Reference no: EM131695048
- What is the primary problem?
- What is the secondary problem?
- Who are the key actors?
- What is the context (constraints/opportunities)?
- What is your strategy? Why?
CASE STUDY ASSIGNEMNT (READ THEN ANSWR QUESTIONS 1-5).
Sarah's coworkers thought she was crazy when she decided to leave her job at the Software Company and start working for the City. She was one of the top group managers at the Software Company and was frequently recruited by headhunters who tried to lure her away to rival companies. Sarah was a valuable commodity to the IT industry and her boss was sorry to see her go. But Sarah knew the time was right to make a career change, and she had always felt the urge to work in the public sector. When the position of "Chief Information Officer" opened up with the City, she jumped at the chance. The City was shocked that someone with so many stock options and experience wanted to take the pay cut and manage the City's IT department. Naturally, Sarah was hired; she was the most experienced candidate for the job. In her interview, she wowed the search committee with her dedication to public service, commitment to introduce private-sector IT practices to the City, and most of all, her exuberance over something called "risk management." The City Manager wasn't sure what this meant, but he was anxious to place someone in the position who would remove any element of risk from the City's investment in technology.
As Sarah cleaned out her office at the Software Company, she confided to her colleague,
"This job is going to be a challenge, but I think once I get my bearings, it won't be different than working here. I know I can work with teams anywhere. It's just a matter of motivating them and helping them understand that a team effort makes IT successful. My first job at the City is to work on a new reporting program for the public safety department. I can't wait to implement some of the team strategies we've been using here for years."
Sarah's first month at the City was a whirlwind. She spent much of her time getting to know everyone on the Executive Team, as well as one-on-one meetings with the Mayor and Councilmembers. On the Executive Team, she quickly recognized that the City Manager, Finance Director and Public Affairs Director were especially troubled by the IT department because of some of the cost overruns in the past and how these overruns were perceived by the public. She made a mental note to communicate the department's successes directly to the Executive Team on a weekly basis so they would begin to understand the significance of the IT department. And she also saw that the Mayor and Council didn't understand how technology fit in to their lives as elected officials, and that their lack of experience using computers made the CIO role undefined in their eyes.
After familiarizing herself with the City bureaucracy, Sarah focused her energy on the technology department. The development team was getting the department's work done, but with significant cost overruns and a lingering sense of animosity and self-doubt amongst many of the team members. Everyone she talked to in the department was prone to petty squabbling and placing blame for past problems. Grouped according to specialization, each division tended to think that the other divisions in the department were the "enemy." Sarah noticed, however, that the tension seemed to be based in the work situation and department's organization, and not from a bad mix of personalities or traits. On the plus side, she also noted that the team members were well qualified with strong training and technical skills.
In her second month on the job, Sarah took the IT department on a weeklong retreat. The Finance Director raised his eyebrows at the cost, but Sarah knew he'd see the value when the team came in under budget on the public safety reporting software. At the retreat, she explained to the team her ideas for the department and the whole notion of building teams. Although some of the members were skeptical about how management would perceive her new "laid back" style, the majority of the department was incredibly responsive and the retreat was a success. Most of all, they liked to hear that their new boss wanted them to work as a team and that she would not criticize or penalize individuals when problems arose with development projects. The last CIO seemed to be working with the threat of the Administration looming over him, and the result was a team that was under a lot of stress to perform, and hence fractured and prone to blaming and hiding mistakes. Among the many suggestions that came from the retreat, Sarah realized the importance of focusing on 1) relaxing some of the more restrictive norms in favor of stimulating creative energies, and 2) promoting open dialogue among the various members of the department. Most of the department had read about how various software firms encouraged creativity and communication, and had heard about the success of Sarah's former company in employing these approaches.
It wasn't long after relaxing some of the procedures and opening the dialogue that Sarah noticed that the team started to act and behave much more cohesively. Each week, she sent an e-mail update on the project to the Executive Team, and she invited the Mayor and Council to visit the department to see first-hand the headway they were making. Wayne was the lead programmer. He liked working in the public sector,and ever since Sarah was hired, his job had gotten a lot easier:
"Before, I had to constantly advocate for my team of programmers. If I wasn't defending their work to the engineers, I was defending it to the CIO, or the Administration. But now, we're working with the whole IT department as a team. Sure, some of those engineers are pretty dry, but their perspectives make my guys work a heck of a lot more efficiently. Now, instead of waiting until we've completed an entire stage of the project to get the input of the engineering department, we just walk over to their desks and see what they think. Plus, it's made the mood of the office a lot better. When we get stuck on a problem, we take a break and play Nerf basketball on the hoop Sarah installed on her office door. There's nothing like a slam-dunk over the team from testing to help you refocus and get the bugs out of the program. At first I was uncomfortable talking about programming problems, but I've come to realize that it's the only way to find solutions."
