please read the case and answer based on the attached files . kindly find the attachments .

Improving Decision Making

Table of Contents Executive Summary 3 Stakeholders 5 Analysis of the case with decision criteria’s 5 Problem Statement and Requirements 6 Strength, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats, and challenges 7 The Strengths 7 Weaknesses 7 Opportunities 9 Threats 10 Plan Components (2010-2020) with details and Plan Goal 10 Service and Collection Levels 11 Recommended strategies 11 Decentralization of Decision Making 11 Restructuring of Internal Communication Channels (Lateral Communication) 13 Change Management 15 The Need for Teamwork 18 Best strategy 20 Implementation Plan 21 Timeline 22 Budget 23 Sources of Funding 24 Conclusion 24 Appendix A 25 Appendix B 25 Footnotes 25 Figure 27

Bill Ptacek, director of the King County Library System (KCLS), and his senior management team, created a strategic plan titled “The Year 2020 Plan.” The document was intended “to ensure that the library system was structured so that resources were distributed equitably and were coordinated to maximize the value to the community of the library’s offerings.” Amidst all the strategizing and planning processes, KCLS was already in possession of a projected twenty percent increase in the population of the local community, hence translating to increased business activities for the library system.

An increase in the population by a significant margin of twenty percent will automatically translate to a proportionate increase in demand. Like a wave, the library system will be forced to fix its shortcomings so that it can be in a position to meet the subsequent demand[footnoteRef:1]. The likeliest issue that has already been revealed concerns the structural issues within the organization. Also apparent is the failure to meet some of the imperatives considered as a key to the KCLS' going concern. From a broader point of view, discussed below are some of the issues that the organization's leadership must solve so that the success path of KCLS can start to concretize to fulfill its future goals. [1: Case Study: IMPROVING DECISION MAKING AND PATRON SERVICE IN THE KING COUNTY LIBRARY SYSTEM (A) ]

The first identified problem is the apparent absence of lateral and vertical communication channels among core areas of the organization. For instance, one cannot be able to authoritatively state the formal channel of information breakdown among the personnel at the branches, area administrators, as well as the Director's Administrative Council (DAC). Closely connected to the communication channel challenges, is the difficulties that clouded policy implementation processes. For instance, the Video Loan Period and the Shift to Central Selection are two policies whose implementations experienced many challenges. The Video Loan Period had to be reviewed after an uproar emerged from the branches opposing the increment of the loaning period. The same happened with the policy of Shift to Central Selection, where, as much as it promised to elevate patron services, largely isolated the branch staffers’ role.

In general, it was a concern that the decisions made by top-level management not only affected operational officers down the pyramid but could sometimes negatively impact their patrons. However, top management was focused on organizational change. Another issue was the tension among the DAC members that was being blamed for the inefficacies that was rocking the organization's highest decision-making unit. As pointed out in the case, several monthly DAC meetings had suffered ineffective communication, leading to the non-resolution of pending matters.

After taking the time to elicit some of the issues believed to be bedeviling the organization, the consultancy had concluded that the issues pointed out above were occasioned by several factors, as discussed below.

First is that the director and his team of senior managers underestimated complaints that kept on coming from the branches and could not acknowledge the primary needs of the organization. In most cases, those in command occasionally pushed for what they thought was ideal from their point of view. That explains the reason many of the policies were failing at the implementation phase due to significant gaps that would result between realities of concession of the ideas and actual operationalization, which needed more significant input of the branch staffers. Comment by Roy: is the footage here important.

Another cause-factor is the King County Library System’s organizational structure is too amorphous with several overlaps, making it difficult to fast track implementation decisions. We also see the structure as too diversified with many divisions creating an impression of a tiny but ineffective apex and overloaded middle management group composed of many units competing for roles. Ideally, each of the thirty-eight branches should operate like related modules in an object-oriented software environment where classes containing objects can share characteristics across many classes.

