Manage a Critical Incident Theory X versus Theory Y You've been at Magnetar Logistics Solutions for nine years and earned a reputation for leading a team that gets done what you say it will get done when you say it will be done. Now your sales team is close to landing a new 10-figure con- tract with an established client, Peterson Warehousing, Inc. You brought Peterson on board six years ago and have since grown and nurtured the relationship, and gotten to know this client in depth. One of the reasons you've achieved so much over the years is that you've always trusted your team mem- bers and given them the room and support they need to oper- ate in their own way. They've repaid you by coming through time and time again with top quality solutions that always matched clients' needs. But Peterson is a different case-at least it seems that way to you; -it's your baby and it's a big account. You know Peterson better than anyone else, and now you're facing a very hard deadline in only weeks, which will determine whether or not you get the new contract. At this point you're doing a lot of close supervision on this pro- ject and not giving team members very much space to oper- ate. There are many complexities with Peterson that you're worried the team will overlook, but which you are on top of. The team as a whole is starting to feel the impact of your switch in management style. Questions (1) What are the consequences of your shifting management style midstream on this project... for success with the client?... for your team?... for your reputation as a successful manager? (2) Is a hands-on Theory X approach the best way to go here, or have you made a miscalculation? (3) Should you back off and return to the Theory Y assumptions that worked well in the past? (4) Is it too late to revert to your normal approach? (5) How can you infuse your Peterson expertise into the project while still keeping team members motivated and satisfied with your leadership?