Chattanooga Case Analysis

Joe Barfield
Jack Welch Management Institute
Dr. Denis Tocci
JWI 510
February 14, 2016

1
Executive Summary Case Analysis
The Chattanooga Ice Cream Division Case studies the rollercoaster of the grandson of the
founder by the same name Charles Moore, the head of said division and his responsibility to his
company and his team. I will be discussing and analyzing the dynamic and often dysfunction of
his leadership style as well as the team, and the contributions of both and how it has impacted the
company. I will also be dissecting Mr. Moores style of management and making alternative
recommendations for him and his team.

2
The Dysfunction of an Ice Cream Icon
Chattanooga Ice Cream, Inc. was a subsidiary of Chattanooga Food Corporation, founded in
1936. The Ice Cream Division of Chattanooga Foods was one of the largest regional ice cream
manufacturers in the United States. (Sloane, 2003) Following the loss of their third biggest
customer Stay & Shop a loss of $6.5 million in revenue, the divisions president and general
manager, Charlie Moore and his executive management team met several times to discuss the
future of the division. Moore was responsible for not only making a very significant decision
about the companys future, but also the high tensions, conflicts, and sometimes out-of-bounds
opinions of his team.
Team Chaos
The ice cream executive team was dysfunctional for many and varying reasons. What stood
out to me at the onset of the reading was the team was not kept informed by its leader, Charles
Moore, whose management style that he used quite frequently led him to make decisions
publically and in a vacuum. The team was a product of the decisions being made singularly and
with no inclusionary consensus input from them. This behavior exhibited by the previous leader
proved that his management team had not been given voice and dignity, as their input was not
needed or requested by the manager. This led to in-fighting, discord, mistrust, and fostered an
environment where the members of the management team stopped giving voice and dignity to
each other, and the team chemistry became one of toxic conflict.
When Charles Moore became the top as head of the ice cream division, he brought with him a
history of leading openly, preferring to operate in an environment of group based decision
making. This proved detrimental, as the management team was incapable of coming to a
consensus because they had little or no respect for their colleagues. In addition, the group was

3
also fundamentally dysfunctional because Mr. Moore did not employ what I believe he should
have instituted at the beginning which is Candor. In my opinion based on the groups
dynamics and unwillingness to work together it would have been best to be more open and
straightforward about what he expects of both the individuals and the team as a whole as well as
their roles and responsibilities. To be an effective leader you cant just stick your head in the
sand hope it will work itself out. You must engage each person and find out what they need to
succeed and what style of leadership fits their personality. In doing research on teams and
leadership I found this article by (Bella Mehta Engagement: whats missing?) where she
examines the difference facilitation can make to people's relationships with their organizations.
She talks about how individuals work as part of a group or team as interwoven relationship with
peers and their leaders as part of a group. By doing this she says that effective facilitation of
groups and teams can have great benefits and create healthy engagement. (Mehta, B. (2013, April
01). Engagement: whats missing? Training Journal, 56)
Moores Leadership Style
I believe that Mr. Moores motivating leadership is an S (Steadiness) personality and fit the
pattern of agent. (DiSC) This characteristic of the agent pattern is that the person strives to
maintain harmony and expects and fosters an environment of respect; which describes Mr.
Moore to a tee. Unfortunately, Mr. Moore also avoided conflict nearly at all cost so much so that
I believe he resisted it for feared of conflict and disagreement. In the context of his teams lack of
respect for each other it was said that, Disdaining such behavior, Moore feigned a deaf ear to it,
hoping his subordinates would get the signal and cease complaining about each other. (Carl,
Sloane, 2003)

4
Moore also contributed to the teams dysfunction through his inability to make a decision on
his own. His pattern of management reinforced his belief that a team should come to an
agreement and make decision as a group. It stated that, Moore believed in the value of groupbased decisions and liked to bring people together formally to share information, consult on
decisions, and forge consensus. (Carl, Sloane, 2003)
Because the team had not historically been given a true voice or dignity by their leader, the
team had no respect for each other and so this belief by Mr. Moore was highly detrimental to the
group as it supported an environment of conflict. Finally, Mr. Moore did not apply the Jacks
principle of candor with his team. When you dont implore candor it allows people not to
express themselves with frankness. They dont communicate straightforwardly or put forth
ideas looking to stimulate real debate. They just dont open up. Instead they withhold comments
or criticism. They keep their mouths shut in order to make people feel better or to avoid conflict,
and they sugarcoat bad news in order to maintain appearances. They keep things to themselves,
hoarding information. Lack of candor blocks and good people contributing all the stuff smart
ideas, fast action, theyve got. Its a killer. (Welch, 2005). In an article I found by authors
Perron, C., Blauth, C. (2010, July 01). The Basic Principles: Building Blocks of Trust. They
mention motivation as critical component in engaging employees. The article says Motivation
is critical, said a leader in our study. It has to be constant and consistent. As a perennial issue
in search of a solution, motivationemployee engagement in todays vocabularyis essential
to creating and sustaining the energy required by todays business challenges.
The case mentions that he had a negative opinion of the actions of his teams, specifically
open conflict, inability to agree and inability to accept responsibility as senior leaders of the
company. I believe his mistake was not being very open with his staff and if he had an issue

