Fey 1

University Phone Center Case

MCASE #3

Eric Fey

PPA 420

Dr. Jennifer A. Taylor

March 29
 Fey 2

Introduction

A university phone center requires a tight bond between employees who share a common

objective. In this instance, the goals of supervisors and students were misaligned with a new

assistant director position which did not need to be created. This led to students losing the

motivation previously provided by the director who had a more fluid leadership style. Even

though the assistant director position did not need to be created, it could have been an overall

benefit to the organization if the individual had taken note of the institutional context that he was

rejoining. In specific, the assistant director was acting more like a manager rather than a leader

who catalyzes change. The organization’s structure was changed, and as a result lines of

accountability were altered with new authority being vested incorrectly in the assistant director.

Communication broke down between parties as well as strongly negative values being

communicated rather than strong positive ones. The implications of the situation and

recommendations will also be discussed.

Issue 1 - Leadership

Power was consolidated in a new assistant director position, but it was never clear

whether this person was assessed for leadership qualities. The assistant director more closely

resembled a manager who is goal and task oriented rather than a leader who would be concerned

with facilitating change and motivation (Barid 2017.) Leadership roles in organizations need to

be the ones responsible for coordinating the type of structural change that occurred in the call

center. When the assistant director was employed as a supervisor, he never demonstrated

exemplary performance or leadership. The executive board did not recognize a strong candidate

who demonstrated the leadership required for the new position and instead prioritized previous

knowledge of the call center. Had a stronger candidate with better person-organization fit been
 Fey 3

chosen, that person may not have caused as much distress and demotivation (Mos 2012.)

Contextually, this leadership style was not appropriate for the existing relationships and didn’t

follow the “law of the situation” (Srdjan 2014) The assistant director was never trained in

leadership skills and only had a directive to maximize profit. The supervisors were used to

receiving deference and opportunities for input from the director, while the assistant director

preferred handing down orders. Training the assistant director to be more inclusive in his

decision making would have prevented low morale in the work environment (Seidle 2016.) The

leadership style being used by the assistant director took away creativity as a tool for each

student supervisor to be able to reach their goals; limiting their effectiveness (Srdjan 2014.)

Issue 2 - Organizational Structure

This case is representative of the misallocation of resources that can occur when a

organization uses a top down structure. The executive board was pressured to raise more money

for the school during a drop in state funds. They decided that the best way to raise more money

was to hire an assistant director of giving whose sole responsibility would be maximizing

donations. If they had consulted with front line managers or the director, they may have hired

more students to work the call center to maximize donations rather than placing additional

pressure on current employees (Brafman 2006.) The existing structure of the organization didn’t

need to be changed, as it functioned properly before by meeting its fundraising goals. The pre-

existing structure gave student supervisors the flexibility to use motivating practices that were

essential to keeping morale and cohesion high. The assistant director didn’t understand that

strong morale and motivation were essential to performing well on donation calls; thus

maximizing profits. The assistant director also has no responsibilities not directly covered by the

student supervisors; duplicating efforts and overmanaging the students. The university passed on
 Fey 4

tough economic conditions to the Annual Giving Department in the form of increased need for

donations. Evaluating and changing organizational structure in response to crisis situations

provides temporary relief, but these solutions may be short-sighted and induced by panic (Paquet

2007.) Restructuring of organizations should be done under ideal conditions of stability to reach

the most logically consistent outcomes. Planning and foresight about future goals can help break

the pattern of decision making based on a punctuated equilibrium model.

Issue 3 - Group Communication

Playing games in a professional setting might sound childish, but the games previously

utilized by the director were an important feedback mechanism to the students and supervisors.

The games supported the free flow of information, such as what students can do to increase their

performance on phone calls, as well as ranking their performance versus their colleagues as a

metric for job mastery. This communication was important to students who constantly seek

directives for improvement and growth. It is also important to note that without this

communication designed to improve motivation and self efficacy, students’ perceptions of task

accomplishment and self worth will decrease (Khong 2017, Nica 2013) The difference in value

communication is also present between the director and the assistant director. When the director

interacted with the students and supervisors, she was motivating, well liked, viewed as an

authority, and made her employees feel valued. The assistant director dehumanizes students in

his interactions with them; as he continues to emphasize profit and how the motivation to receive

a good paycheck should be sufficient to ensure job performance. Reliance on this strategy of fear

and punishment may be effective in group contexts to achieve a task, but it was inappropriately

contrasted with the previous values being communicated to employees (Sampson 1963.)

Decisions should be reached by mutual consensus rather than changes being mandated to ensure
 Fey 5

maximum participation (Siddiqui 2017.) The student supervisors were never consulted about

their feelings of returning to phone duty, and did not accept the decision as procedurally valid.

Information and the opportunity to influence decisions are held in high value by employees, and

can affect work related outcomes (Bergman 2016.) Choosing not to include employees in

decisions is a nonverbal communication that deemphasizes the authority and insight of everyone

who had not been involved.