However, even with such interconnection and close association, each branch must be able to enhance efficiency that is anchored in self-sufficiency. The most crucial issue here is that a branch should not be affected by management inefficiencies of another branch because all resources are tightly linked. Such is the potential impact that the centralized system the management is attempting to implement will create. Another effect of centralization of key operations in the King County Library System is that it eliminated the autonomy of the branches to undertake some implementations, hence creating backlogs that could easily have been avoided. Finally, the last factor we can mention is the apparent absence of skill standardization that arises from professional bureaucracies.

Now that both the problems and the potential causes have been investigated, the consultancy is now in a position to issue recommendations to King County Library System director, Bill Ptacek. The discussion below is a summary of each recommendation.

The first recommendation is that the organization management should consider applying lateral communication strategy to conduct transactions between the topmost administrative council, also referred to as the DAC, the area administrators down to the branches. Looking back over the identified issues that we managed to highlight as bedeviling the organization's ability to implement the "The Year 2020 Plan" was communication. As indicated in the case, two critical policies have faced difficulties in their implementation as a result of poor communication between the three identified core areas of the organization. In both cases, the branches, which occupy the base of the organizations’ structure, became surprised by policies that affected their operations. DAC also failed to build a consensus on matters because members learned of the issues to be deliberated about during the meetings. Another recommendation is to decentralize the decision-making process in the organization. The management levels occupying the base of the organization's structure should be charged with the mandate of developing formulating policies that are then forwarded to the DAC for fine-tuning and ratification. The spirit of teamwork, as well as change management, are also some recommendations that we believe can bring requisite changes to the organization.

King City Library System serves a government agency; hence, its list of stakeholders comprises the government as its shareholder. Others include individuals whose daily lives are affected by the organization’s existence in one way or another. The list can be long, but to start with the most important, we have the community members of King County. Library services are instrumental to every community. The board of trustees whose primary role is to ensure King County’s community interests are well-taken care are important stakeholders. Another group of stakeholders is the employees, both at the headquarters and the rest of the 38 branches. The organization's employees fall into various categories depending on the influence of their responsibilities on day to day running of the KCLS' activities. The employees are further categorized into various levels, such as the senior managers, middle managers, and operation officers in the branches. The last group of stakeholders includes the suppliers, unions, and many more. Comment by Roy: There are no background heare

Analysis carefully carried out connects the primary concerns raised in the case to the structure of the organization, employee motivation, culture, and to some extent, the external environmental factors. As the organization experiences continuous growth, the hierarchical top-down system of management becomes overwhelmed and therefore falls short of meeting the evolving needs of organizations. Practically, an organization should be able to gradually admit changes in its management structure as it continues to expand. The external environment automatically shifts, and that is why we occasionally see the face of the technology keep on changing with the changing nature and size of the organization involved. Another external environment change is the growing population, as well as the diversity of the patrons. The KCLS, on the other hand, is expected to have identified such changes in its external environment and proportionately adjusted.

The analysis of the case is divided into three sections to give room for in-depth exploration. The first section enables an analysis of the problems that are believed to be bedeviling the service delivery process, as well as the successful completion of the long-term expansion plan expiring in 2020. The second section prompts a discussion regarding the implementation of various policies, which turn out to be vital for change management acceptance among employees, and ultimately quality in service delivery. The last section involves recommendations to the director, that if successfully implemented, will not only help achieve the desired outcomes as described in the executive summary, but also streamline operations to avoid situations where staffs in the lower cadres feel they are being sidelined, or being prevented from undertaking their mandated roles.

Bill Ptacek had the urgency of acting upon the issues that had been brought to his attention by the time he was joining the organization. However, he realizes that the current culture of the organization might be the biggest hindrance in the course of implementing the long-term plan. The main problem is finding the best strategy that can enable the director to implement “The Year 2020 Plan,” while fixing the three issues already identified which include: ineffective communication between DAC, the branch personnel and area administrators, and difficulties encountered while implementing procedures and policies. Other challenges include poor cohesion between top-level management and the operating staff and patrons at various branches. Many a time, the top senior management attempted to implement policies without involving the operating staff, hence leading to the failure of such policies. Also, there has been poor coordination of activities among the DAC members, hence causing inefficiency during their monthly meetings. This disconnect, to a large extent, has hindered and often eliminated effective communication among the executive members.

