ORGANIZATIONAL

CASE STUDIES

Dr. Ma. Coselyn “Sey”Santos, MMS

Resource Person
 What’s on the Menu?
• Decision Making and Problem-
Solving
• Command Staff Functions
• Case Studies of Common
Organizational Issues
 Definition of Terms
ETYMOLOGY OF DECISION
• Latin “decidere” which literally means “to cut off”
• Cognitive or mental process in solving problems
• The decision criteria are determined by the decision maker
• Results in the selection of a course of action among
alternative scenarios
• Every decision process produces a final choice – an action
or opinion
• Some decisions are simple while some are complex
• A decision may be revoked or altered in course of time and
circumstance
 Purposes of Decision Making
• To solve or prevent a problem
• To render an opinion (support or opposition,
agreement or disagreement)
• To ease confusion or conflict
• To protect interests and welfare
• To reward or punish
 7 STEPS IN THE DECISION PROCESS

What are What is the Which option

What is the basis for is assessed
the possible
problem? selecting? best?
solutions?

Was the When & how What is the

solution good do I act and final
& effective? communicate? solution?
Case Study: Love
in the Workplace
 LESSONS LEARNED

• Observe due process

• Follow protocol
• Opportunity to self-reflect
•Identify and define the real problem (rootcause
approach)
•Realize the importance of solving the problem
•Enumerate sub-problems, if any, and check how are
they related
•Main Challenge: Too much information
•Possible Pitfall: Not solving the real problem
•Example: Sometimes, we feel are not efficient or
systematic enough at work. In reality, we need to work
on our human relations get cooperation from the team.
PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION
•Brainstorm and enumerate the potential options or
alternatives
•No judgment must be made at this stage
•Research well on the pros and cons of all options
•Main Challenge: Biases of decision makers manifest early
•Possible Pitfall: The list of options may not be
exhaustive!
•Example: When brainstorming in a rush, we do not really
spend quality time in threshing out all options. We are only
guided by our own experiences and fail to research enough

REVIEW OF ALTERNATIVES
•Brainstorm and develop a set of sensible criteria in
selecting the best option
•Assign weights and descriptors to serve as metrics to
objectively assess each option
•Ensure clarity, objectivity and practicability
•Main Challenge: Getting a consensus on the final criteria
•Possible Pitfall: Whimsical & baseless decisions are
made
•Example: Getting non-experts to set the criteria may lead
to a flawed decision. What if you’re alone & not an expert?

DEVELOP DECISION CRITERIA

•Each option must be scrutinized well to warrant the
assessment
•Integrity, transparency and firm resolved in the
assessment is critical
•Conflict of interest and honest mistakes must be
addressed
•Main Challenge: Personal biases of decision makers!
•Possible Pitfall: Conflict of interest is not apparent!
•Example: Dividing the house can either be very personal
or political. It is tough to detached oneself from issues

FAIR & EXHAUSTIVE ASSESSMENT

•The right authority casts judgment or decision
•Decision or solution must be well justified complete with
rationale
•Implementing rules and guidelines on a decision must be
clear and readily available
•Main Challenge: Acceptability of the decision!
•Possible Pitfall: Decision is not supported by a large
group
•Example: Mob rule is a result of unpopular decisions and
no one listens to reason or logic

FINAL DECISION
•Act swiftly but with precision on the decision
•Communicate the decision through the correct channels
•Inject controls to plug potential loopholes
•Monitor closely implementation backed by records
•Main Challenge: Integrity and measurability of results!
•Possible Pitfall: Solution is a failure due to a variety of
reasons!
•Example: Modifications may still occur especially if the
group espouses the culture of flexibility and creativity.

DECISION IMPLEMENTATION
•Measure success or failure of the decision or solution
•Appreciate both quantitative and qualitative feedback
•Recommend or suggest future action to make things right
or better
•Main Challenge: Transparency in evaluation and
feedbacking
•Possible Pitfall: Solution created a new or worse
problem
•Example: Credit-grabbing happens in successful
decisions and blame game starts with failed decisions

EVALUATION AND FEEDBACK

 DECISION MAKING STYLES
STYLE LEADER DISCUSSES WHO DECIDES?
WITH THE TEAM

Authoritative No Leader

Representative No Team Members

Consultative Yes Leader

Collaborative Yes Leader & Team Members

QUESTIONS?
REACTIONS?
COMMENTS?
 Is workplace conflict good or bad?

