Kay Sunderland:

Making the Grade at Attain Learning

Case Analysis

Group 5
Aditya Singh Dharmashaktu, 1411141
Harshita Kumar, 1411157
Kavita Bankapur, 1411164
Padmavathi Krishnamurthy, 1411172
Ajinkya Sapkale, 1411188

INTRODUCTION
This case talks about the dilemma faced by Kay Sunderland, the account director for Attain
Learning, a corporate training firm in Brooklyn. She has just received a complaint about her
content development director, Mike Morgan from Juan Nunez, the Chief Learning Officer of her
firms most important client, Gramen Equipment Company. Nunez informed her that Morgan
had been repeatedly trying to contact him and this was a disturbance. Sunderland was upset that
Morgan had bypassed her to reach out to the client directly, as this was not in line with the policy
of Attain.
In this report, we try to analyze what led to this situation by first examining the personalities and
leadership styles of both Morgan and Sunderland. We then go on to view their actions in this
context and try to add analytical rigor to the same while identifying the key issues at the crux of
the case. Finally, we propose recommendations for each of these issues, while caveating the
various challenges that might occur in implementing the same.

BODY
Analysis of Questions
Describe Sunderlands management and work style. What are her sources of power?
Kay Sunderland, the account director for Attain Learning is an efficient and confident woman
who has grown and built her expertise through her experiences at IBM prior to joining Attain.
She is extremely straightforward to set the expectations right at the start of every project. She
is very particular to understand the clients expectations and believes in delivering the same on

time and therefore she makes sure that the work done by her content team doesnt digress from
the expectations of the client. Sunderland can be classified as an Institutional type of manager as
she understands the importance of delivering up to the clients expectations and making sure her
team learns and performs in the process of building organizational welfare. Being in a relationship
oriented role, she makes efforts to understand what others are doing in her team and tries to be
socially aware of the environment. This may be the reason why she couldnt accept Morgans
behavior with Nunez.
Kay Sunderland is seen to have a strategic mindset and can provide insightful critiques on
situations along with suggestions. Her good terms and influence over Chama proves that she
displays referent power. Having the formal authority to question and pull up Morgan for his
uncalled behavior, Sunderland also displays legitimate and coercive power in this case. She is also
criticized at times for being extremely inflexible and overly demanding from her team and
subordinates. On the other side, she is also quite sensitive and understands Morgans attitude to
challenge client ideas in order to develop out of the box creative solutions to their problems. It
needs great stamina and focus to actively be involved and handle multiple high profile clients
simultaneously. Sunderland, through her actions and personality, commands respect from her
co-workers that displays her positional power where as her relational power is evident by being
a highly valued and admired manager.
Describe Morgans management and work style. What are his sources of power?
Mike Morgan, content development director of Attain, is almost a counterfoil to Kay Sunderland.
Creative and impulsive, he likes working at a relaxed and entrepreneurial environment similar to
his previous firm, Streamlined, which he left as soon as it was acquired by a large conglomerate

and most of his co-workers started being Yes men. Morgans style of work makes him a rebel
in the bureaucratic environment of a large and he always likes to challenge clients ideas and
develop content out of the box. Always eager to be given more freedom at work, he inherently
feels a lack of trust from Sunderland and wants her to trust his judgement about what will work
best at all time.
Examining the basis of power for Morgan, we look at how in early 2010, due to flailing business
conditions, Attain had to lay off the other Content development directors whereas only Morgan
stayed. Being the sole content development director left in the firm, we believe that his work
would have been good enough to legitimately give him this power over others who were at the
same designation. Hence his primary source of power is legitimate.
However, he is also shown to have expert power in his field of strategy and sales, as Kay
Sunderland mentions that he is good in content development and adding a creative touch. His
expert power in this field makes him defend his ideas to the extreme and become excessively
argumentative when things dont go his way. One instance of this is clearly visible when he
presented his video case study to the client Nunez at Gramen Equipment Company, and despite
multiple apprehensions voiced by the client, he continued to persist with his case study even
though it was irrelevant to their requirements.
If we examine the team dynamics of the content team, Morgan is like the lovable star of his team.
They find him to be a fantastic boss and cite his management style is that of a supporter and
partner. Even after working for long hours Morgan tries to keep his team's morale high and is
always ready to pitch in whenever possible and help them when unrealistic goals are set by
Sunderland or Chama. Hence we believe this makes him gain referent power within his team.

