Case Study Group Peer Evaluation (Charity Organization)

Case Study:

A CEO of a large charity organization is adept at attracting big donors to generously support its various causes. Her popularity is enormous. She is invited to donors’ homes and to accompany them on their vacations and even attend their children’s birthday parties. She has been the CEO for seven years and is highly protective of her contacts.  For instance, she will not introduce board members or executive staff to the donors. She does not share information about the donors with her team and attempts to make all contacts go through her.

Irregularities appear occasionally on her requests for reimbursements, but they seem petty considering the funds she receives. In addition, the accounting is murky on monies pledged and what is received from the large donors. The past year, a few employees have complained about her temper, but these too are overlooked as not serious. HR counsels her to improve and she is given extra resources to address the issue. Since her last review, more employees have come forward and are filing lawsuits alleging harassment. One of them is alleging sexual advances on her part to a male subordinate.

An attorney specializing in employment law is retained and an investigation is done. His findings are reported to the Chairman of the Board and the Executive Committee of three people. These findings indicate the CEO should be dismissed. The Chairman is now obligated to communicate the recommended action to dismiss the CEO and the reasons why it must be done.

The Board consists of 20 individuals and many of these members are ardent supporters of the CEO. Many of them share information freely. It is highly probably that the attorney’s findings will leak the moment the entire board is briefed. If the CEO is alerted to her imminent firing, she may approach the donors to wage a campaign for her to stay … or she may go to the media first for a preemptive strike. 

Roles:

· Chairman of the Board: Thomas Bjork, has been in role for past two consecutive terms.

· Donor Shauna DeMontes: Highly influential among the other donors.

· Volunteer Manager Kenny Sartos: Manages over 100 volunteers, has been in position three months.

· Director of Operations Phyllis Hubert: Oversees all departments including HR. She’s been very loyal to the CEO and doesn’t like the Chairman of the Board.

· Reporter Malika Obecini: She works for the most popular newspaper, print and online.

Template

I. ROLE. Each person picks one of the roles listed in the case study. You cannot pick the same role as your colleague. The PM does not pick from the list. Discuss what your role was, why you chose this and the ensuing challenges. You must provide 3 references which support what that role might entail. For example, if you are a supervisor, what type of duties, obligations would you have?

II. QUESTIONS. As the person/s in the role you picked, identify three main questions you could be asked. Explain why you chose these questions among all others and why you prioritized them in order of 1st, 2nd and 3rd. You must justify each question and provide 4 references.

III. SOLUTIONS. As a team you are to identify what answers, resources, individuals, research which may be used to address the questions from each role. You must justify each solution for the specific question asked and provide four references. The information presented should look professional as if it could appear in a business memo.