Cerberus Case Study
Cerberus Case Study
campuses in the United States. Its organizational structure consists of independent business units, each
reporting to corporate headquarters, while essential site functions such as safety and facilities
management are overseen by a central host organization. Within this framework, key individuals play
critical roles. Susan Steele, a member of the facilities group at the Richmond site, spearheads a project
focused on enhancing office ergonomics. Tom Stern, the facilities manager, reports directly to the general
manager of the Adhesives and Sealants Division. Jon Wood, a planning manager with extensive
experience, has recently been transferred from corporate headquarters to Richmond, bringing with him a
pragmatic approach to resource management.
The central challenge presented in this case revolves around Susan's task of updating office furniture to
align with new corporate standards aimed at improving ergonomics. However, this initiative encounters
resistance from Jon Wood, who perceives the replacement of functional but non-standard furniture as
wasteful. This scenario underscores broader issues surrounding policy enforcement, budget constraints,
and interdepartmental communication within the organization.
An analysis of the main points reveals a tension between corporate directives and practical
implementation on the ground. It illustrates the complexities inherent in managing change, particularly
when met with resistance rooted in concerns over cost and perceived wastefulness. Moreover, it
underscores the critical importance of effective communication and stakeholder engagement in navigating
such challenges successfully.
Answer Question:
1. If you were Susan, what would you do?
As Susan, it would be important to balance company policy with practical concerns. Since Jon is
resistant to discarding the old cabinets due to cost and wastefulness, a possible course of action could be
to seek a compromise. This might involve discussing with higher management the possibility of
exceptions to the policy when it leads to significant waste or financial loss. Alternatively, finding a way to
repurpose or donate the old furniture could be an option, allowing for adherence to the new standards
without the guilt of wastefulness.
2. What, if anything, could Susan have done differently to avoid this problem?
Communication and policy review could have been managed better. Susan could have engaged with the
different stakeholders (including Jon) earlier in the process to understand their needs and concerns. This
may have revealed the strong feelings about waste and budget that later surfaced as an issue. Proactively
addressing these concerns by having a clear plan for the existing furniture could have mitigated the
confrontation. Additionally, having a flexible policy to account for practical deviations when necessary
could have been beneficial.
3. What could the management of Cerberus do to more effectively manage situations like this?
Management at Cerberus could create more flexible policies that allow for exceptions in cases where
following the policy to the letter would result in unnecessary waste or financial loss. Implementing a
system for better internal communication and stakeholder consultation could also help anticipate and
mitigate similar issues. Training on negotiation and conflict resolution could be provided to employees
like Susan to better manage resistance to policy changes.