AylorBonnie_Unit9a1_FinalProject_CaseStudy.docx

Seediscussions,stats,andauthorprofilesforthispublicationat:http://www.researchgate.net/publication/279538183

SiemensAGacquiresDresser-Rand:AStudyofContingencyLeadershipModelsinChangeManagementEaseofTransition

THESIS·JUNE2015

DOI:10.13140/RG.2.1.2403.4400

DOWNLOADS

5

VIEWS

4

1AUTHOR:

BonnieReneeAylor

CapellaUniversity

36PUBLICATIONS0CITATIONS

SEEPROFILE

Availablefrom:BonnieReneeAylor

Retrievedon:22July2015

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/279538183_Siemens_AG_acquires_Dresser-Rand_A_Study_of_Contingency_Leadership_Models_in_Change_Management_Ease_of_Transition?enrichId=rgreq-9423d29a-d15d-406e-a2bf-84471432f96e&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI3OTUzODE4MztBUzoyNDcxMzU0ODQ1MTAyMDhAMTQzNTkzMzA5OTcyNA%3D%3D&el=1_x_2

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/279538183_Siemens_AG_acquires_Dresser-Rand_A_Study_of_Contingency_Leadership_Models_in_Change_Management_Ease_of_Transition?enrichId=rgreq-9423d29a-d15d-406e-a2bf-84471432f96e&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI3OTUzODE4MztBUzoyNDcxMzU0ODQ1MTAyMDhAMTQzNTkzMzA5OTcyNA%3D%3D&el=1_x_3

http://www.researchgate.net/?enrichId=rgreq-9423d29a-d15d-406e-a2bf-84471432f96e&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI3OTUzODE4MztBUzoyNDcxMzU0ODQ1MTAyMDhAMTQzNTkzMzA5OTcyNA%3D%3D&el=1_x_1

http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Bonnie_Aylor2?enrichId=rgreq-9423d29a-d15d-406e-a2bf-84471432f96e&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI3OTUzODE4MztBUzoyNDcxMzU0ODQ1MTAyMDhAMTQzNTkzMzA5OTcyNA%3D%3D&el=1_x_4


http://www.researchgate.net/institution/Capella_University?enrichId=rgreq-9423d29a-d15d-406e-a2bf-84471432f96e&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI3OTUzODE4MztBUzoyNDcxMzU0ODQ1MTAyMDhAMTQzNTkzMzA5OTcyNA%3D%3D&el=1_x_6


Siemens AG acquires Dresser-Rand: A Study of Contingency Leadership Models in Change Management Ease of Transition

By: Bonnie Aylor / 2030815

For: BMGT8610 / Spring 2015 / Unit9a1 / Dr Toni Greif

Siemens AG Acquires Dresser-Rand Sunday, June 14, 2015 1 of 32

Abstract

Recently Siemen's AG announced plans to acquire a merger with Dresser Rand. Both

companies work in the engineering and gas, oil and energy sectors. Siemen's specializes in

technological innovations while Dresser-Rand specializes in rotary equipment and after-market

products that are used in all of the company’s designs. Dress-Rand will benefit through the

merger by taking advantage of Siemen's capability to take risk and allow stocks to drop, then

increase above levels prior to the risk taking action. Siemens will benefit from the ability to

utilize Dresser-Rand's cost savings advantage with aftermarket products, and a new way to

innovate energy products with the use of Dresser-Rand's rotary equipment. The companies are

looking at a quick transition period during which it is integral to the success of the merger so

production is not interrupted and leadership styles are able to cohere as a single unit. Siemen's

has an opportunity to administer the transition through a path-goal dominant leadership style

using the recent promise of energy development provisions within an underdeveloped region of

Egypt at the EEDC. This case study will seek out methods for integrating Dresser-Rand’s

management style into Siemen's current use of contingency theories to create action potentials

that will increase the level of ease for transition.


Table of Contents

Abstract ............................................................................................................................................ 1

Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 3

Company Overview ......................................................................................................................... 5

Contingency Model ..................................................................................................................... 6

Current Situation .............................................................................................................................. 8

Incentives for Acquisition ........................................................................................................... 9

Closing the Acquisition ............................................................................................................. 11

Specific Problem or Problems ....................................................................................................... 12

Siemen's Historical Change Agents Program ............................................................................ 13

Leadership Failure ................................................................................................................. 14

New Program ............................................................................................................................. 15

Current Needs ............................................................................................................................ 16

Culture at Siemens ......................................................................................................................... 17

Organizational Culture Across Regions - USA & Germany ..................................................... 20

Suggestions for Moving Forward - Integration ......................................................................... 21

Action Alternatives ........................................................................................................................ 21

Knowledge Integration .............................................................................................................. 22

Cultural Assimilation ................................................................................................................. 23

Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................... 25

Reference ....................................................................................................................................... 27


Introduction

A March, 2007 news report announced the confession of officials working at Siemen’s

AG, as members of an Argentine Bribery Scam that was hosted through the same company

(Calgary, 2007). Shortly after, CEO Klaus Klienfielder stepped down from his position and a

new CEO was appointed – Peter Loescher (Webb, 2013). Siemen’s AG lost profits as a result of

these challenges and operations took a downfall under Loescher (Webb, 2013). Loescher was

unable to recover losses from the scandal and created even more losses over his six year term,

calling for the need to begin searching for a CEO replacement in July of 2013 (Webb, 2013).

The new CEO took office in August of 2013 – Joe Keaser (Siemen’s, 2015). Kaeser was already

the chairman of the finance committee (Webb, 2013) and came into office with a specific agenda

in mind (Larson, 2014). Many of Kaeser’s activities emulate the constructs of the leadership

contingency model, which is a model that is also represented throughout the operations of the

entire establishment of Siemens AG.

Siemens AG is an engineering firm that specializes in energy, mobility and computerized

products (Siemens, 2015). The company holds headquarters in Germany with regional

headquarters all over the globe (Siemen’s, 2015). Aside from just providing engineered capital

products, Siemen’s project procurement team tends to obtain contracts in developing areas where

designs pertain to a social goal, however the true purpose of the designs belongs purely to the

general workings of the firm (Siemens, 2015). With Siemen’s engineering teams’ short project

style of operations, underwritten by the procurement team’s constant ability to create new case

issues, the company appears to be an indulgent source of leadership case research. The


individual project cases help to create examples of how the contingency model in operation at

Siemen’s AG works, including the individual aspects of the leadership model.

