Case Study: Brussels and Bradshaw

The way we have viewed organizations historically is that they are social structure or architectural forms that are characterized by tasks, specialization, hierarchy, power, and endurance. Current organizational theory, however, has focused on other attributes, such as culture and social learning. Increased organizational size has important implications for management it can limit the flexibility of individual work, affect how much authority can be delegated, and lead to an emphasis on results rather than how the work is actually performed. Key organizational behavior issues evident in the Locke/Brussels & Bradshaw case include the organizational design of the firm, employees' span of control, job requirements and the work environment. Kelly Richards is responsible for reviews, employee placement, and some of the tasks of a human resource employee, yet she does not have the training or stature of a formal human resource representative. She doesn’t have any authority to enforce behavioral change or punishment for poor treatment of subordinates. In addition, she is sloppy and haphazard in completing tasks that fall within her responsibility, for instance, introducing Locke to her mentor and following up on employee issues. Employees must know their responsibilities and take action. The environment of the firm is also a key issue. Hazing employees, misstating deadlines, abusing interns, are neither professional nor productive. High-involvement organizations require that associates be engaged and motivated to perform at high levels and that their individual capabilities be used in the most efficient manner.
By these actions lowers motivation, creates dissatisfaction and lowers job performance with the lower associates. These items do not appear to be a problem at the New York or Chicago offices based on Locke's experience. A trained professional must take charge and set company standards for the branch. Expectations must be outlined, reviewed, and met, or Behavior