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.

Grainger explores advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance operational

efficiency within its distribution centers (DCs), integrating automation for tasks like
picking and receiving. The DC Engineering Team collaborates with various departments
to deploy AI solutions, including efforts to introduce a robotic racking system aimed at
streamlining product picking and order fulfillment processes. This initiative aims to
replace hourly team members with automation, freeing them for more impactful roles, a
decision positively communicated by senior leadership to corporate team members,
leaving middle management to communicate to hourly team members.

In addition, my eight-year tenure with the company involved roles in DC operations and
corporate supply chain, focusing on supplier performance and close collaboration with
internal departments. The implementation of AI in our DCs indirectly impacts me
through the portfolio of SKUs managed by my suppliers. Drawing from my previous
experience in middle management at a DC, I can empathize with the communication
strategies employed by higher-level leadership. Such situations will continue to influence
me directly as I transition to the distribution center engineering team in future roles.

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

Grainger uses a divisionalized form type of structure for their organization, similar to
Amazon. “Amazon gets it done with a tight structure that relies on sophisticated
technology, precise measurement, close supervision, and zealous focus on customers…”
(Bolman & Deal, 2021, pg. 66). The main divisions would be legal, supply chain,
merchandising and supplier management, and tech. The distribution centers and my
current role fall under the supply chain division and they both run as a machine
bureaucracy. Each department is divided based on what goals they’re trying to achieve,
such as receiving, shipping, inventory, etc., and tasks within those departments have
Low
Sensitivi 1
ty
 SOPs. The decision-making is more centralized, typically within the VP level or higher.
There aren’t any VP roles within the DCs, but there is a VP overseeing teams of leaders
on the corporate side that manage groups of DCs at a time.

The situation was influenced by the machine bureaucracy type of structure because the
leaders who made the decision were those that were not communicating to the team
members directly affected by the change. They were looking at it from a cost and
productivity standpoint and involved the required departments to make the AI installation
happen. The team members or middle management within the DC were not a part of the
decision-making process. Because the organization is set up as a divisional structure, the
DCs leadership team being left out of these types of decisions tends to silo them. A
majority of the decisions for any type of structural change or technology improvement is
made on the corporate level rather than within DC leadership teams. This can lead to
adverse effects, loss of productivity, or higher turnover rates amongst the DC teams.

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

To use structure for an alternative course of action, I would consider restructuring to a

different structural model. I think in this case, there should be more inclusivity and
accessibility on the DC level. I also think the corporate leadership would benefit in
providing the team members and middle management access to direct communication
with them to increase diversity and creativity. It seems the current divisionalized form
has potential to create tension on the middle management and cause stress, fear, or
frustration team members performing the work. The size of the company would make it
challenging to restructure the entirety of the organization, so I believe restructuring the
DC network and the corporate DC Operations teams would be enough of a restructure to
be able to ease the tension amongst the situation and teams directly impacted.

To achieve more inclusivity, provide more access, and bridge the gap between corporate
leadership and the DCs, I would consider a matrix organization structure. This would
provide the DC teams an opportunity to communicate with other leaders and express their
concerns as well as provide insight from a stakeholder whom the installation of AI would
directly impact both positively and negatively. This would also provide the leadership
teams insight and ideas by working directly with the team performing tasks and help
create a healthy continuous improvement atmosphere. I have confidence the organization
is developed and large enough that there wouldn’t be as much of a risk of additional
problems added to the situation.

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

Low
Sensitivi 2
ty
In this situation, it would’ve been helpful to have a voice for the team members as well as
utilize effective communication. Middle management is typically the spring between
upper management and the team members. Within a matrix structure, the team members
and middle management leaders would report to multiple leaders from different
departments. This would allow for middle management to be included in any AI projects
and an opportunity to provide a voice for themselves and their team while also being able
to communicate updates throughout these types of projects. We could have direct contact
with the DC leaders to take back their insight to other departments involved in the
project. This could impact the amount of time it would take for communications to reach
the appropriate people.
Overall, I think the biggest thing that could’ve been done differently with this structure is
the level of communication and involvement of stakeholders impacted by the AI project.
This structure could help provide a more open and friendly environment for these
changes to happen. I think another thing that could’ve been done differently in the
organization’s current structure would be to use different communication methods to
reach the DC teams and leaders. Leaving the middle management team to process the
change and communicate the changes is a way for the upper leadership teams to avoid
conflict and build a bigger barrier between them and the team members.

Low
Sensitivi 3
ty
 References

- Bolman, L. G. & Deal, T. E. (2021) Reframing Organizations, 7th edition. Jossey-Bass.

- Macrotrends LLC. (2024). W.W Grainger Net Worth 2010-2023. Retrieved January 20,
2024, from https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/GWW/ww-grainger/net-worth
- Built in Chi. (2023). [Grainger company information and job listings]. Retrieved January
20, 2024 from https://www.builtinchicago.org/company/grainger

Low
Sensitivi 4
ty