文書招聘：英雄主義領導策略設計的戰略
領導策略設計的戰略調色板可分為五大類。傳統方法、適應性方法、前瞻性方法、塑造策略和更新策略是制定整體領導策略的策略。經典的傳統方法有一個目標，並朝著目標邁進。這是固定的(波特，2008)。在適應性趨勢中，公司根據市場趨勢和不斷變化的消費者期望做出改變。在有遠見的方法中，會測試新的想法，並開發新的需求來為消費者服務。在某些情況下，公司通過合資和合並交易與其他公司建立聯系。通過這個過程，他們形成了公司的戰略。更新戰略是指重新評估公司的戰略並帶來變革。為此，通常采用自下而上的方法(Porter, 2008)。領導策略不是遵循任何一種方法。在這個例子中，我們發現Rubio已經開發了一個模式，它是這些策略的組合。最初，它依賴於有遠見的方法，並融合了適應性和更新策略。領導層有必要找到這些戰略的正確折衷組合，以確保公司在未來繼續存在(Parry and Hansen, 2007)。
由於盧比奧帶來的這些變化，出現了一些積極的發展(波特，2008)。然而，公司還需要改變另外兩個因素來引入有效的變更管理流程。這是英雄主義的領導風格和不健康的等級制度。這些因素阻礙了進展，下文將詳細解釋這些因素。
傳統的領導方法包括領導者為團隊的所有成員設定目標。百事可樂公司的領導風格一直被認為是英雄主義的實踐。有一個中央領導制定一個願景和目標(Ashkenas et al.， 2015)。自2005年以來，首席執行官盧英德被認為是公司的主要英雄。所提供的報酬是最高的之一。按照行業標準，向最高管理層提供的薪酬是非常高的。把更多的註意力放在領導而不是人員上。這就造成了只有一個聲音的情況。由於這一事實，人們發現，員工對管理感到不滿，甚至認為它是專制和官僚主義(Ashkenas et al.， 2015)。這也導致公眾認為，公司只是在領導者的指導下運作。其他人員的努力基本上沒有引起註意。這家公司沒有提供足夠的無形資產來確保在公司工作的人感到與公司有更多的聯系。
從領導者的視角出發，衍生出許多功能團隊。盧比奧也遵循了這種提議。他基本上為團隊制定了一個新的願景，並要求人們服從命令。在這一過程中，將會有較低水平的責任。這最終將導致員工無法對決策擁有所有權。這是一個公司需要解決的潛在問題。
文書招聘：英雄主義領導策略設計的戰略
Strategic palette of designing leadership strategy can be divided into five main categories. Traditional approach, adaptive approach, visionary approach, shaping strategy and renewal strategy are the strategies for developing a holistic leadership strategy. Classical traditional approach has an objective and moves towards the goal. This is fixed (Porter, 2008). In adaptive trends, companies make changes based on the market trends and the evolving consumer expectation. In visionary approach, newer ideas are tested and newer requirements are developed to service the consumers. In some instances, companies are found to connect with other companies by joint ventures and merger deals. Through this process, they shape the companies strategies. Renewal strategy is about reevaluating the company’s strategy and bringing in change. For this purpose, usually bottom up approach is undertaken (Porter, 2008). Leadership strategies are not about following any one method. In this case, it has been found that Rubio has developed a schema that is a combination of these strategies. Initially, it leans upon the visionary approach and amalgamates adaptive and renewal strategies. Leadership has the imperative duty to find the right eclectic mix of these strategies to ensure that the company sustains in the future (Parry and Hansen, 2007).
There are a number of positive developments that had occurred owing to this changes that are brought in by Rubio (Porter, 2008). Nevertheless, there are two other factors that the company needs to change to bring in effective change management process. It is the heroic style of leadership and unhealthy hierarchy. These factors impede progress they are explaining in detail in the following.
Traditional approach in leadership involves leaders setting the objectives for all members of the team. Heroic style of leadership is always seen to be in practice in Pepsi co. There is a central leader who formulates a vision and objective (Ashkenas et al., 2015). From 2005 onwards, the CEO Indra Nooyi is considered to be the main hero of the company. The remuneration offered is one of the highest. The remuneration offered to the top management is very high in the industry standards. More focus is given to the leader rather than the personnel. This creates a situation of having only one voice. Owing to this fact, it has been found that the personnel feel resentment towards the management and even consider it to be autocratic and bureaucratic (Ashkenas et al., 2015). This also leads to a public perception that the company is functioning only under the guidance of the leader. The efforts of other personnel go largely unnoticed. There are not enough intangibles offered in this company to ensure that the people working in the company feel more connected with the company.
From the vision of the leader, a number of functional teams are derived. Rubio has also followed this style of proposal. He has basically formulated a new vision for the team and had asked people to follow the orders. In this, there will be lower levels of accountability in the process. This will eventually lead to employees not taking ownership of the decisions. This is a potential issue that the company needs to address.
