Final Exam Part I – Issues Paper: Doing More With Less MGT 5045 – Organizational Behavior Alexis Lake
Elmira College
Organizational Behavior – Final Exam Part I
2
“Can you believe it’s been a year since George was let go?” remarked Sarah during a hurried coffee break between meetings. “And Kyle left six months ago.” “It feels like an eternity. We can never keep up now,” shrugged John. “To me it feels like it was just last week. One day they are here, and then the next we had those rushed meetings on the planned giving campaign. Do you remember that?” Sarah asked. “How could I forget? The three of us worked on it together, but then I had to pick it up and launch it in just a few weeks time,” said John between coffee sips. “That was right before I went on maternity leave,” said Sarah with a slight smile on her face, but her demeanor quickly changed. “Certainly a stressful time. And it just continues. We always have to do more with less.” The pair disappeared down the hallway to their next meeting, but the problems of the organization still loomed. In the past year, Heart Path, a longstanding, multi-state nonprofit focused on heart health and education, had experienced quite the shake up in its communications and fund development department. George, the director of communications and marketing was let go due to budget shortages. In short order, another employee, Kyle, the director of annual giving, left to pursue a better paying opportunity. His position was not filled due to budget cuts, and almost immediately Sarah, the lead graphic designer, was out on a 12week maternity leave. The remaining team members, plus the vice president of the department, were expected to pick up and carry the load. Unfortunately, these types of cuts and responsibility changes were becoming the norm across Heart Path.
Organizational Behavior – Final Exam Part I
3
Helping to carry load typically meant a quick, off-hand remark from the Heart Path president, or the department vice president, letting someone know that a project was now their responsibility. Without the former employees there to provide training or guidance, current employees scrambled to find answers. Access to emails and other documents made the transition easier, but employees largely turned to the authority of senior employees. These leaders, at the top of the hierarchy, had seen and experienced it all. They knew how things needed to be done. However, the tasks themselves were very transactional and delegated across functional silos. This created confusion and competition for high-profile projects. In an organization where tradition and consistency founded the overall culture, change was rare and very challenging. As Sarah and John left the meeting and started to walk back to their office, John’s face was flush. The frustration and anger seemed to seep out of his every move. “Do it this way. That is the way we’ve always done it,” muttered John in an angry tone. “We don’t get paid well enough as it is, and then to just ‘do what we’ve always done’ is mindless. There’s no trust, no value in me.” Sarah followed behind looking dejected. She did not speak, but her thoughts drifted. “I just don’t know how I am going to do all this work, and still pick Kristine up on time from daycare,” she worried to herself. That morning, the daycare providers had called Sarah to let her know that her daughter Kristine was the last child at the daycare for three days in row. One more late night and she would be charged significant fines. With her husband traveling on business
Organizational Behavior – Final Exam Part I
4
and family far away, it was all becoming too much for the new mom. Suddenly she burst out and interrupted John’s angry vent session. “I can’t keep doing this. I can’t just keep spinning my wheels here for 40, 50, or 60 hours a week, for nothing. Things keep piling on, and my daughter needs me,” she cried, as the two entered their office suite. Tears started to pour down Sarah’s face and the room began to spin. Suddenly, she felt someone grab her arm and pull her up. Sarah looked up and it was not John, but a woman she had never seen before. “I know how you feel, because I have seen it and experienced it before,” said the woman in a soft-spoken voice. “And I am here to help you, and Heart Path, fix this problem.” Sarah fell into her chair with a shocked John standing nearby. The woman handed them each a business card imprinted with the words, “Maria Costello, Organizational Behavior Expert.” With Maria onboard, the movement toward change was slow, but progressive. She worked closely with the leadership and all the employees to dissect the problems and build a sense of unity across the organization. In a meeting, Maria shared that their frustration was reasonable, but not uncommon, especially in the nonprofit world. She presented a study by Opportunity Knocks, a national career services organization, that found “over 50 percent of the nonprofit employees they surveyed were burned out or were in danger of becoming burned out,” (Krievins, 2015). The study also found that “when an individual leaves a nonprofit, the organization often redistributes the duties,” (Krievins, 2015). While this
Organizational Behavior – Final Exam Part I
5
information was disheartening, the Heart Path leadership really tuned in when Maria shared the greater costs to high-stress organizations, “including 50% higher healthcare costs and 60% to 80% of workplace accidents [happening] due to stress,” (Reilly, 2017). All of this collective data gave team, and the leadership, a clear understanding that real changes were necessity. While budget cuts and employee turnover issues may be evergreen challenges for Heart Path, the underlying culprit was the culture. Maria identified that true problem was that the traditional culture meant that responsibilities stayed the same and did not meet the changing needs of the organization. A cultural shift could take years, but Maria knew the overall benefit of implementing such a change. In fact, she had just read a study from The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science that “a positive organizational culture creates an atmosphere that buffers against negative experiences such as stress,” (Reilly, 2017) and competition. She knew exactly where to start and how to make the workload better. “There were less hands to do the work, so naturally the work needed to change and evolve,” said Maria. “Or as other organizational experts explain, ‘doing more with less requires [a] strategic sorting of priorities,’” (Duncan, 2014). When Maria asked about the overall strategy of the organization, many of the employees referenced the Heart Path mission statement. At first, Maria was reassured by this response. Everyone in the organization seemed to know and appreciate the mission. However, the mission statement only outlines the purpose of the organization, whereas a “strategy is the plan to accomplish the purpose,” (Duncan, 2014). Heart Path’s strategy needed to be clearer, and all the job descriptions needed to be updated to focus on the tasks and responsibilities that mattered the most.
