Author: admin

Watch the movie “A Civil Action” (1998 – starring John Travolta, Robert Duvall, William H. Macy, John Lithgow, James Gandolfini). It is available on YouTube, Amazon Prime, iTunes, and Google Play. (MAKE SURE TO ASK A QUESTION FOR YOUR TITLE/THESIS STATEMENT and INCLUDE WORK CITED)

Discuss:

(a) what heuristics and biases Jan Schlichtmann (John Travolta) exhibited in the movie

(b) how Jan Schlichtmann could have outsmarted his own biases.

You are not limited to the heuristics and biases read about in this class; you may invoke any that you have learned about in other classes. Ask your colleagues an intriguing question about high stakes decision making and the ways we make mistakes. A complete Packback post requires replies to two of your colleagues.

Discussion Overview

The article by Gulati (2018: Structure thats not stifling) suggests that guidelines and frameworks, often perceived as stifling in organizations, do not necessarily inhibit freedom and innovation when designed and implemented effectively. Instead, these frameworks can support and nurture autonomy by providing a clear, galvanizing sense of the organization’s direction, allowing employees to make autonomous decisions while addressing concerns about employees deviating from serving organizational interests:

---

Questions & Instructions

1. Would this “Freedom within a Framework” approach work in your workplace? Why or why not?
2. The article applies the “Freedom within a Framework” approach to two very different firms (Netflix and Alaska Airlines). Do you think there are limits to the “Freedom within a Framework” approach? What are these, and in what contexts do you think this approach would work best?

Examples:

Question 1: Would this “Freedom within a Framework” approach work in your workplace? Why or why not?
Answer:
In my workplace where compliance plays a key role, yes, the “Freedom within a Framework” approach is definitely promising and also complex. In a compliance-related environment, the functions are usually structured, and they operate on strict regulatory requirements, legal standards, and risk controls. It may look like it is not compatible with employee rights, but if we take a glimpse at the article, the author Gulati suggests that if the framework is well designed, then it will enhance the decision-making ability of the employees. For example, if the employees understand the company’s standards and their focus is strictly on ethical behavior or risk management, then they can make decisions that will align with the organization’s priorities even though there are no strict rules that need to be followed. This ideology will allow employees to avoid a “check-the-box” mindset and be more thoughtful in decision-making skills.
The approach that we gave as an example is great, but it will only work if the leaders actually support it. The logic ties with the article The Best Leaders are Great Teachers. In a compliance-controlled environment, the leaders need to explain more than just enforcing rules, and also explain why the rules exist and how to apply them in real situations. If the logic is not explained correctly, then it will create confusion and inconsistency amongst employees. It also ties with the article on “superbosses” and how the leaders, like Larry Ellison, help employees to think independently and be responsible for their own acts, which eventually helps them with their development. Overall, I think that the approach will work, but it does require strong leadership, clear communication, and training.

Question 2: Do you think there are limits to the “Freedom within a Framework” approach? What are these, and in what contexts would they work best?
Answer:
Yes, there are definitely limits, especially in an environment that is high-risk and highly regulated. In fields like healthcare, compliance, or the aviation industry, there are strictly enforced rules and no options for flexibility. There are regulatory requirements that are set and must be followed, because if there is even a little room for error, it could potentially face serious legal or safety risks. As the author Gulati gave an example for Alaska Airlines that they have to operate within certain boundaries, but that safety has to be prioritized over everything else.
Another limitation I feel is that Organizational culture matters because in a workplace where strict controls are enforced, and people are afraid to make mistakes, sometimes they may not take the advantage of the freedom that they are given. Organizations usually support open communication and learning, and in that case, employees may use autonomy in a positive way. This kind of concept works well in technology or knowledge-based companies. Overall, I believe that freedom within a framework is not like one cap fits all sizes. You need to have an environment that has strong leadership, clear communication, and probably a workforce that is capable of thinking independently. If the conditions are not met, then the overall approach will be less effective.

Example 2:

1. Would this “Freedom within a Framework” approach work in your workplace? Why or why not?

Overall, yes, I think Freedom within a Framework would work in my workplace. Gulati’s core requirements are purpose, priorities, and principles. My workplace, in particular my department of sustainability, is inherently purpose-driven with distinct “whys” of reducing environmental impact, advancing circular economy goals, and driving responsible operations. Being a large global company, we as employees are able to exercise judgement, make regional decisions and approaches. Lastly, sustainability teams, like Netflix, tend to draw people who are intrinsically motivated and intellectually engaged. Gulati identifies these characteristics as the most capable employees under a freedom within a framework model. I do want to note that it is not perfect, and there are complications given that company operates in a highly regulated, high-risk industry similar to Alaska Airlines that has safety and regulatory obligations.

