The Political Lens

MBA 650 Dynacorp Case Analysis by Iris Ran

The political lens views an organization as a stage for competition and conflict among individuals members and groups whose interests and goals vary. The roots of conflict lie in different and competing interests and disagreements require political action, including negotiation, coalition building, and the exercise of power and influence. (Ancona, Kochan, Scully, Van Maanen, & Westney, 2005: M-2, 10). The core concepts of political lens are interest and power. When we are applying political lenses in an effective analysis of an organization, we need to answer five fundamental questions first: Who are the stakeholders? What are their interests and conflictions? Who has power? Who can change power: supporters & blockers? What options are possible for achieving initiatives? In this paper, I will find answers to those five questions and identify which aspects will facilitate the change and which aspects will hinder the change process at Dynacorp.

Dynacorp was a leading U.S. manufacturer of information management and data communications systems. It Originated in an office equipment and moved into high- technology applications in the 1960s and 1970s, leading to accelerated growth. Dynacorp had, by the 1980s, successfully became an industry leader, known for its technological innovation. (Dynacorp Revisited, 2005: M-2, 85). However, the company had a more difficult time competing in a changed market in 1990s. The customers looked for "value added services and solutions" (hardware, software, special applications, technical support & professional customer services) rather than just focusing on great hardware. Therefore, Dynacorp has attempted to address the changing market through a restructuring design from a functional structure into front/back structure.

Who are the stakeholders?

* Identification of stakeholders

The change was not easy. In political review, the conflicts arise when stakeholders have competing or conflicting interests. In order to analyze the conflicting interests behind the change that Dynacorp has made, we need to figure out first who are the main stakeholders in this case. A stakeholder can either be an individual members or a group that has a shared stake to affect what the organization is and how it carries out its activities (Ancona et al., 2005: M2, 34). The graph below draws you a clear picture about how many interactive stakeholders are involved in this case.

Stakeholders Representatives Positions

General Manager Carl Greystone Exeutive Vice President -U.S. Customer Operations

Senior Manager Ben Walker Vice President Northeast Region

Not Mentioned Head of BU (business unit)

Middle Manager Martha Pauley Branch Manager Northeastern Region

Not Mentioned Product Manger in BU (business unit)

Team Member Jim Davis Head of Large systems BU (business unit)

Sales Team Members 1,2,3 Sales

Customer Judy Brown N/A

* Relationship between stakeholders

Dynacorp used to have three divisions: engineering, manufacturing and marketing. The new design broke up the divisional boundaries and created a "back end" that combined both engineering and manufacturing divisions in a set of BUs (business units). They also relabeled marketing division " customer operations" with three large geographic divisions, of which the largest was U.S. customer operations (Dynacorp Revisited, 2005: M-2, 85-6). The relationship between stakeholders has become more complicated after the change. Dynacorp has created new cross-functional positions to get its new product to market more quickly. For example, the business units which combined product development, manufacturing, and market strategy in the end design, has a profound impact on the motivation of stakeholders and their interests when adding market strategy and product positioning functions. On the other hand, as mentioned by M. Pauley, "I shared revenue goals for my teams with the product team's general manager in the business units", (Dynacorp Revisited, 2005: M-2, 89) we can see more interaction were involved between business operations and customer operations.

What are their interests and conflictions?

* Map Stakeholders' Interests

There are two approaches differ in " interests" in political lens. One is "individual interest", an "individual acting in his own personal interests, which, however numerous and varied they may be, are reducible to common economic currency that allows that individual to compare the relative value or utility of meeting each interests" (Ancona et al., 2005: M2, 34). The other is "Collective interest", defined as "those interests shared by others who belong to the same group or category, and center on the welfare and maintenance of the group". In shareholder perspective, every stakeholder group not only has common interests but also share an awareness of those interests and a willingness to act to further them (Ancona et al., 2005: M2, 34-5). I will map out the interests of main shareholders involved in Dynacorp Revisited Case in a table and then analyze further about the conflict of interests.

Shareholders Interests

General Manager

Representative: Carl Greystone (EVP U.S. Customer Operations) * Provide integrated solutions with more customized software and more value added services to fit customers' needs.

* Provide multi-product, multi-function support to specific clients in specific industries.

* Rebuild market share and increase margins.

Senior