What is going on here? Why did Morgan call Nunez? Why did Nunez call Sunderland?
The reason for Morgan to have called Nunez needs to be examined in the context of events prior
to the call. Gramen Equipment Company which was a client of Attain, was engaging in an ongoing
relationship to use Attains services to develop the financial acumen of non-financial managers
and supervisors
They were currently working on the initial phase of this program, on which was contingent
further business opportunities for Attain Services to be used and even development of a
partnership if Gramen was satisfied with their experience. Added to this importance of the
account was also the fact that their training module was complex and had a tight schedule.
In this situation, Morgan had proposed a video case study which he felt would be a true aha
moment for the entire team. However, he had used only one small acquisition of Gramen to be
the basis of his entire case study and hence Nunez told him that the case study should be more
universal. Despite this misgiving, Nunez allowed Morgan to spend two whole weeks in developing
a raw video of his idea, but was not impressed when Morgan presented it. Nunez clearly stated
then that the focus of the top management was on increasing inventory turnover and capital
utilization and hence Morgan and his team must work overtime for slightly less than a month in
order to fulfil the new ask.
It is after this sequence of events that we then see that Nunez has been repeatedly receiving calls
from Morgan.
We believe that there could be two possible explanations for why Morgan called Nunez multiple
times:
Case 1: To genuinely seek details

Sunderland, who was supposed to be the single point of contact for all kind of customer
interaction, was handling three different clients which kept her very busy. Given the tight
deadline that Morgan was supposed to follow, it was critical for him to obtain data and
clarification on several things in a very short period of time. He might have wanted Sunderland
to be more responsive to his requests for the same, which she was unable to be and therefore
Morgan might have decided to contact Nunez on his own.
This seems to be unlikely, since Sunderland seems to be surprised at the text from Nunez, while
if the above scenario had played out, she would have been able to predict the same, having
worked with Morgan since last 2 years. Also, from organizations perspective she was the only
one allowed to maintain contact with the clients. Besides that, it is mentioned in the case that
Morgan and Sunderland had a meeting with Nunez a day before so there does not seem to be
any specific reason for Morgan to be contacting Nunez, as he could have used the opportunity of
the meeting to seek any clarifications.
Case 2: To convince Nunez to take up his case study on accounts receivables
According to Morgan, Sunderland was a very strict boss to the team, she used to listen to and
accommodate almost everything the client would demand, and then coerce all the team
members to fulfil those demands. Coming from a small firm and entrepreneurial background
Morgan loved to work with freedom. He always wanted autonomy in developing his own
product or solution for client, which he did not feel he was getting while working under
Sunderland at Attain.
According to him, the client is sometimes unable to express correctly what their real requirement
or need is, but given the freedom to, he could come up with easier, cheaper and more effective

solutions that would solve these needs. Morgan was known to have been extremely defensive of
his ideas and could get excessively argumentative when his idea wasnt pursued.
When Morgan proposed his solution related to the accounts receivable case study, he felt that it
was the best solution for Gramen to adopt, yet it was rejected by Nunez. Instead of defending
Morgan, Sunderland accepted the idea proposed by Nunez of using another case study on
inventory turnover and capital utilization.
Knowing for sure that Sunderland was not going to listen to Morgan, but was going to make him
comply with the clients expectation instead, Morgan must have decided to take matters into his
own hands and started contacting Nunez without informing or approaching Sunderland.
He would possibly have tried several times to explain to Nunez why his case study is better than
the one Nunez proposed. With plenty of arguments and his inherently compelling persuasive
nature, Morgan might have managed to annoy Nunez.
Coming to the next question of why Nunez called Sunderland, it is possibly for the fact that
Sunderland is and has been designated to be the single point of contact for Gramen as a client to
have with Attain. Having dealt with her in the past on this project too, we can assume that Nunez
is comfortable in voicing his concerns to Sunderland especially given the strong personality of
Morgan that might not have been open or accepting of this feedback. Despite his being polite,
Sunderland says she felt the underlying irritation in his voice which is probably a precursor to his
wanting to break off the relationship. Hence it is possible that he feels that issues have reached
a stage where he needs to voice his dissatisfaction to Sunderland in a way in which he warns her
of future consequences of not dealing with the same.