The contingency model is well known as the model that requires leaders to consider the

contextual factors of the leadership environment in determining the direction of organizational

management conditions (Fiedler, 1971). According the Fiedler (1971), the contingency model

entails three leadership contexts – relational context, power context, and the task structure

context. These situations are flexible determinant on the amount of stress in the work

environment, and the perceptions that followers have of the leader (Fiedler, 1971). DeRue &

Ashford (2010) posit that the relationship between the leader and the follower consists of one

member of the relationship claiming their position, while the other member has to grant that

claim. In a study by Bryman (1996), it was found that among a group of officers – when the

leader closely matched the follower’s perception of a leader then the followers were more willing

to accept the leader’s style as effective. Furthermore, top leadership officials felt the same way

regarding the relationship of lower leadership to regular employees (Bryman, 1996). Miller et al

(2004) determined that followers who express the contingency model of followership produce

the same contextual elements as leaders do. However, Miller et al (2004) find an exception in

followers since in low stress situations followers tend to lean towards a more relationship

dominant model rather than the task structure illustrated by leaders. This case study will explore

the expression of the contingency model at Siemen’s AG by studying the transition of leadership

into the governance of CEO Joe Kaeser and his resultant plans to transform the vision of the

corporation, taking on the acquisition of Dresser-Rand, and agreeing to the provision of electrical

construction in Egypt at Beni Suif (Larson, 2014) during the Egypt Energy Development


Conference (EEDC). The study will evaluate the viability of Keaser’s tactics and suggest any

actions that can be taken to ease the transition utilizing the contingency model framework.

Company Overview

The case begins at the onset of Joe Keaser’s transition into his CEO position at Siemen’s

AG. Siemens AG has been around since 1847, with personnel providing services to clients all

over the world - including Europe, Asia, South and Central America, Africa and North America

(Siemens, 2015). The case appears to begin in October of 2014 when leaders running business at

American owned Dresser-Rand decide to sell-out into a merger with Siemens AG (Economist,

2013). However, consensus among researchers finds that when leaders are working with the

contingency model, leaders will strategize during periods of high stress (Dunphy & Stace, 1988;

Dunphy & Stace, 1993; Fiedler, 1971) in such a way that mergers, acquisitions (Mandipour,

2012), and restructuring becomes imperative (Dazin & Van De Van, 1985; Pennings, 1975).

The acquisition only exemplifies Keaser’s vision for the company, as evidenced by the fact that

employees of Dresser-Rand specialize in the design and manufacture of rotating equipment and

aftermarkets products (Dresser-Rand, 2014), a perfect complement to Siemens structural change

to a focus on becoming “electrified” (Economist, para 1, 2015). While Dresser-Rand’s products

are slightly different from Siemens, they make the perfect addition to Siemens oil and gas

industry products, and Siemens executives hope that the Dresser-Rand leadership team will be

able to take over that sector of the company (Dresser-Rand, 2014). Mysteriously, this

acquisition does not come as a single project of its own rite, however is can be said that this

strategy conveys perfectly with the contingency model - capturing many of the multitudinous

versions thereof.


Other projects at Siemen’s coincide wonderfully with the Dresser-Rand acquisition to

round out the model of contingency within Keaser’s visionary plan. Between March 13 through

15 of 2015, Siemens leadership team attended the Egypt Economic Development Conference

(EECD) in Sharm El-Shiek, along with employees from the company's industry competitor - GE.

Representatives from both companies made promises to engage in the development of energy

products inside of some of the lower developed regions of Egypt - specifically Beni Suif, on

behalf of the commitment of Siemens representatives (Larson, 2015). At the same time, March

15, Willi Miexner was appointed CEO of the power and gas segment of Siemen's AG (Siemens,

Press, 2015). During the meeting, GE’s leadership team promised to include wind turbines in

their portfolio of energy developments along the region. Siemen's CEO of the wind powers and

renewables divisions, Markus Tacke, commented about his grievance regarding the competition

(Larson, 2015). Not only do Dresser-Rand engineers specialize in rotary equipment and

aftermarket products, they also specialize in wind energy solutions (Dresser-Rand, 2015) -

indicating a close fit for this particular project. These are all clear examples of the contingency

model in practice.

Contingency Model

The contingency models works like architecture during times of high stress. One

interesting aspect of the contingency model is the ability for leaders to connect small pieces of a

structural program to many different particulars of the program so that it sinks into the entire

structure (Mandanipour, 2012). Drazin & Van de Van (1985) determined that during times of

stress, contingency theory encourages leaders to look at all the small parts, cross compare, and

find similarities so that the similarities can be combined. According to Mandanipour’s (2012)

model, leaders will make a goal and then set a different task that will be used to accomplish that

goal – to each A requires the accomplishment of B. The agreement at EEDC was made five


months after Kaeser’s decision to finally acquire Dresser-Rand. This is a clear image of the

connectivity factor of the contingency model. Like architecture, the contingency model builds

upon itself into an almost artistically designed program of organizational change.

Another aspect of the stress-reduction mode of the contingency model is the tendency to

fall into the task structure of management (Fiedler, 1971). Pennings (1975) states that this task

structure allows the leader to derive order out of the situation. Van de Van (1985) further imply

that this task structure invites a little bit more than just structural change – it also invites tasks of

monitoring, fiscal analysis, cross comparisons of departments, and solicitation of employee

input. With the acquisition of all of this data bringing about the topic of knowledge

management, Beccara-Fernendez & Saberhwal (2001) suggest that the task structure of the

contingency model of knowledge management requires the attainment of more knowledge

derived from external rather than internal entities - when such task structure has to do with

broad, content focused knowledge management during times of crisis. To be more precise, these

tasks involve activities of organizing information into libraries, creating best practices, and

communicating particular learning experiences (Baccara-Fernandez & Saberwhal, 2001) from

sources outside of the company. These specific tasks fall closely in line with Keaser’s goal of

restructuring into automation and a technological infrastructure, and will be suited to an

acquisition of Dresser-Rand due to the similarity of the industry mixed with the technological

variation of the information that will be acquired. Therefore, the current priorities at the firm

connote a definite indication of the attempt towards a task-structure orientation by Siemen’s

leadership personnel.


