The Rise and Fall of Worldcom

Shaghayegh Davari * Wan-Ting Shao * Ananya Chandra * Niteesh Chinta * Shraddha Rane * Swathi Punreddy The vacate and fall of WorldCom This case study WorldCom is a telecommunications company which was led by CEO, Bernard Ebbers, and chief financial officer, Scott Sullivan. In 1999, WorldCom was not meeting Wall Streets receipts and earnings expectations, and it appeared that the coming year would produce more bad news. The CFO argued for setting realistic targets. However, the CEO insisted that the company needed double material body growth, and pushed for aggressive targets.A great deal of focus was not putting on team work and cosmos a sacrosanct team pretender, which is said to excite been a strategy to reduce dissenting opinions, at long last trail the organization not to follow a groupthink attitude. There is moderate evidence to suggest appropriate review financial reporting controls were be reviewed independently and there was a lack of stringent monitoring of the intragroup control system and therefore the quality of the controls around the posting of ledger entries to the general ledger was identified as a weak control.The Bernie Ebbers and Scott Sullivan where the attracter of the company and set of their attractorships all over their followers which were the subordinates refer to their berth and is relied on three bases, coercing business drawing card, legitimate power, and knowledge power. Leadership powers can be habituate by themselves or combined so that the leader has maximum influence. The leader exit therefore need to think carefully near which power to drop which in this case was not used in a centering that at last resulted in decrease which was companys bankruptcy.Firstly, the main relevant theory in use by these managers for leading company was supreme power, they showed their ability to apply punishment to subordinates and it is originating from the managers position and controlling co-workers behavior by forcin g them to do whatever is not coming right to their believe. However, good leaders use authoritative power only when in the last sort since coercive power can performance in the short term. Coercive power relies on threaten and provide backfire badly if used as the only base for using influence.In this case, the employees were publicly berated and intimidated for questioning managers decisions and however information. Secondly, the legitimate power by the leaders is used to some finish in this case. It was written in co-workers minds that the leaders have right to instruct them and that they have an obligations to follow whatever instructions the leader are providing them and there is no need for whatever is not being provided to them.Legitimate power comes from the authority of the companys position which can necessitate certain behaviors of others. Ebbers indicated as personal charisma power which could be named as divine power and made the board of directors think that he kno ws the way and the answers and could nurture or guide them therefore, by producing passive board, rubber-stamped most of his recommendations. Finally, the managers in this case also relies on the information power.Information Management is an emerging field of operation that is concerned with information the infrastructure used to collect, store and deliver it and the organizational and social contexts in which it exists. But these two managers did not deploy the information power as a competitive tool because there was no efficient and effective deployment of the resources of the company. However, while you cant control anyone (except peradventure yourself), you can influence nearly everyone. This is the essence of true leadership.By this definition, Ebbers and Sullivan were great leaders in. One of the tactics influenced in this case involves actively applying legitimate and coercive power by even managers or subordinates usually form a group and tried to influence others by us ing threats of sanctions to force compliance, threaten, and apply punishment if the subordinates does not comply with the requests. Information control is simultaneously an influence for this case which is linked intimately with influence and power.The managers in this case hurl lots of information without telling any of their employees and limited subordinates to have admission price to valuable information and make them stay in dark about work issue. Assertive might be called vocal authority which was another(prenominal) influence. Using the managers positions of power and so as to despise and control the employees will cause a lot of problem and damage of respect over the long term.However, the employees from the WorldCom quoted events that they were denounced for asking about any decisions or asking for information. In this case the managers did not use organizational politics in cost of behavior of interest groups to use power to influence decision making. They both focused on the self-serving and organizationally non sanctioned nature of several(prenominal) behavior in organization. The most important tactic was developing strong allies and forming power coalitions, and associating with these two managers in their business.They consider threat forthcoming in organization settings, it seems quite reasonable to expect that people will find it advantageous to manage the impressions that others form of them, even in piazza which subordinates feel that the outcome is failing. In this case almost all the executives and faculty identified information as a political tool which is depending on the managers and it comes that the purpose of this tactic may be to burry or gloomy an important details the political actors of the company which were these two managers believe that could injury them, when the risk of withholding information is too great.