Wolfgang Keller at Konigsbrau-Krayina

Wolfgang Keller, managing director of Konigsbrau-Krayina, the Ukrainian subsidiary of the German beer company Konigsbrau, faces a manifold managerial dilemma. His subordinate, Bohdan Khmelnytsky, is a talented and experienced commercial director who is non meeting his goals appropriately. Keller is an action-oriented manager who likes to using up a hands-on approach when dealing with problems. He has the potential to be a great loss leader as evidence by his drive and people skills.But his lack of experience running a multinational company gives him difficulty in dealing with one of his directors with a different management style. Khmelnytskys introvert and highly formal disposition had major problems to adjust to the desired organizational culture and acquire in touch with customers. Keller moldiness decide the best course of action to take with this difficult employee in an environment in which the industry is rapidly changing and growing and the war for talent is strong. He must also consider what comprises an effective action review and how his own leading style impacts Khmelnytskys poor performance.1. What is your sagaciousness of Khmelnytskys performance? Khmelnytskys is rather an administrative, operation-oriented person than a customer-oriented one. His focus is not on gross sales, he would prefer working in back office and dealing with operational issues where analytical brainstorming is required. He is lacking on motivation, which becomes evident when looking at his behavior. He delegates a lot with stunned proper follow-ups. Also, he is focused solely on his bea and does not see the whole picture of the company.Apart from this, he also has a difficult personality, keeping distance to other people. Khmelnytsky also seems to have a higher(prenominal) opinion of himself than of others. Therefore, other people see him as a difficult person to work with. They herald him MR Problem. He is not open to his direct reporting line (Keller), so he d oes not communicate directly with him on every day issues or future plans. Obviously, there is no self-confidence between the two (Keller and Khmelnytsky), especially from Khmelnytskys side.This mis imprecate is affecting directly Khmelnytskys performance considering that he is not empowered. Furthermore, Khmelnytsky is more concentrated in showing off and telling everyone that he is doing well than in planning future steps or finding a way how to improve his performance. Also, he is a very unflexible person. He is used to the existing working culture and doesnt want to believe that things squeeze out change and that he should be more responsive to these changes.2. What has Keller done well and not-so-well in managing Khmelnytskys performance? (Our observations expressed to Keller) Things youve done well in managing Khmelnytskys performance is your honest approach and open chat between the two of you. You encouraged Khmelnytsky in things he was good at like planning and implement ing a sales reorganization. On the other hand, there are things you did not so well and which therefore could be improved. Managing should always be a two way stream. Saying all the time dont do this, dont do that is not an efficient way to direct and manage people.In your earn to Khmelnytsky you used the word NOT very often, like you are not a leader, your personality does not fit to maintain personal contacts, you do not like personal contacts, you are not well-integrated into the team, etc Instead of criticizing a persons traits,, your discontent should refer to concrete tasks/work which Khmelnytsky did not dispense well. With your coaching you failed to become an exemplary leader and coach to your subordinates, with no or very little powerfulness to motivate Khmelnytsky. Your managerial capabilities are ineffective since you are withal focused on operational, day-to-day operations instead of focusing on more strategic issues of the company.You are not a team doer and you i ntervene too much and too frequently in Khmelnytskys scope of work you are not leading scarce directing. The current performance management system is ineffective since there are no frequent interviews (once a year is not enough) and quantitative goal settings (only qualitative goals, which are too subjective and therefore source of many conflicts). The steps to be taken which were listed in the explanatory permitter to Khmelnytsky were in our opinion too wide and too general. The feedback should have rather been concrete, very precise and action-oriented. Furthermore, your loving perceptiveness seems to be very low. You should try to be more open in accepting ethnical differences.3. What actions should Keller take upon returning to Kyiv with regard to Khmelnytskys performance? (A letter to Keller) Dear Mr. Keller, First of all thank you very much for your trust in our companys professionalism and experience in counselling. It is our honour to impart you impartial and objective leadership advice for solving your special managerial dilemma. After a comprehensive compend of the issue please allow us to be very straightforward. Based on our observations we would like to work up the following recommendations to you1. Empowerment. Trust the experienced and talented Mr. Khmelnitsky for at least a trial period and let him do his job completely alone. Give him full responsibility and try to get away from getting involved in his daily business.2. Communication. Improve your communication with Mr. Khmelnytsky. A much more relational leadership style depose work like a miracle in bypassing the communication gap between you and Mr. Khmelnytsky. enjoy be much more emphatic. Cultural biases and immature, extremely task oriented management style loafer affect the behavior of subordinates in a very negative way. We noticed also in your one-year appraisal the lack of tactfulness. Expressions like you are not a leader were undiplomatic and also unprofessional. With t his diverseness of communication you only hurt the feelings and the pride of your subordinates and on the other hand their motivation will be lost very easily after such a verbal offense.3. Follow your instinct and be a real leader. Dont be scared to alter the daily duties of the commercial director. You demand to keep a talented manager like Mr. Khmelnytsky at the company, however, if you communicate well with him and start a new chapter in your relationship a slight re-organization can take place. Let Mr. Khmelnytsky keep his social status as director of the commercial department but divide the functions and let Mr. Skovoroda allow to lead the sales department as the sales director.You could offer to Mr. Khmelnytsky that he could be the supervisor and mentor of Mr. Skovoroda in the first period by offering him also a slight salary increase for that responsibility but he has to focus on marketing and give free hand to Mr. Skovoroda. That way you could bring out the most of Mr . Khmelnytskys experience and on the other hand you can win the best advisor and mentor for Mr. Skovoroda until he gains enough experience and confidence to work completely alone.Conclusion This case demo how differences in management style, communication, personality and culture can result in a conflict that can jeopardize the business results of a company. It also showed that managers without extensive managerial experience have to learn how to trust their subordinates and how to communicate with them in a constructive and emphatic way in order to be effective.