Current Situation

Siemen’s is already displaying the conventional contingency style of leadership in the

way that they have enthusiastically displayed their thoughts about the new expertise that Dress-

Rand will be bringing into the firm. Browsing Siemen's Features website (2015), guests may

find an article about a record breaking electric rotating motor that is built from components of

previous motors that were optimized for use in this design. Dresser-Rand (2015) is a company

that specializes in rotary equipment and aftermarket parts - a remarkable similarity to the new

aircraft motor trophied on the front of Siemen's (2015) feature page. This can be explained by

one aspect of Beccara-Fernandez & Saberwhal’s (2001) model - the act of knowledge

management externalization, which is the visual or symbolic representation of what the newest

knowledge is perceived to mean. Then further represented by one aspect of Mandanipour’s

(2001) model that has to do with the institutional integration of relationships involved in change,

as displayed through technological and functional representation, or else through structural or

political inferences. This process further involves the act of making as many connections

between the two change agents as possible (Beccara-Fernandez & Saberwhal, 2001). Finally, in

Dunphy & Stace’s (1988) contingency model of organizational change, the authors noted that

rapid change derived from an organizational fitness crisis that requires immediate action will

oftentimes involve technological breakthroughs and rapid changes in technology. It is becoming

apparent the increased level at which Siemen's (2015) is celebrating their merger acquisition of

Dresser-Rand.

One way to find out about the health of a firm, or even its amount of weakness to sell out

or acquire, is to review the activity of the company stock. Currently Dresser-Rand has a closing

stock at 86.87 points on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) (Dresser-Rand, 2015). This


leads to a positive 0.19 points over the previous rating, pulling the stock at a 0.230% upturn

(Dresser-Rand, 2015). The company has experienced continuous growth since 2010 with an

exchange rate of 42.59 points in 2010, increasing to an exchange rate of 81.50 points in 2014

(Dresser-Rand, 2014). Siemens is currently closing stock at 102.22 points, with a positive of

0.02 from the previous term and an upswing of 0.02% over the last closing rate (MSN, 2015).

The five-year span for Siemens sees some ups and downs, with an all-time low of 70.35 points

per share in the beginning and end of 2012 and an all-time high of 115.87 points in April of 2015

(MSN, 2015). While Dresser-Rand’s stock shows a constant steady growth, Siemen's stock

displays a tipsy tubby effect by which the stock constantly takes a downfall and then overcomes

so that the stock rate comes out further on top, displaying a larger dividend.

Incentives for Acquisition

Both Dresser-Rand and Siemen’s have incentives for the acquisition. For instance,

Dedman & Filatochev (2008) find that corporations with low ability to overcome risk have a

decreased chance of survival and have to lean on the external change environment in order to

maintain a continued existence. As mentioned in Husted’s (2000) Contingency Theory for

Corporate Social Performance, when a firm matches strategies and structures with market

performance they will experience economic growth, however the same factors must also match

up with social issues even though social issues sometimes differ from the market environment.

He then goes on to show four factors of contingent social governance – total agreement between

stakeholders, general disagreement between the facts, general disagreement between what is and

what ought to be, and a disagreement between the firm and its stakeholders (Husted, 2000).

When social issues do not line up with market conditions, disagreement between the firm and

stakeholders may exist even after the firm resolves ambiguities regarding the factual data and

any conflict between what is and what ought to be (Husted, 2000). This inability to make


agreements between firm and stakeholders may lead to the inability to imbue risk. Diamond

(2009) indicated the biggest issue that organizations have in preventing and overcoming crisis is

the inability of leaders and stakeholders to believe that the firm is strong enough to overcome

risk. Dresser-Rand’s incentive to sell out to Siemen’s has clear implications of future goals

towards risk management.

Siemen’s leadership team has their own incentives for undergoing the merger. Begin

with, Drazin & Van de Van (1985) demonstrate that during times of crisis, the contingency

model allots that leaders will do auditing of finances, expenses and regular operating costs and

cross compare with a running budget in order to minimize, consolidate, and restructure the

organization to fit into a newly idealized budget. This is supported when Dunphy & Stace

(1988) explain how capital intensive firms undergoing crisis may be experiencing an innovation

block due to cost structures and will engage in contingency restructuring practices, such as to

take on new ventures in order to overcome the cost setback and induce new technologies. Then

Husted (2000) notes that when there is a conflict between social issues and market processes,

firms will compensate by incorporating financial optimization practices in order to avoid conflict

between the stakeholders and the firm. To further this, Ju et al (2005) examine contingent

strategies for technology alliances, and find that corporations will converge by acquiring external

technological ventures in order to provide a cost structure conducive to greater amounts of

innovative competition. Finally, Siemen’s AG governance team has one other reason to cut

budgetary costs - in a special conference with Joe Kaeser, Ibrahim Mahlib, Egypt’s prime

minister, asked that Siemen’s management team reduce costs and stick to a specific budget when

implementing the electricity generation development program to be offered in Beni Suif (PM

Egypt, 2015). Siemen’s AG financial department can derive great benefit by allowing the new


technologies acquired by Dresser-Rand to work as a tool in improving budgetary costs related to

electrified innovations.

Closing the Acquisition

While both company leaders express eagerness towards the merger, the closing of the

merger is not expected to happen until Summer of 2015. Even so, Siemen's executive teams are

remaining rather active towards preparation for the merger. The company financial committee

agrees to pay a dividend each month until the merger closes in June, and the board of directors of

the company already withholds dividends to offer to a junior stock for the hybrid business of the

merger (Dresser-Rand, 2015). Siemen’s executives are experiencing a replacement of the

former power and gas division CEO with Willi Miexner (Siemens, Press, 2015). The

replacement of leadership personnel during crisis mitigation and restructuring processes has

remained a common theme throughout contingency model literature (Dedman & Filatotchev,

2008; Drazin & Van de Van, 1985; Dunphy & Stace, 1988). An explanation of these theories

can derive an appreciation for Kaeser in implementing the change.

One major aspect of the contingency model deals with the restructuring and convergence

of operations both internal as well as external to the firm. Drazin & Van de Van (1985) stated

that the firm will look at cross structural relations and the performance aspects of individual

departments to find congruencies in leadership style to departmental specialties - which may

entail the restructuring of departmental focus and the moving around of leadership personnel. As

exemplified by Dunphy & Stace (1988), during practices of reorganization leadership personnel

will be matched to positions displaying their optimal levels of capacity, which may entail a

changeover of leadership in specific areas of the firm. Furthermore, Dedman & Filatotchev

(2008) denoted that during industry reorganization, corporate governance boards will look to

optimize their presentation - which may include a changeover in leadership of specific areas of


the firm where department heads are required to exercise positions on the board. These theories

are exemplified when realizing that the gas and power division that Willie Miexner now operates

a CEO position for (Siemens, 2015) is a part of the company's energy sector - the business that

Siemen's is hoping to integrate fully out to Dresser-Rand during the closing of the acquisition,

and a major factor in the company’s reorganization plan. The transition into the merger with

Dresser-Rand accompanies some major leadership concerns.