• At first impulse, due to initial emotional impact,

conflict is perceived as a deterrent to productivity
and harmony in the workplace
• However, looking at a more objective and rational
perspective, conflict can have both good and bad
effects to an organization and its members
 Negative Effects of Workplace
Conflict
• Harbors negative thoughts and feelings towards co-workers
• Delays or impedes work, productivity and action
• Difficulty in getting consensus in highly polarized groups
• Subjectivity and biases surface along with office politics
• Triggers aggressive and rude behavior and language
• Workers tend to resort to facades and defense mechanisms
• May be used to manipulate weak and vulnerable members
 Positive Effects of Workplace Conflict

• Challenges the status quo in search for better solutions

• Promotes critical thinking and creativity
• Triggers interaction (positive or negative) at various levels
• Instills check and balance or transparency
• Elicits workers’ passion over issues, policies and beliefs
• Espouses diversity and inclusiveness
• Develops maturity of teams
 CASE STUDY: THE HARD UP MANAGER
AND THE RIGHTEOUS MANAGER

• Dorie Lonme is an Operations Manager at Yumul Trading

for just 1 year. She is currently renovating her huge house
to the tune of ₱4.6 million. She is short by ₱1.2 million and
the construction is nearing its completion.
• She learned that Cecile, a supervisor under her, has a
lucrative family business (a gasoline station) managed by
her father earning ₱8.5 million per month.
 CASE STUDY: THE HARD UP MANAGER
AND THE RIGHTEOUS MANAGER

• She decided to seek Cecile’s help and frankly requested for

a personal loan to cover her financial deficiency.
• Cecile’s family, however, politely turned down Dorie’s
request.
• A month later, Dorie released the performance appraisal of
all employees in her department. Cecile got one of the
lowest scores (2.37 out of 5.00).
 CASE STUDY: THE HARD UP MANAGER
AND THE RIGHTEOUS MANAGER

• Cecile sought the intervention of Jojo Bagsic, the HR

manager, as she felt there was injustice in her performance
appraisal
• Jojo encouraged Cecile to file a formal complaint so HR
can initiate an appropriate investigation on any possible
conduct unbecoming or abuse of authority by Dorie
• Dorie learned about this and she’s mad at Cecile and Jojo.
 QUESTIONS

• Does Dorie have the right to get mad at Cecile and Jojo?
• Did Cecile do the right thing?
• Was Jojo’s advice wise and helpful?
• Given the current situation, how do you see this problem
being resolved?
• In hindsight, how could this problem be avoided by the
three employees?
 CASE STUDY: TARDS AT WAR

• Cynthia and Paolo are good friends as he is the godfather of her

son. Cynthia is an avid supporter of President Duterte while,
Paolo admires very much President Aquino.
• During the March to May 2016 heated presidential campaign,
their rift was intensified. Even after the election of President
Duterte, their allegiances to these politicians did not waver. In
fact, they took to another and more fierce platform, social media.
 CASE STUDY: TARDS AT WAR

• Cynthia calls Paolo a yellowtard (also meant insensitive

and corrupt) while Paolo calls Cynthia a dutertard (also
meant fanatic and crazy). In the office, their animosity was
very obvious.
• Both of them posted slanderous remarks against each other
in Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. Both even created fake
news. Their children are now involved in the word war.
 Let’s identify the components

• Trigger What was the initial irritant?

