Lewis & Lewis, P. C. is a small, Jackson-based accounting firm that employs thirty-five people and was founded by Phil Willis in 1968. It exhibits many interesting aspects of organizational behavior, which we will examine below from several perspectives. After examining the company’s current policies and practices, we will evaluate its status in the transition from the “old” to the “new” model of organization, and recommend some changes that may improve the way Lewis & Lewis operates. From a Strategic Perspective Physical Description Lewis & Lewis, P. C. s located in a quiet suburb of Jackson, Michigan. It is a forty-five minute drive from Lansing.
The two-storied building is built on a slightly elevated hill with spacious parking lots in the back and to one side. The outer walls are of a pleasant beige brick which is in keeping with the calm atmosphere of the community and of the landscape. Right in front of the building there are columns and the large main entrance is toward the rear off the parking lot. The appearance of the building is well harmonized with the surroundings. However, it gives guests the impression of dignity and openness.
Directly inside the main entrance to Lewis & Lewis is a small but elcoming lobby, with a natural stone floor, stylish but difficult to walk on in heels. There is a narrow open closet for guests to hang their coats, and several chairs arranged around a table on which are placed the company newsletter and other publications. The receptionist’s desk is facing the entrance door, and behind it sits a friendly young woman. The partners’ offices are found against the two farthest external walls, noticeably removed from the rest of office.
The other external walls are lined with the offices of the professionals, with large windows overlooking the pleasant exterior. The remainder of the office space is segmented with partitioning walls, forming a sort of cubicle labyrinth. In the center of this maze is a small kitchen where employees gather and converse informally. Adjacent to the kitchen is a small work area with copy machines and office supplies. In a corner of this floor is a set of uninviting sta irs leading to the ground level, where the conference room is located.
The conference room itself is spacious and handsomely decorated, with a large table and comfortable chairs, a video center with television and VCR. The seating is limited to fourteen people. Task and Job Description Tasks are distributed on the basis of specialization: auditing, tax, government and consulting. Very few tasks are performed by routine; each day may include new procedures for each employee. Jobs in this accounting firm are created by the customers’ needs, and therefore vary greatly from client to client. Each employee does most of his work based on experience, not according to standard procedure.
This individual- style process replaces clearly defined tasks in the firm. However, there is no job rotation between specialties. Coordination Systems Information flows very informally and on a personal basis. While this may create problems that will be discussed later, there are many positive aspects to this arrangement; it contributes to the family-like atmosphere that is very evident to the casual observer. The lack of a formally defined flow of information is in part caused by the many client contacts within the firm, but there is imbalance in the quality and quantity of information that each employee receives.
Formal information flow is undefined between the vaguely defined divisions of the firm in part due to the nature of the accounting industry. Therefore, information flow is very vertical. Information is handed down to each department from the top (Phil, Brian and other partners), and from each professional to the shared administrative staff. Data from each individual professional division flowing back up to Phil and Brian goes through David. There are no general staff meetings at Lewis & Lewis. The only formally coordinated data-sharing medium are the partner meetings.
In a busy month (those preceding April 15) the partners may meet two or three times, but throughout the rest of the year there may only be two meetings scheduled. Therefore, even among the partners, information flow is on a need-to-know basis only. There are very few task forces formed where people from different divisions work together on a project. The exception is an auditing team, created when the company embarks on an external auditing job and sends four or five people to the company being audited. The firm believes relationships with clients are of the utmost importance.
They stress frequent contact with customers, but it is conducted at the discretion of individual responsible for the client’s file, and with little or no coordination among other employees. Control System Lewis & Lewis is controlled almost exclusively by personal authority. Phil is the founder and principal partner, and is responsible for most important decisions within the firm. His control over the company is perceived as firm, and his conduct and demeanor influence all the employees. He is viewed as an authoritative figure, and employees regard his approval as crucial to their job performance.
From a Political Perspective Power Structure Lewis & Lewis has five key stakeholders; the partners. Each of the five partners has one area of expertise and they deal with any questions that arise n this area. However, aside from this, the five partners all have very different roles within the organization and we see an unequal distribution of power among them. Management duties are divided between two of the partners, Phil and Brian. These two supervise all of the staff, generate most of the new business, manage the dispersal of accounts and take care of any problems that may arise within the organization.
The founding partner, Phil, has the ultimate decision making authority, and can therefore override any decisions made by Brian or the other partners. The other three partners all stay out of the anagement aspects of the business, and defer all problems concerning it to Phil or Brian. Phil’s efforts to involve other partners in management issues have been met half-heartedly; the partners seem content in their current roles. This power structure has never been verbalized, nor has it been written. It is implied through practice, and therefore not known or understood by employees.
Most of the employees believe that all five partners participate equally in the management process. This causes confusion for the employees who aren’t sure who to address with particular concerns. It also limits the time mployees have to speak with a managing principal. Conflict Resolution The area of conflict resolution within the company is rather gray. As noted above, Phil and Brian are the two who directly manage the personnel at Lewis & Lewis, but this is not always the case. According to staff interviews, it is very difficult to actually have either Phil or Brian resolve an issue.
