Hi all,
I am persuing my MBA with HR as one of the electives through distant learning. In one of the courseworks, I have been asked to critically evaluate the effectiveness of Design Inc over time, making reference to appropriate literature.
Also through using the knowledge of organisational behaviour, a report has to be drafted to the management which highlights the strengths and weaknesses of Klee’s approach in the below case study
Would request your inputs on how to structure my report, because I do not know much about critical analysis.
Case Study: Perfection or Bust
Design Inc., a successful commercial art studio, is the brainchild of its founder/owner, Bill Klee. Its motto, which hangs on a hand-lettered sign in the reception area, is also Klee’s personal motto: Perfection or Bust!
Design Inc. was started by Klee in 1979. “I’m not interested in launching just another commercial art studio”, Klee told his industry colleagues. “I want to found an academy, where talented young artists and designers can perfect their skills. To work at Design Inc. will be a privilege, because I’m not offering people jobs, I’m offering them a unique educational experience!” And because Klee, a well-known figure in the industry, had a reputation as a perfectionist, his aspirations were taken seriously in most quarters.
Klee’s approach to potential staff members was highly unorthodox. Instead of promising recruits high salaries and tempting bonus packages, he stressed the rigours of the job. “You won’t make as much money with us as you would somewhere else,” he told one lettering specialist, “and you won’t be working in a fancy office with a high-fashion receptionist and inch-thick carpeting. But you will be doing the most satisfying job you’ve ever done in your life, because I demand perfection, and I know that you won’t settle for anything less yourself!” The lettering expert, duly impressed, accepted Klee’s offer some days later and over the next several months other promising recruits followed his lead. In this way, Klee was able to put together in short order a talented and enthusiastic team of graphic artists and designers.
Potential clients were treated to a similar sales pitch. “We have no frills at this studio”, Klee told one prospect, sitting him down in an uncomfortable high-backed chair in his austere office. “If you want luxury, or if you want someone to hold your hand, then go someplace else. But if you want quality, the best commercial artwork in this city, if not in this whole country, then you’ve come to the right place.”
In a matter of months, Design Inc. had carved itself a prosperous niche in the commercial art industry. The staff, enthusiastic to start with, became even more entranced by Klee’s vision of perfection as time went on. True, they weren’t making as much as their colleagues in more orthodox firms, but they had an ideal to pursue, and their intangible rewards went far beyond mere money. At least this is what most of them argued, when socialising with their better-paid colleagues. Sometimes these conversations became quite acrimonious, and some long-standing friendships actually suffered. Employees of other firms did not take kindly to the idea that they were content with mediocrity. On the other hand, the employees of Design Inc. were not pleased when the superiority of their work was called into question by outsiders, especially as its superiority was difficult to demonstrate in any absolute fashion. “Who says your work is so great?” became a common question, to which the common reply evolved: “Our work must be better because we take it more seriously.”
As time went on, it became increasingly common for the employees of Design Inc. to spend much of their leisure time together, discussing work-related matters and reaffirming, within the family circle as it were, their commitment to excellence within their field. Many of Klee’s turn of phrase – “no compromise with mediocrity,” “the best or bust,” “perfection is our only concern” – became part of most staff members’ vocabulary.
It isn’t surprising that Design Inc. employees worked long hours, coming in early and leaving late. Klee was everywhere at once, advising on layout, suggesting new creative approaches for one piece of work, consulting on the choice of colour and typeface for another. Things that would be done three or four times at another studio – reviewing artwork for example – might be done as many as a dozen times or more at Design Inc., as workers agonized to get every last detail of a project right. No stone was left unturned in the staff’s pursuit of excellence. These hours cut even more into the social lives of the employees, throwing them more and more into each others’ company.
About 18 months after Design Inc. was established, its top layout artist, forced to choose between his career at Design Inc. and his family, left the firm for another job. His departure was handled smoothly, a party being held to send him off. Klee stepped into his position until a replacement could be found. Advertisements were put in the paper, and the word was passed along the industry grapevine. In line with the ‘all for one and one for all’ philosophy of Design Inc., it was decided that every staff member should have a say in the selection of the new recruit. After all, as Klee put it, “we’ll probably be spending more time with whomever we hire than with our families!” Everyone agreed that the new recruit would have to be enthusiastic about Design Inc.’s training mission, and would have to demonstrate an unswerving commitment to perfection in his or her work.
A large number of qualified people applied, but somehow none of them seemed exactly to fit the bill. One had a young family and expressed doubt about his ability to work every weekend if need be. A second was passed over because one employee felt that she wasn’t a team player. Another was rejected because several staff members felt he just didn’t have the right attitude. After several months, all the candidates had been interviewed, and all had been rejected for one reason or another.
During this time, Klee, because of his additional responsibilities, had begun to neglect his training mission. The studio continued to function, but as a business and not as an academy. Everyone agreed, however that this situation was temporary. Design Inc. would become a training ground again as soon as it got a new layout person....
In his private moments, Klee occasionally wondered if his studio was quite what he had wanted it to be. It seemed to him that something of his dream had been lost. He did not have a great deal of spare time in which to philosophise, however. Furthermore, the firm was doing well financially, and so, as owner, Klee found a certain consolation in the healthy state of his firm’s balance sheet.
About a year after the layout artist took another job, he dropped by to visit his former colleague. He found Klee still filling in for him. The staff still spoke of dedication to excellence and insisted that the day when Design Inc. again became an academy was close at hand. The visitor sensed a certain hollowness in their bluff statements, however. It seemed to him that employees were less certain of their mission and less confident about the future than they let on.
The layout position was never re-advertised and no new candidates were ever interviewed. Most of the original staff are still with the firm, however, which turns a respectable profit each year.
