OGL 481 Pro-Seminar I:

PCA-Human Resource Frame Worksheet

Worksheet Objectives:
1. Describe the human resource frame
2. Apply the human resource frame to your personal case situation

Complete the following making sure to support your ideas and cite from the textbook and other
course materials per APA guidelines. After the peer review, you have a chance to update this and
format for your Electronic Portfolio due in Module 6.

1) Briefly restate your situation from Module 1 and your role.

As discussed previously, the organizational situation I have chosen to analyze is one that

occurred when I was working with the educational division of the public health office at my

former university as a student volunteer. During a meeting, my response to a question about

ways to improve the program was interrupted and met with hostility from the student lead in

charge of the educational division, leading to the carrying out of a mediation session that

ultimately resulted in my decision to leave the organization.

2) Describe how the human resources of the organization influenced the situation.

Regarding how this organizational situation was influenced by the Human Resources of the

group, one major contributing factor seemed to be a poor fit between the needs of individuals

and the systems within the organization. As stated in the course text, one of the key assumptions

of the Human Resource Approach is, “When the fit between individual and system is poor, one

or both suffer,” (Bolman & Deal, 2017). In the case of my organizational situation, the systemic

approach to managing human resources was to tell those in the organization exactly what to do

and how to do it. However, due to their recruitment practices and the fact that they are a

1
volunteer organization operating within a major university, the individuals who join the

organization are likely to be driven, competent individuals, with an interest in the work done by

the organization. Because of this, many of those joining the organization have a desire to

participate actively, to contribute ideas, and to find ways to continually improve the programs

being implemented. This tendency paired with the rather rigid structure of the organization that

uses more directive approaches to leadership, leads to a mismatch between the system and the

individuals in it, creating an atmosphere that frustrates otherwise motivated individuals and

teaches them to stifle their ability to contribute, as occurred in the outlined organizational

situation.

Another way in which the influence of Human Resources on the featured organizational situation

can be seen is in relation to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, which asserts that for higher level

human needs to be met, the more basic, preceding needs must first be satiated (Bolman & Deal,

2017). Another aspect of the hierarchy of needs is that humans are generally inclined to continue

progressing their way up the hierarchy, trying to satiate higher- and higher-level needs as their

more basic needs are continually met. Given that the organization where the situation being

discussed occurred was voluntary in nature, there is an implication that those joining likely

already had their more basic level needs such as physiological and safety needs met and were

joining in attempt to work towards fulfilling higher level needs. Because those joining the

organization were unpaid volunteers, they did not have anything to gain in terms of physiological

and safety needs from their participation. Thus, for their participation to feel worthwhile, they

would need their involvement in the organization to meet other high-level needs, such as

belonging, esteem, or self-actualization (Bolman & Deal, 2017). However, at least in my case,

2
the generally hierarchal, directive style of the organization’s function did not allow my

involvement in the organization to help me get closer to fulfilling any of these higher-level

needs, thus leading to a lack of interest and motivation that led me to leave the group, as it was

not providing me much benefit.

3) Recommend how you would use the human resources for an alternative course of
action regarding your case.

In terms of how I would utilize aspects of the human resources frame for alternative courses of action, I

would first try to adjust the system’s approach to the volunteers working within it so that they form a

better fit. Instead of treating the university students who are going out of their way to join an organization

because it is something they have genuine interest in as being low-skill, low motivation individuals who

need to be directed, I would create a system that utilizes an approach based in coaching and supporting

styles of leadership. Given that participating in the organization is voluntary, the default assumption

should be that the individuals there are motivated, want to contribute, and have the potential to be great

assets to the organization if they are given the freedom to do so. While it is important for the curriculum

of the programs they put on to be standardized and to gain approval from various channels, this should

not stifle efforts to continually think about how current functions can be improved. If I were to oversee

the organization, I would make sure that there were forums of channels where volunteers could work

collaboratively and creatively to workshop potential new ideas or changes related to programming.

Additionally, I would aim to create an alternative course of action regarding my organizational situation

through putting a greater focus having the organization also meet the needs of the individuals in it, not

just having the individuals meeting the needs of the organization. As I mentioned briefly in my initial

overview of the organizational situation, in the weeks following my decision to leave the featured

organization, three other newly recruited members had also decided to resign from their roles. In a under

3
a month, the organization went from having twelve volunteers to only eight, losing one third of their work

force. This proportionately mass exodus could potentially have been avoided if the organization did more

to meet the esteem, belonging, and self-actualization needs of the members, as in that case they may have

felt more inclined to stay, as they would be benefiting from their involvement in the organization.

4) Reflect on what you would do or not do differently given what you have learned
about this frame.

Given what I have learned about the Human Resource frame, if I were to relive this organizational

situation, I think that I would have been less conflicted or upset about my decision to leave. At the time of

the conflict, I felt that while leaving the organization was my best course of action, I still felt like I was

losing something by ending my involvement. However, now that I have viewed the organization itself and

the situations that unfolded during my time there through a Human Resource perspective, I am starting to

wonder how much I could have lost from leaving the group, given how little I gained from my

involvement. As discussed previously, my involvement in the organization did not do anything to fulfill

lower-level needs such as physiological and safety needs, as those were already met prior to my

involvement, while also not doing anything to satiate my higher-level needs that were not yet fulfilled.

Given that neither my higher nor lower-level needs were being at least in part met by my involvement in

the organization, it is logical to say that I was not deriving much, if any, benefit from my involvement in

the organization.

My newfound understanding of just how little I had to gain from my involvement in the organization

makes me inclined to believe that I would not have been as emotionally impacted by the situation and

would have viewed the whole ordeal as being much lower stakes than I perceived it to be at the actual

time of the organizational situation. Additionally, understanding the events of this organizational situation

through the lens of Human Resources has further established the idea that the events that occurred were

not inherently personal. Rather than being the direct result of a personality clash between two individuals,

4
this situation is a more complex, multi-faceted issue, that may have been influenced by a myriad of

interacting factors

5
 Reference

Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2017). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership

(6th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.