This consulting case study examines the organizational challenges facing a university hospital that has launched a large-scale intervention to improve patient and family services. The paper identifies three core issues: the unknown root cause that prompted the intervention, the lack of clear objectives and strategic direction in department head meetings, and insufficient team cohesion and communication among hospital leadership. Drawing on consultation theory from Block, Boss, and Dougherty, the paper proposes strategies for resolving these issues by building internal problem-solving capacity, establishing shared ownership of organizational goals, and fostering a collaborative team culture that will benefit both current and future challenges.
The paper exemplifies the diagnostic-to-prescriptive structure common in consulting case studies: it first separates overlapping issues into distinct categories, then argues for how resolving secondary issues (team cohesion, strategic clarity) creates the conditions needed to address the primary issue (the hospital's underlying patient-service problem). This layered causality analysis is a hallmark of effective organizational consulting writing.
The paper opens with a brief case overview, then moves through three numbered issues of increasing organizational complexity. Each issue section diagnoses the problem, explains its significance, and suggests investigative or remedial action. The final strategy section synthesizes all three issues into a unified rationale for long-term organizational development, closing with references to consultation theory. The conclusion reinforces the paper's central argument that "the Spike problem" is a cultural symptom, not an individual failing.
A university hospital has initiated an intervention designed to make the organization more user-friendly for patients and their families. This intervention requires department heads to work together and meet with the CEO on a regular basis. Response and attendance at these meetings has been sparse, with one particular department head voicing a negative opinion about the meetings and their productivity. In order for the intervention to have its intended effect, all employees and managers must be supportive of the new program. The CEO places the blame on one individual, but this behavior may be indicative of a larger problem within the organization. The following examines the key issues involved in the situation.
In the entry and contract phase of the consultation, it is difficult to determine the root cause of the problems facing the hospital. However, based on the preliminary information available, the problems can be divided into three distinct issues. The following discusses these issues in detail, along with potential strategies for devising solutions.
The first issue is perhaps the most important in this case. It is apparent that some problems existed prior to the difficulties with Spike. The current problem arose as a result of an intervention that was presumably launched to resolve an existing issue. The key question is not the problem with Spike — it is why the intervention was needed in the first place. At this point, no information has been provided that explains why the hospital felt the need to launch this large-scale initiative.
From the descriptions given regarding the intervention, its scale provides clues that something substantial was needed. It is not yet known whether the need for the intervention arose from customer or patient surveys, litigation, or declining revenues. The reason for the intervention is the primary issue that must be addressed during the consultation. There is clearly an underlying problem that needs attention beyond the difficulties with Spike. Further investigation will be required to determine the nature, scope, and history of previous interventions connected to the problem.
The first phase of the investigation will involve a more detailed interview with senior management to determine the reason for the intervention. A strategy will then be developed to help resolve this underlying issue, regardless of the current problems with meeting attendance. The purpose of the investigation is to identify the root cause of the patient and customer relations challenges facing the hospital.
From Spike's reports that the first two meetings were "going nowhere," it is apparent that the intervention needs a stronger sense of direction. His reaction may indicate a lack of clear objectives and strategy on the part of the CEO and the department heads. There is an evident need to develop measurable objectives as well as a clearly defined strategy for achieving them. Establishing these elements may help alleviate frustration and the feeling that nothing is being accomplished in the meetings.
Spike is voicing an opinion that may be shared by others in the meetings, but he alone was willing to speak out. His rejection of the process should not be taken as an affront by the CEO, but rather as an extreme form of constructive criticism. If the committee already has a set of objectives and a clear strategy, it needs to communicate these directly to meeting attendees. When attendees can see progress toward a clear end goal, they will feel that they are working toward a resolution of the underlying problem identified in Issue 1.
When people do not know what the end goal is or how they will reach it, frustration is a natural result. This is the underlying cause of Spike's reaction. Spike — and possibly other meeting attendees — need to feel that they are accomplishing a common goal. The only way to achieve this is to ensure that department heads understand where the organization is headed and how it will get there.
Although Issue 1 and Issue 2 may appear to be interconnected, they are distinct in practice. Issue 1 relates to a macro view of the situation, as it affects the entire hospital. Issue 2 is a necessary step in addressing Issue 1, but it is limited to the focus and goals of the department heads. The department heads need to develop a unified approach — not only for the current challenge, but also for how they approach subsequent issues in the future.
They need to employ sound problem-solving skills in this and all future challenges they will face. From this perspective, Issues 1 and 2 may be related in this instance, but on a macro level they reflect two distinct organizational challenges. The department heads need to learn to work together toward a common purpose, set clear objectives, and develop their strategic planning capabilities.
You’re 55% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.