A Perfect Response to an Imperfect Storm

A perfect response to an Imperfect storm Twelve days. That’s how long it took for Mississippi power to restore electric power to the heavily damaged areas of southern Mississippi after hurricane Katrina slammed into the Mississippi gulf coast on august 29, 2005, with 145-mph winds and pounding rain. That’s remarkable, given the devastation that news photos and television newscasts so graphically displayed. It’s something that even the federal and state governments could not accomplish. How bad was the damage company employees dealt with? One hundred percent of the company’s customers were without power.Sixty-five percent of its transmission and distribution facilities were destroyed. And yet, this organization of 1,250 employees did what it had to do, despite the horrible circumstances and despite the fact that more than half of its employees suffered substantial damage to their own homes. It speaks volumes about the cultural climate that the managers of Mississippi power had created. As a corporate subsidiary of utility holding company southern company, Mississippi power provides electric services to more than 190,000 customers in the Magnolia state. When Hurricane Katrina turned toward Mississippi. Managers at Mississippi power swung into action with a swift and ambitious disaster plan. After Katrina land fall, Mississippi power management team responded,† with a style designed for speed and flexibility, forget thing done amid confusion and chaos. † David Ratcliffe, senior executive of southern company said, â€Å"I could not be prouder of our response. † What factors led to the company’s ability to respond as efficiently and effectively and effectively as it did?Imagine this is your second day at work as a manager supervising a team of financial analysts in the major technology corporation. Your boss the chief financial officer, calls you in and asks you to have your team find â€Å"creative† ways of improving sales figures. Look back at the framework in exhibit 3-8 and think about the potential consequences as you decide which of the following option you will choose, and why. Option A: Call a meeting of your analyst team and present the boss’s request as a hypothetical challenge designed to sharpen their skills. Present the results to your boss without telling the team. Option B:Work by yourself to dream up a few outlandish, impractical ideas so you can avoid being seen as someone who is not committed to your company’s success. Option C: Privately discuss the situation with the human resources manager who hired you (or another manager you trust) and explain why you are concerned about your boss’s request. One key element is the company’s can-do organizational culture, which is evidenced by important values inscribed on employees’ identification tags â€Å"Unquestionable trust, Superior performance, Total commitment. † Because the values were visible daily, employees knew their importance.They knew what was expected of them, in a disaster response or in just doing their everyday work. In addition, through employee training and managerial example, the organization had, â€Å"steeped its culture† in Stephen covey’s book, The 7 habits of highly effective people. (The company’s training building – the covey Center-flooded during the storm. ) These ingrained habits-be proactive; begin with the end in mind; put first things first; think win/win; seek first to understand then to be understand; synergize; and sharpen the saw-also guided employee decisions and actions.Another important element in the company’s successful post-storm response was the clear lines of responsibility of the 20 â€Å"storm directors,† who had clear responsibility and authority for whatever task they had been assigned. These directors had the power to do what needed to be done backed by unquestionable trust from their bosses. Said one, †I don’t have to ask permission. † Finally the company’s decentralized decision making approach to contribute to the way in which employees were able to accomplish what they did. The old approach of responding to a disaster with topdown decision making had been replaced by decision making being push further down to the electrical substation level, a distribution point that serves some 5,000 people. Crews working to restore power reported to these substations and had a simple mission – get the power back on, â€Å"Even out –of –state line crews, hired on contract and working unsupervised, were empowered to engineer to there solutions. † What the crews often did to â€Å"get the power back on† was quite innovative and entrepreneurial.Would these stack holder change if there was a disaster to which company had to respond? Answer: Stakeholders are the groups and individuals who affect and are affected by the achievement of the organization’s mission, goals and strategies. Providing electric services to more than 190,000 customers in the Magnolia state is important to Mississippi power and stake holder. To provide electric services, to more than 190,000 customers in the Magnolia state; trust among stack holder is very important. Unquestionable trust, Superior performance, Total commitment will be the concern among the stake holders. Another important element is, clear lines of responsibility in case of stake holder. Yes, these stack holder change if there was a disaster to which the company had to respond. The reason behind it is, they learn a lot during the disaster and learn the importance of togetherness and planning. 2. What could other organization learn from Mississippi power about the importance of organization culture? Answer: There are so many lessons learned from the case of Mississippi power to all the organizations and individuals as well. The important learned is, to maintain the good culture of organization.Along with that, respect each other is one of the aspect all the organization can learn from Mississippi power case. Since, values were visible daily, employees knew their importance. Another point is, we should be ready with the disaster recovery plan and we should keep on working on that. One more point the other organization learn is, decentralized decision making approach to contribute to the way in which employees were able to accomplish what they did. Avoid responding to disaster with top down- decision making, instead; decision making being push further down ground level.