Evaluate Morgan and Sunderland relationship.

There are multiple instances in the case that indicate a sort of strain in the relationship between
Morgan and Sunderland. If we begin by examining the statements they make about each other,
both appear to praise each other at the surface but there seems to be an inherent lack of trust
underlying the relationship. Sunderland for example, says that Morgan can get excessively
argumentative, while Morgan states that Sunderland needs to give him a bit more freedom and
trust his judgement about what will work best.
We could classify this relationship as one of constructive conflict as outlined by Chama because
we see that prior to the client having expressed any issues, Sunderland never stepped in and tried
to mandate anything to Morgan, but still did not interfere in his effort to pursue his track of case
study despite the misgivings Nunez had voiced. Knowing the business and the client, Sunderland
might have been aware that this exploratory work might be a setback in terms of delaying the
time left for the final deliverable, and yet it is not mentioned that she stepped in and dissuaded
him at the first instance, but still allowed him to present to Nunez. Perhaps she was trying to give
him the freedom he claimed he always needed.
On the other hand, what Morgan did by contacting Nunez behind Sunderlands back was truly
unacceptable and out of line with the organizations rules and principles. Not only do we feel
that it was unnecessary and showed a great lack of maturity, but also it might inherently have
had to do with Morgans obsessive persuasion. Hence it seems almost as though he has proved
himself unworthy of the trust placed in him and hence possibly this might strain their relationship
even further.

Identification of Problems
1. Conflicting working styles of Sunderland and Morgan:
We believe that the issue of highest priority is as simple as a mismatch of working styles between
the two managers. As Sunderland has a professional background of working at IBM, a big
hierarchical organization, she is seen as a formal and efficient manager, who always sets
expectations at the outset of a project. She is somewhat inflexible and is very single-minded in
delivering orders from clients. Whereas, Morgan enjoys working in a relaxed entrepreneurial
environment. He is a rebel, challenging clients ideas and develops his own out of the box content.
His management style is that of a supporter or a partner and as a result, his staff was very loyal
to him.
This leads to conflict between the two, while Sunderland thinks that Morgan is extremely
defensive of his ideas; Morgan on the other hand believes that Sunderland should give him more
freedom and trust his judgement. When it comes to managing different styles of leadership in
teams with a flat organizational structure, there needs to evolve a mechanism of resolution by
which both types of leaders understand, respect and compliment each others strengths and
styles. Any conflict in this space is the root cause for gaps in communication and perception
elsewhere.
2. Perception of clients needs
Sunderland is very firm and single minded in matching clients expectations. On the other hand,
Morgan was completely opposite, he questioned the clients ideas. He believed that sometimes
what the client wanted was just unrealistic and often what the client suggested wasnt the best
way to approach the training content. This was a fundamental mismatch in the approach of both

