Reference no: EM133142406

In short paragraphs, Describe the Background and Context of the Case. What is the main issue/problem? 

What is the main cause? Explain based on information in the case.

When Lee Keiko returned from a quick lunch, she scanned her email inbox for the message she was dreading. She found it labeled "high priority," among a dozen other emails and sank back in her chair as she mentally braced to open it. Keiko felt a tightening in her stomach as she clicked on the message and braced herself for the assault she had grown to expect from her boss, Barry Carver. Carver lead Environmental Designs International (EDI), a rapidly growing "green" company that specializes in retrofitting commercial buildings to improve their energy efficiency.

The primary clients of EDI are owners of skyscrapers who renovate their buildings to reduce energy use and cut down on greenhouse emissions, a contributor to global warming. Within these towering skyscrapers, the largest gas guzzlers are lighting, cooling, and heating. In 2012, owners of New York City's Empire State Building expect to reduce the skyscraper's energy use by 38 percent by the end of 2013 at annual savings of $4.4 million after this 78-year old building is retrofitted.

Keiko had expected Carver's scathing email and knew he would lambaste her and her team for missing last Friday's deadline for submitting a proposal to retrofit a 60-story Chicago skyscraper to meet new Federal green standards. Keiko had warned Carver of the proposal delay in completing the proposal due to changing federal regulations for energy efficiency. It was truly out of her hands. She had even consulted with the client to alert them of the delay, and they had agreed to an extended deadline.

Nevertheless, Carver was angry about the delay and fired off an email that was brusque and insensitive. "I depend on you to meet deadlines and work effectively with regulatory agencies. Your ineptness may cost us this important project, "he exclaimed in his email to Keiko. "Why aren't you committed to this project as I am? I can't do alone," he stated. This was one more example of how Carver often made life miserable for his subordinates, verbally attacking them to get results. Carver had also started alienating his peers. During a recent meeting to discuss the replacement of thousands of windows in a Chicago skyscraper, Carver embarrassed a colleague by accusing him of selecting a supplier without doing a price comparison among suppliers. "How can I value your recommendations, Tom, if you fail to do homework? I need new prices by Friday!" shouted Carver.

Carver was a highly skilled architect and responsible for managing a team of designers at EDI's Chicago office. Although his abrupt personality had helped him climb the corporate ladder, his intimidating communication style was beginning to create problems and hamper his ability to get results. Carver learned in his performance review that his relationships were suffering and complaints about him were increasing. Even his long-time peers were avoiding ways to work with him.

Sensitive to the growing animosity against him, Carver began to reconsider how he interacted with his staff and peers. He felt motivated to begin using some of the tools he had learned at a leadership education course he had just completed. During one of the skills assessment activities, Carver learned he could get better results by communicating more gently, build consensus, and working in a more team-oriented manner. He realized he had to find ways to handle his anger and frustration when dealing with federal regulatory agencies and the inevitable delays that hampered progress on big construction projects. As he thought about his skills assessment, Carver wondered if he could soften his image and perhaps even be considered for a senior management position he was eying at EDI's Los Angeles office.