Question

Leadership in Action: Too Much of a Good Thing?

Not long ago, Jessica Armstrong, vice president of administration for Delaware Valley Chemical (DVC) Inc., a
New Jersey-based multinational company, made a point of stopping by department head Darius Harris’s office
and lavishly praising him for his volunteer work with an after-school program for disadvantaged children in a
nearby urban neighborhood. Now she was about to summon him to her office so she could take him to task for
dedication to the same volunteer work.
It was Carolyn Clark, Harris’s secretary, who’d alerted her to the problem. “Darius told the community center
he’d take responsibility for a fundraising mass mailing. And then he asked me to edit the letter he’d drafted,
make all the copies, stuff the enveloped, and get it into the mail – most of this on my own time,” she reported,
still obviously indignant. “When I told him, ‘I’m sorry, but that’s not my job,’ he looked me straight in the eye
and asked when I’d like to schedule my upcoming performance appraisal.”
Several of Harris’s subordinates also volunteered with the program. After chatting with them, Armstrong
concluded most were volunteering out of a desire to stay on the boss’s good side. It was time to talk to Harris.
“Oh, come on,” responded Harris impatiently when Armstrong confronted him. “Yes, I asked for her help as a
personal favor to me. But I only brought up the appraisal because I was going out of town, and we needed to set
some time aside to do the evaluation.” Harris went on to talk about how important working for the after-school
program was to him personally. “I grew up in that neighborhood, and if it hadn’t been for the people at the
center, I wouldn’t be here today,” he said. Besides, even if he had pressured employees to help out – and he
wasn’t saying he had – didn’t all the emphasis the company was putting on employee volunteerism make it OK
to use employees’ time and company resources?
After Harris left, Armstrong thought about the conversation. There was no question DVC actively encouraged
employee volunteerism – and not just because it was the right thing to do. It was a chemical company with a
couple of unfortunate accidental spills in its recent past that caused environmental damage and community
anger.
Volunteering had the potential to help employees acquire new skills, create a sense of camaraderie, and play a
role in recruiting and retaining talented people. But most of all, it gave a badly needed boost to the company’s
public image. Recently, DVC took every opportunity to publicize its employees’ extracurricular community
work on its website and in company publications. And the company created the annual Delaware Prize, which
granted cash awards ranging from $1,000 to $5,000 to outstanding volunteers.
So now that Armstrong had talked with everyone concerned, just what was she going to do about the dispute
between Darius Harris and Carolyn Clark?
What Should Armstrong Do – Choose Your Favorite of the 3 Options Below
Option 1: Tell Carolyn Clark that employee volunteerism is important to the company and that while her
performance evaluation will not be affected by her decision, she should consider helping Harris because it is an
opportunity to help a worthy community project.
Option 2: Tell Harris that the employee volunteer program is just that – a volunteer program. Even though the
company sees volunteerism as an important piece of its public relations campaign, employees must be free to
choose whether to volunteer. He should not ask for the help of his direct reports with the after-school program.
Option 3: Discipline Harris for coercing his subordinates to spend their own time on his volunteer work at the
community after-school program.
Questions:
1. Which option did you choose and why did you choose that option?
2. Why didn’t you choose the other options?
3. How do you see leadership being relevant to this situation?

Answer 1

Option 2 is recommended for Jessica Armstrong to choose because it maintains the integrity of the volunteer program and ensures that employees are not pressured into volunteering by their supervisors. Options 1 and 3 were not selected due to their potential to indirectly pressure or unfairly discipline employees, respectively. Leadership in this context involves setting clear guidelines for voluntary work and respecting employees' personal boundaries.

Step-by-step explanation:

In resolving the dispute between Darius Harris and Carolyn Clark with respect to employee volunteerism at Delaware Valley Chemical (DVC) Inc., I would recommend Option 2. This approach upholds the voluntary nature of the employee volunteer program and aligns with the ethical standard that participation should not be coerced. Jessica Armstrong should communicate to Harris that while the company values employee volunteerism, it must not impinge on the employees' personal time or be linked to job performance and appraisals. Employees like Carolyn Clark should be able to choose whether to volunteer without any implied consequences for their job evaluation.

Option 1 was not chosen because it indirectly pressures Clark to participate in the voluntary program to support a community project, potentially influencing her decision under the guise of it being beneficial for her. This still implies that volunteer work may somehow be tied to the company's perception of her job performance. Moreover, Option 3, which involves disciplining Harris, was not chosen as it might be too severe a response without first establishing clear guidelines and expectations around volunteering activities and their separation from work obligations. There might be a need for a clear policy, but immediate discipline might demoralize Harris and other employees who are genuinely interested in community work.

Leadership is highly relevant in this situation as it involves establishing clear guidelines for voluntary work, respecting employees' personal time, and ensuring that there is no abuse of power. It's also about cultivating a culture where community engagement is encouraged but not mandatory, which reflects the company's values in a way that is fair and ethical.