Case Study 2

Ramon Avancena Final Examination MBA 670 Spring 2013 Consultants’ Report to Program Team The culture of the three groups differs in various ways and each group’s current characteristics are represented by the table below.

Table 1: Culture of Three Groups Characteristics| School District| NCPIE| Woodson| Innovation & Risk Taking| Low| Medium| High| Attention to detail| Low| Medium| High| Outcome orientation| High| High| High| People orientation| Low| High| High| Team orientation| Low| Medium| High| Aggressiveness| Medium| Low| High|

Stability| Medium| High| Low| In terms to innovation and risk taking I would rate the school district as low because of its bureaucracy and lack of change. The school district prioritizes its policies and procedures, employees unionized labor, and is subject to their district budgets. This makes it difficult for them to implement any sort of innovation or risk taking, but it must align with these factors and thus makes their structure rigid and stifles change. I rated the NCPIE medium in this category, because it is not subject to the bureaucracy of the school district.

The NCPIE mission increase parental control which is a somewhat broad objective.

It also embraces diversity with regards gender, race, ethnicity, and disability status, which makes their values more broad and open to risk taking. I gave Woodson the highest rating for innovation and risk taking because they emphasize efficiency and experimentation. They provide excellent services while minimizing cost through creativity and experimentation. With respect to attention to detail, I rated the school district low.

While the teachers and administrators are competent and understand the challenges and issues within the school district, the students still under perform, resources are not maximized, and the high turnover rate for teachers dilutes talent pool within the school district.

I rate NCPIE medium in this category. They are not as restricted as the school district, they are diverse and are dedicated to have more parents in the educational process, however, there is still a large need for parental involvement and they could be more proactive in this function.

In contrast, I rated the Woodson Foundation high because of reputation of acquiring funding, creating ideas to maximize their goals, and using hard data to measure their initiatives. In regards to outcome orientation, I rated all three organizations high. The school district is focused on the result and outcomes, because it is taking the initiated to seek outside counsel from the Woodson Foundation.

They also understand that there is a problem with the current problems they face and are looking to make a substantial difference. The same is true for the NCPIE.

It is looking to find a way to engage the parents in to being more involved in the educational process. And the Woodson Foundation is definitely outcome oriented because they record date to observe the performance of their initiatives. With people orientation, I gave the school district a low rating because of its bureaucratic nature. It obvious that they are having problems within the school district and their ability to adapt and change is limited.

Also teachers like Ari Kaufman do not get along with the faculty and believe that outside involvement is necessary.

Which is probably one of the main reasons teacher turnover rate is very high and they leave for other school districts. I gave the NCPIE a high rating for this category because they generally match up the demographic diversity of the schools with their makeup and their members are very diverse ensuring that everyone can weigh in on the issues. I also gave the Woodson Foundation a high rating because they are most coordinated of all of the organizations. They take into account data on the outcomes of their initiatives and empower their members of creative and cost effective ways for project development.

For team orientation I gave the school district a low score because teachers seem to work individually and the administrative structure has little room for deviation. Examples of this is Ari Kaufman not getting along with the other faculty and their the members of the school district like Duane Hardy, who believe that they should have the most power in the new program. I gave the NCPIE a medium because of their mission to increase parental control in the education system.

They ultimately need to coordinate between the school district and parents to accomplish this goal, which in turn leads to more team oriented functions and working towards a common goal.

Finally, I gave the Woodson Foundation a high score, because their organization is built charitable consultations and services to places like school districts. This automatically makes them the most accustomed to working a group environment because they utilize their resources to help other organizations in a team or cooperative format.

In terms of aggressiveness I gave the Woodson Foundation the highest score, followed by a medium grade for the school district, and a low appraisal for NCPIE. The Woodson Foundation has a reputation for their work and is further given legitimacy in its competitiveness with their awards and achievements. They don’t mind interjecting and forming their own ideas for other organizations as a consultant or partner.

The school district is somewhat aggressive in its tactics.

It wants to perform better and is even will to seek outside help to achieve its goal. They also want to maintain a strong form of control and be aggressive with their agenda. Finally, I found NCPIE the least aggressive because while its goal is to have more parental involvement, they have yet to achieve that and only harp on the fact that the parents do not follow through. Lastly, the final category assessed is stability.

I gave the school district a medium score, the NCPIE a high score, and the Woodson Foundation a low score.

The school district does maintain the status quo, but they are seeking improvement in many areas including student performance. They want to promote change, but have yet to do so. The NCPIE on the other hand is maintaining their same rudimentary function. Not much growth has occurred in terms of reaching out to parents and they are less open to seeking help from the outside because they believe that their diverse outlooks gives them the best perspective of the issues at hand.

In contrast, I gave the Woodson Foundation a low score, because they are open to change, are looking for creative areas for opportunity and growth. The transformational message that I have developed is “Let’s educate everyone today for our children tomorrow. ” I believe that message such as this reflects a broad message for all. Education is wide ranging, the school district educates the students to unlock their future potential, however their ineffectiveness has caused them to seek outside counsel.

Administrators like Victoria Adams also need to be educated on how to function more efficiently, work with our stakeholders like the parents and other faculty members to promote lasting change.

The main reason she reached out to Woodson Foundation is because the limited resources at her disposal are insufficient without creative means to bring fresh ideas and cooperation from other stakeholders to improve student performance This also addresses Meredith Watson’s goal of having more parental involvement and improving the structure of the school system.

An approach where all of the stakeholders from the parents to the school district are educated on the needs of the students as well as the needs of the school district allows for fresh and creative ways to make improvements. In Meredith’s example if the school district administrators understood where the areas of redundancy are in the school system, then the wasted resources in duplicated jobs could be reallocated to areas of need like the funding for the after school activities.

Also, more parents educated in the challenges their children face will make them more motivated to be involve and promote changes from home. In Mason Dupree’s case, being more educated in the problems of the school district would make him more open to spending money in areas of need. The final part of the message “for our children’s tomorrow” represents all the team members’ common goal of increased student learning. If each understands they are working towards one vision, then this will promote cooperation and motivation to achieve the lasting change and positive results.