5
with their performance or behavior he should have immediately addressed it. He also should
have set clear and concise expectations and made sure they understood what they were expected
to do.
Trouble on the Horizon
The case screams that changes will have to be made. With the loss of one of their third largest
will spell major negative financial implications for the company. The article states that the
decision is final and the customer Stay & Shop will be gone. They do have a slim chance to
make changes in hopes to maybe have the customer stay. During this window significant
changes will have to be made to offset the losses. These changes would need to come from all
areas of the division including but not limited to product, the manufacturing process, marketing
etc. will have to be discovered as well to make sure not more bigger clients leave. In the
readings the company offers a significant smaller assortment of ice-cream and is not participating
in the trend in mixed-in ice-cream, sorbets, yoghurt ice-cream etc. To be competitive they
should seriously considering these options.

The executive team have offered several ideas,

which are worthy of further discussion.

Numerous ideas are given by several subordinates.
volume which was lost from Stay & Shop.

One of the proposals is to replace the

While on the surface this may seem like a good

solution further analysis suggest that this idea will not work due to it not being a long term
sustainable solution which in the future may arise since it does not answer the question why the
customer Stay & Shop left.

6
The other idea was to reduce cut expenses with the same amount than the lost profit. Again
this is a short term solution that could look well on the balance sheet temporarily. It however,
does not solve the problem for long term sustainable growth. This doesnt differentiate the
company from its competitors and give the customers a reason to stay or even start a new
relationship with the company. The issue still remains that the competitors offer a bigger variety
and the Chattanooga Ice Cream company does not.
Stop the Bleeding
I believe in order to solve this problem the company needs to focus on growth. Therefore,
they should invest heavily in expanding the assortment, offer mixed-in ice-cream and increase
the sales and marketing program significantly. The case points out that the market changed over
the last few decades with a big increase in demand for more exotic ice-cream, mixed-in icecream etc. Chattanooga Ice Cream clearly didnt watch market trends or keep up with what the
customers were asking for. They just kept things status quo and allowed the previous leader to
make them irrelevant all along thinking they would remain a market leader in this sector.
Now the company is forced to make big investments in order to become competitive again.
By increasing the assortment of ice-cream, by also offering mixed-in ice-cream and investigate
further the formula of the non-fat ice-cream in hopes to regain market share. The landscape has
shifted and the industry shows a big movement to the more exotic and flavorful ice-creams. If
they want to remain viable they should shift focus and embrace this change to save the division.

Changing the mindset of Staff

7
In conclusion I would recommend that Mr. Moore implement regular team meetings, maybe
twice a week from the onsite and then as things improve going to every other week. In order to
build trust, respect, teamwork, and collaboration it starts with team building on a regular basis,
not just during reactive situations.

I believe he has to set the standard and be the standard by

setting concrete expectations that, going forward, the atmosphere of all team meetings will be
one of professional courtesy and respect. There will be zero tolerance for unprofessional
attitudes, conjuncture or snide comments.
In all team meetings, it should be the responsibility the leader to give each team member an
opportunity to alternate on who facilitates the meetings. This can be accomplished by setting up
a rotating schedule and allowing each member to play the role of leader. By doing this, in my
experience team members will start to develop an emotional attachment and barriers of effective
communication will continue to break down. I have in the past held meetings where I given each
member the floor at the end of each meeting to comment on anything discussed, be open and
candid by the business good or bad or bring new ideas that havent been discussed. I have found
this fosters a willingness of each individual to feel a since of pride and ownership and that their
opinions and voices are not just listened to but also heard.

References

8
Sloane, C. (2003). The Chattanooga Ice Cream Division. Harvard Business Review
Welch, J (2005). Winning, NY: HarperCollins
Wiley. Everything Disc Management: Assessment to Action. [Measurement instrument.]
Retrieved from The Jack Welch Management Institute Blackboard with Strayer University.
Lencione, P. (2002). The Five Dysfunctions of a Team. CA: Jossey-Bass
Mehta, B. (2013, April 01). Engagement: whats missing? Training Journal, 56 Retrieved from
the Strayer Online Library
Perron, C., Blauth, C. (2010, July 01). The Basic Principles: Building Blocks of Trust.
Catalyst, The. (2), 10 Retrieved from the Strayer Online Library