Recommendations

The resources being put towards an assistant director should never have been allocated.

Profits would have been maximized in a healthy way with more students making donation calls

and maybe an additional student supervisor. The assistant director should have been hired for a

position underneath the director whose responsibility it was to imagine new revenue or

fundraising streams, something he would have likely excelled at based on his personality and

values. The call center should not continue funding the position for assistant director, potentially

eliminating this employee if the “higher fundraising issues” position wasn’t shifted to him

underneath the director. The authority of the existing executive director should have been

expanded to oversight of this new position rather than making that her new responsibility, as she

excelled at leadership and morale among the supervisors. Unless it serves a legitimate business

interest, don’t change the structure of break time or asinine policies about food to avoid the

isolation and frustration of employees with no benefit. Do not communicate values of efficiency

and time maximization in an environment where these values are not the primary concern. The

university needed to try and exhibit some foresight to predict future financial conditions rather

than overburden existing departments. Front line managers need be included in decision making

when their input is relevant, and even sometimes when their input is irrelevant to provide the
 Fey 6

perception of institutional influence and employee contributions. Leadership in management

should go beyond just problem solving by compromise and should involve integrating the ideas

of all employees to more fully reflect the total environment in which the organization exists

(Parker 1984.) Student supervisors need to be more vocal in expressing their ideas to their

supervisor to create a more encouraging environment. It is possible that the assistant director

could have been more open to different leadership styles with enough training or prompting from

his supervisor. Without the information from oversight or communication that he was

contributing to a serious detriment in morale, he likely never would have sought any change to

his behavior.

Conclusion

If the conditions of the call center aren’t remediated, we expect to see low organizational

commitment, low morale, and high turnover; yet these can be conditions easily corrected. The

executive director who worked so well with students and supervisors should not have been

placed in a different position. The director represents ideals present in the New Public Service,

whereas the assistant director represents those ideals from New Public Management. The new

position created should have addressed higher fundraising issues rather than managing the call

center. Adding a new authority into the mix of employees confused the student supervisors and

brought the group backwards in terms of having well defined perceptions of their roles within the

organization. If the board of directors decides that the assistant director is actually required to

manage the call center, he should either adapt his leadership style or be replaced with a candidate

who maximizes donations through encouragement rather than fear. The assistant director should

have used leadership and communication to build trust among his team based on the environment

needed for a call center to succeed. Situations and case studies such as these are critical to
 Fey 7

understanding how to design organizational structure to best direct employees towards reaching

the goals of the organization. This case also represents the tendency of new positions of authority

in organizations to try and drastically change organizational structure rather than patiently

assessing the needs, constraints, and context required to accomplish tasks.

 Fey 8

References

Bergman, C., Dellve, L., & Skagert, K. (2016). Exploring communication processes in
workplace meetings: A mixed methods study in a Swedish healthcare organization. Work,
54(3), 533-541.

Barid Nizarudin, W. (2017). The differences between management and leadership. Sinergi:
Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Manajemen, Vol 7, Iss 1 (2017), (1),

Brafman, O., & Beckstrom, R. A. (2006). The starfish and the spider: The unstoppable power of
leaderless organizations. London: Portfolio.

Cropf, R. A. (2015). The Public Administration Casebook. Routledge.

Khong, J. N., Liem, G. D., & Klassen, R. M. (2017). Task performance in small group settings:
the role of group members' self-efficacy and collective efficacy and group's
characteristics. Educational Psychology, 37(9), 1082-1105.

Mos, A., & Padurean, A. (2012). Leadership in public administration in romania in comparison
with leadership in public administration of other countries. Cross-Cultural Management
Journal, 14(2), 36-41.

Nica, E. (2013). Organizational culture in the public sector. Economics, Management &
Financial Markets, 8(2), 179-184.

Paquet, G., 2007. Organization design as governance’s achilles heel. www.governancia.com, 1

(3), 1-11.

Parker, L. D. (1984). Control in Organizational Life: The contribution of Mary Parker Follett.
Academy Of Management Review, 9(4), 736-745.

Sampson, E. E. (1963). Individual and group performance under reward and fine. Journal
Of Social Psychology, 61(1), 111-125.

Seidle, B., Fernandez, S., & Perry, J. L. (2016). Do leadership training and development make a
difference in the public sector? A panel study. Public Administration Review, 76(4), 603-
613.

Siddiqui, A., Panhwar, U., & Shah, A. A. (2017). A case study on leadership in a school
organization. International Research Journal Of Art & Humanities, 45(45), 119-123.

Srdjan, N., Radmila, M., & Dejana, P. (2014). Visionary thinker: leadership and management in
works of Mary P. Follett – long-term perspective in the companies of the republic of
Serbia. International Journal For Quality Research, Vol 8, Iss 2, Pp 239-254 (2014), (2),
239.
Fey 9