Chris Peterson at DSS Consulting Case Solution

1. Identify the key issues in the case study. 

Following key issues are identified in the case study:

• There was a lack of clear communication and misalignment between Meg Cooke (Chief Operating Officer) and Chris Peterson’s (leader of Southwest region team) understanding, strategic priorities and expectations. Although Chris tried to give an update on the project’s status and team efforts, Meg still decided to cancel the project. It reflects ineffective communication and misalignment between the project’s goals and organizational goals.

• As Chris’s team found that small school districts lack an integrated system for planning and budgeting and simultaneously recognized an opportunity for DSS Consulting’s expansion to larger school districts, they started planning for the development of new products. This development process necessitated technical support from DSS functional specialists and interdisciplinary or departmental coordination and collaboration. However, there was a lack of support from them during this process, which led to disappointment, demotivation, anxiety, uncertainty and frustration among team member Chris Peterson and hindered the development and implementation of a new product. Furthermore, Chris’s team also faced time constraints and resource limitation challenges.

• Although Chris believed that an integrated system for planning and budgeting holds strong market potential and can better serve the complex needs of small districts, Meg was skeptical about project’s feasibility and its strategic significance for large school districts. Such differences in perception about the project’s potential indicate a lack of clarity and shared vision within DSS Consulting, leading to ambiguity, ineffective decision making and hindering the implementation of a new strategy.

• Southwest region team perceived that decisions at DSS now seem to be more political, and the new Meg is engaged in favoritism practices. The perceived political dynamics within DSS Consulting hampered Chris’s team members’ trust and lowered their morale.

• Lastly, DSS regional teams were ambiguous about their roles and responsibilities in product development versus marketing. For instance, a regional team led by Chris Peterson was mainly focused on development of integrated system for planning and budgeting but was uncertain about their role in marketing and promotion of this system and other new DSS services to clients. This led to confusion among team members regarding strategic priorities.

2. Summarize the key players, relevant facts, and the most important issues. 

Key players:

• Meg Cooke: Meg, Chief Operating Officer (COO) at DSS Consulting, was responsible for driving structural change, a transition from practice-oriented functional to hybrid structure. Meg has an important role in decision-making regarding resource allocation, strategic direction, regional teams’ roles distribution and project cancellation.

• Chris Peterson: Chris, appointed as a leader of Southwest region team, was responsible for developing relationships with school districts in her region and leading the team in developing and marketing new products to meet the critical needs of those districts.

• Southwest region team: The Southwest region team was comprised of DSS consultants from several functional areas. Two consultants each from Information Technology, Contract Negotiations, and Procurement and Systems, and one consultant from Facilities planning was chosen for new cross-functional team. The team was tasked with developing an integrated system for budgeting and planning for school districts in Southwest region.

• Stakeholders: DSS functional specialists, district consultants and superintendents from small school districts were other key stakeholders who could offer feedback, assistance and technical support for the project.