For the consultancy to issue reliable and effective recommendations that can help the director come out of the dilemma, but also help him steer future operations in the right direction, a SWOT analysis on the King City Library Services becomes a necessary step as a starting point. In this analysis, we will point out various strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats, and also associated challenges.

KCLS, just like other majority public libraries, has a large number of users who closely identify with the various 38 branches of the organization. Another strength is highly qualified and well-trained staff, especially those occupying the senior-most positions. From the case, we learn that all the DAC membership possess a master's degree in library-related courses or information science. The rest of the employees are also trained and experienced, as well. A majority of the employees in the organization have tangible experiences of dealing with library operations, having worked for the same organization for a couple of years. The advantage of this is that they are fully familiar with and understand the business environment of the KCLS.

The main weakness that has significantly contributed to the current situation at the organization is its culture. KCLS’s culture can be described as ineffective, non-productive, and inefficient as well. Organizational culture is a diverse topic that calls a proper dissection. We will, therefore, spend some time linking KCLS' culture with weakness in an analysis' point of view. In basic terms, culture consists of the various beliefs, as well as attitudes and expectations, that bring together a specific community and give it an identity. Therefore, for purposes of this report, organizational culture will be defined as the behavior of people in an organizational setting that is governed by the beliefs and values they share. The organizational culture of KCLS is, therefore, the said system's basic personality. It is based on this culture that employees adapt their behaviors. Towards this end, employees also perform their day-to-day duties and tasks, activities, and even dress based on this very culture.

At present, KCLS's culture is not aligned with its mission. It is important to note that, in essence, the influence shared values have on the efficient running of an organization's operations is often significant. In the case of KCLS, there is no common network of shared beliefs and values as a consequence of the conflict between DAC and branch personnel, as well as the conflict amongst DAC members. This disconnect effectively negates efficient and professional service delivery.

At the branch level, staff members feel that the decisions made by DAC are not consultative enough, and often end up negatively impacting patrons as well as line staff. An excellent example of this is the implementation of new policies or programs that affect branches, without prior engagements with branch employees. For instance, overnight changes to the Public Access (PAC) Terminals without staff input, or some of the training initiatives for staff members tasked with sensitizing the public on the said changes. Staff members also feel that their concerns are either deliberately ignored or forgotten altogether. For instance, there is one particular instance where a microfiche reader took a whole year to repair due to the authorization of the repair work. At the same time, the Service Center team, comprising of top management, appears too focused on competing at the interdepartmental level. It is important to note that the informal running of DAC meetings provides a perfect breeding ground for the said competition. With items being introduced 'on-the-spot,' only those who can either garner the support of their 'friendly' members and/or can aggressively present and support their agendas hope to see the said agendas through. Same day agendas effectively means that, from time to time, excellent ideas could be disregarded or endlessly postponed, not because they are ineffective, but because of sheer resistance founded on organizational politics. It should be noted that, in essence, the current way of doing things defines KCLS' organizational culture, which leads to the formation of 'de facto' policies that not only provide guidance to employees and senior officers of KCLS but also dictate the overall direction of the entire organization. Adaptations ought to be made if the library system envisioned is to be achieved.

Having identified strengths and weaknesses of KCLS, we explore opportunities that the organization can exploit to improve its status, either in terms of service delivery to the community, or just enhancing its internal processes. The greatest opportunity that KCLS has is technology. Although we are told that there was automation that the previous director undertook, KCLS still has a long way to go in terms of developing a robust information technology infrastructure that would significantly limit the number of physical books they display in the shelves. Further, the organizational structure revealed numerous duplications in roles played by the employees, hence the delays and unnecessary bureaucracies being witnessed in the line of service delivery, as well as those of communication. Another opportunity is that the organization is funded through the government, hence saving it from the hustles or relying on sales for continuity. This structure gives the organization an opportunity to focus on service delivery to the communities within the county.

