Running Head: Organizational Analysis Paper: A Study of Greenly University Kadell 1

Alexandra Kadell
Rozana Carducci
EDU 811: Admin and Organizations
Organizational Analysis Paper: A Study of Greenly University
March 26, 2017
 A Study of Greenly University Kadell 2

Part I. The Organization and Dilemma

Institutional Background

Averaging around 7,000 plus undergraduate students and over 2,000 graduate students

Greenly University is a large public state school located in the heart of Maine. The mission of

Greenly University is to provide students with an affordable liberal arts education that strives to

expose students to a diverse society while also challenging them to think critically and develop

skills that engages and prepares students to be productive members of our society. Nearby cities

and natural elements provides students a unique opportunity to explore the historical city life and

robust scenery. Offering over fifty majors and minors, students at Greenly University are

challenged academically and prepared for a competitive work force. Sixty-three percent of

Greenly University undergraduate students are female and thirty-seven are male. Approximately

fifty-five percent of the undergraduate student population identifies as a student of color. Greenly

University also supports a large Pell Eligible student population and provides academic and

social support services to all students.

Student and Professional Backgrounds

The case study will be analyzing two students attending Greenly University during the

2016 – 2017 academic year who work in the Transitional Support Service (TSS) office on

campus. This section provides a brief background to the individuals within this case study.

Dawn is a Sophomore, identifying as a heterosexual, Black, female student. Dawn is an

English and Education major. During her first academic year at Greenly University she was

academically successful receiving dean’s list and membership into two honor societies. As a

Pell, Eligible and independent student Dawn must have a job on campus in order to pay for
 A Study of Greenly University Kadell 3

school. Dawn’s two jobs include working as a Resident Assistant (RA) in the first-year resident’s

hall and as a Peer Advisor in the TSS office at Greenly University.

Mia is a Junior, identifying as a heterosexual, Latina, female student. Mia is a first-

generation student with a Social Work major with the aspirations to work for Child Protection

Services. At Greenly University Mia struggled her first year earning below a 2.0, had no

engagement on campus, and was constantly going home on the weekend due to homesickness.

Since then Mia has used resources such as the TSS office, academic tutoring, and the

multicultural affairs office to improve her college experience. Currently, Mia has boosted her

GPA, is a senator on the student government association, and is working as an office assistant at

the TSS office.

Garrett is the director of the TSS office, identifying as a heterosexual, White, male.

Garrett earned his Master’s degree in Educational Leadership and is currently in a PhD program

that he will be completing in the Spring. Working in the TSS office for ten years Garrett has

shown that he is passionate and loyal in assisting the students and the institution. Therefore, after

his PhD completion an administrative opportunity will be opening up for him for the next

academic year.

Becca and Mark are two graduate students working in the TSS office. Becca is a

heterosexual, White, female and Mark is a heterosexual, White, male who are both completing

the Higher Education Leadership Master’s program at Greenly University. This is Becca’s first

year and Mark’s second year working in the TSS office, both graduates oversee the student staff

within the office while also coordinating specific programming.

The Case Study

 A Study of Greenly University Kadell 4

The Transition Support Services (TSS) office was established in order to help students

during their first-year transition into Greenly University. Providing resources such as webinars,

community service opportunities, one-on-one meetings with Peer Advisors, purposeful

programming, and having connections with almost all student service offices at the institution,

TSS is a fundamental service that has risen retention rates and engaged students academically

and socially to their campus community. TSS strives to be an inclusive and safe space for all

students to come with for any academic or social concerns. However, within the office Dawn and

Mia are the only students of color that work for TSS.

As a Peer Advisor Dawn is allowed to work six hours a week requiring her to be in the

office about twice a week. While at work Dawn has open office hours for students to come for

assistance with any academic or social concerns they are experiencing. Dawn must complete

written reports of any interaction she has with students for her main supervisors Becca and Mark.

Additionally, bi-weekly Dawn is responsible for broadcasting a topic of choice through the office

webinar series. Primarily working similar hours as Becca by mid-October Dawn has been

approached by Becca several times to discuss her quality of work. The approach Becca has made

with addressing Dawns performance has been in front of the other Peer Advisors and students.

Statements such as “Dawn, you did not file your interactions properly, do we need to go over it

again?” or “Dawn, your topic for this week’s webinar was pointless, you should ask another peer

advisor for some realistic topics” were made regularly to Dawn. The other Peer Advisors in the

office ignore Becca’s comments towards Dawn and continue their daily work activities.

Embarrassed by these comments Dawn believes that the criticism was due to her lack of

experience at Greenly University thus far. Furthermore, Dawn has begun to readjust her working

style to imitate her peers.

 A Study of Greenly University Kadell 5

However, the negative relationship between Dawn and Becca grew deeper by late-

November. Dawn has had three one-on-one conversations with Dawn regarding her abilities at

work. Within those meetings, Becca would encourage Dawn to be more like Brad or Chad,

White male Peer Advisors in the office. Additionally, Becca would mock Dawn from her

attended profession as an English teacher. Becca would state “how could she make class

interesting when she can’t even make her webinars interesting” or, “she never had Black teachers

in high school, I wonder how the kids would react to you!” Dawn wants to quit her job, but

cannot afford to do so without considering dropping out of college.

As an Office Assistant Mia is the first line of interaction for students coming to the TSS

office. Mia’s main responsibilities within the office include greeting students and visitors,

directing visitors to the proper office workers, answering phone calls and emails, while also

accomplishing smaller tasks such as filing and imputing information into Excels. Mia enjoys

working for the TSS office, she loves the conversations she has with visitors and when things are

quiet in the office she can complete assignments for class. However, things in the office have

been tense for Mia by the end of November. Becca has also approached Mia about her quality of

work. Although, Becca and Mia do not work together often she endorse criticism such as Dawns.

Lately, the comments have become less about her work abilities and more about her ethnicity.

One afternoon while Mia, Becca, and Mark were working, Becca left to run an errand.

When she returned, Mia greeted her like she does with all TSS visitors, but was stunned when

Becca laughed in her face. Confused Mia asked Becca what she was laughing at. Becca replied

with a laugh “I just realized what they say is true! Mexicans do have serious resting bitch faces!”

Over hearing the comment Mark rushed over the two and excused Becca from the conversation

by asking her to speak to him outside. With a brief conversation with Becca out of the office she
 A Study of Greenly University Kadell 6

returned red in the face. Proceeding after was Mark who smiled at Mia and returned back to his

work. Unaware of what Mia could do, she continued to show up for work, sat in silence besides

the occasional visitor, and began to slump into her old routines of first semester.

The turning point occurred after Winter break. Having time away from school and the

office Dawn was refreshed for another semester. Mia waited for anticipation for another

stereotypical comment to spill out of Becca’s mouth. With a new Spring semester schedule,

Dawn, Mia, and Becca all now worked together on the same day. At first the co-workers were

friendly, but it did not take long until Becca started to make comments surrounding the students

work and ethnicity. During one of their shifts Dawn overheard Becca asking Mia if she was

going into Social Work because she knows what the ghettos are like and she clearly wants to

help out her kind. Later that shift Dawn approached Mia and the students began to discuss what

happened earlier on. From their conversation, the students both realized that they both have been

facing these comments all year. Diving deeper Mia and Dawn began to ask the other students

workers if they experience similar situations. Generally, the students who identified as white

never experienced the same interactions with Becca.

The two students agreed that they would seek help from Mark in order to approach

Garrett about their concerns regarding Becca. Mia was skeptical since the last experience with

Mark did not result with her best intentions, but he was the only ally the students had. Knowing

of the wrong doings that Becca has made Mark agreed to help the students. They began to write

past and current comments Becca has made towards the student as evidence to Garrett. Weeks

after Mia and Dawn met with Garrett to discuss their experiences in the office. Unaware of the

situation at hand Garrett reassured the students that Becca would be held accountable. However,

days went by and Becca started to intentionally make side comments to other student workers in
 A Study of Greenly University Kadell 7

the office such as “You’re doing great Rachel! Keep up the hard work, unlike others in the

office.” Becca knew the students went to Garrett. Mark informed Mia and Dawn that Becca and

Garrett did have a conversation during staff meeting, but it was more relaxed then what they

anticipated. Garrett asked Becca to “calm down with comments towards the students. With the

promotion getting closer he does not need any scandals getting in the way.” The students rushed

back to Garrett demanding that he follow the office values and have consequences for Becca’s

behavior, but Garrett responded that “this is not career services, resident’s life, or athletics, the

institution, myself, and the other student employees see the TSS office as an inclusive and safe

space for all students, I’m not sure why you girls both do not see it that way.”

