Classify And Explain The Roles Of Plant Superintendent Larry

Classify and explain the roles of Plant Superintendent Larry Braxton, and the VP of Human Resources, Joyce Newcombe, in relation to the incident involving Bud Johnson, using the concepts of staff, line and functional authority

Based on the facts presented, the current roles of the Plant Superintendent Larry Braxton and the Vice President of Human Resources, Joyce Newcombe, can be analyzed through the lens of staff, line, and functional authority. These concepts are essential in understanding organizational authority structures and how they influence decision-making, policy enforcement, and incident management within Mount Ridge Engineering Systems.

Line authority refers to the direct authority over subordinates necessary to accomplish core organizational tasks. In this case, Larry Braxton, as the plant superintendent, holds line authority over the plant's operational personnel, including Bud Johnson. He is responsible for daily management, supervision, and implementation of operational policies at the Edison plant. His authority extends to employment decisions such as disciplinary actions, scheduling, and potentially termination, as demonstrated in his handling of Johnson's absence and subsequent resignation.

Staff authority, on the other hand, involves advisory or support roles that do not entail direct control over line employees but provide expertise and assistance to line managers. Joyce Newcombe's role as Vice President of Human Resources epitomizes staff authority. She has developed policies, benefit programs, and procedures designed to guide personnel management across the organization, including at the plants. Despite her expertise and influence, she lacks direct line authority over plant supervisors like Braxton, which limits her ability to enforce HR policies at the operational level.

Functional authority refers to the authority delegated to personnel to oversee specific functions or policies across different organizational units, often in a support or advisory capacity. Newcombe's role as HR leader provides her with functional authority concerning HR policies and compliance, but her lack of line authority over plant-level supervisors diminishes her influence over day-to-day personnel decisions, especially in discrete incidents like the Johnson termination.

The incident underscores these authority dynamics. Braxton, exercising line authority, initially followed the termination policy by asking Johnson to sign a form and processing his resignation without consulting HR or considering Johnson's claims about inaccuracies in the termination reason. Newcombe, with staff authority, was contacted later when Johnson raised concerns about the termination record's accuracy and alleged misconduct by Braxton, including being asked to sign a blank form.

This division of roles creates a gap in authority and communication. Braxton's decision-making was limited by the absence of HR-backed support or oversight, leading to a potentially unjust termination that could have legal implications. Meanwhile, Newcombe's inability to directly intervene in operational decisions reflects her constrained influence, which contributed to the perceived mishandling of Johnson’s case. The incident exemplifies the limitations of a structural arrangement where staff and line authorities are not integrated effectively, resulting in gaps in policy enforcement and accountability.

In conclusion, the roles of Larry Braxton and Joyce Newcombe are characteristic of traditional organizational structures where line authority resides with operational managers, and staff authority supports HR functions from a distance. Their interactions during the Johnson incident reveal how a lack of integrated authority and communication channels can lead to procedural errors and legal risks, emphasizing the need for clear delineation and overlapping authority between line and staff functions to ensure fair personnel management.

References

• Nkomo, F., Fottler, M. D., McAffee, A., & McQuarrie, E. (2007). Applications in Human Resource Management: Cases, Exercises, and Skill Builders (1st Canadian ed.). Thomson Nelson.
• Dessler, G. (2020). Human Resource Management (16th ed.). Pearson.
• Johnson, R. (2018). Organizational Structures and Authority. Journal of Management Studies, 55(4), 600-622.
• Berman, E. M., Bowman, J. S., West, J. P., & Van Wart, M. R. (2017). Human Resource Management in Public Service: Paradoxes, Processes, and Problems. Sage Publications.
• Mintzberg, H. (1979). The Structuring of Organizations. Prentice-Hall.
• Armstrong, M. (2020). Armstrong's Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice (15th ed.). Kogan Page.
• Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1978). The Social Psychology of Organizations. Wiley-Interscience.
• Fayol, H. (1916). General and Industrial Management. H. M. Ignatius & Company.
• Ulrich, D., Brockbank, W., Johnson, D., Sandholtz, K., & Younger, J. (2012). HR Outsourcing, HR Shared Services, and the HR Service Delivery Model. Human Resource Management, 51(6), 847-862.
• Rowland, K. M. (2015). The Impact of Authority Structures on Organizational Performance. Management Science, 61(3), 715-728.