OGL 481 Pro-Seminar I:

PCA-Human Resource Frame Worksheet

Worksheet Objectives:
1. Describe the human resource frame
2. Apply the human resource 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 I have used was a big project in our organization that was taken on with
limited direction and insight from leadership on how it should be managed and led. For
this project, we were not only moving from one version of our current system to another,
but were also cleaning up multiple aspects of the system that were old or outdated. This
project was initially started by our Director of Recruitment because the new system
would have a functionality that allowed for applicant tracking whereas our current system
didn’t have this in place. This was a situation from the start because one of our c-suite
leaders who had initialized the start of this project for him, did not properly review what
was needed in order to successfully implement and go live in the new system. As the
Operations Manager at the time, I was helping with various projects from each
department to ensure that they worked not just for that department, but for the other
departments as well. Because of the lack of oversight and initial planning, the project was
originally spearheaded by only our Director of Recruitment and it wasn’t until later that I
was brought into the project. It was because of this that initial elements in the project
were missed and training and testing in the system were not originally done until later in
the project. Additionally, because of this lack of oversight there were multiple risks that
were later identified and caused the project to push back on our go live date.

2) Describe how the human resources of the organization influenced the situation.

I felt that the human resources of the organization influenced the situation in two major
ways. The first way was in the lack of culture from our c-suite leader. For the lack of
culture, I felt that it was an error in the way the c-suite leader actually led the departments
which they oversaw. As we read this week, “strong companies know the kinds of people
they want and hite those who fit the mold” (Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E., 202, p. 144).
We had a strong group of individuals ready to assist on the project and were even in the
initial demo phase of the project to see what it offered and how it would better our
1
 processes. Instead of then bringing this team together and having the right people in the
right place to work together through the project, they allowed only the one Director to
oversee and work with the outside vendors on the project. This led to issues once we
realized what the project would entail and the departments which it would affect because
it was more than just simply adding something new into the system but a total system
revamp.

The second way human resources influence the situation was through the dynamics of the
team that was then working on the project. The Director who was initially tasked to lead
the project was one of those personalities that wanted it their way or no way at all. This
initially caused issues because when I then came onto the project it felt as though I had to
tip toe on what needed to be done versus what they wanted to see done. Rather than being
able to express our conflicts, I was agreeing with their way of doing things and realizing
later that it wouldn’t work for the other departments or would cause issues in the way the
process flowed. It wasn’t until I was comfortable with the understanding of what the
project would accomplish that I was finally able to speak up as to the issues that needed
to be addressed and worked with the director, our team, and the contractors to find a way
that would be beneficial for all departments.

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

In our situation, I felt that one of the key ways I would have used human resources for
alternative courses of action were to use the team members we had and their skills to
better breakdown the project from the start. We had multiple people involved in our
project and two of the people from our IT department were not utilized to the fullest and
had minimal involvement because of the outside vendors we were using. If we had
initially been able to scope out the project in a more meaningful way, I would have
brought our IT team in from the beginning so that they were the ones to call the shots
about what needed to happen. I felt that they were underutilized and with that had less
buy in to how the project progressed.

I also feel that if I was on the project from the start this would have helped from the
human resources aspect. Because I came on late to the project and only because I told my
boss that I felt I was needed to help ensure the back office and their needs were
accounted for in this adjustment and implementation I felt that my voice wasn’t heard as
much. I wasn’t willing to originally speak up for myself and when I did come into the
project instead of being in a project manager position it felt that I was more of a spectator
giving my input when needed. I would have changed this by initiating conversations not
only between our project team but other department leaders to get their input and allow
everyone to agree on what the end goal was.

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

I felt that there were many things I would have done differently now that I have learned
about the human resources frame. First as I mentioned above, I would have involved
myself and our team from the very beginning. I feel that by getting this feedback and buy
in upfront it would have allowed each person to feel valued and gain an understanding of
what this project would accomplish rather than confusion from multiple departments on
what was happening and how it would affect them. As I read in Cahpter 6 about Theory
X, I felt that we did treat others as if “they’re lazy and need to be directed” (Bolman, L.
G., & Deal, T. E., 202, p. 128). I would rather have built up the teams and used little
outside assistance so we would know our system and what we wanted from it throughout
the whole process. I feel that by doing this it would have allowed for more meaningful
work and better job satisfaction from our team because they would have been involved
the entire time rather than after initial decisions were made.

One of the things that I wouldn’t do differently was getting involved in the project. I am
happy with myself that I saw and overhead the goings on with the project enough that I
was able to identify a need for involvement. I felt that this was helpful not only for me to
grow as a leader but also to help get those involved that didn’t even know what was
happening. While this may seem like I was stepping on toes for the Director of
Recruitment and them leading the project, once I was involved and made them aware of
the other applications we had in the system that would be impacted they too realized how
much bigger this project was than they originally thought. I also felt that by involving our
IT team more, this not only helped to sharpen their skills with what they already knew
about the system and changes that need to be made, but helped bring about new skills for
them in areas they weren’t familiar with.

3
 Reference

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