Freeman-Brown Private Case Study

Refer to the “Freeman-Brown Private School Case Study” document for details pertaining to this assignment.
The board of directors at Freeman-Brown Private School (FBPS) has hired you as part of a consulting team to review the situation and present your findings and recommendations. Write a paper (1,500-1750 words) that discusses the case. Complete this assignment from the perspective of the hired consultants. Respond to the following questions:
1. Review how organizations interact with their external environment (as open systems and complex adaptive systems). How effective was Freeman-Brown as an open system at the time of the closure? How effective was Freeman-Brown as a complex adaptive system at the time of the closure?
2. Review your reading this week on the internal environment of organizations. What is your evaluation of the organizational culture and organizational climate at the time the decision to close two campuses was made?
3. What is your evaluation of the decision made by Dr. Murphy and Caudill? What is your evaluation of the process of going about the closure?
4. Was FBPS demonstrating social responsibility? Discuss the closure impact on three specific stakeholders.
5. Provide an explanation, using appropriate management theories, for how the administration could have handled the closure effectively with stakeholders? Include one theory from each of the following: the classical approach, the human relations approach, and the modern management approach.
6. You have been asked to suggest two goals: one long-term and one short-term goal for the future direction of FBPS. Justify your decision.
7. Present a concluding statement that integrates the 4 functions of management as a means to revamp management at FBPS and meets the recommended goals.
Use at least two academic resources as references for this assignment.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

 

 

 

Freeman-Brown Private Case Study

Introduction

The Freeman-Brown private School Case Study is a classic example of the complexity and ubiquitous nature of the present-day management systems. The case study gives an in-depth analysis of how distinct lack of or failure to adopt various management theories affects the transformation of systems from one environment to another. This paper discusses the Freeman-Brown private school case in the context of systems, organizational culture, climate, the closure process, social responsibility and stakeholders, administration closure options, and plans for the future of FBPS.

Systems

The free-Brown private school operated in an external environment that supported the growth and expansion to meet the needs of the community. The organization incorporated both humanitarian aid and materials to achieve global academic excellence. In the period leading to its closure, Freeman-Brown did not actively operate as an open system. Open systems function effectively by conventing material, human resources into finished goods and services (Charles, 2016). The closure of the Culpeper and Hampton campuses slowed down the turnover rate as the organization was not transforming materials into goods or services.

The FBPS case is a unique case of a complex adaptive system. The organization used diverse and dynamic adaptive systems to engage, interact, and adapt to thrive in its immediate surroundings.    However, FBPS faced fierce competition in neighboring charter schools and was also affected by the economic recession of 2008. The continuous interplay of these factors weakened the organization structures forcing the organization to reinvent and adapt to new environments by closing Culpeper and Hampton campuses to salvage funds to run the remaining schools. The decision to close down was long overdue to cut down on operation costs of running both campuses to shelf the remaining schools from bankruptcy. This shows the  adoptive nature FBPS uses to reinvent itself to save the entire organization from the economic recession.

Organizational Culture and Climate

However, the management was inconsiderate of the organizational culture and only made the decision solely in favor of the organization. As critical stakeholders in the corporate, parents were not allowed to take part in the decision-making regardless of their care and willingness to revive the organizations academic capabilities they were not given a platform to air their grievances and concerns for the academic progress of their students for the rest of the academic year. Both parties could not come to a consensus on the way forward. On the one hand, the parents were determined to change the system to retain their children in school for the rest of the academic year while the management was adamant in dissolving the institution to maintain funds to run the open campuses. The administration and the parents had different belief systems, and the parents were optimistic about reviving the system; some even offered to pay additional fees if the school was facing monetary issues.  However, the administration was not receptive to the idea and did not also share the problems ailing the school even after in house meetings with the school heads. The parents did not have a deal and were left stranded with their children expected to be out of school for the next academic year as the admission window had already closed in the neighboring schools.

Immediately after this misunderstanding, parents started pulling out their children from the school even before the end of the semester.  Following this, the school had no option but a force to close its doors for good. The parent’s perception of the school was distorted, and they were angry for what felt as an inconsiderate and unethical decision from the board. They viewed the school as an irresponsible institution that only cared about its reputation and not the need of the children and parents. The organizational climate was clearly on a downward spiral as they were no c shared perceptions, and the stakeholders did not agree with the behavior and practice of the management.

