Organization Structure

As a senior on my high school varsity football team, we successfully clinched our first playoff berth in several years, beating the traditional powerhouse schools in our division along the way.  Not only did we make it to the playoffs, we won the first two rounds easily, and lead the eventual state champs 17-0 at halftime in the third game, however, a breakdown in leadership led to us losing the game 34-17.  I will go into this debacle later.  For now, let’s take a look at how this team was organized, and what is was that allowed us to be so successful.

The fundamental team configuration followed a dual authority model.  I believe this is fairly common across and sports organization. This is due to the fact that there is simply too much for one person to handle in terms of physically coaching players, and managing all three phases of the game (offense, defense, special teams).  The head coach is the first boss.  He then delegates authority to coordinators for each phase of the game as I mentioned.  They have the authority over each of those areas while the head coach has the ultimate say in matters as well as handling the general game plan, talking to players, team morale, etc.  After this second level of bosses, the structure becomes what I would say it something of a hybrid between dual authority and a simple hierarchy.  For example, from the head coach to the offensive coordinator, the structure follows dual authority.  From the offensive coordinator, there are several position coaches such as running back coach, wide receiver coach, quarterback coach, etc.  However, each of these positions have equal authority which is why I believe it fits the simple hierarchy definition better.  As a running back, I reported directly to the running back coach during most of practice, but at times would be involved in drills run by any of the other position coaches, there was no difference in their level of authority over me. 

When we look at Katzenbach & Smith’s distinguishing characteristics, several stand out to me as defining characteristics of the team I was part of.  First, high performing teams shape purpose in response to a demand or opportunity.  This was definitely a huge aspect of the team when I played.  Coaches communicated their goals and expectations to the players, and in turn the players knew what they needed to do in order to keep the team functioning as a well-oiled machine, avoiding conflicts and collectively growing stronger as a team.  The second characteristic also holds true.  I remember very clearly our stat board hanging on the wall outside the locker room.  After every game, the coach would post key stats on the board, really allowing us to absorb what we had accomplished that game, or sometimes, not accomplished.  This served as a powerful motivator in several ways.  When the stats were great, we felt great as a team.  Confidence is a powerful factor in any sport.   On the flipside, when the stats were not so great, we were embarrassed and sometimes a little angry.  Pride is another powerful motivating factor, not just in sports but in life. The last characteristic, members of high performing teams hold themselves collectively accountable, was a major driving force the entire season.  When someone on the team failed, missed a play call, blew an assignment, or anything else, the rest of the team felt collectively responsible, and in turn we did our best to not let that particular thing happen again.  This is a huge boost in morale for the player involved, and ultimately leads to the team, truly playing as a team where everyone is involved and nobody is left on an island to suffer the consequences of their mistake.   Feeling a mistake was one person’s fault creates division within the team and division leads to failure.

Ironically, as I mentioned at the start of this post, we were leading the eventual state champs 17-0 at halftime.  However, our head coach decided to change the structure of the organization to a one boss structure.  He allowed his ego to get in the way and began calling the plays himself, deviating from the original game plan which was working perfectly.  This completely changed the tone of the game and ultimately led to us losing the game.  Sure, there were mistakes made by players, but only due to the coach putting us in a position where we weren't able to perform at our best.

Opportunism is Lacking

There is one type of opportunism, or lack thereof, I am very familiar with.  As a student in college, I do not have to work 40 hour weeks, nor do I have class all day, every day.  Given these facts coupled with the availability of a syllabus which outlines due dates in detail,  in theory, I should have ample time during the week to complete my assignments well before they are due, and save myself the headache of a last minute rush to finish my work. Yet week after week, year after year, hundreds of thousands of students find themselves pushing deadlines and cramming before exams. In fact, I am suffering the consequences of this lack of opportunism at this very moment.  Even though I have had multiple hours of free time every day this week, I have not started this blog post until 8 pm on a Friday night.  There are many things I would rather be doing right now, including joining the rest of my apartment as they go into “fun mode”. 

Procrastination is not limited to college students.  People procrastinate in all manner of ways.  People put off dieting, even though it may be critical to their health.  Some people put off paying bills, even though doing so will result in financial penalties. It’s not always something unpleasant we put off doing.  It may be telling a friend you will buy concert tickets again and again until finally the tickets are no longer available and you don’t get to go, or you have to buy them at a much higher cost. It may be seeing an incredible deal on a vacation package, yet we don’t purchase it when we have the chance and sooner or later it’s gone.  Another I can think of is how people avoid going to the gym, even when they have the time and ability.  This is ironic to me because going to the gym is something I would do to avoid writing this blog post, or other homework. 

