each leader uses influence to change the behavior of other leaders, coworkers, and subordinates within the organization Leaders, through their influence, have a significant impact on the organizational culture and behavior.

Therefore, leaders can easily employ their influence to alter and transform the behavior of other leaders, peers, and subordinates within the organization. John Stumpf utilized his power and influence within Wells Fargo to change the behavior of personnel to conform to his controlling and authoritative culture. This encompassed beating serious targets and deadlines, failure to listen to employee concerns, and this pushed the personnel to behave unethically.

In accordance to Morris (2016), salespersons of Wells Fargo were subjected to severe pressure to sign consumers up for numerous accounts, in the end steering them to take part in fraud. These individuals are expected to form eight new accounts every day and even at times the number being raised up to 20. When salespersons failed to meet such objectives, they would be subjected to demeaning sessions and warned that they would be sacked if better results did not come immediately.

Such demands and pressuring culture developed by John Stumpf altered the behaviors of personnel within Wells Fargo to behave in unethical manners so as to meet the objectives that had been set for them. In the end, this led to the creation of millions of fake consumer accounts by employees who did this in order to secure their jobs and avoid being sacked (Morris, 2016). Coach K. largely utilizes his influence to transform the behavior of other individuals within the Duke University community.

For instance, operating in an educational organization, Coach K. uses his influence to not only be a leadership teacher and also coach, but also in people development. For instance, numerous teachers and players incessantly come back and seek advice from Coach K. as a result of the longstanding mentoring relationship and trust he has founded with them. Coach K. generates a structure in which the members of the team are linked not just to him, but to each other, to the managers, and to the assistant coaches (Siang, 2015).

Dissimilar individuals all the way through the organization express similar messages, and everybody shares and adds notions across the board. Owing to this kind of connectivity, the philosophy, principles, and best practices are possessed by the whole team and remain in place even at the time when persons leave. For instance, in the year 2004, Coach K.

formed a strategic partnership with Duke's Fuqua School of Business to make a think tank center for nurturing a profounder understanding of leadership in order to have the capacity to develop the next generation of leaders and endow present-day leaders to effect positive societal change (Siang, 2015). A comparison of the techniques used by each leader to influence employee motivation The techniques utilized by Coach K. and John Stumpf are quite contrasting. One of the key ways in which Coach K.

motivates his players and subordinates is through finding the connection and sending the right message to them. According to Coach K, selecting the fitting words is no less significant to the result of the game than select the fitting players and tactics in the court. He outlines that the best way to motivate any team, is by knowing the audience and outline or delineate vivid stories (Krzyzewski, 2011). Over the years, he had coached different players and different teams and all through he has managed to motivate the players.

According to Yaeger (2014), whilst coaching the USA basketball team, Coach utilizes patriotism to inculcate pride in the players and thereby motivating them. In particular, he creates moments, for instance, team visits to cemeteries, trips to military bases, and any activities to impel the important message of playing for one's country. Coach K. asserts that it is necessary for the players to hear it, perceive it, and comprehend what the coach is trying to do (Yaeger, 2014).

On the other hand, the technique utilized by John Stumpf to influence employee motivation is through threats. In essence, employees of Wells Fargo were motivated to open eight accounts for every consumer as a way of attaining a promotion and advancement in the organizational ranks. This did in fact motivate employees to work harder as they utilized their personal relationships to open accounts. However, ultimately, this motivation technique proved to be ineffective and adverse for the organization as the personnel resorted to unethical practices (Pendergrass, 2016).

An analysis of self-destructive tendencies of each leader, and how these tendencies affect the organization Self-destructive tendencies encompass the mannerisms and conducts of an individual that adversely have an impact on one's mind or body owing to the life choices that are made. It is imperative to note that most people are unaware of such tendencies. One self-destructive tendency of John Stumpf encompasses self-delusion. According to Pendergrass (2016), Wells Fargo had nurtured its corporate image as a moral and upright community banker.

Stumpf more than any individual within the company was completely self-deluded to this perspective, and in the present years appeared to espouse every prospect to extol the virtues of the organization's culture and values. By existing in this sort of self-admiring and sycophantic internal bubble in the course of a good period, there's the tendency of making an individual tin-eared and tone-deaf in the external world when such periods become tough.

This is exactly the case for Stumpf, who failed to see the falsification of accounts that had been taking place for five years within the company, thereby rendering Wells Fargo less upright and into a scandal (Pendergrass, 2016). The self-destructive tendency of Coach K. as a leader can be said to be that he is quick to anger. Be it on the court or off the court activities of the players and subordinates, Coach K. gets very angry quite easily when they do not get well acquainted with the program.

For instance, in recent periods, Coach K. informed his players that they were prohibited from wearing the Duke University basketball team apparel and also temporarily banned from the locker room (The Sports Exchange, 2017). This tendency can have a negative and adverse impact on the organization. Despite the fact that it can instigate motivation and impetus amongst the members of the organization, at the same time, it can instill fear and also cause deflation of the players.

For instance, if the players give their best and the coach continues being upset, it can cause the players to be deflated and also opt not to be part of the team. A comparison of how each leader rewards employees, and how effective the reward systems are As the top-ranking leader of Wells Fargo, John Stumpf rewarded employees through sales incentives. In particular, sales personnel were rewarded after opening eight accounts for every consumer. However, this system of rewarding proved to be largely ineffective.

In accordance to Lawler (2016), Wells Fargo inculcated that each consumer ought to have eight relationships with the financial institution and in turn promotion would be handed to meet cross-selling goals and objectives. This system proved to be ineffective for the company. In actual fact, the current cross-selling scam at Wells Fargo was entirely anticipated, owing to the manner in which it was incentivized by the leaders higher up, conceivably at the uppermost level of the organization.

In particular, the majority of the employees cross-sold Wells Fargo products regardless of what they had to undertake to achieve it for the reason that doing so was rewarded and not doing so was punished. The extent of its ineffectiveness lies in the fact that over 5,000 personnel ended up opening millions of fake accounts (Lawler, 2016). Coach K. uses a reward system that takes into account accountability together with competition. In particular, Coach K. uses the fist analogy in that a fist is stronger in comparison to individual five fingers.

With this reward system, every player knows that they ought to work hard, not be slacking because they are responsible for the team and without togetherness then the team simply fails. In this case, the players that are willing to work together with the team and not think of prospering by themselves are rewarded by being included in the team and given time to play.

This reward system is in fact effective largely for the reason that it motivates every player within the team to work hard not only individually, but also as a team. The coach gauges the success of the team by the motivation level of the players. If all are working in tandem, then the team gets better and is more successful (Duran, 2015).

An analysis of which leadership theory best describes each leader and the reasons that you selected the leadership theory based on research The leadership theory that best describes Coach K. is the transformational leadership theory. It delineates.