Serve 6.

8: Case Study of Agency Subgroups

Adrienne Long
Colorado State University
1.Referral source and client descriptive info:
a. Instead of a specic client, I am examining the disconnect between the Disaster
Navigator Program and the Project Team, both fall under the umbrella of Serve
6.8.
i. The head of the Project Team is Kaden (ctitious name), who works directly
with the navigators to coordinate projects.
ii. The Disaster Navigator Program reports to Kaden, which means that the
Navigators are low on the chain of command.
b. There is no referral source, but I recommend that this disconnect be addressed to
help the agency become more effective at serving their client base.
2. Reading on client situation: See annotated bibliography on page
3. Diversity issues:
a. The organization has stemmed from Timberline Church, which means that
employees have brought their religious culture to the agency, even though the
agency is secular (Schneider, 2013).
i. Religious culture greatly affects the permanent staff, specically within the
Project Team, because many employees are also members of the church.
ii. Staff values have greatly shaped the organizational culture of Serve 6.8, and
this culture also affects subsections of the organization.
b. The Navigator Program is made up of social work students who do not have
connections to Timberline or any other religious community within Fort Collins.
i. Cohesive values are not seen among the Navigator team.
c. Strong ties to Timberline Church also effects the client base that the agency
serves.
4. Practice situation:
a. Navigator team visits clients, but many only need debris clean up and construction
projects.
i. This is frustrating for the Navigators because they want to be practicing case
management skills, but clients only need a project to be completed.
ii. Navigators must go through Kaden (aka Project Team) to get projects done
because he is in charge of the grant money for construction.
iii. The Navigators are not allowed to contract work out to different companies or
allowed to manage construction projects.
iv.Meetings with Kaden are weekly, which means a big delays in services.
v. The Navigators feel like they are letting their clients down and losing rapport
since the timeline for construction projects is unclear.
vi.The Navigators have started to be more aggressive at these meetings with
Kaden.
vii.Navigator work ethic is low because they do not see any action being made
for their clients.
b. The case presentations with Kaden should help shape the 30-60 day project plan.
i. Projects are supposed to be assigned according to grant specications.
ii. Despite these guidelines, the 30-60 project plan does not reect this and it is
unclear how projects were assigned to this list.
iii. At the last case meeting with Kaden, the Navigator team started pressing
Kaden for answers.
iv.Kaden has started to become more and more defensive at these weekly
meetings. He continually gives unclear answers to questions about project
timelines.
v. He refused to share the 30-60 day project plan, and told the Navigators that
he needs exibility when it comes to starting projects because of the weather
and volunteer uctuation.
vi. There is not a clear timeline and the Navigators are unsure when their client!s
projects are going to be worked on.
c. Projects are not being completed, and the meetings are becoming less
constructive. This disconnect between the Project team and the Navigator!s is
causing the clients! needs to go unmet.
5. Contract goals and objectives (using S.M.A.R.T goals):
a. The Navigators, Kaden, Lisa LaDue (Navigator eld advisor), and Kinsey
(Navigator direct supervisor) will be in attendance at the meeting on Thursday
4/3/2014 at 1pm at Timberline Church.
b. At the end of the meeting the Navigators will have a calendar view of the next ve
projects that are scheduled.
i. Will keep in mind that this plan is a working plan and needs to be exible
ii. Will show evidence that it is based off of the grant guidelines.
c. Both the Navigators and the Project team will have established clear boundaries
for contacting outside construction resources
d. Communication is key between these two groups, and preferred style of
communication will be dened in the meeting.
i. The Navigator team will keep in mind action learning guidelines, and try to
address and reect on their own biases throughout the meeting (Kramer,
2007).
ii. Will ask high level questions that will open options for discussion/reection
instead of demanding answers to from Kaden (Kramer, 2007).
6. Assessment and planned change process:
a. The groups is in the engagement stage of the helping process.
i. Navigators have observed the processes of how the agency assigns
construction projects, but now there needs to be a change.
ii. By adhering to the SMART goals the Navigators will be able to engage the
Project team in a respectful way to create cohesion between the groups.
iii. Informal assessment of levels of participatory decision making will be given
after each meeting to all members.
b. The theoretical practice model that I will be using is based around a heuristic
framework that emphasizes participatory decision making within the agency.
i. I am using this framework because the issue between the Project and
Navigator team is due to the lack of decision making power the Navigators
have to inuence project plans.
ii. The practice model will be used to open discussion between the Project team
and the Navigators to come up with effective ways to value input from both
teams.
iii. This will be done by weekly assessing each team members! perception of the
level of participatory decision amongst the group.
