Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
SlideShare a Scribd company logo

Cooper Pharmaceuticals Inc.

•Download as PPTX, PDF•
•
Argha Ray
Argha Ray

Cooper Pharmaceuticals abruptly terminated Bob Marsh after 12 years as a drug sales representative in Toledo. Customers are complaining about the decision. Marsh had a history of strong customer relationships but poor record keeping and disorganization. While earlier managers acknowledged his strengths, later ones focused more on weaknesses in performance reviews. The frequent changing of sales managers and lack of career development or enrichment for Marsh contributed to his disengagement. Terminating such a loyal employee with good customer relationships was too harsh a decision without addressing his motivational needs or trying other options.

Related slideshows

Mountain dew
Mountain dewMountain dew
Mountain dew
 
Sales Force Training at Arrow Electronics - Case Analysis
Sales Force Training at Arrow Electronics - Case AnalysisSales Force Training at Arrow Electronics - Case Analysis
Sales Force Training at Arrow Electronics - Case Analysis
 
Gino sa distribution channel management case study
Gino sa distribution channel management case studyGino sa distribution channel management case study
Gino sa distribution channel management case study
 
1 of 8
Cooper Pharmaceuticals Inc. Case Analysis SDM, NMP Term IV Group 5 Abhijeet Tomar - 03 Argha Ray - 15 Khushal Malik - 28 Vipin Kathuria– 59
Context • Cooper is a major manufacturer of prescription drugs. • Bob Marsh was abruptly terminated from his duties after serving 12 years as a detailer in the Toledo region. • Irate customers are complaining about Cooper’s decision. • Cooper has initiated enquiry into the circumstances of Bob’s dismissal. • Bob’s record suggest long history of unsatisfactory performance reviews.
Bob’s Individuality: • Excellent Customer rapport. • Loyal and sincere employee. • Cooperative with managerial instructions. • Citizenship with fellow sales representatives. • Lack of planning and untidy record keeping. • Non identification with company promotion policies. • Cluttered sample bag and car. Strength Weakness
Honeymoon under Meredith and Couch: • Steady progress under both Meredith and Couch during exploration stage. • Both managers pointed out his lack of planning and record keeping. • Indications of an inherent personality trait of lack of an eye for detail manifested in untidy upkeep of bag and car. • Lacks the urge to work on non important record keeping and follow up. • Predisposition to think of selling as an art rather than science manifested in relationships with customers (inborn vs learned). • Motivation seems to be achievement of end goals (sales volume and long term relationship) and not on the paraphernalia. • But, still shows adaptability to improve on aspects he thinks as non important to keep managers in good humor.
Torrid time under Rathbun: • New manager with new eccentricity. • Too detail oriented to Marsh’s comfort. • Marsh takes recourse to falsifying facts to avoid being constantly under the scanner. • Shows signs of helplessness while signing probation agreement. • Still tries to mould himself in the establishment stage of career. • A free flowing affable character finds himself as prisoner of rules. • Finally passes the Rathbun test.
Continued agony under Reed and Wilkens: • Finds himself reporting to much younger lot. • Lack of career advancement seems to take a toll as Marsh reverses ground gained under Rathbun. ( Return to untidy bag and car) • Managers may be going by past records of Marsh’s files. Even Wilkens notices only old attributes in her short association with Marsh. • No manager may be willing to develop a fresh perspective about Marsh other than old appraisal reports. • Repeat probation may have shattered Marsh during his maintenance stage of career. • Constant debacle turns Marsh passive.
Career Plateau under Franklin: • Satisfaction with income in comparison with peers. • No upward mobility. • Burden of unfair treatment from previous 3 managers. • Withdrawal during disengagement stage. Continued managerial apathy helped rush the stage. • No remonstration during termination reveals how Marsh had left the happenings to fate and reconciled to the fact that the job was no longer his cup of tea. • The rejection of even the last request may have catalyzed feeling of reprisal against his beloved company.
Decision: • All managers were transactional and nobody attempted to be transformational. • Cooper never realized Marsh’s unique motivational needs. It never tailored company goals with Marsh’s personality. ( More weightage on outcome rather than paraphernalia) • Nothing explains why sales managers were changing so frequently while Marsh stayed constant. Nobody tried to communicate to Marsh about the benefits and pitfalls of tidiness by setting examples. • Very little signs of job enrichment for Marsh. ( No new territory or assignments). Only financial rewards were forthcoming. • One way communication and order barking. Cooper didn’t care to take inputs from Marsh even on ethical issues like promotion or his career development plan. • Termination is too harsh a decision for a salesperson who is a favorite with the customers. Reconsider the decision.

