1. What problems are facing Erik Peterson? 2. How effective has Erik Peterson been as a manager of the Hanover operations? Provide evidence to support your answer. 3. Is there another approach (with specific actions) to managing the Hanover operations that might be more effective? 1. What problems are facing Erik Peterson? Erik Peterson is facing multiple problems.
Main reasons for his problems are two things- the fact that he is not enough experienced for the position he has got (he didn’t even apply for this position, it was more like a coincidence that he got it) and miscommunication with and guidance from higher management. At first Erik was told that he will be reporting to a very experienced VP who will be involved in the launch process a great deal himself. As the VP left the Company, Peterson reported to a lower manager who was not experienced in this kind of launch and often was unsure about himself and therefore wouldn’t make unpopular decisions.
In the cooperation between Erik and higher management there was serious lack of decision making power. Other problems Peterson was facing: * Not enough mentoring received from higher management- both before start of work and during the launch * Tense relationship with part of his direct reports as some of them had expected to get Erik’s position, also tense relationship between the direct reports * Lack of specific industry/ project launch experience within the company- both within management and direct reports * Complex relationship with some of the key KOLs as they have started to mistrust SciMat due to management changes.
At the end Peterson didn’t participate in resolving them, special team was asked to do it. Peterson didn’t have trustful and solid relationship with the team members based on historic events * Commercial manufacturing taking place in Costa Rica and manufacturing quality and deadlines being missed constantly. Peterson is not able to fully control the process due to remote destination, language barrier and not enough technical knowledge (his key operational personnel are giving him different opinions about the situation) * Petersons lack of experience and skills of managing and verseeing the whole launch process- in some areas he is getting involved too much, in some not enough.
2. How effective has Erik Peterson been as a manager of the Hanover operations? Provide evidence to support your answer. E. Peterson is quite effective in overseeing the process of launch. Involved personnel have praised him for the new weekly status meeting he has introduced. This was all the people are aware of latest status of the launch. On the other hand Peterson has not been effective on individual situations and tasks.
For example when there was struggle with KOLs (they seemed to have lost their trust in SciMat and planned to postpone trials of catheter), Erik had communicated to the key KOLs that he will offer extra help from technicians and other relevant personnel for their trials. However after discussions with his management he was not able to deliver this. Situations like these when GM promises something and is not able to fulfill damages reputation not only of him and the new product but also for the whole Company.
Similar situation was with his employee Miczek- he promised her larger salary than she actually got in the end. Also in the situation with Operations director when he wanted him to be replaced he could not get it done. All of the examples mentioned above prove that E. Peterson has not been a very effective manager so far. 3. Is there another approach (with specific actions) to managing the Hanover operations that might be more effective? Peterson should’ve communicated his concerns about the launch and not enough guidance from Hardy to Jenkins when he first saw them.
He should’ve been more judgmental of his own and also Hardy’s experience in such projects. If the right mentoring had been offered to Erik and he had known how to pass it over to his team, the launch would’ve already been smoother. Peterson had also used a more aggressive approach when handling specific issues. If he could not get what he wanted from Hardy he should’ve gone to Jerkins and try to reason him. Erik also should’ve developed priorities and communicated them to the team so later there would be no conflicts between different functions of the project.