Barbara Russell, a manufacturing manager, walked into the monthly company-wide meeting with a light step and a feeling of hopefulness she hadn't felt in a long time. The company's new, dynamic CEO was going to announce a new era of empowerment at Sparkies Limited, an 80-year-old publicly-held company that had once been a leading manufacturer and retailer of electrical products and supplies. In recent years, the company experienced a host of problems: market share was declining in the face of increased foreign and domestic competition; new product ideas were few and far between; departments such as manufacturing and sales barely spoke to one another; morale was at an all-time low; and many employees were actively seeking other jobs. Everyone needed a dose of hope. Martin Griffin, who had been hired to revive the failing company, briskly opened the meeting with a challenge: 'As we face increasing competition, we need new ideas, new energy, new spirit to make this company great. And the source for this change is you - each one of you'. He then went on to explain that under the new empowerment campaign, employees would be getting more information about how the company was run and would be able to work with other employees in new and creative ways. Martin proclaimed a new era of trust and cooperation at Sparkies Limited. Barbara felt the excitement stir within her, but as she looked around the room, she saw many of the other employees, including her friend Harry, rolling their eyes. 'Just another pile of corporate crap,' Harry said later. 'One minute they try downsizing, the next re-engineering. Then they dabble in restructuring. Now Martin wants to push empowerment. Garbage like empowerment isn't a substitute for hard work and a little faith in the people who have been with this company for years. We made it great once, and we can do it again. Just get out of our way.' Harry had been a manufacturing engineer with Sparkies Limited for more than 20 years. Barbara knew he was extremely loyal to the company, but he and a lot of others like him, were going to be an obstacle to the empowerment efforts.

Top management assigned selected managers to several problem-solving teams to come up with ideas for implementing the empowerment campaign. Barbara loved her assignment as team leader of the manufacturing team, working on ideas to improve the way retail stores received the merchandise they needed when they needed it. The team thrived, and trust blossomed among the members. They even spent nights and weekends working to complete their report. They were proud of their ideas, which they believed were innovative but easily achievable: permit a manager to follow a product from design through sales to customers; allow salespeople to refund up to $500 worth of merchandise on the spot; make information available to salespeople about future products; and swap sales and manufacturing personnel for short periods to let them get to know one another's jobs.

When the team presented its report to department heads, Martin Griffin was enthusiastic. But shortly into the meeting he had to excuse himself because of a late-breaking deal with a major hardware store chain. With Martin absent, the department heads rapidly formed a wall of resistance. The director of human resources complained that the ideas for personnel changes would destroy the carefully crafted job categories that had just been completed. The finance department argued that allowing salespeople to make $500 refunds would create a gold mine for unethical customers and salespeople. The legal department warned that providing information to salespeople about future products would invite industrial spying. The team members were stunned. As Barbara mulled over the latest turn of events, she considered her options: keep her mouth shut; take a chance and confront Martin about her sincerity in making empowerment work; push slowly for reform and work for gradual support from the other teams; or look for another job and leave a company she really cared about. Barbara realised there would be no easy choices and no easy answers.

Question 1. Explain the executive summary of the above case study?