2. The article applies the “Freedom within a Framework” approach to two very different firms (Netflix and Alaska Airlines). Do you think there are limits to the “Freedom within a Framework” approach? What are these, and in what contexts do you think this approach would work best?

I do think there are limits within the approach, and Gulati acknowledges that the framework is inherently fragile. He goes on to say that it requires maintenance with continued awareness of the company’s purpose, priorities, and principles. Limits to this include moments of crisis, when leaders instinctively tighten control, as Alaska Airlines demonstrated following 9/11. Another example is periods of rapid success, as seen with Nokia’s drift toward bureaucracy after peak performance. Additionally, the approach is constrained by workforce composition, industry risk levels, and how much room compliance requirements leave for genuine autonomy.

The approach works best in knowledge-intensive, purpose-driven environments where employees are hired for judgment and their values alignment. Global teams benefit greatly, as with my workplace example, where a well-internalized framework allows local teams to act decisively. Ultimately, it is most effective when leadership genuinely models the framework, regardless of when things get difficult. They trust that the shared purpose and clear principles will guide their teams.

Reference

Gulati, R. 2018. Structure thats not stifling. Harvard Business Review, 96(3): 6879.

Discussion Overview

We read two papers by Sydney Finkelstein this week (2016 & 2018 HBR). In essence, Finkelstein’s research points to a leadership style that transcends traditional managerial roles, emphasizing instead the profound and lasting influence that comes from teaching, personal investment in talent development, and a genuine commitment to fostering excellence and innovation in their teams. This discussion is focused on your views of these “superbosses”. (Edit April 2026: Due to technical issues, the article “Secrets of the superbosses” can also be downloaded

)

---

Questions & Instructions

1. Do you have any experience with an individual who may have exhibited a leadership style consistent with a “Superboss” in your current or past role? If so, how did this interaction change your career trajectory? If not, how do you think this would have helped in your career development?
2. What skills and competencies from the readings (Superbosses or Best Leaders are Great Teachers) do you find most effective and plan to implement in your current or future leadership role? Explain why you find this skill important for your role and context.

Examples :

There was a situation where I was faced with a superboss style of leadership, and that was during my Operations internship at Amazon. Especially as my first internship, I didn’t know what to expect, but I imagined that I would be doing simple tasks within my position for my manager and not have such a high responsibility for processes within the warehouse I was assigned to. My manager decided that I belonged on the floor in charge of a big portion of the warehouse and a group of associates, all by myself, which was scary as someone who had just gotten there. After getting more comfortable with the discomfort, my confidence was raised in the abilities that I possessed, but were never tested. By the end of the internship, I had felt like I did the job itself and learned things that I would have never learned if I were just stuck in a cubicle working on my project. Finkelstein mentions something similar to the situation I was in, as the idea of step-change growth. This is where leaders give their employees a high level of responsibility to help them develop faster. My perspective changed because of this, and I see myself taking on more opportunities that I find challenging and seeing that as a way to improve. I find that being a teacher rather than just a manager is a competency that I see myself applying to my future role. My life’s purpose is to help people aid their development because that will make me grow as well. In my future role, I know that I will be managing people, and it is important to know that leadership is not just about status but rather the meaningful connections and impact that I will create in the environment I am put in.

Example:

Do you have any experience with an individual who may have exhibited a leadership style consistent with a “Superboss” in your current or past role? If so, how did this interaction change your career trajectory? If not, how do you think this would have helped in your career development?

I have not had direct experience working for a leader I would classify as a Superboss, but I have worked under a variety of managers who each demonstrated pieces of that leadership style. Some recognized my abilities quickly, while others initially underestimated my capabilities. These experiences pushed me to consistently demonstrate my value and helped shape my resilience and work ethic.

One of the most impactful leaders I worked with was a female supervisor who was both positive and encouraging. She recognized my drive and understood that I needed to be challenged in order to stay engaged and continue growing. She gave me the autonomy to restructure operations, hire staff, and implement new processes within the diagnostic center I managed. She also gave me the confidence to be myself, which encouraged creativity and gave me the freedom to take initiative and implement meaningful changes. As a result, the improvements I introduced led to increased performance and overall profitability. Because of this success, she trusted me to extend those same process improvements to other centers, where I trained teams and helped elevate their performance. Although she wanted me to remain with the company, she also acknowledged that the organization was limited in its ability to continue developing my potential. Her support and trust gave me the confidence to believe in my abilities and expand beyond my formal role.

In my experience, I have often taken initiative beyond my formal responsibilities, which has exposed me to different aspects of leadership, including team development and operational improvement. While not all leaders I worked with actively developed my talents, I gained valuable insights from observing different management styles and learned the importance of understanding employees from a more human perspective. All of these experiences (good and bad) have shaped how I approach leadership today.

