OGL 481 Pro-Seminar I:

PCA-Structural Frame Worksheet

Worksheet Objectives:
1. Describe the structural frame
2. Apply the structural 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.

During the height of COVID-19 in 2020, my current company, Alpha ProTech

(APT), a manufacturer of disposable protective apparel including N-95 particulate
respirators, received several large orders for N-95’s from the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA), which is part of the U.S. Department of Homeland
Security (DHS). Within a week or so afterward, I received an email from my manager,
the senior vice president of sales, that our CEO had ordered all the government orders to
be fulfilled first, which pushed back our national distributor orders by several weeks, and
in some cases, months. Based on my manager’s tone, while diplomatic, he clearly did not
align with this strategy. Alpha ProTech is a publicly traded company, and while it is not a
formally published goal, it is reasonable to suggest that “shareholder profitability” was a
significant motivation in this decision, as the profit margins on these government orders
were higher than our traditional distributor orders.

As an Area Manager for Alpha ProTech, I am responsible for the growth and
development of my territory by establishing new customer and distributor relationships,
while effectively managing the existing relationships of our large distributors located
throughout the Western U.S. and Western Canada. Many of these distributors are aligned
with high-profile companies desperate for orders to keep their employees safe. Additional
delays in order fulfillment dates created tension between our company, our distributors,
and our end-user customers at times. This was concerning, as we are a company highly
dependent on our relationships with our distribution partners since we do not have a
direct sales business model; the U.S. government is an exception during the rarity of a
national pandemic.

1
 2) Describe how the structure of the organization influenced the situation.

For an organization to pursue its strategic goal, there needs to be some form of
structure in place. Structure acts as the “blueprint for expectations and exchanges among
internal players (executives, managers, employees) and external constituencies (such as
customers, competitors, regulators, and clients)” (Bolman & Deal, 2021, p. 53). Based on
Alpha ProTech’s organizational goals, its technology, and organizational norms, the
company operates with a top-down, “simple” hierarchical structure. (Bolman & Deal,
2021). Under normal circumstances, the company coordinates the individual and
collective efforts toward their organizational goals in two primary ways: (1) Vertically,
through a formal chain of command, and (2) Laterally, through various meetings
(Bolman & Deal, 2021). In essence, the senior leaders, starting with the CEO, Lloyd
Hoffman, coordinate and control “the work of subordinates through authority, rules and
policies, and planning and control systems” (Bolman & Deal, 2021, p. 58). In this
environment, the roles are clearly defined, and rigid processes, such as order fulfillment
strategies, are in place and respected.

However, the effects of the pandemic impacted the company’s operating

environment due to the unprecedented demand. In response, Lloyd decided to exercise
his legitimate power and assume control of our operating/order fulfillment strategy,
despite having skilled senior leaders who could navigate the environment themselves.
While this created tension between the leaders, it was a testament to how the CEO had
the formal authority to influence the situation due to his position in the chain of
command.

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

At the center of this case study is the use of power and control and how that
translated to the company working towards its organizational goals. The hierarchical
structure within an organization determines who can wield how much power and control
based on where each member fits within it. As we have learned, the division of labor, or
the allocation of tasks, is a principal component of structure (Bolman & Deal, 2021). At
Alpha ProTech, the tasks associated with running the business are allocated to personnel
with specific skills and competencies to carry them out effectively; this includes our
order fulfillment strategy. Under normal circumstances, the manufacturing of disposable
goods is a stable process. However, with the large influx of orders due to the pandemic,
what was formally stable was now more fluid due to strain on the supply chain and
scarcity of critical raw materials.

However, rather than Lloyd taking control of the company’s operational and order
fulfillment strategy, I would have liked to have seen him create a task force comprised of

2
 key individuals in the organization. Those individuals would include the vice president of
protective apparel sales, the vice president of manufacturing and operations, and the plant
manager for our Salt Lake City manufacturing facility where our N-95 respirators are
made. Employing this approach creates an opportunity where healthy vertical and lateral
communications occur, ideas are socialized, and feedback is considered before any
concrete directives are established. Most importantly, creating a task force creates an
opportunity to leverage the specific skills and talents of each key member of the group
instead of Lloyd making decisions solely on his own (Bolman & Deal, 2021).

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

As Bolman & Deal (2021) mentions, “The structural perspective advocates

pointing people in the right direction, defining jobs, and stipulating how they work
together. Properly designed, these provisions support and accommodate both collective
goals and individual differences” (p. 49). In this instance, there are two ways to view this
case: (1) The CEO exercised his legitimate power appropriately, based on his position
within the simple hierarchical structure (regardless of whether his motivations were
narrow-sighted at the time), or (2) The CEO overstepped his boundaries due to his desire
for control. I would suggest it was more of the latter. Regardless, since I am two layers
beneath the CEO within the current structure, if the situation were to play out again in the
same fashion, I do not possess the level of authority to overrule a directive handed down
from my leader, which was handed down from his leader.

That said, in simple structures, “one or two people control the operation and can
turn on a dime when needed” (Bolman & Deal, 2021, p. 75). For some companies, this
may serve as an advantage, but it may be a barrier to meaningful (and needed) change in
others. I would suggest that is the case here. As Bolman & Deal (2021) mentions, “A
boss too close to day-to-day operations is easily distracted by immediate problems,
neglecting long-range strategic issues” (p. 75). While the company’s balance sheet
showed a tremendous profit from these orders, it came at a price of strained relationships
and lost revenue due to canceled orders from the distributors the company depended on
before the pandemic and who they will need to depend on after it.

With that in mind, I would propose a restructuring from the “Simple” hierarchy to
a structure similar to the “Dual Authority” hierarchy presented in our text (Bolman &
Deal, 2021). While the CEO still technically represents the top of the chain of command,
there is a division president for the protective apparel side of the business unit and
another division president for the house wrap side of the business (which has not been

3
 discussed but operates autonomously from the apparel division and currently reports to
the CEO today). While this creates a management layer below the CEO and reduces his
span of control, this is by design. This will free up his time to focus on the company’s
longer-term strategic initiatives instead of the day-to-day operations. While
communication would flow freely up and down between these two positions, it would
require the CEO to yield much of his power and desire for control, even during a
pandemic. If I am evaluating this strategy under a “lens” of achieving company growth
objectives while delivering on shareholder value, I would suggest this as being a
significant step forward to better accomplish this.

4
 Reference:

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