Phil is always out of the office and when he is in the office he does not have the time to deal with employee problems. Brian is always willing to take the time to listen to employee problems and he seems to sincerely want to help, but e prefers to wait until the issue blows over before addressing it. There is no set procedure for how a problem is solved once either Phil or Brian gets involved. One partner is apt to give one possible solution to the problem only to have the other turn around and contradict what has been suggested.
This sends mixed signals to the employees who are not sure which path of resolution to follow. In addition, conflicts are not resolved in the same manner for all employees. Some experience more favorable outcomes that others, and the people who are lower on the totem pole do not always see their nterests being protected. Employee Interests The support staff is basically at the mercy of the partners, and don’t have much say in how the company is run or what might work better in certain areas. All of the employees agree that Lewis & Lewis tries to be flexible where work schedules and time off are concerned.
Unfortunately, however, there is tension among the employees because of perceived favoritism when it comes to approving flexible work schedules. Some people are allowed to work part time, others are not. Some part-timers receive benefits, some do not. In an office s small as Lewis & Lewis, this can be a source of contention between employees. Employees do not always know where they stand in regard to job performance. The limited feedback they do get from the partners is inconsistent. At times they are criticized for the same performance on which they were previously complimented.
This causes worry among the employees, who fear that duties will be taken away and leave their job in jeopardy. From a Cultural Perspective Artifacts Some of the artifacts we identified at Lewis & Lewis include its recruitment practices, its highly rigid job descriptions, and the physical ffice itself. The recruitment practices at Lewis & Lewis are consistent with the informality of the company. Lewis & Lewis usually does not advertise its job openings; instead, most of its new employees are hired through its clients.
For example, one employee had applied for a secretarial position with a client of Lewis & Lewis. The client passed on her resume to Lewis & Lewis. The company uses the same strategy for attracting new clients. It does not market its services conventionally; instead, existing clients tell business associates about the firm and its services. While there are no written job descriptions, the specific tasks that each employee must complete imply a rigid definition of their position at Lewis & Lewis. The building itself is an artifact. First, the building is very identifiable to the Jackson community.
On our first visit to Lewis & Lewis, we got lost and asked a gas station attendant if he knew how to get to Lewis & Lewis. He not only know where it was, he gave us an exact description of the building. Lewis & Lewis is a long-standing business in the Jackson community, and almost eighty percent of its clients are based in the greater Jackson area. During our visits to Lewis & Lewis, we conducted our interviews in the Antique Room, a small office filled with antiques accumulated over the years. The Antique Room is a microcosm of the history of the company. Values The company places great value on the individual and the home.
Within the company’s facility itself, one sees many clearly evident proofs of these values; family photos adorn the desks of most employees, spouses and children are invited to all company functions. The offices within the building are strategically placed to limit the interaction among employees. There is very little open office space and, with the exception of a conference room, there is no area conducive to team interaction. This value placed on individualism can best be summed up by a partner who stated “there are plenty of opportunities for people to succeed at Lewis & Lewis.
It is up to each individual to take advantage of them. While team interaction is limited at Lewis & Lewis, subcultures are prevalent. Examples of subcultures are the secretarial staff, the “old guard,” and the newly hired CPA’s. The secretarial staff subculture seems to have been reated as a support mechanism for the secretaries. Our interviews with these employees indicated that they feel unappreciated and thus seek encouragement and support from each other. The company’s most recently-formed subculture is the group of new CPA’s who were hired at approximately the same time and are expected to take over the leadership of the firm in the next decade.
In general, subcultures are formed to provide support and to create a system of reward mechanisms for employees within them. Employees crave support and recognition because they feel they are not receiving it from the partners. Despite the lack of support from management cited above, productivity does not seem to be a problem at Lewis & Lewis. What are the motivational factors for employees? First, employees seem to be largely self-motivated. Self-motivation is consistent with motivational posters displayed throughout the office.
For example, one poster states that “success is what you make of it. ” To a lesser extent, employees seem motivated by the independence given to them by their supervisors. Even given the small size of Lewis & Lewis, some employees claimed that they may not communicate with any of the partners for as ong as a week at a time. Finally, employees are somewhat motivated by the lack of communication from management itself. Employees work hard and try to cover all aspects of their assignments because it is not always clear to them what management expects.
Underlying Assumptions The most obvious underlying assumption is that employees should be loyal and self-motivated. The company provides a good salary and benefits package but it provides little support in terms of the daily responsibilities of its employees. Instead, management believes that if it provides its employees with ood pay and a comfortable working environment, employees will be productive. Another underlying assumption is that if you provide a good service, businesses will come to you, and the clients’ concerns are always top priority.
As stated above, Lewis & Lewis does very little if any marketing of its services. It believes, instead, in the word-of-mouth philosophy that satisfied clients will recommend its services to others. In the same way, the company opts to develop good relationships with the banks of Jackson, in order to benefits from their referrals. In short, analyzing Lewis & Lewis from the cultural perspective reveals, mong other things, the management philosophy of the partners and the impact that philosophy has on Lewis & Lewis employees.
Management places great value on individualism and expects its employees to perform their jobs with little support from management. However, there is a major inconsistency. Although the company values individual responsibility, the employees themselves do not feel empowered enough to make all of their own decisions. One employee had a problem with a small project and asked Phil for help. Phil responded, “I don’t have time for your problems. I’m trying to run this company. “