Specific Problem or Problems

Any time there is a merger or acquisition, there are obstacles to overcome. In this

situation, Siemen's management teams are working to overcome the obstacles related to the new

reorganization of the firm, the transition into ownership of Dresser-Rand, and then any

challenges that may arise with managing a new platform for the fulfillment of their promise at

the EEDC for Egypt (Larson, 2015) as an immediate outcome of the new hybrid organization

being formed by the merger. Dresser-Rand representatives list a few of the immediately

perceived obstacles related to the ownership transition in a company newsletter providing a

summary of the same (Dreser-Rand, 2015). These obstacles include the risks associated with

differences in operating practices, differences in safety and monitoring practices, and

complications with the smooth running of the businesses during the transition process –

including side effects related to the interrelation of differing business cultures (Dresser-Rand,

2015). Many of these concerns are already a part of the natural progression of the contingency

model during periods of stress.

There are still a few other problems to consider during a corporate restructuring. One

such problem relates to the sayings of Becarra-Fernandez & Sabherwal (2001) that a major

concern of knowledge management is the ability to turn tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge


so that is can be shared with the rest of the firm. Dunphy & Stace (1988) also recognize that

contingency models for change management include collaborative methods of sharing broad

contextual knowledge – including developing the means such as through knowledge libraries and

facilitative technologies. Ju et al (2005) suggest that one major factor in the success of a

technology alliance is the ability to increase competitive advantage through the situational

specific modeling of alliance strategies, that is developed through shared knowledge. Drazin &

Van de Van (1985) say it well when they explain how organizations will study the cross

comparison of corporate departments and integrate monitoring, knowledge tracking, and

information sharing practices that fit well with the current situation. Kaeser has already planned

to integrate automation and technology into the major firm processes (Larson, 2014). Although

this is a step in the right direction, budgetary factors may also be a top concern throughout the

program’s implementation process – which coincides well with the common recognition that

new acquisition is a source of budgetary optimization within the framework of the contingency

model (Becarra-Fernandez & Saberwhal, 2001; Ju et al, 2015). The two companies must work

together throughout the transition in order to foster smooth administration of the new ownership.

Siemen's Historical Change Agents Program

Siemen’s leadership learn from past experience what works well within the firm for

development of leadership and employment skills. Siemen's leadership previously operated a

change management program during the company's merger from Siemen's Nixdorf into just

Siemen's AG (Dover, 2002). Through this program certain representatives from different

employment departments of Siemens Nixdorf are required to attend a workshop to prepare them

to be examples and leaders of knowledge as agents of change within their departments (Dover,

2002). These employees are trained in specific areas of leadership, knowledge about the

company, and knowledge about different characteristics specific to dealing with change, so that


they can be integral leaders of change within their specific departments (Dover, 2002).

However, due to some obscurities in who the leader is and what the change agent's position is

within the firm, the program is currently dissolved (Dover, 2002).

Leadership Failure

One of the major elements causing failure of the change agents program is that the

program administers a model pf path-goal leadership that is different from the firm’s individual

model of leadership. By following the leadership theories of House (1971) and Evans (1974)

researchers can recognize aspects of the path-goal style of leadership implemented through the

change agents program, and the way in which it effects the ability to induce change at Siemen’s.

In the particular situation with Siemens, change management is initiated by leadership personnel

through a requirement to join the training (House, 1971). These change leaders play the role of

mentors who have access to resources at the firm and positional advocacy between department

employees and higher level authorities (Evens, 1974). As they progress through the program,

they exercise their position within their departments and are then able to have trainers redirect

methods that are weak or failing (House 1971). This falls into perfect alignment with the path-

goal theory, which is unlike Siemen’s contingency model design.

The program’s conflict is present because the employees that are chosen to administer the

program in their departments are just regular employees, and their positional acuity within those

departments begin to diminish as they are required to lead the change (Evans, 1974). The entire

situation is a mismatch to Fiedler's (1971) contingency theory because as the ability to delineate

the program’s leader becomes obscure, change agents lose respect for executive leaders, creating

a break in the power relationship between leader and follower. One of Fiedler’s (1971) major

factors of leadership effectiveness is for followers to recognize the power relationship. It is

important to note that within the study of followership, researchers have found that when a leader


makes a claim of leadership, the followers must grant that claim for it to hold true (DeRue &

Ashford, 2010). However, follower’s ability to grant the claim of leadership becomes

diminished as they also begin to practice leadership skills among their peers and begin to wonder

about their positions in relation to those skills (DeRue & Ashford, 2010). This program

eventually transitions into a full affiliation of Siemen's AG, where change agents became

entrepreneurs for the firm and a new set of full time employees began to work as internal agents

of the firm (Dover, 2002). This serves as an indication of a true internal transformation into

leadership maturity for the original agents, but an inadequate leader-member relationship within

the firm.

New Program

When Siemen's dissolves the change agents program, training personnel begin to offer a

new form of leadership development that deals with change through one on one mentorship

programs and constant on-the-job exposure to change situations. The new program addresses

change through on-the-job experiences that are not expressed directly as change (Siemens,

Careers, 2015). The new program resolves leader-member relations issues by integrating the

leader-exchange theory explained by Graen & Ulh-Bien (1995) into the path-goal attainment

plans so that each developing leader has a mentor. According to a study by Miller et al (2004),

contingency model of followership entails the same factors as the contingency model of

leadership, except for one thing – in low stress situations followers prefer the relational style of

management over the task-structure style. Coupling the mentorship with the on-the-job training

aspect of the new leadership development program indicates attempts by company leaders to

develop new ways to compensate for differences between leaders and followers contingency

needs through integration of the mentorships. Although this mentored relationship emphasizes

the leader's goal reinforcement behaviors required by House’s (1971) theory, and may constitute


as an example of the clarity aspects required in Evan's (1974) path-goal attainment theory, it

further enhances the idea of respect required for ease of the leader's position in Fiedler's

contingency theory (1971). Siemen's new leader development system proves very valuable in

the development of leaders equipped for change within Siemen's global atmosphere.

