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.

I was an inbound call customer service representative for Sprint. I was unable to
submit a return for a customer. My direct supervisor would not return the
unopened phone because the customer did not request to speak to her. I could
not request the supervisor to speak to the customer unless the request came
from the customer. If the customer had asked to speak to the supervisor, she
would have submitted a return for the customer. The customer needed to submit
the return because their daughter had passed, so they did not need the phone or
service line.

2) Describe how the human resources of the organization influenced

the situation.

The organization's human resources could not influence the situation. Had I
attempted to involve others, they would have sided with the supervisor because
these were the company's wishes. The organization I technically worked for was
called GC services, a call center. Sprint contracted with GC, and therefore, GC
agreed to follow policies set by the individual companies. Unfortunately, this left
room for employees of GC to prefer certain companies over others.

I worked under the Nike account before working under the Sprint account. Nike
had a "customer's always the right approach." Their goal was to serve the needs
of their customers, even if it meant we were to find the customer a Nike product
they were looking for on a non-Nike website. With Nike, we knew that we could
go to our supervisors with a customer issue, and they would be more than willing
to help us resolve it. We also knew that if the supervisor was not willing to assist,
we could reach up the hierarchy to someone who would be able to, and that
supervisor would be held accountable. With Sprint, I knew that I could not go to
anyone above my supervisor because they would have sided with Sprint's
guidelines.
3) Recommend how you would use the human resources for an
alternative course of action regarding your case.

Looking back, I would have saved the customer's name and number. I
would have reached out to human resources like other supervisors I had
previously worked with on other accounts. After I explained the situation, I am
sure they would have helped me develop a solution that could have followed the
company's policies and helped out a customer during an already tragic time in
their life. Being young and overly obedient was a damaging attribute to why I
wasn't as good of a customer advocate as I am now. I understand now that there
is typically a way to help a customer based on the situation, even with set
policies.

Sprint spent all the time and money contracting with GC because of its
exceptional customer service skills. Only to not take full advantage of what GC
did right. That was providing solutions to customers' needs to drive satisfaction
and loyalty. Sprint should have left the room in their policies for both employees
and supervisors to make case-based decisions. They didn't understand the value
of the people they hired. Like me, many employees who ended up working from
Sprint came from other accounts with GC services. We had freedom and
authority, more feedback, and more significant challenges on the other accounts.
It is fascinating how this directly correlates with customer satisfaction. The
company policy, administration, and supervision of Sprint are what Herzberg
called "hygiene factors." (Bolman, 149) Prioritizing "hygiene factors" doesn't allow
a company to serve the needs of its employees or customers.

4) Reflect on what you would do or not do differently given what you

have learned about this frame.

I am not surprised that Sprint "merged" with T-Mobile. They did not offer
the customer service satisfaction that T-Mobile does. When I left Sprint shortly
after this incident, I knew I could never work for a company that doesn't value its
customers again. I also learned that allowing an employee to make decisions
based on the specific incident is essential for a company. The employer should
trust that their training, leadership, and selection of employees with the skills and
values that align with theirs will be enough.

While working for Sprint, a majority of the customers were new. There was
minimal loyalty to Sprint because they did not value their customers. The
customers who had been with Sprint for a long time were purely due to their
grandfathered low prices. They even took advantage of their long-time
customers. Often they received unexpected surcharges. Many customers left
Sprint for another company when their contract was over. I would never have
joined Sprint as a phone company because I saw how they treated customers
firsthand. As I reflect on my short time working for Sprint, I am proud that I chose
to leave work for them because I recognized a company doomed to fail.

Reference

Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2008). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice,

and leadership (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.