Organizational Behavior – Final Exam Part I
6
“We had that big meeting where Jeff (the organization’s president) outlined the overall strategy of the organization, which was great, but what does that mean for me?” asked John. Through redefining job descriptions and identifying meaningful performance indicators, John and the other employees felt empowered. They knew how and what to prioritize and focus on the work that mattered the most (Duncan, 2014). Additionally, through instituting strengths based approaches to teamwork, the tasks were easier to assign and share based on individual strengths. The confusion and competition for highprofile projects started to decrease and communication across functional teams increased. In another step, Maria suggested that the leadership team consider instituting more employee recognition and a rewards system. The idea had Jeff, the Heart Path president, feeling very anxious. “We would love to give everyone raises or performance bonuses, but financially it just isn’t possible given the government cuts to the healthcare sector,” said Jeff. “As an organization in healthcare, we need to do less with more on a whole, including recognition.” “How often do you say ‘thank you,’ or go around and ask the employees how they are feeling, or let them know how much you appreciate their work,” challenged Maria. By the look on Jeff’s face, she knew the answer. With Jeff being a data-driven person, Maria shared the results of a recent Gallup study from over two million employees at 700 companies that found “most workers rate having a caring boss even higher than they value money or fringe benefits,” (Saunderson, 2012). This resonated with Jeff and soon he began walking around the office more to interact with and thank
Organizational Behavior – Final Exam Part I
7
employees. The difference was almost immediate amongst the employees. They seemed relaxed, even excited when Jeff approached them, versus stressed about a project falling into their laps. Additionally, Maria encouraged Heart Path to give employees some other rewards such as flexible hours, options to work remotely twice a month, and even causal Fridays or team building activities. In her making case to the leadership team, Maria shared that a recent public sector study found that “97% of [employees] agreed or strongly agreed,” (Saunderson, 2012) that this type of recognition, “improves morale… and increased their levels of commitment…and productivity,” (Saunderson, 2012). Reluctant at first, but the leadership team soon agreed. The new benefits took a while to take hold, but once they did, the traditional, consistent culture gave way to a more open, encouraging, and teambased culture. “Is it okay if I call into our meeting on Friday? I will be working from home and spending some extra time with Kristine before she starts pre-school,” said Sarah, a few months later. “Pre-school! Wow, time flies. And no problem on Friday,” replied John, as they returned from a lunch meeting with Jeff. “It is great we now have the option to call-in when we need to, so please use it.” “Absolutely! Very thankful for that, and feeling like our time is better utilized by the team and really valued by Jeff,” smiled Sarah. “Overall it is a great time to be at Heart Path,” said John.
Organizational Behavior – Final Exam Part I
8
References: Duncan, R. D. (2014, December 05). Doing More With Less: Avoid Fake Work. Retrieved December 05, 2017, from https://www.forbes.com/sites/rodgerdeanduncan/2014/12/04/doing-more-withless-avoid-fake-work/#f8679ac6c1e7 Krievins, S. (2015, October 27). "Doing More with Less" Often Means Burnout for Nonprofit Staff. Retrieved December 01, 2017, from https://charitableadvisors.com/doing-more-with-less-often-means-burnout-fornonprofit-staff/ Reilly, C. (2017, May 03). Workplace Culture and Productivity - How Culture Affects Productivity. Retrieved December 01, 2017, from http://employeetotalwellbeing.com/blog/culture-productivity/ Saunderson, R. (2012, May 22). Making the Case for Employee Recognition in Tough Times. Retrieved December 05, 2017, from http://www.industryweek.com/companies-amp-executives/making-caseemployee-recognition-tough-times Uhl-Bien, M., Schermerhorn, J. R. Jr., and Osborn, R. N. (2014). Organizational Behavior. Wiley. Thirteenth Edition.