Part II. Organizational Frames

Organizations are complexed and have various components that influences the nature of the

organization. In order to understand the operations, perspectives, missions, and navigation of an

organization, Organizational Frames were created to serve as a mental model which provides

clarity and context to identifying a profile of an organizations (Bolman & Deal, 2013). Once an

organization or an aspect of an organization is categorized, frame tools such as policies,

procedures, negotiations, or communication can be applied to take action within the frame

(Bolman & Deal, 2013). Within higher education organizational frames are evident in the design

and foundation. During the daily operations of an institution frames such as political, structural,

symbolic, racial, and human resources are present and overlap. Throughout the case study there

are various organizational frames that can be used to analyze and resolve the situation in the TSS

office at Greenly University. Although multiple frames are demonstrated inequality regims and

the political frame are apparent throughout the case.

Inequality Regimes
 A Study of Greenly University Kadell 8

As defined by Joan Acker (2006) inequality regims are the stability of gender, class, and

racial inequalities due to the practices conducted within an organization. The actions, procedures,

or processes that create inequalities within an organization have been establish by the societal

constructs throughout our history, culture and politics. Typically, inequalities are visible in

higher management, leadership, and department head positions (Acker 2006). In regards to the

situation at Greenly University, race is the primary identity that inequality regims influence.

Race is the physical characteristics, culture, and history of an individual. When historical

dominance or oppression occurs due to these characteristics the individual within the identity

becomes unequal (Acker, 2006). Throughout the United States early and modern history

minorities of specific genders, classes and races have been discriminated against. Therefore, the

foundation of our society and organizations are rooted in racism and oppression. Although, as a

society we have made strides in creating access and equal opportunities for all, intentional and

implicit biases occur.

More specifically about the situation at Greenly University, a degree of segregation was

created which instilled an inequality regime within the office. Race segregation in a job can also

be gendered, but mainly is the action of differentiating a particular group of individuals over

another (Acker, 2006). Segregation in the work place is complexed and can be measured by

wage, occupation, and demographic differences. However, measuring segregation is challenging

since it can occur subtly. Organizations that foster segregation in the work place create a hostile

and unjust working environment.

Mia and Dawn were the only two students of color represented in the office and both

were treated differently than the other student workers because of their physical appearance. The

student’s direct supervisors all identified as White individuals. First, inequality regims are
 A Study of Greenly University Kadell 9

showcased through the demographics of the office. The TSS office does not represent a diverse

group of people and therefore natural hierarchies disadvantaging people who have historically

been marginalized occurred. Secondly, the micro-aggressive comments that Becca made to the

students provides further evidence that the students were targeted due to their physical

characteristics. Becca asserting that Mia and Dawn should be more like the other students in the

office distinguished that those students were more effective and valued. Lastly, by Becca

approaching Mia and Dawn in the office with other student workers around and no one

advocating on their behalf, an informal segregation in the office was established. The presence of

derogatory statements conveys that Mia and Dawn can be spoken to in a certain way. A

combination of Becca’s comments with Garrett’s lack of involvement has clearly divided the

office allowing for inequality regimes to continue. As a result, the TSS office has become an

environment that is non-inclusive for students of color.

Informal interactions while “doing the work” is a concept that Acker (2006) defines as

the assumptions that individuals of certain classes, genders, and races encounter during daily

activities that results in an organization having inequality regimes. Individuals working in an

organization have preconceived biases towards groups of people that indirectly influence their

interactions with others; therefore, reinforcing the inequality regims within an organization.

Interactions with women or people of color can be demonstrated through individuals during and

after work hours, not listening to them in meetings, devaluing their opinions, and questioning

their quality of work (Acker, 2006). Particularly those with authority and white males participate

in informal interactions.

The example of informal interactions while “doing the work” is portrayed in the students’

work experiences within the TSS office. Arriving to work each day Mia and Dawn became
 A Study of Greenly University Kadell 10

accustomed to the comments from Becca. Many of the comments that the students experienced

where connected to their quality of work. Due to societal constructs learned by Becca, she

assumed that the two students were unable to accomplish tasks correctly or effectively because

of their physical identity. For example, during the work day Becca would criticize Dawn for

filing interactions improperly or producing webinars. The critiques that Becca would make often

involved comparing Dawn to the white student staff in the office and mainly occurred when

other student employees were in the office. Although, the interactions that Becca engaged in did

not disrupted the daily work activities of all, for students like Dawn and Mia it discouraged and

influenced their work productivity. Informal interactions are also demonstrated through Garrett’s

lack of interest to resolve the situation in the office. When the girls originally encountered

Garrett about the issues they experienced with Becca he did not truly listen to what the students

were expressing. Rather Garrett undervalued their opinions and experiences by simply asking

Becca to calm down. Garrett also dismissed the student’s perspectives when they reapproached

him by blaming the students for the experiences and comparing other offices for the unjust

environment they conveyed. The actions of Garrett did not hold Becca or the office responsible

for the marginalized experiences the students endured. Therefore, strengthening the inequality

regimes to pursue in the TSS office.