One day, the Mayor and two Councilmembers stopped by the IT department on their way to lunch. As Wayne went up for a jump shot on the Nerf net, he almost collided with the Mayor. After apologizing, Wayne and the programmers told the Mayor that they were just "letting off some steam" before they tackled the reporting system software, and that they had almost successfully fixed a major problem they had with the "user interface." Since the Mayor and Councilmembers didn't know what this jargon meant, they left the IT department with the knowledge that there was a major problem in the software and the image of the basketball game fresh on their minds.
Given Officer George Smith's proclivity toward technology - he had three computers at home he was always tinkering with - he was the police department's liaison to the City IT department. In the past, he was constantly frustrated with the inability of the department to "get it right." They never seemed to listen to him, and on the last reporting software they developed, they waited until the last minute to get George's comments on the functionality of the program. Of course, it was unusable by anyone on the force and didn't capture half of the information the Chief needed. So it went back to the drawing board and was six months late in development. But now that Sarah was at the helm, things were different.
"I can talk to the IT team without worrying about offending anyone, because we're all in this together. In fact, it's gotten to the point where we're all so in sync with the project, the tech guys can almost anticipate what I'll say when I review the program. And no one gets their feelings hurt when I tell them that something just won't work. Before we opened the lines of communication, the software problems went unnoticed until it was too late. Now, I just tell the team when something is headed down the wrong path. Sarah encourages us to share potential problems because in the end, it's better to be proactive even if it means shooting down someone's work. But we can all take it; we're all adults. I told Wayne the other day that there wasn't a chance in the world that police officers would understand how to use the F-Control keys when they were inputting their daily reports. He's got his team working on this so the software is easier to use and more manageable for the officers. It's that kind of openness that we have now, and I like it."
The project was moving ahead at record speed, and although there were some setbacks now and then, the IT department was on target to finish the software project in the next month. Sarah hadn't heard much from the Executive Team, but she chalked it up to their uncertainty about technology and their comfort with her leadership. A week later, she overheard a heated conversation in the staff lunchroom. The IT team was debating about the appearance of the software on the screen. She heard the programmers voicing disagreement with how the engineers wished to proceed. And many of them were challenging the police representative about their user capacity. It was standard banter for the department, and Sarah knew there wasn't any anger in the process; it was just part of the open dialogue that was needed to flesh out the details of the software design. But as she walked toward the lunchroom to get a better handle on what they were discussing, she came face to face with the City Manager, Finance Director and Public Affairs Director. They had stopped by for a visit and could hear the raucous debate from the hallway.
Sarah was summoned the next day to a meeting with the Executive Team, Mayor and Council. She anxiously awaited the chance to tell them that the software was close to final design, and that the project was on time, to specification and would likely be under budget. When she arrived at the meeting, the faces around the table were stern.
"We're concerned about your progress on the public safety software," the City Manager began.
"We hear that the software has a number of problems and that the team has a tendency to procrastinate," continued the Finance Director.
The Public Affairs Director chimed in, "Plus, the whole City is talking about the disagreements among your staff and now I have reporters calling me asking me for statements on "the problems" associated with the new system!"
The Mayor said, "What's going on, Sarah? You have us very worried. We've seen the antics of the department, and heard the arguing that is going on. We can't have that type of image projected; we're working for the taxpayers here and it's not seemly to have one department goofing off and airing disagreements when they're supposed to be working - especially a department that eats up so much of our budget as yours."
The City Manager gave Sarah a firm directive, "I don't know what's going on, but we need your department to shape up - act more responsibly. There's too much financial and public risk involved; you need to keep the department on task. Keep a lid on the fighting, and for God's sake, Sarah - your department needs to act more professionally."
Sarah left the meeting with a sinking feeling. Had the skeptics at the retreat been right? Despite the progress her department had made, the Administration just didn't understand the type of culture she needed to establish to make her team productive. And if she now clamped down on her team, what would that do for delivering the project on-time and on-budget?
Kirsten Olson - University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill
Mary Maureen Brown - University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill