Organizational change proposal and implementation strategies

Organizational Change Proposal

At its start in 1962, the seven founding lawyers of the company Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP (MTO) had one aim in mind: to create a high-quality law practice in an environment that stimulates the creativity of its members. Currently, the company boasts 192 lawyers known for trying high-profile cases an negotiating corporate shaping deals with a very high success rate. In fact, so impressive are its accomplishments, that MTO has achieved first place on the most elite law firms according to the American Lawyer.

Indicative of the company's prowess in the world of law is the main reason why clients turn to them. When creativity and high-level arguing is required, clients prefer MTO. This reputation has been created by the company's commitment to providing exceptional judgment, creative thinking, and a commitment to solving clients' problems.

Principally, the company works in areas such as bankruptcy, corporate, environmental, labor and employment, litigation, real estate and tax. In addition to a high quality of service, this is also delivered in a cost-effective manner. This is accomplished by means of a one-to-one partner-associate ratio. In addition, paralegals and other personnel are assigned to less intensive tasks at a lower cost.

To achieve the mission of excellent service, MTO attempts to associate only lawyers who are at the top of the range in terms of qualifications and creativity. Of the current workforce at the company,, 70% served as law clerks to federal judges. In addition 18 attorneys were involved in work with U.S. Supreme court Justices. Others have experience in government, such as the U.S. Attorneys' Office and the Environmental Protection Agency, while others are graduates with degrees such as physics, literature, economics, history and medicine.

The corporate culture is egalitarian, with al attorneys invited and encouraged to participate in the governance of the firm.

Because of the focus on egalitarian leadership, the company may on occasion experience conflicts among its workers, especially where ethically questionable cases are concerned. One colleague may for example believe that the company should not take a case where the defendant is known to have committed some wrong, while another may believe that the challenge of proving such a person innocent is on the highest priority list of the company.

This is a conflict situation that might detract from MTO's goal of providing the best possible service to its clients, while also remaining at the top of the list of legal services in the country.

The conflict can occur on both a personal and company-wide scale. Individuals may experience conflict in terms of their personal value sets. For one individual, the interest of the company, including retaining its reputation as the best at any cost, may be at the top of his or her work ethic. For another, a personal value system, including an adherence to honesty, may be more important than any work ethic.

On a corporate scale, the company may experience conflict, as one of its aims is to project an image of community interest and service, while it is also committed to protecting the interest of its clients. Furthermore, the company also professes to be open to suggestions by its employees, as dictated by its egalitarian environment.

Such conflicts may also affect the company's overall ethics and values base. The two employees mentioned above can represent the fundamental values conflict within the company itself. On the one hand, it is committed to serving its clients to the best of its ability. While MTO is indeed committed to pro bono work, it does need revenue from high-paying clients in order to retain its leading position in the corporate world, as well as its notably excellent employee base.

To interpret the issue of potential internal conflict within the company, Bolman & Deal's organizational frames can be used. Particularly, a combination of the "Families" and "Jungles" frames appear to be relevant.

The "Families" frame focuses on interpersonal relationships among employees. Human resources are at the bottom of this perspective, where employees are regarded as the most important component of the organization. This appears to be applicable to MTO, where the focus is on recruiting only the best in the organization. Once this goal is accomplished, the focus is to retain employees by means of incentives such as bonuses and rewards. Employees are therefore encouraged to not only contribute to corporate governance, but also to do so with excellence in mind.

This frame could contribute to the problem mentioned above by creating a culture of striving for professional excellence to such an extent that ethics may become a lesser concern. In order to work for the collective reputation of the company, for example, individual employees may be encouraged to take cases that might be ethically questionable, such as proving the innocence of a known perpetrator.

From a family point-of-view, this could result in internal conflict, as individuals are expected to care for each other and for the company like an extended family. Hence, those with a higher moral or values basis would object to this type of behavior once it becomes known. In this way, internal conflict results, which also leads to a consideration of the "Jungle" frame.

The "Jungles" frame focuses upon the political paradigm. This frame considers an organization as a platform for contest. Competition abounds for power and scarce resources, while conflict results from contending needs, perspectives, and lifestyles. Individuals and groups contend within such organization, resolving conflicts by means of bargaining, negotiation, coercion and compromise.

In the case of MTO, it is unlikely that coercion occurs, as the "Jungles" frame is mitigated somewhat by the "Family" frame. Because of the view of the extended family, individuals and groups within MTO are more likely to compromise and negotiate as equals rather than conceding to coercing tactics. Also, the coalitions typical of the "Jungles" frame are also unlikely within MTO, since the organization is very much focused upon giving all its employees an equal opportunity for voicing their opinions and concerns.

In order to understand the conflict mentioned above in terms of this frame, one might assume that the employees in question harbor different sets of ideals and values. One employee is focused upon generally and socially accepted values, while the other is focused upon a work ethic that places the interest of the company above all else. Because of the extended family paradigm, the assumption here can be that negotiation and compromise could resolve the conflict. Rather than the political skills and acumen solution of the "Jungles" frame, this is a more amicable solution to the conflict, which benefits not only the colleagues involved, but also the company in general.

In resolving this conflict, the most effective frame can therefore be seen as the "Family" frame. While political structures to form some of the basis of relationships within MTO, it is also true that these relationships are based upon a collaborative rather than a competitive paradigm. Individual commitment and motivation are indeed essential to success, which means that competition is part of the culture within MTO. However, the egalitarian culture that forms the basis of the company also places the extended family paradigm at a higher level than the competitive, political paradigm.

The principles of anticipation and containment can also be used as alternative interpretations of the problem. The first principle of anticipation, for example, is the preoccupation with failure. This principle concerned with paying attention to the lessons that could be learned from failure.

The conflict in question could, for example, be a warning sign of potential failure. On the one hand, adhering to the ethics principle of not accepting clients who are known to be guilty could result in significant financial loss for the company. If all such clients are turned away, these implications can be significant. This is especially important in the light of the community and pro bono work with which the company is involved. Turning away wealthy clients on the basis of an ethical principle could result in financial losses that also translate to a failure in terms of the company's commitment to the community.

On the other hand, failure can also relate to mistakes that people would not want to make. These must also be carefully documented in order to learn from them. In this paradigm, ignoring an ethical principle for the sake of revenue could be a mistake with even greater financial implications than accepting the wealthy client. Defending a client that is known to be guilty, even successfully, could tarnish the ethical reputation of MTO. Clearly, the company wishes to promote itself as a highly ethical entity that cares for its community. To return known "criminals" to the streets could be devastating in this regard. In this way, the magnitude of either failure must be measured against the other in order to be able to understand and mitigate the problem. In one case, the failure is financial, while in the other case, it is ethical.

The second principle of anticipation is Reluctance to Simplify. Simplification is a way of identifying and detecting small failures before they escalate into larger ones. In this regard, the conflict in question is a small occurrence in a company with hundreds of employees. However, leaving it unmitigated could result in severe future conflicts and related failures. Because employees are encouraged to contribute to corporate governance in an egalitarian way, the unmitigated conflict could lead to major future problems that could relate to significant financial or reputation losses for the company. Simplification can result in a global ethical principal that all the company's employees should contribute to and adhere to.

The third principle of anticipation is Sensitivity to Operations. This means that all employees are aware of the systems responsible for the smooth functioning of the company. For the conflict involved, this is probably the most important principle. If both employees in question are aware of the system underlying the operations of MTO and how to effectively promote these operations, the conflict would be much easier to mitigate. Indeed, there might be no conflict in the first place.

When applying all three principles of anticipation combined, the company can therefore promote the effectiveness of operations, while also mitigating the threat that conflict might pose to its financial and ethical prowess.

The concept of containment concerns the prevention of unwanted outcomes after an event that is unexpected. There are two principles related to the principle of containment. The first is Commitment to Resilience, while the second is Deference to Expertise.

Commitment to Resilience concerns the commitment of managers to find cures to errors that already occurred. At the basis of this principle is the recognition that errors are inevitable, but that they can be learned from. Once the decision is made to accept the high-paying, criminal client, for example, the repercussions in terms of the company's reputation might be significant. The managers of the company must therefore be mindful of their employees' mistakes and mitigate these publicly as far as possible. In this particular case, press releases can for example be issued that indicate the company's continued commitment to ethics, while training employees to maintain an adherence to the ethical principles of the company. If not addressed in terms of the resilience principle, the small failure created by the single employee or group of employees could permanently tarnish the ethical reputation of the company. It is therefore necessary to address this principle fully.

The second principle of containment is Deference to Expertise. This principle concerns the tendency to defer to experts when problems and failures arise. However, when a failure like the one above are concerned, the MTO egalitarian culture, as well as the second principle mentioned here, dictates that all employees should be aware of how to handle certain problems and issues. Once the wealthy client has been accepted and exposed, for example, the employee, group of employees, or even all employees, should be made aware of the ethical principles relating to criminal elements seeking the help of the company.

Doing this publicly will not only mitigate this problem in terms of future occurrences, but will also provide a platform for all future decisions and similar conflicts. At the same time, the company will save its reputation and mitigate any future failures that might otherwise have occurred. In this way, the egalitarian culture of MTO can all contribute to mitigating and preventing future problems by becoming a learning culture that uses its mistakes to improve future practice.

According to current information, the MTO company not only contains an egalitarian culture, but also one that is just and flexible. The just culture is mindful of ethical principles such as reporting when wrongdoing occurs internally, but also externally in terms of community and pro bono service. MTO is externally just in terms of its community and pro bono service. Internally, it might be able to learn from past mistakes and failures by increasingly adhering to a universal ethical principles to be followed by all employees when accepting new clients. Generally, however, it might be said that the culture within the company attempts to be both egalitarian and just. Furthermore, the company also strives to be internally just to its employees by providing incentives for promotion and an egalitarian platform for communication.

A flexible culture adapts to the changing demands of the business environment. Here, the egalitarian culture is of the essence. In order to grow and change as an organization, all employees need to function upon a platform of collaboration and change where necessary. As such, managers cannot be inflexible when approached by employees with specific needs or problems. Specifically, MTO has shown an ability to change with the demands of the times by becoming increasingly diverse in terms of culture and lifestyle. Indeed, they were one of the first legal assistance companies to do so.

Furthermore, the company's community and pro bono work have testified to its ability to adhere to the changing needs of the society within which it functions. Flexibility is therefore a culture that is promoted throughout the organization. Internally, the company also defers to the expertise required to help it solve technical and other issues. There is a general recognition that neither al managers nor all employees have the expertise necessary to solve every problem or address every issue. The company consists of a completely egalitarian team to solve the problems that arise.

In order to provide an even better platform of functioning, the company could also encourage a culture of reporting and learning. A culture of reporting provides a platform of honesty that helps the company to retain its ethical core in the face of a decidedly unethical business world and profession. A learning culture learns from failure and paves the way forward with potential future success.

In its current form, MTO has a very sound basis for effectiveness. The egalitarian culture and sound social ethics provide a good platform for creating public trust and therefore function not only as an accepted entity, but also as a profitable one. To be a leader in such a company is therefore much more than approaching issues with a single-minded platform of solutions, where subordinates are expected to accept anything the leader says. Instead, the egalitarian culture in MTO dictates an open communication policy, by means of which all employees should be willing to raise concerns or opinions for debate.

In terms of the conflict mentioned above, for example, the culture should dictate that the two disagreeing employees must be willing to approach management with their question. The manager, in turn, should not offer an immediate solution. Instead, the culture of reporting and trust should dictate that a meeting be held, either within the branch involved, or with the global employee base. All opinions should be considered in the light of the broad ethical principles of the business itself. Furthermore, the debate should also highlight all the advantages and disadvantages of either course of action. Only after global debate can a single ethical principle be decided upon for dealing with similar future events. In this way, a culture of trust and a culture of reporting can be cultivated.

In terms of reporting, this is an important issue for the growing, learning organization. Being an egalitarian culture does not mean that employees do not make mistakes or engage in failing activities. Hence, for the future of this organization, I would engage in practices that encourage reporting of perceived wrongdoing or failure. All employees must be encouraged to report such activity without fearing penalization. Because MTO is ethically committed to the community and integrity, such reporting activities must be viewed as a necessary part of the company's function. Also, if an employee reports any perceived wrongdoing, the recipients of such reports will be investigated fully before any disclosure is made of their identity or indeed the perceived activity in question.