Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley: Case Analysis

Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley: Case Evaluation

Predicament Analysis

The case is about a young banker named Rob Parson, who was hired for a really difficult job of market place coverage skilled by the Paul Nasr, a senior managing director in Capital Market Solutions at Morgan Stanley for his outstanding performance and energetic attitude. Nasr promised him to promote to the position of managing director. Rob Parson did extremely nicely and with his efforts, he pushed Morgan Stanley from 10th position to 3rd inside a quite short span of time. With his efforts, he expanded the market place share from 2% to 12.five%, which was an proof of his outstanding and influential efficiency. Regrettably, Rob Parson failed in building very good relations with his peers and colleagues, which was of great value for the firm. At Morgan Stanley, group function was of much far more importance than individual work and the employees were not permitted to breach the guidelines of the firm for reaching a distinct purpose. In the predicament, Rob Parson broke also several eggs to accomplish his ambitions and objectives which tremendously affected his relationships with his peers and colleagues.

Rob Parson’s performance evaluation is on its course and it became hard for Paul Nasr to promote Rob Parson since of a lot of unfavorable views. At Morgan Stanley, a 360-Degree efficiency evaluation procedure was implemented where the pros were evaluated by the superiors, colleagues and subordinates. Although, Rob Parson did really properly in bringing customers to the firm but he had poor relations with his colleagues and subordinates and absolutely everyone had commented negatively for the duration of his performance evaluation. Rob Parson activities and qualities are not in agreement with the organization’s mission and culture. In the self-assessment exercise, he did concede that he is not exactly suited to the organizations’ culture, and he would require some time to fully adjust. Thinking seriously about all these points, it comes down to what is crucial for the organization, its society, the mission and the qualities set for itself or the fleeting cash associated profit.

Dilemma STATEMENT

Paul Nasr has to take decision to advocate Rob Parson for the promotion to the position of managing director. If yes, then what would be the implications of this decision on the general organization’s policies? If no, then what would be the reaction of Rob Parson, it could be attainable that Morgan Stanley loses such a competent and leading performer. The principal difficulty for Paul Nasr was to take a fair choice while dealing in a sophisticated manner with Rob Parson so that he could get his point. The root cause of the problem was the distinction among Rob Parson’s thoughts and the corporate culture of the firm. He doesn’t show respect towards his coworkers, does not have any cooperation aptitudes, and do not take into account the significance of employee development, as he believes that he is the sharpest of every one particular of them. Parsons basic vision was through his magnificent execution in the Capital Industry Services to develop excellent benefits and to manufacture nicely and extended haul association with his and the organization’s consumers and he is performing the job successfully. It could be achievable that Rob Parson would be a victim of self-sabotage, exactly where folks unconsciously undercut themselves due to the difficult nature of their job or due to some other factors. An aggressive feedback regarding a person’s unconscious behavior could influence his/her self-assurance and self-dignity.

VIEWS & Analysis

Psychological Contract for the duration of recruitment: Paul necessary a person to take on a difficult job and Parson wanted the opportunity to be inventive as nicely as the possibility to achieve a promotion to managing director. Parson is a Type “C” manager because he’s interested in his own opinion rather than those of other people. The majority of the time he was proper. When he was, it produced his co-workers feel undermined which produced animosity.

Part conflict: Paul Nasr, hired Rob Parson, an aggressive person who’s not necessarily a team player, to fill a position that necessary his distinctive character qualities.

Expectancy theory: Parson was only interested in creating benefits which he expected would result in his promotion to managing director.

Herzberg’s Two-Element theory of motivation is also present. Parson’s dissatisfaction (extrinsic) factor was company procedures and his satisfaction (intrinsic) factor was responsibility, possibility of development, and advancement.

Everybody shouldn’t be evaluated on the very same criteria and the evaluation shouldn’t be the only aspect in determining promotion: a Principal shouldn’t be evaluated using the identical criteria of a managing director or an associate. Also, a principal in the capital industry solutions division shouldn’t be compared to a principal in yet another because the job requirements are distinct.

1 downfall of employing only the 360 degree evaluation is that animosity can sometime cloud a fair and impartial judgement by co-workers.

Option Solutions

1. Advocate Rob Parson for Promotion.

This recommendation entails to neglect the importance of the culture and values of the Morgan Stanley to retain such a competent and hustler performer. However, opting for this option would raise several concerns about the fairness of the functionality evaluation system as well as would modify the perception of other personnel about Morgan Stanley. Opting for this alternative would not have an effect on the revenues and market place share of the firm and support the organization to get advantages from the influential efforts of Rob Parson. On the unfavorable side, this choice would communicate a message that staff could attract company at the expense of the company’s culture which would be detrimental to the attempts of top management relating to collaboration, teamwork, respect and so forth.

2. Do not advocate Rob Parson for Promotion.

The choice entails to contemplate only the company’s culture alternatively of the efforts created by Rob Parson. This would save the special culture of the organization and would also improve the trust and loyalty of workers towards the company. On the other hand, it would hurt Rob Parson for his efforts and possibly he may leave the company. Rob Parson had some excellent skills to attract customers and his exit from the business would drop its revenues and market share since all the consumers have been eager to function with him.

3. Extend the period for Rob Parson to perform as “Principal”.