This paper critically analyzes the case of Harry Creighton, a middle manager at Chisum Industries whose agreeableness personality trait makes him popular with employees yet limits his suitability for promotion to top management. The paper examines how Harry's tendency to absorb employee responsibilities undermines his leadership effectiveness, then proposes two primary solutions: cultivating self-awareness and shifting his perception of what effective management requires. Drawing on concepts from Daft (2013) and research on personality trait development, the paper argues that agreeableness need not be a barrier to leadership if a manager can learn to differentiate social rapport from professional accountability.
The paper demonstrates applied case analysis: it identifies a behavioral problem, diagnoses its theoretical root (agreeableness as a Big Five personality trait), and prescribes evidence-based interventions. This mirrors the problem–diagnosis–solution structure common in organizational behavior coursework and business case writing.
The paper opens with a narrative introduction that establishes the case context and identifies the central tension. An "Analysis" section unpacks Harry's personality trait and its managerial consequences. A "Solutions" section proposes self-awareness and perceptual change as remedies, with supporting citations. An "Application" section reflects on broader lessons for personal and professional leadership development. This four-part structure — context, analysis, solution, reflection — is a hallmark of undergraduate organizational behavior case studies.
Chisum Industries has historically promoted managers from within its own ranks. Harry Creighton was a middle manager widely regarded by workers as a "nice manager." Workers described him this way because Harry was always present and willing to help them with their work. Top managers, including Marcus Chisum, were conducting a meeting to discuss which middle managers to promote to top management positions. Harry was next on their list, and all of the top managers seemed to agree that he was a good manager who had motivated employees and raised performance levels. Harry also maintained a strong relationship with his employees, which clearly reflected his personality. His dominant personality trait is agreeableness (Daft, 2013, p. 466).
However, the top managers felt that Harry was not fully qualified because he lacked the skills necessary to manage employees at a higher level. He might be a popular manager, but popularity alone does not constitute the skill set required for top management. Harry needs the ability to say "no" to his employees and to take a tough stance in certain situations. In the eyes of the top managers, Harry is perceived not so much as a manager, but rather as a co-worker who is always willing to step in, assist, and take on responsibilities that belong to others.
The central issue with Harry's situation is his personality trait. Agreeableness, as a personality trait, means that Harry gets along easily with his junior employees (Hudson, Roberts, & Lodi-Smith, 2012). Harry is highly likable, which is why employees describe him as a nice manager. Being always willing to help employees and even taking over their responsibilities is another characteristic of an agreeable personality. His strong relationships with employees allowed him to motivate them and influence them to perform at a higher level. Yet this same personality trait is a hindrance to his promotion to top management, because at that level there is no room for softness — difficult roles and tough decisions must be made, and Harry's personality may prevent him from doing so effectively.
The personality trait becomes particularly problematic when Harry is faced with situations requiring him to boost employee morale. In order to achieve this, he most likely immersed himself in their work and offered a helping hand at every turn. While employee morale and performance did improve, Harry was unable to extricate himself from the dynamic he had created. He was not able to manage his own boundaries, which led to him performing tasks that were not his responsibility. What Harry needs most is clarity of objectives. Once he understands precisely what is expected of him and the appropriate steps to take, he will be able to distance himself from responsibilities that belong to others.
A good manager should bring out the best in their employees. Covering up employees' weaknesses only works against the manager, because employees become dependent on the manager to perform what they themselves cannot. Harry appeared to give employees slack when it came to meeting deadlines and tolerating sloppiness in their work. This demonstrates that he lacks the capacity to make tough decisions — a prerequisite for top management. Harry was more comfortable being popular than providing genuine leadership. While there are introverted managers who still lead effectively, what Harry must understand is how to differentiate between official responsibilities and social ones. It is entirely possible for Harry to offer strong leadership while still being agreeable and personable with employees.
Bratton, V. K., Dodd, N. G., & Brown, F. W. (2011). The impact of emotional intelligence on accuracy of self-awareness and leadership performance. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 32(2), 127–149.
Daft, R. (2013). Management. Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.
Hudson, N. W., Roberts, B. W., & Lodi-Smith, J. (2012). Personality trait development and social investment in work. Journal of Research in Personality, 46(3), 334–344.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.