Reference no: EM133249874

Question - Case Study - In the academic world, the old adage "publish or perish" has unmistakable meaning. This is especially so for Sophia Lopez, who has been an assistant professor in the school of pharmacy for several years and is currently up for promotion to associate professor with tenure.

Professor Lopez's department is headed up by Dr. Lilly Chen, a recognized scholar in medical and pharmaceutical research. Dr. Chen is known to get perks from the pharma companies who give the school grants for research, which she uses her junior faculty and graduate students to conduct.

Dr. Chen has been at the university for 20 years and is widely known for her flamboyant and confident style. Besides her administrative duties, she has a busy travel schedule giving international presentations on drug discovery. Dr. Chen is a favourite of the university's upper administration because of her international reputation but also because she brings large government grants to the university for her research with pharmaceutical companies. As a result of these lucrative grants, Dr. Chen is known to have influence and power over university administrators and generally gets whatever she wants, and the administration looks the other way about the perks she gets from the pharma companies.

Dr. Chen's leadership within the school of pharmacy does not receive the same accolades. Although she is tolerated, Dr. Chen is not well liked among the school's faculty. As director of the school, she has the responsibility and power to set the school's mission and supervise its day-to-day operations, but when she carries out this work, she does so without regard for others' input. Faculty seldom say anything positive about Dr. Chen's administrative ability, often describing her as a leader who is driven, self-serving, and cavalier. Junior faculty are cautious around her and describe her as mean-spirited and authoritarian.

It is within this work environment that Sophia Lopez finds herself. Sophia is a single mom with two children who came to the United States from Mexico 6 years ago, having completed her doctoral degree with honours. She has a work visa that allows her to stay in the country, but the vis is reviewed annually. Any misstep in her employment situation could mean immediate deportation. Professionally, Sophia has worked very hard. She teaches a full load of classes each semester and also conducts research. She spends considerable time outside of class mentoring students, listening to their personal problems, and giving them support. Sophia has resisted the pressure to take part in Dr. Chen's research projects because she doesn't have time and it is not her area of speciality. Sophia has had 3 articles accepted for publication recently in clinical journals but not in the top-tier research journals. Annual teaching evaluations indicate that she is an average instructor.

For her upcoming annual review, Sophia needs a letter of support from Dr. Chen stating that Sophia's teaching and research meet the standards necessary for promotion. Sophia met with Dr. Chen to discuss the letter and to obtain her support, and although she was fearful about her meeting with the administrator, Sophia did not anticipate how threatening and overwhelming the meeting would actually be.

Regarding teaching, Dr. Chen said she expected everyone to be superior in the classroom and expressed disappointment in Sophia's average teaching evaluations, suggestion she devote more time to class preparations and improving her classroom teaching style. Sophia tried to defend herself and point out that she has a large teaching load (five classes) and is teaching more night classes than any other faculty. Dr. Chen dismissed her comments and told her to "quit whining." She also accused Sophia of spending too much time working at home instead of at the office, wondering if she was really working when at home or "just taking care of her kids and cleaning the house."

Regarding Sophia's research, Dr. Chen was very frank, stating that she wanted her pharmacy school to be ranked in the top 10 nationally and that Sophia was "doing nothing" to help that ranking. Furthermore, Dr. Chen berated Sophia for the low productivity and called her "the weakest faculty member in the school." She pointed out that Sophia had only published three articles, none of which were cutting edge scholarship. Dr. Chen reminded Sophia that when she was hired, she was given a sizeable start-up grant to get her research off the ground, but Sophia accomplished little with these funds and made frequent excuses about her lack of time to publish articles on her research. Dr. Chen then wryly noted that the pharma company research projects she overseas gave more credibility and are in higher-tiered journals but that Sophia "seems to feel she is above working on that kind of research."

Needless to say, Sophia was devastated by Dr. Chen's review of her work. Dr. Chen seemed mean, heartless, and intimidating. Sophia likes the school of pharmacy and her colleagues but does not know how to make Dr. Chen recognize her value to the school. Sophia is also worried about her children and even more so about keeping her green card (for employment purposes) if Dr. Chen decides to let her go.

Case Study Questions -

1. Destructive leaders often have charisma, needs for power, narcissism, negative life themes, and ideologies of hate. In what way does Dr. Chen exhibit these traits?

2. Discuss how Dr. Chen's response to Sophia could have been different and what impact this may have had on Sophia's research and teaching outcomes. Fully substantiate your response, highlighting relevant leadership theories to support your answer.