Current Needs

In this transitory system, leaders need to analyze the differences between both firms in

order to discover a point of convergence and areas that may require change for the newly

designed firm to successfully combine. Leaders of both firms must look to the cultural concerns

across company borders in order to discover adequate ways to integrate social order, knowledge

management, and accuracy to perceived intelligence of either firm. According to a study

conducted by Bryman (1996), when employees perceptions of what a leader is closely match the

actual leadership style of company leaders, these employees have an increased perception

regarding the effectiveness of the firm. DeRue & Ashford (2010) also find that followers are

more willing to grant a leadership claim when the style of leadership more closely confers with

their own perceptions of what a leader should be. Their study further emphasizes that the

cultural aspects that define that leadership perception must be in line with the leadership style for

followers to be open to acceptance of it (DeRue & Ashford, 2010). In a study by Mulksyc &

Holt (2008) regarding contingency model of culture, it was found that although it is important to

align structural and business factors during corporate integration processes, it is also important to

ensure that specific cultural attributes of the employees are in line with the leadership style in

order for that leadership style to be effective within the organization (2008). Siemen’s AG will

need to determine different methods for aligning leadership styles, leadership preferences, and

employee cultural associations to the leadership styles at Siemen’s AG in order for the company

to exercise effective governance over both firms.


Culture at Siemens

In order to integrate leadership styles between the two firms, it is important to understand

the cultural differences between them. There are some clear pieces of evidence that lead to a

description of the Siemen's leadership culture, as well as some basic research outcomes for

German businesses in general. First of all, Siemen's current CEO, Joe Kaeser, has dealt with his

transition into leadership in a way that evidences a basic set of traits that indicate a clear

leadership style (Larson, 2014). The leadership style is more autocratic than democratic

(Dickson et al, 2002) because there is a clear hierarchy in relations at Siemens AG (Siemen's

2015). Keaser exercises a clear style of masculinity in that he remains separate from the rest of

the firm, is focused on monetary ideals, and clearly directs the group in which way to go -

offering them consequences for not following (Larson, 2014; Dickson et al, 2002; Gerber et al,

2011) (Larson, 2014; Dickson et al, 2002; Gerber et al, 2011). He also does not hesitate to

communicate his goals and what he means, even if this entails hiring on a new personnel to carry

out his objective (Larson, 2014; Dickson et al, 2002; Gerber et al, 2011). These are all clear

indicators of the task structure style of the contingency model as expressed by Fiedler (1971),

Drazin & Van de van (1985), and Dunphy & Stace (1988) in that Keaser is staying focused on

the data and implementing plans of action according to that data.

There are some similarities within the regular employee culture and Joe Keaser’s

individual cultural contribution, as well as in some areas where the leader-follower relationship

differentiates a little to a slightly more feminine style. This switch to the relational style is

represented through Miller et al’s (2004) model of contingency followership that states that the

follower will differentiate from the leader in low stress environments in such a way that the

follower will need a relational style rather than a task structure style of leadership – indicating


that a leader needs to induce a stressful situation in order for the follower to recognize the

leadership relationship. In this respect, it is important to first illustrate the power distance

structure at Siemen’s AG to decide the amount of stress that needs to occur.

There are sure signs of a power-distance style of leadership at Siemen’s AG. Siemen's

exercises a clear structure of power distance (Dickson et al, 2002) in that leadership employees

go through years of training before they are offered their final position, they sit on boards which

are separated according to the level of leadership and influence, and leaders are required to be

able to exercise mobility while followers are only expected to stay in one region for the duration

of their employment, unless changing positions (Siemen's, 2015). However, some of that power

distance is closed in (Dickenson et a, 2002) when considering such aspects of the leadership

atmosphere as the inclusion of a certain number of regular employment representatives required

to exercise a position on the management board (Siemens, 2015). The gap is even further filled

during leadership development while employees are entertained by individual mentors that hold

close affiliation with leaders throughout their training program (Siemen’s, 2015). These are clear

indicators of a power distance structure.

Another cultural aspect exercised at Siemen's AG is uncertainty avoidance. Uncertainty

avoidance is described by Dickenson et al (2002) as a culture in which employment is more

stable than flexible, the need for education is high, and the power structure is relatively high. At

Siemen's, leaders are required to have at least a Master's Degree, where there are two programs

for leadership depending on if a Master's degree has already been obtained or if the potential

future leader will be obtaining a Master Degree through Siemen's Master Degree education

program (Siemen's, 2015). On Siemen's website, management credentials are displayed for upper

level management personnel that clearly depict the requirement for higher education, as well as


the longevity of employment typically displayed by leadership personnel at the firm (Siemens,

2015). Furthermore, Keaser immediately came into office with an assortment of data previouly

collected in relation to the health of the firm and implemented a clear plan for the firm’s

direction regarding this data (Larson, 2014). Keaser exercises a power structure in regards to

this program by requiring the change or else engaging in merger to the larger firm (Economist,

2015), and through B and A goal attainment (Larson, 2015; Mandanipour, 2010). Regardless,

any engineering firm will require higher expertise and a clear plan of action. Siemen's clearly

displays the requirements that match an uncertainty avoidant culture.

Siemen's also exercises a mixed culture relating to collectivism and individualism. For

instance, the organization is split into different departments according to areas of expertise and

then teams complete projects based on cross departmental assortment, depending on the expected

outcomes of the projects (Siemens AG, 2015). Extenuating on this, Dickensen et al (2002) and

Geber et al (2011) find that collectivist cultures establish teamwork and then gear goals towards

the team or organization. However, Siemen's also requires that the leaders of individual

departments administer company goals according to their own way of doing things, their own

expertise, and their own agendas that match those company goals (Larson, 2014; Siemens, 2015)

- a clear example of the aspects of individualism (Dickenson et al, 2002). In this reference,

researchers would have to view the individualism-collectivist culture on a multidimensional

framework (House et al, 2003) and consider that the true culture may be an authoritative

structure of vertical collectivism (Dickenson et al, 2002). Siemen's leadership exercises

individualism in leadership decision across the horizontal, yet a clear indication of collectivism

in vertical positions ascending from the horizontal leadership atmosphere. Culture remains fixed

along the same foundational construct of masculinity as Kaeser displays indivudally, accept that


in the contingency style of management exercised at Siemens, followers require a relational style

of leadership during low stress periods (Miller et al, 2004). However, this same construct is

counteracted with the short lived project timeframe exercised as a regular part of the Seimen's

culture – a feministic leadership attribute (Dickenson, 2002). The leadership style is relatively

mixed, but indicates some dominate styles that cannot be ignored across cultures.

