OGL 481 Pro-Seminar I:

PCA-Structural Frame Worksheet

Worksheet Objectives:
1. Describe the structural frame
2. Apply the structural 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.

During the last ship integration process, my team and I encountered several issues. Due to
limited space onboard the ship and the robust support request from the squadron, the allocation
of materials proved to be difficult. Additionally, our efforts to train and educate the ship's
personnel did not yield the desired outcomes, leading to rework and complicating the
coordination and execution of logistics activities. Despite encountering consistent obstacles
throughout our interactions with this ship, we maintained commitment to finding solutions and
addressing the challenges at hand.

2) Describe how the structure of the organization influenced the situation.

The difference in structure between the United States Marine Corps and Navy had a notable
impact on the situation described above. Both organizations possess well-defined hierarchical
structures and clear chains of command. However, the United States Marine Corps distinguishes
itself by promoting decentralized decision-making and empowering junior leaders to take charge.
This structural distinction plays a crucial role in shaping how each branch makes decisions,
coordinates activities, and conducts military operations.

The hierarchical structure of both organizations influenced the flow of communication and the
decision-making processes during the integration efforts between my office and the ship. Each
branch has its own command structure, wherein specific roles and responsibilities are assigned to
individuals based on their ranks and positions. This structure influences how information is
disseminated among various units and how decisions are ultimately reached. In the described
scenario, my office had the expectation that decisions would primarily be made at the lowest
level possible, yet they frequently ended up being elevated through the chain of command,
leading to a slowdown in the decision-making process.

1
The contrasting structures of the United States Marine Corps and Navy had a significant
influence on the situation we faced. The emphasis on decentralized decision-making in the
Marine Corps fosters greater autonomy for junior leaders, while the hierarchical structure of both
branches affects communication channels, decision-making processes, and resource allocation.

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

I would focus on an alternative course of action that centers around improving communication
and empowering junior leaders. A key aspect of this approach would involve implementing a
communication strategy that promotes openness and transparency among all levels of command.
This could be achieved through the establishment of regular meetings, briefings, and forums
where information can be freely shared and discussed. By fostering a culture that values
communication, the decision-making process can be streamlined, reducing the need for constant
upward delegation.

In addition, I would place a strong emphasis on empowering junior leaders within the chain of
command. This would entail providing them with the necessary training and guidance to make
decisions within their designated areas of responsibility. By equipping these individuals with the
skills and knowledge needed to make informed decisions, the overall decision-making process
can be expedited, and unnecessary delays resulting from constant referral up the chain of
command can be minimized.

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

Understanding the hierarchical structure of the Navy provides valuable insights into the decision-
making processes and dynamics that unfolded during the integration phase. By recognizing the
layers of authority and the chain of command, I can gain a better understanding of why certain
decisions were made or why there may have been a lack of decision-making in certain instances.
This understanding allows me to navigate the organization more effectively and identify the key
decision-makers or offices that need to be engaged to drive progress.

In hindsight, one area where I would take a different approach is in fostering relationships with
the appropriate individuals or offices within the Navy. By understanding where decisions were
being made within the hierarchy, I could have proactively established connections and nurtured
relationships with the relevant decision-makers. This would have allowed our office to have a
direct line of communication with the individuals or offices responsible for making decisions
related to resource allocation, space utilization, and other critical aspects of the integration
process. By taking this proactive approach, we could have improved the efficiency and
effectiveness of our interactions with the ship, ensuring that our concerns and requirements were
effectively communicated to the appropriate channels. This would have minimized any delays or

2
miscommunications that may have occurred due to a lack of clarity regarding decision-making
authority.