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.

The situation for this case study is an event company that I worked for the previous 12
years which went out of business this year due to the lack of leadership, commitment, and
utilizing the company as his personal bank account by the CEO/Owner. The CEO/Owner
treated the company essentially as a hobby to maintain his portrayed lifestyle and allowed
a lot of his personal drama to impact his ability to lead. I was initially hired as the IT
Manager, but my role expanded as I learned more about the business. At the end I was
the IT Director as well as in charge of digital marketing, social media, production needs
at the event, data entry, and running the registration process at the events.

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

When the CEO/Owner restarted the company after a previous rendition which was run by
his brother-in-law, his intention was to structure the company differently. The previous
rendition was very much a vertical structure with one individual making all of the
decisions. My boss wanted a structure which was more horizontal where all of senior
management could include their ideas and thoughts based on their areas of expertise. This
did not occur as Bolman and Deal mention that restructuring seldom starts from scratch
and previous experiences are involved. (Bolman & Deal, 2021) The CEO/Owner also
was hesitant to relinquish control of any decision making which left him more distracted
with everyday operations versus dealing with other issues and the future.

In essence we had a vertical structure that my boss verbally stated he did not want. It
could be questioned if we truly had a vertical structure as the functioning of the structure
was exacerbated by the fact the CEO/Owner would randomly become detached and
unavailable for days, weeks, and even a year leaving senior managers with a lack of
direction. This lack of direction and clarity created an atmosphere where some managers,
particularly those who worked in the previous company, interpreted their roles to be more

1
 than initially given. The problem was that only he had the power to make certain
decisions in the vertical structure leaving the company adrift without a rudder at times.
The structure he professed to not want but embraced negatively influenced the success of
the company.

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

The first recommendation I would give the CEO/Owner was to eliminate all of the
artifacts from the previous company and start entirely from scratch with launching the
new company. He wanted to restructure but like most people he was hesitant to try new
ideas but instead held onto what he knew and was comfortable with even down to the
employee handbook. He was initially able to surround himself with good leadership
because he communicated a vision that excited everyone. He had years of knowledge and
experience in this particular event niche, but it was based on old philosophies and
standards of practice. His experience from the previous company was a very strict
vertical structure that produces a top person who controls everything, lacks trust of their
subordinates, and creates an atmosphere of intimidation. Instead, I would have advised
him to embrace a more horizontal structure which enabled senior managers to
communicate freely with each other and permitting them to do what they excel in. This
would free the CEO/Owner to spend their precious time on more strategic issues that
directly impacted the growth and profitability of the company.

Next, I would recommend embracing change. This includes not pushing some leaders
out in order to bring in ones that he worked with before. The familiarity and friendships
of working with leaders who were part of the problem in the past will only hinder growth
and change. I would also recommend embracing the change of core technologies,
innovation, and the customer needs and wants. Structure change is required when these
dynamics change. (Bolman & Deal, 2021) Just like companies such as Kodak which was
successful for decades, the CEO/Owner experienced success for 25 years prior in the
industry. But just like Kodak, which did not see the need to adapt and chose to suppress
new technology, the CEO/Owner also did not see the need to adapt and utilize new
technology and standards of practice.

Finally, I would recommend that the CEO/Owner revise the structure if he was going to
treat the company as a hobby to support his portrayed lifestyle. A vertical structure will
never work when the person at the top is unavailable to make key decisions. He would
need to create a hybrid structure where there was a leadership position created below him
that could make everyday decisions within the company. Pointing back to the previous
paragraph, this person should not be a friend which was attempted during the last two
months of the company.

2
 4) Reflect on what you would do or not do differently given what you have learned
about this frame.

Based on our material, there is not very much I would do differently within this company.
As a leader in a structure that was framed haphazardly, I was limited to what I could
accomplish. There were areas that I had a direct impact on and others that I had an
indirect impact. My belief is that the company would not have survived as long as it did
without a few senior managers informally restructuring into a horizontal structure. Our
motto was that we could accomplish anything and that the company survived despite the
CEO/Owner. When senior management did have meetings with the CEO/Owner, I had no
qualms with being the devil’s advocate concerning his ideas and suggesting new ideas of
my own which were supplemented with analytics and data. Being a “yes” person was not
something I was going to resort to. The most successful meetings were those which a few
senior managers would have to resolve issues and plan for the future.

Organizing groups and teams was something I focused on. As the IT Director I was well
aware that most organizations view their IT has a cost center and has a negative
perception within the organization. I take a different approach. My teams are given
purpose with the understanding, they are responsible for the success of the company,
have the flexibility to make decisions, and they are accountable for the success of the
department. With a restructured mindset, they did everything within their power to
produce projects that directly impacted other departments positively. They were not
allowed to use the word “no” for anything requested and had the freedom to do what was
necessary to accomplish the request. I had their back and they knew that if something
went wrong, I would take the blame. This gave them the freedom to be creative and it
created an environment that they enjoyed and excelled in. Other departments fed off of
the positivity of the IT department even when drama was occurring within the company
due to the CEO/Owner.

References:

Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2021). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership (7th
ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass