response for Mounika Iska
4. Were Al Zink’s actions that of someone trying to be an invisible sponsor?
Al Zink actions make it obvious that he is trying to be an invisible sponsor, though they are many reasons for him to take that end. Al Zink not responding to Fred’s requests in the fear of decision making and attempts for not initiating the project plan and schedules clearly depicts his interest towards invisible sponsor. Considering his experience, these actions might not be intentional but his fear of losing the reputation made him an invisible sponsor.
5. Did Fred Cutler act appropriately in trying to get Al Zink to act as a sponsor?
Talking about the situation Fred had gotten in to, Fred’s act was appropriate because he got to escalate things when there is no action done by his co-worker to get the job done. At the same time, Fred never put his efforts to make Al Zink comfortable with his new role. As per the case study Fred has enough knowledge about how to handle this project and where exactly Al Zink came from, also he was told to train Al Zink which he never done instead he made Zink’s fears aggressive by stating Zink’s role as the most crucial part.
6. What is your best guess as to what happened to the working relationship between Al Zink and Fred Cutler?
As discussed in the previous question, things would have been in a better place if Fred acted well in time. When an employee is given the opportunity of training someone, they should analyze the trainee and make sure they get best out of his expertise and inject the responsibilities in a timely fashion with which he has no experience. In this case, none of the two has the maturity to read the other person and act accordingly instead they both are trying their best to make sure they won’t end up getting a red flag from higher authorities.
Reference: Kezner, H. (2013). A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling,and Controlling. New York: Wiley.