As things are, KCLS faces the threat of losing its top talented employees to other library systems either within the District of Columbia or outside. KCLS offers competitive salaries. In fact, numerous employees draw their inspiration from other things such as career development, being able to influence processes and contribute to the final product, and many others. Such individuals are likely to become frustrated and will consider other employers. For instance, a senior staff is heard registering his concerns over the lack of consensus among his colleagues during one of the DAC monthly meetings. The tone of his expression is engulfed in defeat, showing how frustrating working in the company had become. Comment by Roy: The library system is in Washington State.

Bill Ptacek joined the King County Library System (KCLS) in the capacity of a director and, together with the help of his senior management team, prepared the “The Year 2020 Plan.” The document was intended to achieve a couple of issues, chief among them being “to ensure that the library system was structured so that resources were distributed equitably and were coordinated to maximize the value to the community of the library’s offerings.” The KCLS is also laying the ground for a potential increase in demand for library services as a result of a projected increase in the population of the King County community by twenty percent. The plan itself was meant to address vital issues such as service and collection levels, capital projects, staffing models, and revenue and expenditures. Below is a brief discussion about the mentioned components of the plan.

As earlier indicated, analysis carefully carried out connects the elementary concerns raised in the case to the structure of the organization, employee motivation, culture, and to some extent, external environmental factors. The centralized, top-down approach that KCLS adopted annihilates collaboration as well as communication and coordination among the 38 branches, which are diverse and unique in their ways. The centralized approach of service delivery at best coerces these diverse and unique branches into unnecessary homogeneity, hence suffocating them. By obstructing communication and collaboration among the branches, service delivery becomes processes that become slow and frustrating to the various branch employees, as well as the patrons. The system being utilized by the KCLS fits organizations that handle homogenous, predictable, and well-understood tasks. However, the KCSL's environment is a diverse, fast-changing, and non-predictable environment that requires a laterally coordinated system that is flexible enough to accommodate creativity and quick decision making.

To begin with, two of the most prominent issues that this report seeks to evaluate are bureaucracy and centralized decision making. KCLS is a hugely centralized organization. In essence, KCLS provides for a hierarchical structure of decision-making where key decisions and deliberations are made by the senior management team, which is referred to as the director's Administrative Council (DAC). It comprises of a total of eight individuals and all the decisions made concerning the direction and management of the library system has to be deliberated upon by this group. It is, however, important to note that there are several other formations, like the Language committee, within the system that provides DAC with advisory assistance.

With the formal decision-making body, lower chain managers, such as the 38 managing librarians, have limited decision-making potential. Therefore, they cannot implement policies and adopt drastic measures without DAC's express approval. In essence, this structure has its advantages and disadvantages. While KCLS benefits from uniformity in decision making, in which case there can be better coordination across all the libraries, the system could lose in terms of delayed authorization of courses of action – which negatively affects service delivery. For instance, in what could be attributed to the downsides of centralized decision making, authorization to fix a microfiche reader took over 12 months. Bureaucracy, in this case, happens to be a consequence of centralized decision making.

Decisions ought to be decentralized, in which case several other individuals (apart from the eight persons who sit in DAC), can share in the decision-making responsibilities. Currently, the organization has a great percentage of staff that have professional training. In addition to having access to a graduate program at the University of Washington, KCLS requires that its librarians possess, at a minimum, a Library and Information Science (or equivalent) Master's Degree. These are men and women capable of making rational and appropriate decisions concerning the day to day management of library processes. I would recommend that the area administrators' scope and authority be enhanced to include authorization of specific aspects of branch operations.

There are currently three area managers, with each overseeing at least 11 of the 38 branches of the library system. Each of these area managers should be given authority to address service delivery issues that are unique to individual branches. Branch managers, on the other hand, could be given more authority in getting things done at their branch level or addressing day-to-day concerns like minor repairs. Therefore, in essence, issues unique to a specific branch ought not to find their way into the monthly Public Services Meeting, or to DAC. It is my opinion that the Public Service Meeting ought to include only the three area managers, as opposed to the 38 managing librarians. Discussions and deliberations in this meeting should be limited to i) service delivery problems that affect multiple branches, and ii) policy issues originating from the Service Center. Only concerns or clarifications that cannot be addressed in this forum ought to be passed on to DAC.

Comment by Roy: Add as strategy : . Committee to organize agenda of DAC meeting

Further, in keeping with the spirit of decentralization, there is also a need to ensure that the physical offices of the 38 managers are located at the branch level. The area supervisors should also have their physical offices relocated from the Service Center, in downtown Seattle. The reasoning behind this is to keep the said administrators and managers closer to branch personnel and for more effective day to day management of the branches. Moving area supervisors effectively means that the only person to be housed within the Service Center should be the members of the director's Administrative Council and staff members of the seven departments. Comment by Roy: I am not sure if this section accurate or not!

The relevance of a smooth flow of information in an organizational setting cannot be overstated. Towards this end, ensuring that there is open and ongoing communication between top management and members of staff in the lower levels of the organizational chart is critical. Excellent communication not only helps clarify professional objectives but also ensures that conflicts and various pending issues are addressed before they get out of hand. KSLS has what I would refer to as a communication crisis. Whether it is communicating new changes or updating employees of new policy directions, KSLS has fallen short on this goal. Concerns raised by employees do not often get through to the decision-making level, and when they do, no progress updates are offered. It is important to note that unlike, as is often the case for flat organizational structures, hierarchical organizational structures frequently hinder communication. This is clear in the case of KSLS, and a culture change is needed to promote healthy internal communication by embracing various approaches. Comment by Roy: Is this correct?

First, a system of offering regular updates on concerns and issues that have been raised ought to be put in place. It should be noted that at present, branch managers feel that most of the issues they table at the Public Services Meetings do not get the attention they deserve. They point out that in the past, concerns brought to the attention of the Assistant Directors for urgent resolution are forwarded to the DAC. The result is a long wait, and in some instances, nothing is heard about the forwarded concerns again. One of the branch managers refers to the whole setup as a 'black hole.' In his own words, you would have no idea whether "the issue you placed on the table at the Head's Meetings would be resolved eventually by DAC or slip through the cracks." This dissatisfaction is an indicator of the need for progress updates. Progress updates could be issued via the already existing structures, i.e. for issues brought to the attention of DAC, progress updates could be passed down to the branch level through the area administrators. This is essentially top-down communication.

It should also be noted that bottom-up communication is also as important. This is more so in the case given, which shows a need to ensure that employees are given a voice. Towards this end, there is a need for top management to collect feedback from those at the lower levels of the organizational chart. In basic terms, feedback would come in handy in the assessment of how those meant to implement the perceive various policies or decisions. This feedback is critical as it enables the top managers to institute corrective measures where need be. If a feedback mechanism had been in place during the 'video loan period debacle,’ measures to remedy the situation would have been set in motion even sooner. Over time, the levels of dissatisfaction have arisen because of what the branch personnel terms as 'thoughtless neglect.' They feel that the service center acts alone, and it is they who are left with messy situations on their hands. The formulation and implementation of a system of feedback from the branch personnel level to the top decision organ will ensure that the dissatisfaction is arrested sooner than later. Such a system could be put in place through a dedicated email channel, or an anonymous suggestion mailing system. KSLS will benefit from various fronts from efficient internal communication. In addition, to further enhancing the morale of employees, effective communication will help eliminate misunderstandings and contribute towards the enhancement of various procedures and processes.