Regards
Rajesh Sharma
I am persuing my MBA with HR as one of the electives through distant learning. In one of the courseworks, I have been asked to critically evaluate the effectiveness of Design Inc over time, making reference to appropriate literature.
Also through using the knowledge of organisational behaviour, a report has to be drafted to the management which highlights the strengths and weaknesses of Klee’s approach in the below case study
Would request your inputs on how to structure my report, because I do not know much about critical analysis.
Case Study: Perfection or Bust
Design Inc., a successful commercial art studio, is the brainchild of its founder/owner, Bill Klee. Its motto, which hangs on a hand-lettered sign in the reception area, is also Klee’s personal motto: Perfection or Bust!
Design Inc. was started by Klee in 1979. “I’m not interested in launching just another commercial art studio”, Klee told his industry colleagues. “I want to found an academy, where talented young artists and designers can perfect their skills. To work at Design Inc. will be a privilege, because I’m not offering people jobs, I’m offering them a unique educational experience!” And because Klee, a well-known figure in the industry, had a reputation as a perfectionist, his aspirations were taken seriously in most quarters.
Klee’s approach to potential staff members was highly unorthodox. Instead of promising recruits high salaries and tempting bonus packages, he stressed the rigours of the job. “You won’t make as much money with us as you would somewhere else,” he told one lettering specialist, “and you won’t be working in a fancy office with a high-fashion receptionist and inch-thick carpeting. But you will be doing the most satisfying job you’ve ever done in your life, because I demand perfection, and I know that you won’t settle for anything less yourself!” The lettering expert, duly impressed, accepted Klee’s offer some days later and over the next several months other promising recruits followed his lead. In this way, Klee was able to put together in short order a talented and enthusiastic team of graphic artists and designers.
Potential clients were treated to a similar sales pitch. “We have no frills at this studio”, Klee told one prospect, sitting him down in an uncomfortable high-backed chair in his austere office. “If you want luxury, or if you want someone to hold your hand, then go someplace else. But if you want quality, the best commercial artwork in this city, if not in this whole country, then you’ve come to the right place.”
In a matter of months, Design Inc. had carved itself a prosperous niche in the commercial art industry. The staff, enthusiastic to start with, became even more entranced by Klee’s vision of perfection as time went on. True, they weren’t making as much as their colleagues in more orthodox firms, but they had an ideal to pursue, and their intangible rewards went far beyond mere money. At least this is what most of them argued, when socialising with their better-paid colleagues. Sometimes these conversations became quite acrimonious, and some long-standing friendships actually suffered. Employees of other firms did not take kindly to the idea that they were content with mediocrity. On the other hand, the employees of Design Inc. were not pleased when the superiority of their work was called into question by outsiders, especially as its superiority was difficult to demonstrate in any absolute fashion. “Who says your work is so great?” became a common question, to which the common reply evolved: “Our work must be better because we take it more seriously.”
As time went on, it became increasingly common for the employees of Design Inc. to spend much of their leisure time together, discussing work-related matters and reaffirming, within the family circle as it were, their commitment to excellence within their field. Many of Klee’s turn of phrase – “no compromise with mediocrity,” “the best or bust,” “perfection is our only concern” – became part of most staff members’ vocabulary.
It isn’t surprising that Design Inc. employees worked long hours, coming in early and leaving late. Klee was everywhere at once, advising on layout, suggesting new creative approaches for one piece of work, consulting on the choice of colour and typeface for another. Things that would be done three or four times at another studio – reviewing artwork for example – might be done as many as a dozen times or more at Design Inc., as workers agonized to get every last detail of a project right. No stone was left unturned in the staff’s pursuit of excellence. These hours cut even more into the social lives of the employees, throwing them more and more into each others’ company.
About 18 months after Design Inc. was established, its top layout artist, forced to choose between his career at Design Inc. and his family, left the firm for another job. His departure was handled smoothly, a party being held to send him off. Klee stepped into his position until a replacement could be found. Advertisements were put in the paper, and the word was passed along the industry grapevine. In line with the ‘all for one and one for all’ philosophy of Design Inc., it was decided that every staff member should have a say in the selection of the new recruit. After all, as Klee put it, “we’ll probably be spending more time with whomever we hire than with our families!” Everyone agreed that the new recruit would have to be enthusiastic about Design Inc.’s training mission, and would have to demonstrate an unswerving commitment to perfection in his or her work.
A large number of qualified people applied, but somehow none of them seemed exactly to fit the bill. One had a young family and expressed doubt about his ability to work every weekend if need be. A second was passed over because one employee felt that she wasn’t a team player. Another was rejected because several staff members felt he just didn’t have the right attitude. After several months, all the candidates had been interviewed, and all had been rejected for one reason or another.
During this time, Klee, because of his additional responsibilities, had begun to neglect his training mission. The studio continued to function, but as a business and not as an academy. Everyone agreed, however that this situation was temporary. Design Inc. would become a training ground again as soon as it got a new layout person....
In his private moments, Klee occasionally wondered if his studio was quite what he had wanted it to be. It seemed to him that something of his dream had been lost. He did not have a great deal of spare time in which to philosophise, however. Furthermore, the firm was doing well financially, and so, as owner, Klee found a certain consolation in the healthy state of his firm’s balance sheet.
About a year after the layout artist took another job, he dropped by to visit his former colleague. He found Klee still filling in for him. The staff still spoke of dedication to excellence and insisted that the day when Design Inc. again became an academy was close at hand. The visitor sensed a certain hollowness in their bluff statements, however. It seemed to him that employees were less certain of their mission and less confident about the future than they let on.
The layout position was never re-advertised and no new candidates were ever interviewed. Most of the original staff are still with the firm, however, which turns a respectable profit each year.
Regards
Rajesh Sharma