So why do people procrastinate?  There are a variety of answers to this question, most pointing to an avoidance of pain or fear on various levels. By procrastinating, we don’t leave our comfort zone.  Ironically, eventually we all have to face the music. By avoiding our fears, they simply grow larger until the deadline arrives and we are forced to face whatever we have been avoiding doing. This would explain why an action that some people avoid doing (working out), is something I do to avoid another action (writing this blog).  Going to the gym is well within my comfort zone, I love working out.   Blogging on the other hand, is not.  

While I agree with this answer, I also feel there are other reasons why we do not take action when we have the opportunity.  I believe some people are simply lazy and choose the action that provides immediate gratification.  There are many times where I have chosen to sit on the couch and watch TV rather than completing an easy assignment which presents little to no challenge at all. A perfect example of this is the surveys many professors conduct at the beginning of the semester, including in this class.  These are easy, require no actual work, and take very little time, yet many students, including myself, don’t complete these until they are in class the first day.   In the case of buying tickets to an event, we put it off even though we know the event itself would be incredibly fun and have no concerns about the event.  I don’t believe the “fear” rationale is appropriate in these situations. 

On a side note, several hours of my free time this week have come while sitting at work on a computer.  I could have easily shifted my work responsibilities to someone else, and worked on this blog post instead.  I chose to do my work and put off writing this post.  Was this lack of opportunism or was the driving factor my desire to act ethically?  Even I am not quite sure.

Organizational Change & Transaction Costs

As a sophomore, I was fortunate to be accepted into a very prestigious organization here on campus.  When I say prestigious, you might be tempted to laugh a little, after all, how prestigious can an RSO really be?  Rest assured, as a student within my major at the university, there really was no higher goal in my young college career.  In fact, I was not accepted into the organization the first time, but the second time around I had matured and worked on my communication skills, and I was lucky enough to be offered a bid.  The fact that I was offered a bid during a fall semester but not a spring semester is rather ironic now that I have experienced it from the other side.  Typically a fall rush has around 400-500 candidates, which are then whittled down to a pledge class of about 20, while a spring rush may usually only have about half that.  Once admitted, my experience lived up to everything I could have wanted out of a school organization.  I found my circle of friends on campus, began to build my network, and in general had a great time.  I know this story is not unique, most students go through some sort of searching out process and finally find their place on campus.  I only describe what being a part of this organization meant to me as an attempt to highlight how much the change which occurred within this organization really impacted myself as well as my close friends. 

By now you are probably wondering, what happened?  Well, as in most organizations, there are certain “traditions” which develop over time, and to the members of the organization, are an integral part of what makes them so close.  Unfortunately, from the standpoint of a governing central office, these traditions often violate bylaws the organization is supposed to follow. It so happened that a disgruntled member took it upon themselves to detail several of these violations to the central office of this organization.  Long story short, this resulted in an extended investigation and suspension of many activities myself and the other members valued, essentially changing the culture of the organization as well as the structure.  Many new guidelines were put in place, with the chain of command as well as organizational bylaws being changed, all due to harmless transgressions. As a byproduct of all this, many members, including myself, felt that the organization had changed to such a degree it was no longer worthwhile to continue to pledge time and effort to the organization.  While the organization still exists, it is essentially completely changed from what it once was, and does not hold the same meaning to many of its current and former members.  

A transaction cost is defined as the cost incurred in making an economic exchange, or in other words, the cost of participating in a market. Of the three types; search and information, bargaining, and policing and enforcement, bargaining costs hold the most relevance to me due to recently having gone through the negotiation process after receiving a job offer.  After receiving the offer, I went through several rounds of negotiations to work out the salary and benefits that seemed most desirable, and fair, to me.  Besides the discomfort in negotiating, it took a considerable amount of time that could have been used elsewhere. This is also similar to a scenario in game theory called the game of chicken.  The game of chicken states that while both parties prefer not to yield to each other, the worst possible outcome is when neither party yields. I believe a job offer negotiation is very similar in many aspects.  I have my own self interests in mind in terms of compensation, as does the firm’s representative.  However, the firm has already invested considerable time and resources into my growth while I was an intern, and does not want that to be wasted.  On the other hand, I have invested my own time as an intern, and have nurtured the relationships at that firm in hopes of being offered a job.  Clearly, if we cannot come to an agreement, both parties lose.  These are all factors in determining when is the correct time to accept the offer on the table, a very important decision in any young professional’s life.