Change management execution is not only the preparation for change, but also the implementation, and support for change. It should be noted that failure to manage the change process well could result in resistance to change. Resistance to change could be manifested in a variety of ways. These include, but are not limited to, outright sabotage of the change efforts, lukewarm support for change, absenteeism, or high employee turnover. At KSLS, there is a dire need for adjustments related to how policy and technical changes are implemented. Most branch level managers believe that no consultations are made before the implementation of various changes, with most of them being caught unawares by technical changes. I would recommend the implementation of a five-step change management process to ensure seamless implementation of change. The change management process has been highlighted below.

First, there is a need to define the change desired in clear and concise terms. The clear and concise articulation of a policy change helps in the assessment of its viability, need, and urgency. It is also at this point that the resources to be allocated are defined in terms such as cost and personnel needs. The questions which could be asked include i) What ought to be changed? ii) Why is the change necessary? And, iii) What ought to be done to ensure that the desired change succeeds in the implementation stage?

Secondly, there is a need to seek the input of all those who will, in one way or another, be impacted or affected by the incoming change or those tasked with the actual implementation of the said change. For input to be meaningful, the intended change and the reason for the same ought to be clearly defined to those charged with implementation. In the case of KSLS, there have been instances of new policies as well as programs being initiated by the administration with zero input from those who will be implementing the said changes, i.e., branch employees. A perfect example of a lack of input would be the 'video loan policy' implementation with no input at all from the branch level where its implementation would take effect. Branch personnel, in this case, employees were aware of the impending change when they received official communication from DAC a few days to the rollout. It is little wonder that the video loan period policy became an implementation nightmare, and adjustments had to be made at some point. The debacle could have been avoided had the change in the video loan policy been clearly defined early enough, and the input of branch personnel sought before fine-tuning the policy.

In yet another instance where the input of those to be impacted by the change was not sought before implementing the change, DAC, acting on the recommendations of a consultant, gave the green light to a new shift to a central purchasing of books policy. The system was, however, poorly received by branch personnel who viewed this as an insult to one of their most enjoyable activities, i.e., the selection and ordering of books. The dissatisfaction with the new policy, which could lead to resistance to change, could have been addressed easily had DAC sensitized branch personnel of the need for change and taken into consideration their views. In this case, the findings of the consultant could have been communicated to those impacted by the change before the actual implementation to enhance a 'partnership' kind of engagement between the senior managers and branch personnel on this issue.

Third, in most cases, change calls for the learning of new skills and the development of new capabilities. The need for training cannot, therefore, be overstated in the management of change. In the case of KSLS, some of the changes to programs as well as policies originating from the administration, became an implementation nightmare because those who were charged with their implementation had not been familiarized with the software change. A good example of this is the upgrading of the Public Access (PAC) Terminals. In this case, the terminals were upgraded overnight, and the branch personnel were not told of the upgrades until the morning when they reported for duty. As one of the reference librarians who was caught up in the ensuing events pointed out, it was embarrassing to give patrons erroneous information and be unable to offer them a valid explanation of what exactly was happening. Complaints regarding failure to train staff in advance have been raised before. This routinely happens whenever new software is introduced. There have also been instances where the period of training is not properly aligned with the implementation phase, i.e., in instances where training takes place a long time before the actual implementation. When no refresher engagements are offered, it is possible for those who attended training to forget some key concepts. Training could, in this case, be informal or structured. Further, the said training could be offered via a wide variety of mediums, including but not limited to, online modules, sit-in training workshops, and hardcopy handouts. The most important questions to be taken into considerations, in this case, include i) What are the required skills that will be required for successful implementation? ii) Which will be the most appropriate delivery method for the identified training efforts?

Next is the actual implementation and tracking phase when a technical or policy change is rolled out. At this point, both the top management and the team charged with implementation ought to work closely together, especially given the need to ensure that personnel fully adjust to the change and to provide additional resources when needed. In instances where the need for adjustments is identified, corrective measures, as well as reinforcements, ought to be instituted.