7. Interventions:
a. Provide training around action learning to both the Project team and the Navigator
team. This will hopefully open mindsets and allow both teams to put assumptions
aside to create a comforting space in the face of the unknown disaster recovery
realm (Kramer, 2007). This training will create dissonance which allows the group
to move beyond what is already learned and embrace questions that require self/
organizational culture reection.
b. Continually use the assessment tool to monitor how group members feel and their
level of involvement in the decision making process.
i. Adjust the assessment tool as needed throughout the rest of the semester.
8. Research design:
a. I will know that the Navigator and Project team has achieved its goal when each
member has ranked their involvement in the decision making process as 4 or
above.
b. I will measure the progress amongst group members! decision making power by
using individualized rating scales, which mark goal attainment by quantitatively
showing group member!s perception of involvement.
i. This measure will be useful to the group because the goals are qualitative in
nature and require group members to use intrinsic qualities, such as shifting
mindsets, in order to reach the goal.
ii. It will be useful for all group members to see a ranking which will help track
involvement and empower the group to continue to work together in decision
making processes.
c. The indicator of success will be having all group members self-report a 4 or higher
for their level of involvement in decision making processes.
9. Issues and concerns:
a. I am currently addressing the lack of communication between the Project team
and the Navigator team. There is not a clear way to communicate with Kaden
since he is in and out of cell service when preforming projects.
b. There has been no progress in terms of a timeline for projects, and last week he
scheduled projects without communicating this to the Navigator team.
i. This was an issue because the Navigator team was contacting clients to do
initial meetings, but they had already had initial contact with Kaden.
ii. This makes the agency and the Navigator team look unprofessional and
uncoordinated in their efforts.
iii. Limited communication effects the reputation of the agency within the
community, and has had backlash on some of the Navigators because clients
are dissatised with the lack of agency coordination.
10. Problems and dilemmas:
a. The main problem is the defensiveness that occurs when the Navigators question
Kaden!s project process. He shuts down and the Navigators are unable to get
clear answers to explain his decision making process.
b. System wide, allocation of recovery money is limited and one project on the
Navigator case load would use up all of the Serve 6.8 grant money.
c. The disaster recovery community is fragmented and it is hard to pull funds
together.
11. Specic questions to address:
a. How would you address the disconnect between agency subgroups?
b. How would you help ease the defensiveness that occurs during these weekly
meetings?
i. What specic phrases would you use to prevent Kaden from completely
shutting down at these meetings.
c. What would you say to the Navigators to limit their harsh attitude towards Kaden!s
team- believes that he is ineffective and wasting grant money on the wrong
projects.
Annotated Bibliography
Bess, K. D., Perkins, D. D., Cooper, D. G., & Jones, D.L. Heuristic Framework for
Understanding the Role of Participatory Decision Making in Community-Based
Non-Prots. American Journal of Community Psychology 47.3/4 (2011): 236-252.
Academic Search Premier. Web. 30 Mar. 2014.
This article described a study that qualitatively tracked the levels of participatory
decision-making (PDM) within four non-prot organizations. The main objective was to
see whether a higher level of PDM would effect the organizations! capacity to meet
community needs, also known as organizational learning. In order for an agency to be
effective in the community, the organization must combine adaptive learning with
generational learning so that the non-prot can be creative when addressing community
issues. It was really helpful to read the case studies of agencies that were caught up in
survival learning and to see how this learning style negatively affected their employees
and the community that they served. It was helpful to see how other organizations relied
on survival learning due to nancial restrictions, and that same stress appears in my
agency. To transition into positive learning styles, organizations must restructure who
they include in decision making processes, such as employees and volunteers, who
provide new input that will reshape the way the organization approaches problems. This
transition is challenging, but will be helpful for Serve 6.8 to adopt so that they can
become an effective agency that serves an ever changing client base.
Kramer, R. Leading Change through Action Learning. Public Manager 36.3 (2007):
38-44. Academic Search Premier. Web. 30 Mar. 2014.
