Reference no: EM132239544

Fatima was asked to consult with a hospital that was attempting to enhance organizational effectiveness. She was able to meet briefly with the CEO before she started a series of meetings with front-line managers. The managers were quite informative about the issues they observed in their departments and provided Fatima with what she thought was an honest assessment of the issues. After two weeks of meetings, she met again with the CEO to review the data and recommend a course of action. The CEO seemed genuinely interested in what she had to say, but disagreed with many of her conclusions and plan of action. He determined the problem to be poor team dynamics, whereas Fatima had suggested that the team issues were a “symptom” of problem processes resulting in role ambiguity/uncertainty, and apathy/lack of interest. The CEO decided that the easier course of action was to work on the team dynamics and directed Fatima to pursue that course of action. Against Fatima’s better judgment, she started a team-building initiative involving many months and over 500 employees. As a result of the initiative, there seemed to be some better camaraderie (mutual trust and friendship), yet the role uncertainty and other problems persisted. Six months after the completion of the team-building project, the CEO commented at the senior management monthly meeting that it was a waste of time with no significant outcomes and decided to never hire an OD consultant again.

Discussion Questions:

1. What went wrong?

2. What should have been done differently?

3. How effective was Fatima in her role?