Evaluation of Decision to Close and Closure Process

Dr. Murphy’s and Caudill’s decision depicted a lack of accountability as it was clear that at the time, many schools were undergoing difficult times due to financial constraints, district-related issues. There was no moral reason for Dr. Murphy to give little and unfounded reasons to the parents. The PTSA meeting conducted in 2013 when parents pressed on the need to close the school was a convenient time for Dr. Murphy to be honest and offer the parents a valid reason for the closure. Still, she only gave a vague answer that it was purely a demographic issue. First of all, the management announcement to close the school at the beginning of semesters ultimately disoriented many parents as they would not be able to enroll their children in any other school for the remaining academic year. Dr. Murphy and Caudill should have communicated with parents about the decision at a convenient time to allow them to transfer their children to different schools before the enrollment period elapses.

Social Responsibilities and Impact on Stakeholders

A school plays an integral role in society. School shapes children’s minds, influences their behavior, and plays a crucial role in molding them to become responsible people in the community. FBPS had the moral responsibility to uphold and abide by the role and obligations put in place in regards to school and schooling to fulfill their function in the society as well as enhance the nation. In reference to the case study provided, Freeman-Brown breached the social responsibility pact to the parents, teachers, faculty, and the community at large. News of the closure was not well received, and the institutions received a lot of backlash from parents and members of the city. Parents were furious and angry at the administration’s untimely announcement of e disclosure. The parents could not fathom where and how they could enroll their children late into the academic year, considering all the students from the schools were competing for the handful of schools in the neighborhood. It was not only stressful and hectic for the parents thinking about the possibility of their children failing to secure an opportunity for a whole academic year.

On the other hand, the children experienced the most significant loss as the closure of the campuses robbed them of the opportunity to learn at one of the prestigious centers of education. As a result, this disoriented there learning patterns and would take a  significantly long period to adjust to a new campus. Furthermore, many faculty members lost their jobs in the process following the immediate closure of two universities without any compensation for the direct contamination. This negatively impacted the families of the faculty members as the chances of finding another job in the same setting were increasingly low. The FBPS community’s decision to disregard their social responsibilities had far-fetching effects that took a relatively long time to be corrected.

 

Administrative Closure Options

The closure of the Free-Brown School was not correctly handled. The parents were not given a valid reason for the closing as well enough time to be refunded their money to make necessary school change arrangements. Therefore the management ought to have implemented and adopted the classical approach to facilitate proper exit out of the system. The classical approach reinstates the ability of a business organization rationally analyze the current performance, prospects of the organization and project its financial capability, demographic factors, internal and external factors to ascertain the capacity of the organization surviving in the same environment in the future. In the case of the Freeman-Brown case, the management ad anticipated an overall disturbance following the issues affecting neighboring schools. The continuous financial constraints in the nearby schools should have been enough alarm for the administration to expect a recession as the school was an exception, especially after the closure of the Hampton campus. With this knowledge, the administration should have informed the parents’   the school’s difficulties at the beginning of the year.

The behavioral approach could also have come into play to facilitate an amicable decision between the administration and the stakeholders. Behavioral theory strives to communicate clearly and accurately about any environmental changes and adoption to ensure all members of the community navigate the new environment with assurance and certainty (Thomas, 2017).  In the first meeting, the administration should have done its best to provide accurate information about the closure rather than give vague and unclear reasons. Sharing the organizational burdens not only aids the process of dissolution but also helps the stakeholders cope with the certainty of the new environments. The behavioral decision of the administration to avoid communication with the stakeholders caused an ineffective closure and bad reputation for the Freeman-Brown campuses. Finally, the system approach theory could have adequately executed the exit of the organization. Freeman-Brown is a network of social functions that form an s system. Therefore any decision made by the administration had ripple effects on the subs systems. It was, therefore, equally right for the administration to consider the repercussions before announcing the decision. It should have taken into consideration the organization’s potential to refund the money to facilitate children’s enrollment to different schools.

Plans for Future Direction

With the  Freeman-Brown preparatory school still in operation across significant states in the US and countries in the world, it is explicitly essential to revamp the organizational goals of the FBPS. In the long run, the management should revise the high costs of transforming human and material resources to academic excellence. The high prices of learning restrict many people from accessing the services reducing the chances of the school thriving in many regions across the country. Additionally, the indefinite closure of the two schools without formal notice and failure to refunds school fees destroyed the image and reputation of the school. It is, therefore, the management to work towards restoring the organization’s image to ensure the survival of the remaining schools.

Conclusion

Management is an essential process in the running of any organization that is made up of four functions: planning, controlling, organizing, and leading. These functions co-exist interchangeably to facilitate change, adoption, and flexibility of business into new environments without altering the organization’s success rate. Conclusively all companies need this function to utilize the available resources to achieve the organizational measurable fully.

References

Charles, D. (2016, November 3). Organisations As Open Systems. Organisations As Open Systems, p. 10.

Thomas, P. (2017). A Behavioral Theory of Management. Academy of Management Journal, 341-350.

 

 

No matter what kind of paper writing service you need, we’ll get it written. Place Your Order Now!
× How can I help you?