• Escalation What exacerbated the disagreement?
• Positioning How polarized are the entities?
• Assessment How can the gaps be narrowed?
• Resolution How can opposing entities address the conflict?
• Feedback Is everything alright now?
 PERSONALITIES IN A CONFLICT

Influencers Influencers

Party A Arbiter Party B

Stakeholders Stakeholders
 Parties to a Conflict

• Opposing parties or entities (i.e. pro and against)

• Influencers (i.e. leaders, mentors, interested
stakeholders)
• Supporters (i.e. subordinates, teams, related
parties)
• Arbiter (i.e. judge, mediator, neutral entity)
Conflict as a Strategy and Weapon

• As a bargaining tool
• As a challenge to the leadership
• As an agent for change and reforms
• As a means for manipulation and oppression
• As means to seek revenge or get even
• As means to assert power and authority
 Rootcauses of Conflict

• Diversity (education, culture, beliefs system, personal

circumstances)
• Personality (tolerance level, passion, wisdom, life
experiences)
• Environmental Triggers (social media, government,
leader-mentor influencers, relationships)
QUESTIONS?
REACTIONS?
COMMENTS?
 CASE STUDY: STYMIED PROMOTION
• Helen is a staff at NTN Enterprise who reports directly to a
Greek boss, Alekos Petrides, the country manager in the
Philippines.
• The office is composed of 44 employees only with 7
managers.
• In the recent performance appraisal of all employees, only 8
got a merit increase, 2 got promoted to team leader (score of
4.50+, on a scale of 1 to 5).
• This is one thing she deeply aspired for the past 4 years she
has been with the company.
• Helen got a 4.47, among the highest but short of the merit
increase / promotion due to low scores in attendance &
cooperation (3 & 2). She believes she deserves higher
scores (5 & 4) as her attendance was perfect (no tardiness)
and she was instrumental in the success of 2 big committees.
• Her boss has a very strong personality and can be very
intimidating. She attempted to explain her side but was
overcome by fear and lack of confidence. Days passed and
she felt depressed and uneasy.
• If corrected, she would get both the merit increase and
promotion. What should she do to correct this mistake?
 What is Assertive Communication?

• Assertive communication is the ability to express

positive and negative ideas and feelings in an open,
honest and direct way. It recognizes our rights whilst
still respecting the rights of others. It allows us to take
responsibility for ourselves and our actions without
judging or blaming other people.
 Why is it important to practice Assertive
Communication at work?
• Bonding, rapport building, team effectiveness
• More productive brainstorming sessions and meetings
• Facilitates conflict resolution and problem solving
• Thrive in an honest and transparent work environment
• Develops secure leaders and empowered subordinates
• Improves decision making competencies
 Six Characteristics of Assertiveness
in Communication
• Eye contact: demonstrates interest, shows sincerity
• Body posture: body language improve the significance
• Gestures: appropriate gestures help to add emphasis
• Voice: well-modulated tone is more convincing
• Timing: maximize receptivity & impact
• Content: conviction in what you want to say
Components of Good Communication
• Always check audience engagement
• Listen actively (ask questions & acknowledge)
• Use jargon among colleagues only
• Practice brevity (direct and concise)
• Manage or control any brewing misunderstanding
• Be relatable (personalize for credibility and impact)
• Be genuine and transparent (sincerity)
QUESTIONS?
REACTIONS?
COMMENTS?
 Priority Development Assistance Fund
scam, also called the pork barrel scam,
CASE STUDY #3
is a political scandal involving the alleged
misuse by several members of the
PDAF: Reign Congress and Senate.
of Greed
The PDAF is a lump-sum discretionary
fund granted to each lawmakers for
spending on priority development
projects of the Philippine government.
 Exposed on July 12, 2013,
CASE STUDY #3 businesswoman Janet Lim Napoles as
the mastermind after Benhur Luy, her
PDAF: Reign cousin and former assistant, blew the
of Greed whistle.

It is estimated that the government was

defrauded of, at least, P10 billion.
 PDAF and DAF have been declared by
the Supreme Court as unconstitutional
CASE STUDY #3 and illegal.

Sen. Panfilo Lacson, however, alleges

PDAF: Reign
that the 2022 national budget is full of
of Greed
insertions.

Today, the 3 senators accused of

plunder have all been set free.
 Bong Revilla’s aide, co-accused of
CASE STUDY #3 plunder, died in jail recently.

Today, all legislators continue to enjoy

PDAF: Reign pork barrel in many other forms.
of Greed 
Hence, the seriousness of the
administration in fighting corruption is
now being doubted.
 CASE STUDY #3 Suggest ways on how corruption
in government can be
PDAF: Reign eradicated?
of Greed
How does this apply to your
organization?
QUESTIONS?
REACTIONS?
COMMENTS?
ELEMENTS OF EXECUTIVE LEADERSHIP

• Intelligence
• Influence
• Initiative
• Helicopter Factor
 CASE STUDY: ELISA AND MARCO
• Elisa is the audit manager of ATP & Co. She hired Marco as her
assistant manager to run the office while she does a lot of external
work. At first, she did not like much of Marco’s outputs, i.e. below
her standard. Meanwhile, Marco wasn’t very comfortable working
for a female boss. How should they resolve their differences?
• After one year, Elisa has been ill for 2 months and took a medical
leave in the US. Marco became the OIC during the said period.
Employees noted that Marco seemed to be a better and more
compassionate boss. When Elisa came back, rumors were ripe
that she would be reassigned somewhere else. As the company
was expanding, Marco got promoted to audit manager for another
territory. If you were Elisa and Marco, how would you feel about
these developments?
 CASE STUDY: ELISA AND MARCO
• Marco continued to shine in his own turf and was able to
produce excellent results, far better than other business units
in the company. Elisa, made some reforms which were also
lauded by top management. When the vacancy for Partner
became apparent, both Marco and Elisa were the most
notable contenders. In the end, Marco got the promotion.
What are your thoughts about it?
• Five years passed and so many things have transpired.
There are now a new set of Partners in the firm. Elisa
married the most Senior Partner, Arthur Padilla, and she was
given choice projects, an opportunity for her to shine. Within
a year, she was appointed Managing Partner of the firm?
 APPLICATIONS

• How does this case apply to your organization?

• Is promotion a major issue?

• How intense is professional jealousy?

• What lesson did you learn from the case?

 LESSONS LEARNED

• Be nice and professional with everyone; don’t

burn bridges
• Opportunities come in many shapes and forms
• Organizational climate, culture and politics
evolve
• We are responsible for our own destiny
 COMMAND STAFF FUNCTIONS

• Incident Command
• Establishes incident objectives, strategies and
priorities
• Assume overall responsibility for the incident
 COMMAND STAFF FUNCTIONS

• Operations
• Determines tactics and resources for achieving
objectives
• Directs the tactical response
 COMMAND STAFF FUNCTIONS

• Planning
• Collects and analyzes information
• Tracks resources
• Maintains documentation
 COMMAND STAFF FUNCTIONS

• Logistics
• Provides resources and needed services
 COMMAND STAFF FUNCTIONS

• Finance and Administration

• Accounts for expenditures, claims and
compensation
• Procures needed resources
 THE MAMASAPANO INCIDENT
• On January 25, 2015, 3 platoons of the elite SAF police squad
entered the guerrilla enclave of Tukanalipao, Mindanao with the
goal of detaining two high-ranking Jemaah-Islamiyah-affiliated,
improvised-explosive-device experts, Zulkifli Abdhir (also known
as Marwan) and Abdul Basit Usman.
• The SAF troops raided the hut where they believed Marwan was
located, and the man they believe to be Marwan engaged them in a
firefight and was killed.
• The SAF initially planned to take his body for identification.
However, the shooting alerted the BIFF and MILF 118th
Command in the area.
 THE MAMASAPANO INCIDENT
• The SAF had no time to retrieve the body so they just cut off a
finger, took a photo, and left his body there.
• By 6:18 AM, an SMS message was sent by the Commander of
SAF 61D Battalion to SAF Director Getulio Napeñas that they
were pinned down sending their coordinates.
• What followed was a bloody encounter that left 44 SAF, 18 MILF,
and 5 BIFF dead.
• On Wednesday, February 4, 2015, the FBI confirmed to the PNP
that the DNA sample from the finger matched that of Marwan's
brother detained in a U.S. facility.
 PERFORMANCE TASK
Due: May 15 @5pm to your LM
• How do we apply the concept of command staff
functions in this specific incident?
• What was the role played by Gen. Napeñas, Gen.
Purisima, the acting head of the PNP, the head of AFP,
the secretary of National Defense, and the President?
• In hindsight, what could you have suggested?
Give man fish and you feed him for a day. Teach
him how to fish and you feed him a lifetime.