It is clear that teamwork is lacking in this case. The entire library system does not work as a unit in the delivery of services to patrons. Without teamwork, it is often difficult to get tasks accomplished in an organizational setting. It is important to note that each of those who work for KSLS has a special skill set that would be most useful if deployed in a team setting and complemented by the skill sets of other employees. The Service Center-based senior management team does not work as a team. As a matter of fact, the interdepartmental competition seems to guide and inform most of their responses and undertakings. One only needs to visit the Monday morning DAC meetings to have a feel of how disjointed the managerial team is. The modus operandi, in this case, is largely informal, and new items are often added as the meeting progresses. It is also not uncommon for attendees to shoot down or fail to support each other’s agendas if they feel that the said agendas threaten the implementation of their preferred courses of action. This dissent is despite the fact that this is a team that should, ideally, be reading from the same script.

Teamwork further suffers as one descends down the organizational hierarchy. There is a 'them-versus-us' conflict with branch managers feeling that DAC deliberately ignores some of the issues raised during various forums, i.e. during the Heads Meeting. As one branch manager who has been frustrated by the failure of issues to be addressed points out, there are no guarantees that issues forwarded to DAC will be addressed. This frustration and discouragement kills teamwork. It is important to note that top management has a generalist view of the entire library system and is best placed on formulating decisions whose impact is felt across all the branches. On the other hand, branch level personnel have the best knowledge of what patrons need and the actual problems on the ground. As one branch manager points out, most of the decisions made at the Service Center have no input at all from the branches. This effectively complicates service delivery at the branches.

There are various strategies that KSLS could implement in an attempt to further enhance teamwork within its ranks. It is important to note that in basic terms, teamwork cannot succeed without the enhancement of communication and cooperation across the organization. There is an urgent need to build respect as well as trust within the organization. This is more so in this case since without trust, i.e., between the top management and branch personnel, relations are likely to continue to be strained, leading to suboptimal performance. The lower cadre employees should feel that their viewpoints are respected, and concerns are taken into consideration. Also, in an attempt to ease relations across the entire library system, management could introduce an end of year party to be held in the month of December. Owing to the huge number of staff members and the logistical challenges that would be posed by attempting to have a central location for the party, separate parties could be convened by the area administrators within their areas of jurisdiction. It is important to note that parties and social gatherings of this nature would not only be an effective way of rewarding employees and showing appreciation, but also a great team-building tool as employees are likely to interact and share ideas.

There is also the need to cultivate and further enhance open communication. The various elements and enhancers of top-down communication, bottom-up communication, and horizontal communication ought to be implemented. Open communication channels will ensure that decisions and new policy directions originating from the top managers reach their intended recipients, and an appropriate mechanism of feedback collection is implemented across all organizational levels. Horizontal communication amongst senior managers also ought to be further strengthened so that issues designated as discussion items can be evaluated by each member before the actual meeting.

Further, it is also important to ensure that all employees have clearly defined responsibilities and roles. Each person working for KSLS should be aware of the role they play towards the overall success of the library system. Also, to ensure that the entire library system team oversees the smooth running of operations as a single unit, conflicts should be resolved swiftly. Conflicts are inevitable. When conflict is present, what makes the difference between the success and failure of an organization is conflict management. Effective conflict management strategies would help to repair relationships among DAC members. In this case, the said members would realize that they are indeed part of the same team working towards the same end. Upon realizing this, they are likely to ditch meaningless competitions and instead focus on working together to achieve the mission of KSLS.

Comment by Roy: Add these strategies: Staff training Committee to solve problem.

In the case of KCLS, the best strategy would be one that has the ability to solve the problems mentioned, while at the same time does not introduce radical changes that would result in KCLS losing the image it spent several years to piece together. The strategy also brings together the above recommendations at the time of implementation. Analysis carefully carried out connects the primary concerns raised related to the structure of the organization, employee motivation, culture, and to some extent, the external environmental factors. KCLS’s current vertical management system has given rise to an organizational structure viewed as rigid and dictatorial. The current system frustrates efforts of collaboration and negotiation.

