Free «Applying the Robin Hood Myth to Engineering Management» Essay
Despite the fact that the tale of Robin Hood dates back to the twelfth century, this myth is extensively applied in modern business environment. Since many employees distrust their managers or leaders, they often act like Robin Hood did and believe that top managers will solve all problems and punish the culpable. However, in many cases, employees’ attempts to find a champion of their ideas result in negative consequences. The given paper aims to summarize the main ideas presented in the article Applying the Robin Hood Myth to Engineering Management. In addition, much attention will be paid to educative and informative lessons that can be learned from this article.
To begin with, Kennedy and Huston suggest the idea the Robin Hood Myth is used in different spheres of science, including politics, economics, history, etc. Despite paramount benefits of the Robin Hood’s punishment methods in just and fair world, sometimes these methods lead to undesirable results because employees always expect that everything will successfully work according to laws of the “Sherwood Forest”. However, workers sometimes fail due to numerous reasons. The authors of the article provide several convincing examples to prove that Robin Hood’s methods are ineffective and unreliable. For example, Kennedy and Huston use the Robin Hood legend to show how German peasants in the first part of the sixteenth century planned a rebellion against local authorities. Also, the researchers use two current cases to demonstrate that the behavior of Robin Hood may fail in modern business world. In the first situation, Martin, who held the post of a project manager in one of engineering companies, wanted to improve the work of irresponsible purchasing department. Consequently, he decided to make an appointment with the CEO to solve this problem and some other minor misunderstandings. In the second case, the researchers use the example of Susan, who also acted as the Robin Hood did. However, according to the estimations of Kennedy and Huston, both of them, Martin and Susan, made a serious mistake when decided to step outside the usual chain of command within their companies. Moreover, the writers rely on supporting literature, opinions of other professionals in the sphere of management, and experimental data to prove that sometimes the Robin Rood myth makes no sense in modern business environment. The authors have come to the conclusion that there are many reasons why the effectiveness of the Robin Hood myth is diminished nowadays. In general, good does not always triumph over evil in the sphere of business. In addition, secret alliances in organizations, high positions of authorities, and inaccurate evaluation are the key risk factors.
0 Preparing Orders
0 Active Writers
0% Positive Feedback
0 Support Agents
Having analyzed the main ideas presented in this research, it is possible to state that many educational lessons can be learned from it. The authors try to warn the readers that the goal does not always justify endeavors, and the “king” not always acts as it is anticipated. In spite of the fact that many employees develop misunderstanding and mistrust of senior management, they should remember that situation of dissenting and rebellious workers, their supervisors, and top benevolent managers have close ties with heroes found in this legend. The authors of the article recommend not to make spontaneous decisions but to weight all pros and cons of possible consequences of their behavior. Furthermore, Kennedy and Huston stress that Robin Hood employees should avoid circumventing their bosses because this tactic is not only ineffective but very dangerous.
Hurry up! Limited time offer
Use discount code
Having analyzed the main ideas of the article Applying the Robin Hood Myth to Engineering Management and identified possible lessons learned, it is possible to sum up that employees should be aware of the fact that Robin Hood myth is just a fable that sometimes makes no sense in various business settings.