Organizational Culture Across Regions - USA & Germany

When doing business on the multinational atmosphere, it is important to consider cross-

cultural attributes of leadership. There are some important considerations to take into account

between the USA and Germany when conducting a cross cultural analysis of Siemens & Dresser-

Rand. First of all, while Siemens does exercise a clear power-distance relationship, it has been

evidenced that US firms exercise low power distance (Dickenson et al, 2002), however both

German and US firms are known for their participative leadership attributes. Although there is

not much research representing the uncertainty avoidance (UA) relationship of US firms, review

of the characteristics mentioned by Dickenson et al (2002) and Gerber et al (2011) can lead one

to assume that the US displays mixed attributes of uncertainty, leading to the belief that more

research could review the way that the UA characteristics displayed in US firms are related to

UA or to some other cultural aspect that crosses borders with UA. This is because US firms are

well known for their use of intellectual capital - connoting a large need for specialization and

education which is a UA characteristic according the Dickenson et al (2002). However, US

firms also work best in a competitive atmosphere that requires risk-taking, innovation, and

mobility - characteristics of low uncertainty avoidance (Gerber et al, 2011). German firms like

to plan things out, exercise work stability, and are high on education in order to avoid risk -

apparent high uncertainty avoidance characteristics (Dickenson et al, 2002; Gerber et al, 2011).

However, stock performance at Dresser-Rand indicates a higher uncertainty avoidance than most


US nationally headquartered firms (Dresser-Rand, 2015) in that it continually grows, but there is

no indication of risk taking behavior that would cause a drop in growth. US firms and German

firms display similar levels of collectivism and masculinity, exercising a more vertically-

collective society with dominant traits of masculinity over feminism (Dickenson et al, 2002).

This indicates a clear ability to find convergence.

Suggestions for Moving Forward - Integration

There are several areas of convergence between Siemens and US owned Dresser-Rand.

For instance, both German firms and US firms exercise participative leadership. Also, Dresser-

Rand may be more willing to adhere to the measures of uncertainty avoidance distributed

throughout German owned Siemens AG due to their currently avoidant culture in relation to

expenditures, expansion, and level of expertise. Collectivism and masculinity levels at each firm

are expected to be on equal terms, which will help with a smooth transition into one company.

Overall, both companies are already at an optimal level of pairing according to House et al’s

(2003) multi-dimensional cross regional analysis model. Very slight measures may be needed

for the integration according to management frames (Gerber et al, 2011), however the transition

is almost already set within the foundational culture of each company. Siemen’s may only need

to work on its mutual awareness of Dresser-Rand.

Action Alternatives

The two companies have many alternatives that they can consider in attempting to

implement the necessary actions towards the merger. Contingency model literature dealing with

change offers a number of solutions for effectively leading new policies and restructuring within

organizations. Siemen’s AG has a number of transition related challenges to overcome.


Knowledge Integration

The first challenge deals with the integration of knowledge between the two firms.

Siemens CEO Joe Kaeser has already mentioned that he wants the firm to be restructured for

automation and technology (Larson, 2014). This method has been mentioned by various

contingency model theorists when knowledge integration involves a broad set of knowledge over

a collaborative atmosphere (Becarra-Fernandez & Sabherwal, 2008) where rapid change is

expected to provide immediate relief to a fast changing culture involving crisis (Dunphy &

Stace, 1988). Drazin & Van de Van (1985) also show that during the context of restructuring,

organizational leadership personnel must monitor and store data for future use. In highly

technical environments, Drazin & Van de Van (1985) mention that knowledge must be presented

in such a way that it is it simplistic and readily understood by general employees of the firm.

According to Ju et al (2005), technology alliances tend to be chosen based on similar learning

structures and similar operational functionalities that ease the complexity of transition – namely

the efficiency of communicating shared knowledge. This research theory serves as an ample

guide to creating action alternatives.

It is important that Siemen’s performs a cross examination of learning functions and

facilitations offered at Dresser-Rand compared to those offered through Siemen’s AG. Once

such a determination is made, leadership teams can begin to match gaps in learning abilities to

proper methods of knowledge sharing in order to facilitate an increased ability to integrate

knowledge proprieties between the two firms. Furthermore, Seimen’s personnel should

implement automation through techniques such as bar coding publications, working in

knowledgeable teams, and integrating a company website with knowledge repositories that

employees can easily access. According to Becerra-Fernandez & Sabherwal (2008), a major

aspect of knowledge integration is the ability to transform tacit knowledge into explicit


knowledge. Siemen’s leadership should implement methods to record knowledge as it develops

in tacit form, through monitoring and note-taking techniques, so that this knowledge can be

transferred into explicit publication and barcoded for recording within repositories and for use in

training through isolation as best practices.

Teamwork can be an integral piece to the knowledge management puzzle. Manidanipour

(2010) emphasizes the way in which a firm undergoing reorganization will enforce this

restructuring through a connectivity approach where employees must complete B in order to

accomplish A. The transference of tacit knowledge can also be implemented through the use of

knowledgeable work teams where project teams are varied according to multiple skills

attainment. Team members can be encouraged to transfer their independent intelligences among

the rest of the members of the group in order to facilitate the optimization of project completion.

This will allow for an ease of transition, and it will cohere evenly to Kaeser’s plan for company

automation and technology implementation.

Cultural Assimilation

The second level of concern introduces the need for cultural assimilation among the two

firms. According to Ju et al (2005), during technology alliance formation firms will ensure that

learning styles and managerial style are already at a close match before they will consider other

elements, short of technological capabilities. Although this may be true, Muczyk & Holt (2008)

show how cultures may change across regions, despite learning and managerial implementations.

According to the literature by Mucsyk & Holt (2008), US cultures, such as what would be

exercised by Dresser-Rand, are most attuned to the contingency methods relating to employee’s

participation in decision-making and goal setting or attainment, and monitoring behaviors.

Mucsyk & Holt (2008) also find that in Eastern European cultures (2006), such as would be

exercise through Siemens, the emphasis is on power-distance, collectivism, uncertainty


avoidance, an external environmental orientation, and a concern for production among various

short term projects. It is important to find methods to mitigate these differences.

Bujstad et al (2006) created a model for matching followership styles to leadership styles.