Lastly, visibility of inequalities is another aspect that can either break or reinforce

inequality regims within an organization. Visibility of inequalities is the awareness that different

inequalities are present within the structure of an organization (Acker 2006). Organizations that

are conscientious about present inequalities gain a better understanding of the people within their

organization and are more likely to create initiatives that seek to resolve the imbalance.

However, not all organizations are transparent or aware of their existing inequalities. Defined by
 A Study of Greenly University Kadell 11

Acker (2006) invisibility is the intentional or unintentional awareness of inequality regimes.

Organizations that intentionally lack awareness are either choosing not to disclose information of

inequalities or are not realistically perceiving the issues and structure of the organization.

Additionally, authorities who have a lack of awareness tend to see the problem occurring in other

areas then their own. The different biases and privileges that individuals hold within and

organization influences the patter for visible and invisible inequalities to continue or change.

Greenly University TSS office indicates both invisible and visible inequalities. First,

Becca, as a graduate student may not be aware of her own biases and privileges that are attached

to her identity. Additionally, Becca does not fully understand the social inequalities that are built

into the work place and how her actions reinforces the discrimination. Since Garrett did not

provide a learning opportunity for Becca in a supervisory role she continues to unconsciously

continue the inequality regime between supervisors and student staff. More directly is the

intentional lack of awareness that Garrett demonstrates throughout the case study. The TSS

office has become a predominately successful office by retaining and engaging students into the

campus community, while also being perceived as an inclusive environment for all. After the

students first went to Garrett he was conscious that unequal experiences were happening in the

office. However, Garrett targeted and blamed other offices on campus for the inequality regimes

present on campus without recognizing that it was happening within his own office. As well

Garrett intentionally decided not to be transparent with the issue in order to protect his own

opportunities. Rather Garrett showcased that although he was visible to the situation he chose to

lack awareness for the safety of the office and his job.

Within higher education it is critical that the institution, academic classes, student affairs

offices, administration, and educators understand that inequality regime exist on campus.
 A Study of Greenly University Kadell 12

Individuals who have historically been marginalized are the growing student population within

our current higher education system. Therefore, as we cater to students we must be mindful that

preconceived biases influence our work with students. It is essential that we are mindful of the

inequality regimes within a worldly and institutional context in order to take action accordingly

when situations develop.

Political Frame

The political frame is an organizations belief, goals, values, allotment, procedures,

activities, or pressures that have significant influences on the overall structure and operations

(Bolman & Deal, 2013). Heavily based on power the political frame fosters decision making

processes and constructs an organization. Imbedded into the political frame are hierarchies which

are centered around authorities and partisans. Authorities are the decision-making individuals or

groups that are defined by position or expertise. While partisans are the individuals being

influenced by the authority’s decision makings (Bolman & Deal, 2013). Both authorities and

partisans within the political frame create, enforce and are impacted by the political ecosystem

and arena. The ecosystem and arenas are the external factors that organizations depend upon and

effect (Bolman & Deal, 2013). Within a higher education context, the political frame is seen

within governing bodies, administrative positions, policies, or foundations. In many cases

faculty, staff and administrators are the authority holders over the partisan students. The state,

federal, local government and agencies are primary external factors that influence laws and

funding toward higher education. The presence and concepts of the political frame is seen

throughout the daily operations of Higher Education institutions.

From the perspective of Greenly University there are several concepts of the political

frame that are applicable to the situation in the TSS office. Primarily there is a significant use of
 A Study of Greenly University Kadell 13

power. In the political frame power is the center of political thinking and decision making

(Bolman & Deal, 2013). When used properly, power can create social change and empowerment,

but can also be abused and detrimental to an organization. Furthermore, power can take many

forms and within Garrett and Becca’s circumstance positional, coercive and reputational power

is visible. Positional power is the use of an individual’s authority or expertise to influence

decision making (Bolman & Deal, 2013). This power is seen in higher education through

administrative personnel, department chairs, or trustee positions who all use their positions at the

institution to create and enact change. Coercive power is an individual using their authority to

interfere, block or punish others within the organization (Bolman & Deal, 2013). At institutions,

coercive power can clearly be seen in committee meetings when motions or initiatives are tabled

due to someone's ability to interfere in the process. Lastly, reputational power is influence an

individual acquires based on their past and present performance (Bolman & Deal, 2013).

Reputational power can be used to showcase the legitimacy of a person based off of their

accomplishments, but also influence the actions of an individual to maintain a perspective.

Additionally, a concept that is attributed to power is the dominance of persuasion. Persuasion is

the influence an individual has on another with or without realizing its effect. More specifically

in the situation at Greenly, social proof persuasion is evident. Social proof is when an individual

begins to engage in something others are doing, due to an external influence persuading them to

do so (Bolman & Deal, 2013). Therefore, by having the authority and certain powers a partisan

may be impacted by persuasion.

Both Becca and Garrett showcase the impact that power has had within the TSS office at

Greenly University. Throughout the case Becca utilizes her positional power, as a graduate

student, to justify the comments being made towards the students. As a direct supervisor to Mia
 A Study of Greenly University Kadell 14

and Dawn, Becca’s attitudes towards the students were approached through a work ethic lens.

Becca’s underlining biases were able to be projected due to the authority she had over the

students. Additionally, Becca had a substantial persuasion impact on the students. In particular,

Becca would constantly discourage Dawn for her work in the office and compare her to the other

student workers. By the end of the first semester Dawn began to question her own work ability

and shifted her style to align with the other Peer Advisors in the office. Whether Becca was

aware, her dominance of persuasion intertwined with her positional power in the office

convinced Dawn to reevaluate her work ethic.

In regards to Garrett his political thinking and decisions throughout the situation were

influenced by his power within the office and at the institution. After Mia and Dawn had both

addressed the issues occurring in the office, Garrett had the opportunity and authority to resolve

the issues. However, due to Garretts promotion in the Fall he was aware that a racial scandal in

the office could diminish his reputation on campus for being an inclusive director and office.

Therefore, motivated by advancing his positional power he used his current power as a director

to indirectly manage the issue in order to salvage his own opportunities. By reassuring false

resolutions and minimalizing the issue in staff meeting, Garrett interfered with the issue arising

any further. Unsatisfied with the progress in the office the students readdressed the problem, but

Garrett had the ability to turn the blame on the students rather than the office. Overall, Garrett

has significant power within the office and used the power to subside the student’s experiences

and ensure job security for the future.

Alliances and networking is another political concept that is visible within that dilemma

at Greenly University. Defined by Lee Bolman and Terrence Deal (2013), alliances and

networking is the formulation of individuals and groups which act together as a cohesive unit in
 A Study of Greenly University Kadell 15

order to successfully accomplish task and initiatives within an organization. The strong alliances

and networks that are established insures a united front when confronting political agendas in an

organization. Power also plays a role in this concept due to alliances and networking of people

who have power influence the legitimacy of the group. Within higher education alliances and

networking are essential for individual professionals and departments on campus to function.

When financial resources are needed, collectively advocating, or supporting new initiatives arise

it is beneficial to have members of the community that are dedicated to helping those they are

connected to achieving the outcomes.

Once Mia and Dawn commonly agreed that they were experiencing similar injustices an

alliance was formed. In order to advocate and produce change within the office the students

understood that they needed to formulate a network that would directly tie to Garrett. The

students sought out the help from Mark, which due to his positional power created a direct and

legitimate strength to their efforts. Through this alliance, the students were able to strategize best

practices and provide substance to their claims from both a co-worker to employee perspectives.

Additionally, having the insight that Mark possess allowed for the students to understand the

plan of action that Garrett implemented in resolving the situation. Leading to the current

predicament the students encountered when addressing Garrett for the second time.

The political frame has an intricate foundation that encompasses various concepts that

tend to overlap. Within an institution, the political framework can be complexed and uncertain,

however, the political frame provides an opportunity to deconstruct the decision-making

processes and hierarchies within the foundation. In regards to the situation at Greenly University

the key concepts of the political frame provide evidence to why Garrett, Becca, Mia, Dawn, and

Mark are engaging in a situation of conflict.

