Midwestern Contemporary Art
The case study presented, Midwestern Contemporary Art, illustrates a classic power conflict between two men, Peter Smith and Keith Schmidt. Peter is the chairman of the board and former municipal judge who, along with his wife, loves contemporary art. He and his wife became involved with the Midwestern Contemporary Art (MCA) museum when they began collecting art pieces, and he was eventually named chairman of the board. Keith is the executive director of the museum, and has a long successful background as a director for several prestigious art museums. Upon accepting his position, he developed a set of specific goals and objectives that included expansion and a new building. His strategic leadership is apparent …show more content…
Keith also tried to create an alliance of board members, many of whom saw his efforts as successful, even with some concerns about the financial status of the organizations. Keith was always able to manage the projects well enough to end the fiscal year with a balanced budget. Which showed that he was managing the projects responsibly and strategically with the long term goals in mind.
Peter seems unwilling to accept that Keith is the expert, hired to do exactly what has done for the museum. Peter is approaching the situation as an authoritarian leader with a completely different style of management than Keith, and trying to maintain power. The source of his power is his position as chairman of the board, and he is exercising his perceived power in ways that are both negative and self-destructive. Peter is a far more conservative, and does not like taking risks towards goal accomplishment. He would prefer to move through Keith’s plan slowly and with …show more content…
The intergroup conflict represents the final stage of conflict and reaches the complex level due to the number of people involved. Therefore, the board chose to vote on the strategy that represented the best course to reach the long term goals they had all agreed on previously. The decision to maintain the path laid out in Keith’s strategic plan led to an unexpected situation in which Peter left his position without notice. His response was an emotional one, and his personal feelings clouded his judgement. He chose to interpret the outcome as a personal attack or perhaps a failure on the part of the board to stand by him, the
The case study presented, Midwestern Contemporary Art, illustrates a classic power conflict between two men, Peter Smith and Keith Schmidt. Peter is the chairman of the board and former municipal judge who, along with his wife, loves contemporary art. He and his wife became involved with the Midwestern Contemporary Art (MCA) museum when they began collecting art pieces, and he was eventually named chairman of the board. Keith is the executive director of the museum, and has a long successful background as a director for several prestigious art museums. Upon accepting his position, he developed a set of specific goals and objectives that included expansion and a new building. His strategic leadership is apparent …show more content…
Keith also tried to create an alliance of board members, many of whom saw his efforts as successful, even with some concerns about the financial status of the organizations. Keith was always able to manage the projects well enough to end the fiscal year with a balanced budget. Which showed that he was managing the projects responsibly and strategically with the long term goals in mind.
Peter seems unwilling to accept that Keith is the expert, hired to do exactly what has done for the museum. Peter is approaching the situation as an authoritarian leader with a completely different style of management than Keith, and trying to maintain power. The source of his power is his position as chairman of the board, and he is exercising his perceived power in ways that are both negative and self-destructive. Peter is a far more conservative, and does not like taking risks towards goal accomplishment. He would prefer to move through Keith’s plan slowly and with …show more content…
The intergroup conflict represents the final stage of conflict and reaches the complex level due to the number of people involved. Therefore, the board chose to vote on the strategy that represented the best course to reach the long term goals they had all agreed on previously. The decision to maintain the path laid out in Keith’s strategic plan led to an unexpected situation in which Peter left his position without notice. His response was an emotional one, and his personal feelings clouded his judgement. He chose to interpret the outcome as a personal attack or perhaps a failure on the part of the board to stand by him, the