According to this model (Bujstad et al, 2006), styles between US cultures and Eastern European

cultures do not immediately match, however the model does provide a method for combining

them. While US cultures are more exemplary and participatory, Eastern European cultures are

more conformative and telling – however a good solution for combining the two cultures is

through the selling technique that mixes telling and participatory methods so that they gain more

confidence in the change (Bujstad et al, 2006). This method will allow for questioning of

leadership agendas that are transferred through directive actions (Bujstad et al, 2006). According

to the Dunphy & Stace (1988) contingency model of organizational change, organizations

experiencing isolated periods of change using collaborative methods are best to integrate the

change process through team building, goal setting appraisal, and management development

methods. Mandanipour’s (2010) connectivity model characterized cultural assimilation as

encouraged by task structure when teams are implemented towards the completion of the project

B that induces A’s attainment. Husted’s (2000) theory lays it out in illustrating that socialization

advances along the contingency model using computation and routine, then discovery, then

inspiration, and finally - bargaining and representation – all conducted within a team atmosphere.

Cultural theory represents adequate presentation of the way in which corporations can stretch

across national cultures to generate cohesion.

This research represents a clear path for alternative actions for integrating cultures

between Siemens AG and Dresser-Rand. It is important that Siemen’s leadership team continue

to implement project based teams in which current employees of both firms can work with each


other to discover new ideas, encourage each other to implement innovations related to new

knowledge, ask questions about directives, and bargain among each other in the final planning of

new projects. Siemen’s recent involvement in the EEDC (Larson, 2014) will provide a

connectivity in which teams can cross cultures between both firms to implement projects

directed by the development plan. With these programs in place, employees will have a direct

focus that will redirect their thoughts from differing cultures to the completion of goal B that will

facilitate that cultural integration.

Conclusion

Although Siemen's AG has been around since the mid-nineteenth century, the company

will need to use its leadership expertise to integrate some small measures used to ease the

transition of the company into the new vision and new acquisition of Dresser-Rand. The

company has worked with engineering and software since the onset of its existence, choosing to

mitigate relations between multi-national alliances. Studying the company dynamics, one could

conclude that the company thrives through a leadership administered using the contingency

theory with historical aspects of path-goal attainment. Recently, Siemen's has made plans to

acquire a merger with Dresser-Rand (2015) in order to integrate its power and gas division with

the capabilities of Dresser-Rand in the formation of a hybrid oil and gas division and an

increased level of ability towards Siemen's goal of electrification. These changes will need to be

accompanied by an action plan used to induce transition into the merger.

Siemen's is already reinforcing this merger with the introduction of a new CEO of the gas

and power division (Siemens, Press, 2015) and agreements at EEDC to utilize their firm to

provide energy sector development in underdeveloped regions of Egypt (Larson, 2015). The

company has to integrate its contingency style in order to induce knowledge sharing activities


and cultural assimilation that will enhance creativity towards the innovation of energy

development projects during the merging of Siemen’s with Dresser-Rand. They must do this by

taking steps to monitor and record information during episodes of tacit knowledge, integrating

multicultural teams for project implementation, and allowing automated technologies to provide

a platform for information repositories, best practices dissemination, and bargaining forums that

can later be turned into recorded data for knowledge management. Further research should be

implemented to test the ability for single aspects of the contingency model of organizational

change to compensate for cultural integration when cultures express differing aspects of the same

model, encouraging them to blend together. Furthermore, research should be conducted in the

ability to use the contingency model for social performance as a method to construe cultural

integration. Finally, an empirical study integrating the connectivity model of contingency theory

to the contingency model of cultural imperatives to study cultural integration would be a benefit

to contingency theories of cultural performance.


Reference

(April 16, 2015 ). PM Meets Siemens CEO. Egypt State Information Service. Retrieved from

www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic

Bass, B. M. (1995). Theory of Transformational Leadership Redux. The Leadership Quarterly, 6

(4), 463-478. doi: http://dx.doi.org.library.capella.edu/10.1016/1048-9843(95)90021-7

Becerra-Fernandez, I., & Sabherwal, R. (2001). Organizational Knowledge Management: A

Contingency Perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1), 23-55.

Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com.library.capella.edu/docview/218928929?accountid=27965

Bjugstad, K., Thach, E. C., Thompson, K. J., & Morris, A. (2006). A Fresh Look at

Followership: A Model for Matching Followership and Leadership Styles. Journal of

Behavioral and Applied Management, 7(3), 304-311,313-319. Retrieved from


Bryman, A, Stephens, M, à Campo, C. (1996). The Importance of Context: Qualitative Research

and the Study of Leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, Volume 7, Issue 3, Autumn 1996,

Pages 353-370, ISSN 1048-9843, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(96)90025-9.

(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1048984396900259)

Day, D. V., Antonakis, J. (2012). The Nature of Leadership, 2nd Edition. Thousand Oaks, Ca,

Sage Publications Inc. ISBN: 978-1-4129-8020-3.

Dedman, E., & Filatotchev, I. (2008). Corporate Governance Research: A Contingency

Framework. International Journal of Managerial Finance, 4(4), 248-258.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17439130810902778 Retrieved from:

http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic

http://dx.doi.org.library.capella.edu/10.1016/1048-9843%2895%2990021-7


http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(96)90025-9

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1048984396900259


http://search.proquest.com.library.capella.edu/docview/228359695?pq-

origsite=summon&http://library.capella.edu/login?url=accountid=27965

DeRue, D. S., & Ashford, S. J. (2010). Who Will Lead and Who Will Follow? A Social Process

of Leadership Identity Construction in Organizations. Academy of Management Review,

35(4), 627-647. doi:10.5465/AMR.2010.53503267 Retrieved from:

http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct

=true&db=bth&AN=53503267&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Dickson, M. W., Den Hartog, D. N., & Mitchelson, J. K. (2003). Research on Leadership in a

Cross-Cultural Context: Making Progress, and Raising New Questions. The leadership

quarterly, 14(6), 729-768. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2003.09.002 Retrieved from:

http://www.sciencedirect.com.library.capella.edu/science/article/pii/S1048984303000560

Drazin, R., & Van De Ven, A. H. (1985). Alternative Forms of Fit in Contingency

Theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 30(4), 514-539.


=true&db=bah&AN=4013921&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Dresser-Rand. (2015). Investor Relations. Retrieved from: http://investor.dresser-

rand.com/stockquote.cfm

Dover, P. (2002). Change Agents at Works: Lessons from Siemens Nixdorf. Journal of Change

Management, 3(3), 243-. ISSN:14697017 / DOI:10.1080/714042535

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/714042535#

Dunphy, D. C., & Stace, D. A. (1988). Transformational and Coercive Strategies for Planned

Organizational Change: Beyond the OD Model. Organization Studies,9(3), 317-334.