More Related Content

Cooper Pharmaceuticals Inc.

  • 1. Cooper Pharmaceuticals Inc. Case Analysis SDM, NMP Term IV Group 5 Abhijeet Tomar - 03 Argha Ray - 15 Khushal Malik - 28 Vipin Kathuria– 59
  • 2. Context • Cooper is a major manufacturer of prescription drugs. • Bob Marsh was abruptly terminated from his duties after serving 12 years as a detailer in the Toledo region. • Irate customers are complaining about Cooper’s decision. • Cooper has initiated enquiry into the circumstances of Bob’s dismissal. • Bob’s record suggest long history of unsatisfactory performance reviews.
  • 3. Bob’s Individuality: • Excellent Customer rapport. • Loyal and sincere employee. • Cooperative with managerial instructions. • Citizenship with fellow sales representatives. • Lack of planning and untidy record keeping. • Non identification with company promotion policies. • Cluttered sample bag and car. Strength Weakness
  • 4. Honeymoon under Meredith and Couch: • Steady progress under both Meredith and Couch during exploration stage. • Both managers pointed out his lack of planning and record keeping. • Indications of an inherent personality trait of lack of an eye for detail manifested in untidy upkeep of bag and car. • Lacks the urge to work on non important record keeping and follow up. • Predisposition to think of selling as an art rather than science manifested in relationships with customers (inborn vs learned). • Motivation seems to be achievement of end goals (sales volume and long term relationship) and not on the paraphernalia. • But, still shows adaptability to improve on aspects he thinks as non important to keep managers in good humor.
  • 5. Torrid time under Rathbun: • New manager with new eccentricity. • Too detail oriented to Marsh’s comfort. • Marsh takes recourse to falsifying facts to avoid being constantly under the scanner. • Shows signs of helplessness while signing probation agreement. • Still tries to mould himself in the establishment stage of career. • A free flowing affable character finds himself as prisoner of rules. • Finally passes the Rathbun test.
  • 6. Continued agony under Reed and Wilkens: • Finds himself reporting to much younger lot. • Lack of career advancement seems to take a toll as Marsh reverses ground gained under Rathbun. ( Return to untidy bag and car) • Managers may be going by past records of Marsh’s files. Even Wilkens notices only old attributes in her short association with Marsh. • No manager may be willing to develop a fresh perspective about Marsh other than old appraisal reports. • Repeat probation may have shattered Marsh during his maintenance stage of career. • Constant debacle turns Marsh passive.
  • 7. Career Plateau under Franklin: • Satisfaction with income in comparison with peers. • No upward mobility. • Burden of unfair treatment from previous 3 managers. • Withdrawal during disengagement stage. Continued managerial apathy helped rush the stage. • No remonstration during termination reveals how Marsh had left the happenings to fate and reconciled to the fact that the job was no longer his cup of tea. • The rejection of even the last request may have catalyzed feeling of reprisal against his beloved company.
  • 8. Decision: • All managers were transactional and nobody attempted to be transformational. • Cooper never realized Marsh’s unique motivational needs. It never tailored company goals with Marsh’s personality. ( More weightage on outcome rather than paraphernalia) • Nothing explains why sales managers were changing so frequently while Marsh stayed constant. Nobody tried to communicate to Marsh about the benefits and pitfalls of tidiness by setting examples. • Very little signs of job enrichment for Marsh. ( No new territory or assignments). Only financial rewards were forthcoming. • One way communication and order barking. Cooper didn’t care to take inputs from Marsh even on ethical issues like promotion or his career development plan. • Termination is too harsh a decision for a salesperson who is a favorite with the customers. Reconsider the decision.