parties, and this difference manifested itself in multiple ways as we have seen in the example of
the financial case studies. In an organization, we believe that it is important for people to align
themselves to the approach they are going to take in handling customer needs. While some
managers may take the Henry Ford style of one-for-all, others might emulate Steve Jobs who
focused on probing customer wants and needs to a subconscious level. Unless all stakeholders
are convinced of the merits of whichever of these approaches is followed, it will be difficult to
align everyone in a direction that will help them to work in synergy and this can lead to further
issues in the organization.
3. Flat Structure with Asymmetric Responsibilities
Leading up from the previous two issues is the conclusion that despite both Morgan and
Sunderland being nominally at the same level within the organization, there seems to be an
asymmetric division of responsibilities where Sunderland is involved with more client facing
responsibilities. She is the sole point of contact with the client and is responsible for scoping out
the project, keeping the content development director, technology director, content area
experts, and event planning director on task and acting as the conductor of harmonious
workflow. It is almost as though despite Morgan having more power in the team and in a general
scenario, Sunderland has more power in a day to day working or operational scenario. Hence
she is able to enforce her style in the short run. This however is not good for the team in the long
run and given Morgans background it might amplify the streak of rebellion within him. It is
possible that his defiance to protocol in reaching the client might therefore have just been to
prove a point that he didnt take orders from someone at the same level.
4. Communication Barriers

Sunderland is the sole point of contact with the client and she is busy with other clients. Hence,
she had no time to listen to Morgans out of the box ideas and would want him to comply with
the expectations laid out by the client. This might have led Morgan to contact the client directly,
bypassing Sunderland.
Recommending Solutions
Having examined the issues above, we believe that this is a classic case of conflict, as explained
below
Based on the personalities of both managers, we evaluate the following courses of action:
1. Avoidance: Do nothing and ignore Morgan and Nunez. This is infeasible because it might
snowball into a bigger issue and result in loss of the contract from Gramen which is vital to
Aspire.
2. Confrontation: With both Morgan and Sunderland being strong willed personalities, it is easy
to expect a scenario where Sunderland demands an explanation for the breach of protocol
from Morgan and then admonishes him for his behavior. However, we do not recommend
the same given that both are at the same organizational level as a result of the structure
discussed earlier, and ego clashes might emerge between the peers which can hamper future
working relationships.
3. Termination: Sunderland might decide that it is impossible to continue working with Morgan
and therefore to move or terminate his services. However, we do not recommend the same
because of the technical prowess and strong team loyalty that Morgan commands, making
him an asset to the organization

4. Acceptance: Give him more autonomy: This could be risky in multiple ways because not only
does it send out the wrong precedent to the rest of the organization but also invalidates the
purpose for Sunderlands existence in the team as described by Nicholas and Chama, which
is to induce formality into the system
Hence the road ahead lies in Collaboration through reciprocity which is a combination of option
2 and 4. Basically, we recommend Sunderland to calmly take some time off and meet Morgan
face to face after his meeting. She should ask him about the breach of protocol and explain her
situation as being under pressure from Nunez. She should then tell him that was exactly the
concern for which he was not given autonomy earlier but she still believes he is capable of
handling it if he is able to deliver to client expectations in this one project. She should say that
she could have kept Chama in the loop but she is not doing so, only because she trusts him and
believes he will rectify the situation and if he is unable to do so then she will be pulled up by
Chama for it. By doing this deed of trust, she earns his reciprocity and respect and he will be
compelled to work to save her back.
The challenges of implementing this are two fold:
a) External: There might be a backlash from the client if this is ineffective and then he will
escalate it to Chama who might come back and ask Sunderland why she didnt tell him earlier.
She will have to explain that it was a call she took in order to build trust in the team
b) Internal: Morgan may not be convinced and may not be able to deliver to client expectations
in which case they will lose a major account. Sunderland can develop a backup plan by
requesting the client for an extension or at least convincing those of the value add in
Morgans services which justify either the delay or the drop in quality if any such thing occurs.

CONCLUSION
Hence, in our report we have examined the various aspects involved in the case and tried to
provide recommendations which are able to appease all stakeholders involved. We believe that
this case is one of two different styles of leadership and client management with equal amounts
of power which are however coming from different sources and applicable in different situations,
and neither is able to back down because both are fundamentally at the same level in a flat
structure. Hence we have analyzed the options open and presented our recommendations
accordingly.