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.

a. As a Contracting Officer in the 49th Contracting Squadron, a situation occurred

revolving around the implementation of an online contract file storing system
known as KTFS at Holloman Air Force Base. This “overhaul” raised many
concerns within the organization as it proves to be extremely time consuming and
poses issues with an initial learning barrier that must be overcome. An inspection
of the organization and its implementation of the new file storage system was
accomplished and the organization was reprimanded for failing to implement the
system. A breakdown in communication at all levels in the organization led to
failed inspection.

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

a. The human resources of the organization played a significant role in the mishap
that occurred at Holloman Air Force Base. From the human resource perspective,
the organization is made up of diverse employees ranging from 18 to 62 years of
age, with different backgrounds, education, and management styles. Being an
organization that is a mix of active duty military and civil service employees,
there are different and often times confusing supervisory chains, however in this
instance the commander (an active duty officer) told the flight chief (a GS-13
civilian) that he would check with Contracting Command to inquire about an
extension. When he failed to do so, he then expressed his frustration with the
civilian employee at the next meeting when we were given a failing grade for the
inspection.
b. The difference in backgrounds aided in the mishap as the officer was accustomed
to active duty enlisted employees bending over backwards to ensure something
got done if the commander brought it up as a task needing accomplished,
regardless of clear direction or not. Additionally, the flight chief is known to have
1
 a laissez faire management style and it’s often joked about in the office between
the employees not directly on the executive/leadership team. That said, while this
was known by many of the employees in the office under leadership of that Flight
Chief, it was not known to the Commander at the time. When the suspense for the
implementation had come and gone without any intervention from, or cooperation
between the Commander and Flight Chief, lack of initiative and laissez faire
attitudes inherited the brunt of the blame. However, the Flight Chief may have
seemed laissez faire, but in retrospect he lacked motivation due to overworking
and constant pressure to accomplish high priority taskers while simultaneaously
wrapped up in non-stop conflicts with the Commander. He had psychologically
withdrawn due to his upcoming retirement and utilized this moment to express his
disdain for the Commander and his lack of appreciation for other members of the
leadership team.

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

a. When I look at the human resource side of this case study and think of an
alternative action, I can’t really ensure a positive alternative course in the
moment. This would require going back to when the Commander and Flight Chief
first began working together. They didn’t understand eachother and never took the
time to. They constantly argued and required some form of conflict resolution on
nearly a weekly basis. I think something that could have set their relationship on a
different course and perhaps avoided this situation altogether is if they both got to
understand eachother on a more personal level.
b. The Commander and Flight Chief needed to take the time at the beginning of their
tumultuous relationship to understand one another. They needed to understand
what motivates each other and what doesn’t. Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory
would have been great place to start in learning the hygiene factors and
motivators of one another. This could have allowed them to glean some form of
understanding instead of forming their mutual disdain of one another.
Additionally, they could have shared their Myers Briggs results with one another
to further understand respective management styles, thus allowing them to play to
each others strengths and weaknesses. With those two on the same page, an
alternative course would have completely avoided the failed inspection as the two
would have understood how the other operates and would act accordingly to
ensure things were accomplished on time and with efficiency.

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

2
 a. Upon reflection, I think the biggest takeaway for the human resource frame in
regard to this situation is the time investment required in your employees. The
Commander didn’t take the time to know his Flight Chief and vice versa, therefor,
they couldn’t work in a symbiotic manner. I would look at the Commander and
Flight Chief as a group for this scenario and I would look at avenues to deal with
group conflict. In this instance I would promote the development of skills
between the two, such as active listening, communicating, and conflict
management. Additionally, I would have them find some common ground from
which they can lay the foundation for a fruitful working relationship.
b. If we look at the Commander’s role in this as the leader of the organization, I
would also ensure a sense of direction and commitment prior to adjourning the
initial meeting from which the issue stemmed. I would ensure the Flight Chief had
a clear direction for some aspect of the task to be accomplished while the
Commander sought an extension from higher level leadership. I would ensure
there were no personal issues with the two parties, as interpersonal dynamics play
a vital role in an organizations effectiveness. Lastly, I would make sure that both
parties needs are being met by way of Maslow’s Hierachy of Needs. I would find
where their needs aren’t being met (in this case self-esteem) and strive to fulfill
that need so a meaningful and productive relationship can move forward,
ultimately avoiding the initial scenario.

3
 Reference

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