 A Study of Greenly University Kadell 16

Part III: Lessons Learned

Through the analysis of the institutional dilemma occurring in the TSS office while also

outlining the concepts behind inequality regimes and the political frame, a greater understanding

of the organizational mapwork is clearly conveyed. Furthermore, the fundamental concepts of

the frames assists in informing student affairs practitioners with the learning outcomes of a

situation. With this knowledge application to practice can be implemented within a functional

area, professionally, and institutionally.

In relation to the political dynamics in the TSS office, the power and authority that the

characters exemplify showcases the complexities of the political frame. However, power can

have influential practices when used properly. In addition to power a major predicament of the

TSS office is the lack of morality within the foundation. When morality is absent people within

an organization feel vulnerable, powerless, and helpless. As power begins to grow within the

office individuals seek ways to manipulate dilemmas in order to protect themselves (Bolman &

Deal).

After the students went to Garrett the first time, rather than avoiding the situation to

secure his own intentions, Garrett could have used his power to successfully tackle the conflicts

in the office. Garrett could have used his positional and coercive power to suitably hold Becca

accountable for her decisions in the office. Becca’s actions could have jeopardized both her

graduate program and her job within the office if Garrett took an active approach. On a less

severe outlook, Garrett could have used his power as a director to provide Becca with a learning

opportunity as she accomplishes her degree in higher education. Lastly, rather than avoiding the

situation Garrett could have used the dilemma to assessed the values and goals of the office to

clearly understand the influences the office has on student experiences. If the results displayed
 A Study of Greenly University Kadell 17

that the TSS office was not meeting its standards, then restructuring could be implemented in

order to effectively serve the student population and uphold the values of the office. By actively

criticizing one’s own work and implementing new initiatives Garrett’s reputational power may

have increased and could have solidified his promotion since he followed correct procedures and

showcased his abilities as an authority to enact change (Bolman & Deal, 2013). Understanding

that as student affairs educators, our various powers dramatically influence the everyday

decisions we make. We must be aware of our authority to implement when needed and avoid

when unnecessary.

Lastly, the moral judgements of the office were not evident racially or politically.

Ethically, the office was not incorporating initiatives that provided their student workers to feel

included within the office environment. Defined by the authorities in the office segregation and

unequal working conditions were instilled. In order to prevent this from occurring certain

policies, procedures and empowerment should be established to secure equal opportunities and

uphold the office goals. Specifically, the principles of moral judgment outline four concepts that

are important to consider within an organizations structure. First is mutuality, which is when all

individuals should be supervised and operate under the same rules. Second is generality, which

are the procedures organizations comply with during moral conduct. Third is openness, which is

the organizations ability and comfortability to publicly disclose, think and make decisions. Lastly

is caring, which is the legitimate concern an organization takes when dealing with partisan’s

emotions (Bolman & Deal, 2013).

Within the TSS office the aspect of moral judgment is severely lacking. A core

component to any functional area in higher education a certain level of morality, ethics and

diversity needs to be implemented into the foundation. Garrett, the TSS team, and the institution
 A Study of Greenly University Kadell 18

at Greenly University needs to be actively engaged in creating policies and an environment that

is treating all individuals equally, open to all perspectives, and has a genuine interest in the

impact they are having on the students. The TSS office could have avoided the conflict from

developing if a level of moral judgement had been instilled from the beginning. Tensions that

further advanced should have been prevented when Garrett understood the ethical issues that the

students were experiencing rather than viewing it as an inconvenience. The students have an

ethical right to report the TSS office for the insensitive and unjust acts committed against them.

To avoid situations that the TSS office encountered and to be ethical members of our society that

diminishes social inequalities it is necessary that as student affairs practitioners we are constantly

implementing practices such as the concepts of moral judgement.

IV: Conclusion

The dilemma at Greenly University is an example of a situation that could realistically

happen at an institution of higher learning. Therefore, it is essential to understand organizational

frames in order to categorize the complexities that surround higher education institutions. Daily,

student affairs practitioners encounter aspects of each organizational frame which influences

their institution, department, or individual professionalism. Although at times frames integrate

with one another, each have a predominate role within an organization. Likewise, frames can

also be visible in an individual’s personality therefore, influencing their work ethic and

interactions. Through a foundational knowledge of the frames, student affairs practitioners are

able to analyze the concepts at hand and intentionally implement practices that coincides with the

frames to produce effective outcomes.

 A Study of Greenly University Kadell 19

References

Acker, J. (2006). Inequality regimes: Gender, class, and race in organizations. Gender &

Society, 20 (4), 441–464.

Bolman, L. G. & Deal, T. E. (2013). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership

(5th edition). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.