Retrieved from:

http://search.proquest.com.library.capella.edu/docview/228359695?pq-origsite=summon&http://library.capella.edu/login?url=accountid=27965

http://search.proquest.com.library.capella.edu/docview/228359695?pq-origsite=summon&http://library.capella.edu/login?url=accountid=27965

http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=53503267&site=ehost-live&scope=site

http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=53503267&site=ehost-live&scope=site

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2003.09.002


http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bah&AN=4013921&site=ehost-live&scope=site


http://investor.dresser-rand.com/stockquote.cfm



http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/714042535




Dunphy, D., & Stace, D. (1993). The Strategic Management of Corporate Change. Human

Relations, 46(8), 905. Retrieved from


The Economist, 412, 53-54. Retrieved from


The Economist (Online), Retrieved from


Etsy, A. (2009). An Interview with Jared Diamond. Sigma XI: The Scientific Research Society.

Retrieved from: http://www.americanscientist.org/bookshelf/pub/jared-diamond

Evans, M. G. (1974). Extensions of a Path-Goal Theory of Motivation. Journal Of Applied

Psychology, 59(2), 172-178. doi:10.1037/h0036516


=true&db=pdh&AN=1974-31094-001&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Fiedler, F. E. (1971). Validation and Extension of the Contingency Model of Leadership

Effectiveness: A Review of Empirical Findings. Psychological Bulletin, 76(2), 128-148.

doi:10.1037/h0031454


=true&db=pdh&AN=1972-02829-001&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-Based Approach to Leadership:

Development of Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory of Leadership over 25 Years:

Applying a Multi-Level Multi-Domain Perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219-





http://www.americanscientist.org/bookshelf/pub/jared-diamond

http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=pdh&AN=1974-31094-001&site=ehost-live&scope=site





247. doi:10.1016/1048-9843(95)90036-5 Retrieved from

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/1048984395900365

House, R. J. (1971). A Path Goal Theory of Leader Effectiveness. Administrative Science

Quarterly, 16(3), 321-339.



House, R., Javidan, M., Hanges, P., & Dorfman, P. (2002). Understanding Cultures and Implicit

Leadership Theories Across the Globe: an Introduction to Project GLOBE. Journal of

world business, 37(1), 3-10. doi:10.1016/S1090-9516(01)00069-4 Retrieved from:


Husted, W. (2000). A Contingency Theory of Corporate Social Performance. Business and

Society, 39(1), 24-48. Retrieved from


Ju, T. L., Shu-Hui, C., Chia-Ying, L., & Tien-Shiang, L. (2005). A Strategic Contingency Model

for Technology Alliance. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 105(5), 623-644.

Retrieved from


Larson, A. Siemens and GE Ink Big Orders with Egypt. Electric Power, Power Magazine.

Powermag.com. Retrieved from: http://www.powermag.com/siemens-and-ge-ink-big-

orders-with-egypt/

Madanipour, A. (2010). Connectivity and Contingency in Planning. Planning Theory. Retrieved

from: http://plt.sagepub.com.library.capella.edu/content/9/4/351.full.pdf+html

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/1048-9843(95)90036-5

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/1048984395900365



http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1090-9516(01)00069-4


http://www.powermag.com/siemens-and-ge-ink-big-orders-with-egypt/

http://www.powermag.com/siemens-and-ge-ink-big-orders-with-egypt/

http://plt.sagepub.com.library.capella.edu/content/9/4/351.full.pdf+html


Mahadevan, N. (2015, Mar 14). Siemens Signs $4.2 Billion Power Deals in Egypt; German

Conglomerate Agrees to Build Power Plant in North African Country. Wall Street

Journal (Online). Retrieved from


Miller, R. L., Butler, J., & Cosentino, C. J. (2004). Followership Effectiveness: An Extension of

Fiedler's Contingency Model. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 25(3),

362-368. Retrieved from


MSN Money. (2015). Retrieved from: http://www.msn.com/en-

us/money/stockdetails?symbol=DE:SIE

Mumford, M. D., Friedrich, T. L., Caughron, J. J., and Byrne, C. L. (2007). Leader Cognition in

Real-World Settings: How do Leaders Think About Crises?. The Leadership Quarterly,

Volume 18, Issue 6, December 2007, Pages 515-543, ISSN 1048-9843,

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.09.002.

(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S104898430700118X)

Muczyk, J. P., & Holt, D. T. (2008). Toward a Cultural Contingency Model of

Leadership. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 14(4), 277-286. Retrieved

from: http://jlo.sagepub.com.library.capella.edu/content/14/4/277.full.pdf+html

Pennings, J. M. (1975). The Relevance of the Structural-Contingency Model for Organizational

Effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 20(3), 393-410.





http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.09.002

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S104898430700118X

http://jlo.sagepub.com.library.capella.edu/content/14/4/277.full.pdf+html




PR, N. (2014, September 21). Dresser-Rand Signs Agreement to Sell to Siemens for

Approximately $7.6 Billion in an all Cash Transition. PR Newswire US, September 21,

Regional Business News, ESBSCO Host.


=true&db=bwh&AN=201409211952PR.NEWS.USPR.DA17842&site=ehost-

live&scope=site

Siemens. (2015). Siemens Global Website: Features. Siemens Corporation. Retrieved from:

http://www.siemens.com/press/en/index.php

Siemens. (2015). Siemens Global Website: Jobs & Careers. Siemens Corporation. Retrieved

from: http://www.siemens.com/jobs/en/

Siemens. (2015). Siemens Global Website: Press. Siemens Corporation. Retrieved from:

http://www.siemens.com/press/en/pressrelease/index.php

Siemens. (2015). Siemens Global Website: Siemens Worldwide. Siemens Corporation.

Retrieved from: http://www.siemens.com/entry/cc/en/

Sousa, R., & Voss, C. A. (2008). Contingency Research in Operations Management

Practices. Journal of Operations Management, 26(6), 697-713. Retrieved from:


?np=y

http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bwh&AN=201409211952PR.NEWS.USPR.DA17842&site=ehost-live&scope=site



http://www.siemens.com/press/en/index.php

http://www.siemens.com/jobs/en/

http://www.siemens.com/press/en/pressrelease/index.php

http://www.siemens.com/entry/cc/en/

http://www.sciencedirect.com.library.capella.edu/science/article/pii/S0272696308000405?np=y

http://www.sciencedirect.com.library.capella.edu/science/article/pii/S0272696308000405?np=y

Documents

AylorBonnie_Unit9a1_FinalProject_CaseStudy.docx