Who is Alvin Roth?

Before picking up this class at the last minute, and before being assigned this alias, I really had no idea who Alvin Roth was, what he did, or what he was famous for.  In fact, I know very little about any famous economists, although being a business student, I probably should make it a point to learn more.  But enough about me, back to Alvin Roth.  Interestingly enough, Alvin Roth was not an immediate success.  In fact, Roth was initially a high school dropout and it was only after a failed Ph.D. qualifying exam that he met the mentor and advisor who would help him get through his struggles at Stanford.  Soon afterwards, Roth ended up taking an appointment in economics at THE University of Illinois where he developed much of his research on game theory. After his time at Illinois, Roth then went to Pittsburgh and finally to Harvard. At the peak of his career at Harvard, Roth decided to leave and take a job at Stanford University, surprising quite a few people along the way.

After reading up on Alvin Roth as a person, as well as some of his work, I would have to say not only is he a fascinating person, but he has done some very interesting things with economics.  As I mentioned, I know very little about famous economists much less the complex theories they are famous for studying and/or applying.  So I did a bit of side research on game theory.  There are myriad high level definitions of game theory, but the one I found to make the most sense defined it as “the study of how people, companies or nations (referred to as agents or players) determine strategies in different situations in the face of competing strategies acted out by other agents or players.”  This all lead me to wonder, how did Roth apply his expertise in game theory and subsequently win a Nobel prize? 

Roth used game theory to develop some very relevant systems that play a role in very critical areas of our lives.  Roth further developed a mathematical algorithm which was then used to redesign several existing systems to work more efficiently. The first major area in which Roth applied game theory was within the medical field.  Roth developed a system to match doctors with hospitals, and a system to match organ donors with patients.  Roth also applied game theory to the school system, developing a system to better match school pupils with schools.  

The best known of all these is the National Resident Matching Program.  Also known as “The Match”, this system adopted Roth’s algorithm in order to more successfully match US student doctors to hospitals.  Roth also applied his algorithm to the live organ donor system.  In a nutshell, this “enabled patients to trade nonmatching donor kidneys for those that match, connecting people who need kidneys with the right donors” (Woolhouse & Denison, Boston Globe).  According to the program manager at UNOS National Kidney Paired Donation Program in Richmond, “Al reinvented the way living organs are donated” (Woolhouse & Denison, Boston Globe).  

My personal favorite, and something I can relate to because of going through the process of applying to schools myself, is Roth’s application of game theory to the problem of Boston’s school selection process.  “In Boston, the school assignment system was operating badly. Parents competing for popular schools were often penalized if they did not get their first choice; if their second and third choices were also popular, those slots would be filled by students choosing them first” (Woolhouse & Denison, Boston Globe).  Roth created a system where parents and students would be incentivized to select their true preferred schools, and therefore not attempt to “game” the system.

Above all, in spite of his success and knowledge, all accounts point to Roth being an even better person.  A genuine, down to earth, and inspiring person, loved by everyone who knows him.  This, to me, makes me pretty content, and inspired, to be using his name as my alias for a semester.

 Is Alvin Roth’s work relevant to this course?  I believe it is.  Going back to the definition of game theory, I believe it would apply to the classic problem of participation in class.  I have two options, participate or don’t participate.  If I do participate, I may be wrong and feel embarrassed, while everyone else benefits.  However, if I don’t participate, someone else will take the risk of being wrong while I benefit.  In order to correct this, most classes include a participation grade which then forces students to participate or risk being penalized for not doing so.   This situation appears to me to be agents (students) acting out strategies (participate or not participate) in the face of competing strategies by other agents (students & professor).  While my interpretation may not be completely accurate, game theory at its core involves agents, or organizations, which is what we have set out to learn more about in this course. Given this, I feel it is very relevant to our class.

Sources Used:

"Alvin E. Roth - Biographical." Alvin E. Roth - Biographical. N.p., n.d. Web. 04 Sept. 2015.

Ro, Sam. "NYC And Boston High School Students Can Thank Nobel Prize Winner Alvin Roth For Their Fates." Business Insider. Business Insider, Inc, 15 Oct. 2012. Web. 04 Sept. 2015.

Scheve, Tom. "How Game Theory Works." HowStuffWorks. HowStuffWorks.com, n.d. Web. 04 Sept. 2015.

Woolhouse, Megan, and D.C. Denison. "Harvard Professor Alvin Roth Awarded Nobel Prize in Economics - The Boston Globe." BostonGlobe.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 04 Sept. 2015.

Test Post

This is a test post.