The action learning model that was presented in this article was helpful because it
requires reframing of the learning process for all group members. This is essential to
create change within an agency because organizational culture usually dictates how
things are done, and leaders of an agency strictly reinforce this culture. In active
learning, the answer to the problem is not important, instead voicing high quality
questions that require group members to think critically is valued. Reection was also
highly valued, and requires group members to see their own social conditioning, beliefs,
and assumptions. This is helps shake up organizational norms and nds the roots of
counterproductive learning styles.
Action learning could be greatly used within the Serve 6.8 organization because
mindsets are hard to change and are greatly embedded within the organizational culture
of the agency. If the staff could transition into an action learning mindset, the many
unknowns in disaster relief could be addressed in an effective way, which would ease
tensions amongst differing departments.
Schneider, J.A. Comparing Stewardship Across Faith-Based Organizations. Nonprot
and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 42.3 (2013): 517-539. Academic Search Premier.
Web 30 Mar. 2014.
This article looked at how religious communities can express stewardship through non-
prot organizations. This is applicable to Serve 6.8 because the agency stemmed from
Timberline Church. Schneider states that stewardship values of a religious group are
usually portrayed through the actions of the non-prot that they are supporting, whether
that be through social or nancial capital. This is seen within Serve 6.8 and how
stewardship is expressed based around values that are determine from the Timberline
community. The navigator program is based out of a centralized location, and provides a
direct connection to non-church members, which allows for an on the ground view of
what the community needs. The article also talks about how stafng and networking
usually stems from the church community and greatly inuences the organizational
culture of an agency. Stafng and networking at Serve 6.8 ties directly to Timberline
Church, this is fortunate because the agency can pull social and nancial capital in
times of need. This is interesting to keep in mind when viewing the organizational
culture of Serve 6.8 because although it is not directly associated with Timberline,
engrained in the culture of the agency are values that the religious community holds
dear.
Reection Paper
The case presentation was very interesting to me because it allowed me to focus
on an issue facing my agency and view the issue from an outsider!s lens. At times I
have gotten caught up in the conict facing the Navigator and Project team, which is not
helpful when trying to resolve issues. There are multiple problems facing both groups
and it becomes more complicated by the fact that I am part of the Navigator team. The
case presentation allowed me to take away my own feelings and look at the case from a
purely social worker mindset. This is a very important skill set that will help guide me in
future conicts with clients because at some point I will need to negotiate through a
conict between a client and I.
This case has not been addressed because Kaden (project manager) has been
on vacation for the last week. So I am not able to report that I have seen any changes
happening yet. He returns this week and so I will try to encourage positive
communication amongst all group members. With my seminar group!s suggestions in
mind, I will talk to the Navigator team prior to the meeting to set group rules and to talk
to them about what we want to get out of the meeting with Kaden. This will set
guidelines for appropriate and respectful behavior, also well as giving structure to the
meeting. I really appreciated that suggestion from my group and plan to take that action
when we meet this week. It was also helpful to have their encouragement and someone
to brainstorm with. It is really helpful for me to have someone to talk to when facing
interpersonal issues in my personal life and I nd it equally helpful in the professional
realm.
I wish I had known about participatory decision making prior to the last meeting
with Kaden. I think if I had had that framework in mind I would have been able to direct
the meeting in a more positive way. I nd it helpful to have a framework to guide my
meetings with individual clients, and so I found it equally helpful to have a framework for
planning how to barter through conict within an organizational setting. I also wish that I
had the training that the Head Resource Specialist at the Murphy Center (Brandy)
presented to us this week. The training was about engaging in conict and being able to
barter with a reluctant client in order to achieve their goals. The training also specically
targeted issues between the client and the social worker, which can apply to my issues
with organizational disconnect. This would have been a helpful skill to use when
bartering with Kaden over 30-60 project plan lists.
During my presentation, I felt very comfortable presenting my case to the other
members. I felt like they really cared, and they offered creative solutions and comments
during my presentation. This presentation style felt very comfortable and I have
observed from Murphy Center case meetings that many agencies gain insight into their
cases by presenting them to their cohorts. My case presentation is very similar to
agency case meetings and I liked how my peers provided me with new insight. As I start
my social work career I will be comfortable with this process of presenting cases to staff
members and will be able to effectively collect insight from my peers.