The best strategy for KCLS, therefore, is a lateral integration management system. A lateral integration management system focuses on task forces, meetings, coordination of roles, creation of opportunities for employees, matrix structures, participation in decision-making processes of the organization, as well as policy formulation and development. The strategy also promotes individual employee creativity and innovation, consultation among employees, and respect for individual input. The framework encourages each employee to make independent decisions and account for their actions. Compared to the top-down vertical strategy of organizational management that KCLS uses, we can see why there are problems of this nature in the organization.

The implementation of this strategy involves an overhaul of the existing top-down vertical management system into a lateral integration management system. This implementation process will make use of the four suggested recommendations so that it fully takes care of all problems being witnessed with the existing system. As earlier indicated, it should be noted that failure to manage the change process well could result in resistance to change. The actual implementation brings together the technical or policy change rolled out. The top management will appoint a team that will be mandated to implement the change. The team will be referred to as the change implementation team. The top management and the team charged with implementation will work closely to come up with terms of change – especially given the need to ensure that personnel fully adjust to the change and additional resources are allocated when needed. In instances where the need for adjustments is identified, corrective measures, as well as reinforcements, will be instituted.

The team will first define the change desired in clear and concise terms, which in this case is changing the organization's top-down vertical management system to a lateral integrated management system. The team will have to make the change agenda as clear as possible and also concisely explain a policy change that assesses the viability, need, and urgency of the process. From there, the team will quote resources to be allocated are defined in terms of cost, personnel need.

Timelines refer to the breakdown of the change process into dates and periods that are definite. For instance, the team responsible for the process will disintegrate it into phases, then issue dates, as well as a description of activities that will take place. An example is the first meeting that brings all organization employees, including the 38 branches, where the change management team explains how the whole process of transformation will span out. The following table explains the change process time that the team can adopt.

Just like project processes, change management requires budget allocation for funding of the processes that are involved. Below are graphs demonstrating the same. The budget estimate is indicative of all the items needed to support the various alternatives and recommendations highlighted in this report.

As a government agency, the main source of funds to fund activities, such as change management, will come from the government and the agency's own revenue streams.

In conclusion, the current culture of the library system can be described as ineffective, inefficient, and unproductive. The need for corrective measures to optimize the system for service delivery cannot be overstated. This change will be the subject of the long-range plan. The problem to be addressed is two-fold. There are inherent tensions at DAC that get in the way of effective and efficient decision-making. Secondly, branch personnel feels that their input is not taken into consideration and that they have no say in a variety of issues affecting their respective branches. In seeking to address these dual components, this document highlights the specific factors that tie to the said components and offers recommendations backed-up by best practices in organizational behavior and management. Our intervention has delivered the following recommendations to the director; decentralizing the decision making, restructuring the internal communication channels, the need for teamwork, and change management. This change is finally accompanied by the best strategy, together with its implementation plan.

After the video loan plan, a few issues were immediately evident to the branch staff. Enabling patrons to lease videos for as long as fourteen days and then repletely check them out with no limit, making it difficult for people to find and check out popular videos. With organizations like Netflix and Red Box developing in ubiquity, it is a brilliant plan to keep an enormous motion picture assortment in stock. This recommendation will help draw old and new clients to the KCLS framework. Notwithstanding, under the present rules, motion picture rentals are turning into a huge piece of a Librarian’s time, and is having an intense effect on the bookkeeper's everyday work.

When the new PAC framework was implemented without library staff's input, it demonstrated how disengaged the Service Center was from the working center. Staff should be prepared to utilize new innovations. Training will enable custodians to help benefactors all the more successfully while creating an increasingly positive workplace among representatives and executives. Each Regional Manager should plan preparing days to visit the different provincial libraries. This recommendation will give directors time to perceive how the new innovation is influencing the work environment’s effectiveness, and time to hear criticism from representatives. By and large, more training would help advantage the social structure just as profitability among the branches.

Case Study: IMPROVING DECISION MAKING AND PATRON SERVICE IN

THE KING COUNTY LIBRARY SYSTEM (A)

Board of Trustees