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.

I am an associate project manager for the billing team at Zelle. My team makes
maintenance and enhancement software upgrades to the organizations billing interface
which generates all of the back-end invoices for our products. My product owner, main
stakeholder and customer are the same person – I will refer to them as the “business”,
which they represent. They hold a Sr. level title. My job as a project manager is to
leverage relationships in my team, implement organization structures, remove blockers
and facilitate the planning, design, testing and execution of our deliverables to ensure
they remain in scope, on schedule and in budget. After recently stepping into the team
and analyzing the current environment I’ve assessed that our biggest root problem lies in
the teams weak foundational elements. Improper communication and collaboration
standards leave a lack of clear and mutual understanding of requirements being handed
down from my stakeholder to the development team. From it stems a myriad of symptom
issues.
I’ve turned to the foundations to address the issue. My first plan of attack: Train
the business on how to submit formal user stories. User stories are formal descriptions of
the feature they would like the development team to build from the perspective of the end
user. Implementing them would provide us the necessary clarity surrounding work
packages to reduce re-work, improve testing pre-conditions/acceptance criteria and
facilitate planning to mitigate schedule crashing. To implement this change I held
multiple walk-down meetings and training workshop sessions that discussed the
procedure, value add, reporting metrics, and key performance indicators of submitting
user stories and collaborated with my product owner to determine cadence and due date
schedules. All seemed well until our first due date passed. No stories had been submitted
and we entered into a state of non complianc. In the days following attempts were made
verbally, and formally in team meetings, to garner compliance. My product owner
assured me he would get it done – but to no avail. To address the problem I chose to wait

1
 until our monthly on-site working session and to start a second strategically planned
workshop session. It went swimmingly. The team and I walked the business through a
few user story submissions and it was quickly made evident to me that my initial training
was not enough for the business to feel comfortable and confident using the tool.
Ultimately that day I finally received compliance but it remains to be seen if
compliance will be held in the future, or if the avenue taken to implement the process was
the most viable.

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

When looking at the social background of my product owner we can analyze

many different elements of their overall social style and the influence it had over the
situation at hand. Based on my interacitons both at work and off-site dinners, I believe
my product owner is a Theory X Manager. These type of managers look at human
resource structures in a hierarchical and simplified way (Bolman, Pg.141). They make all
of the rules and orders, and the lower level employees jobs are to follow those rules or
orders. One of the symptom issues I was hoping to address through the business fomally
submitting these types of orders through user stories is unplanned work. My development
team will get calls at any time of day or night with new orders from the product owner.
Looking at these requests through a Theory X Manager lens, I can see how this type of
environment may not be viewed as problematic. It could even be seen as a benefit –
allowing the team to produce more work. However, it doesn’t facilitate the self-
acualization needs of my team based off of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs (Bolman, Pg.
134). Leaving them to sacrifice personal needs that otherwise would lead them more
towards their ultimate fulfillment.

Another frame to view this situation through is that of Argyris and Schon’s
Theories for Aciton Model I (Bolman, Pg. 167). Under this frame my product owner
could believe the root of our problems – such as poor test-pass rates, re-work and testing
in production – as being the development teams fault. If this is the case he may not see
the connection between my request to submit formal user stories as a means to address
foundational issues that will ultimately improve our problem areas. You see, as a product
owner he has his own vision - for the business. Whereas I have a vision for my team. We
both have varying viewpoints of our collective pain points that often represent two
perspectives of the same picture. Under this frame he would be likely struggle to see fault
as anything other than outside of himself.

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

As a transformational leader I believe that people are our biggest resources. I

think the antethesis of my product owners perspective against mine is best summarized

2
 by Bolman who said “Investing in people requires time and persistence to yield a payoff.
Relentless pressure for immediate results, execs turn to cutting corners on HR” (Pg. 141).
In order to change the culture of my team I have to be strategic. As far as the Theory X
Manager theory is concerned I find the best course of action to be in creating additional
opprotunities outside of his rules and guidelines. I wish not to create the same type of
rules for him. However, I have the ability to facilitate collective interactions in the name
of increasing employee discretion coordination and collaboration to increase efficiency,
reduce errors and facilitate personal and professional goals (Bolman, Pg. 151). If the
results are as expected it’s likely that he will see human resources as an essential part of
producing the deliverables hes desires.
If you question how to address our opprotunities surrounding Argyris and Schon’s
Theories for Action Model I, the answer can be found first in examinging the second
model, and then the third. We must address my product owners viewpoint from a state of
root cause analysis. The same way we approach the problem itself. Through model II we
believe our learned assumptions and experiences shape our personal theories for action
(Bolman, Pg. 166). These theories act as a filter. Potentially leading my product owner to
believe that he has to look out for himself, or that it is dangerous to facilitate strong
relational bonds in the corporate world (Bolman, 176). Going further, if we then turn to
model III we find a roadmap to navigate the situation by “Emphasizing common goals
and mutual influence” (Bolman, 168). During my walkdown and training sessions I can
emphasize the alignment of my vision towards his ultimate pain-points. Detailing that
once we have visibility, and a clear and mutual understanding of work packages we will
see results. Re-work will naturally decline. Freeing up valuable time and relieving the
pressure to produce in a fast and lose fashion.

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

My largest take away from this module is the intricacies of understanding and
implementing a human resources frame as a necessary component of growth and
stability. The first aspect of this frame that I find to be the most applicable to my life
currently is the ability to approach my co-workers from a place of curiosity. In the hopes
of learning about their educational backgrounds, social styles, and personal and
professional needs. I now consider that some of the solution based frameworks and
approaches we learn about within an organizational leadership degree to be far less viable
on their own. I believe the most value comes from applying them in intentional alignment
towards that persons – or a teams combination of - unique styles, goals and ways of
working. In this sense I’d be sure to include more of a personal approach with my
product owner to get to know him better and that find that alignment. I would also use
that information to increase training coordination and goal alignment.

3
 Similarly I would execute the same mindset in order to address the ideologies of
Argyris and Shon’s Theories for Action Model I, II and III. We cannot address the
foundations of the team if we ignore the human resources model as part of the
foundation. One way way I could bring awareness is to address the teams goals and
visions in a meeting and map out processes to bring visibility towards the social
backgrounds of our team in order to feel a greater sense of alignment once our new
processes are in place.

4
 Reference or References

Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2021). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership

(7th ed.). San

Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass (ASU Bookstore Automatic Purchase-Perusall Version Only)