2. What skills and competencies from the readings (Superbosses or Best Leaders are Great Teachers) do you find most effective and plan to implement in your current or future leadership role? Explain why you find this skill important for your role and context.

One of the most impactful skills from the readings that I really resonated with me is the ability to find unlikely winners” because it challenges traditional ideas of talent and emphasizes potential over credentials or background. Superbosses are willing to take chances on individuals who may not fit the typical mold but demonstrate intuition, drive, or untapped ability. This is especially meaningful to me because I consider myself an unlikely winner. In my experience, I have encountered situations where my abilities were either underestimated or not fully recognized at first. Because of that, I have developed a strong awareness of how much potential can exist in individuals who may be overlooked. I understand firsthand how impactful it is when someone recognizes your capabilities and gives you the opportunity to grow. I believe that some of the most valuable employees are those who bring a fresh perspective even if they lack conventional experience. I have seen how empowering individuals can lead to strong performance and team success.

When people feel seen and valued for their potential, they are often more motivated, engaged, and willing to exceed expectations. By identifying and developing unlikely winners, it can help build a more diverse, innovative, and high-performing team.

Examples:

In my professional experience, I have had the opportunity to work under a leader who demonstrated several characteristics consistent with Sydney Finkelstein’s description of a superboss. In one of my roles within a large manufacturing environment, this leader did not simply assign tasks but invested significant time in developing my decision-making capabilities. Rather than providing direct answers, they challenged me to think critically, justify my assumptions, and take ownership of outcomes. This approach initially felt demanding, but it ultimately accelerated my professional growth by building both confidence and accountability.

This experience had a meaningful impact on my career trajectory. It shifted my mindset from task-oriented to more strategic and cross-functional thinking. I became more comfortable leading supplier negotiations, presenting data-driven insights, and taking initiative across business units. Most importantly, it reinforced the idea that strong leadership is not about control, but about creating other leaders.

From the readings, one of the most impactful competencies I plan to implement is the concept that the best leaders are great teachers. This includes actively coaching team members, providing real-time feedback, and creating opportunities for others to stretch beyond their current capabilities. In a supply chain and procurement environment like mine, where decisions directly affect costs, operations, and supplier relationships, developing capable and confident team members is critical to long-term success.

Another key takeaway is the importance of personalized investment in talent. Superbosses recognize individual strengths and tailor development accordingly. I find this particularly important because teams today are diverse in both skill sets and motivations. Taking the time to understand each individual allows a leader to unlock higher performance and engagement.

Overall, I believe adopting a superboss mindset focused on teaching, empowerment, and high expectations will not only improve team performance but also create a lasting leadership legacy through the success of others.

Discussion Prompt:

Compensation systems often struggle to balance standardization with flexibility for diverse employee groups. Describe a situation in which offering flexible benefits could improve outcomes and one situation where it could create new problems.

In your post:

1. Explain the potential benefit.
2. Explain the potential problem.
3. Identify one design constraint that organizations must consider when offering flexibility.

Example:

Compensation systems must balance standardization with flexibility to meet the diverse needs of employees. Flexible benefits allow employees to select from different options within a fixed employer contribution. In a multigenerational workforce, such flexibility can improve outcomes. For example, younger employees may prioritize tuition reimbursement, while employees with families may value dependent care or enhanced health coverage. Allowing choice increases fairness and satisfaction because employees can align benefits with personal needs (Heneman & Judge, 2018). When employees perceive that rewards are meaningful and tailored, organizational commitment and motivation tend to increase (Guzzo et al., 1987).

Flexible benefits can also create new problems. Without sufficient guidance, employees may make poor benefit selections leaving themselves underinsured or dissatisfied later. Additionally, flexible systems may lead to adverse selection, in which employees with higher anticipated needs disproportionately choose more costly options, increasing overall plan expenses (Shields, 2007). Such outcomes can undermine cost predictability and equity.

One major design constraint organizations must consider is cost control and regulatory compliance. Employers must structure contribution limits and eligibility rules carefully to prevent escalating costs while complying with nondiscrimination requirements (Milkovich et al., 2016). That being said, flexibility must be thoughtfully designed to balance employee choice and organizational sustainability.

References

Guzzo, R. A., Noonan, K. A., & Elron, E. (1987). Expatriate managers and the psychological contract. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(3), 363372.

Heneman, H. G., & Judge, T. A. (2018). Staffing organizations (9th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.

Milkovich, G. T., Newman, J. M., & Gerhart, B. (2016). Compensation (12th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.

Shields, J. (2007). Managing employee performance and reward: Concepts, practices, strategies. Cambridge University Press

People (Human Resources) Analytics

Readings Assignment #10: Staffing Analytics

Reading: