Cheetham And Wynne: A Fast-Growing Law Firm With A New Open-Plan Office, Essay.

History and Specialization of Cheetham and Wynne

Cheetham and Wynne, a fast-growing law firm started in 1976 by Owen Cheetham and Jack Wynne, had been located in a downtown Auckland office for nearly 40 years. The company specialised in commercial law, with many of their clients being banking, insurance and finance organisations. For a long time, all of the lawyers had been white males, most of whom had gone to the same school as Owen and Jack. The administrative and paralegal staff were mostly younger women. Late on Friday afternoons the lawyers often went to the O’Connell Club, a members-only club, styled on those found in London, where they could eat, drink and play snooker and darts. Originally, it was an all-male domain, but when the club had been accused of discrimination it had opened its doors to female members. Only a few women had joined in the past decade, though, and there were also only a few non-white members. Many deals were done by the Cheetham and Wynne law firm in this club or on the golf course.

Two new partners had joined the firm four years ago, Mark Cheetham and Cathy Wynne. Like their fathers, they had been classmates at university. Cathy was the first female lawyer to be hired. Since the two had started at the practice, the number of clients—many of which were internet, mobile and software companies—had grown significantly. These firms were aggressively sought by the two young lawyers, who specialised in the protection of patents and other intellectual property. It had taken considerable persuasion from the two younger partners for the firm to hire Anand Moodley, who concentrated on environmental issues, and Pauline Herata, who had strong connections with Mãori businesses and community organisations. The two senior partners had initially been reluctant to employ lawyers, who, as Jack had put it, were ‘not like us’, or to go into fields that were different from the safe commercial arena they knew well. However, they had softened their stance somewhat when the firm experienced strong growth in the newer areas.

The size of the firm had grown, too, from a stable 14 to a total of 30 staff, and the premises were found to be too small. In addition to the four partners there were 13 other lawyers, five legal executives (staff who concentrate on debt collection and property transfers but who are not qualified lawyers), six secretaries, a receptionist and an accountant.

New Partners and Areas of Growth

A few weeks ago the firm moved into a brand-new office building opposite the harbour. Mark and Cathy had persuaded their fathers to agree to an open-plan form of office design. An email from the partners to all staff one month before the move pointed out the reasons for the move and for the new office layout. It was suggested that the benefits included more flexibility and opportunities for teamwork. The email noted that open plan is a more economical use of space. Since the firm was growing, building walls for offices and then knocking them down and rebuilding them for new offices would be very expensive. The cost savings on building fixed walls was significant and part of this would be put into providing more expensive and more comfortable furniture. A team atmosphere would develop when people were working ‘side-by-side’ and communicating more often. Confidential meetings were to be held in a number of meeting rooms, with a new online system used to book the rooms. Cathy Wynne had been behind the office move and had liaised with the interiors firm that had furnished it. The walls were painted in a range of pastel colours, decorated with modern paintings, and the desks had glass tops. There was a large informal kitchen and a staff area that included beanbags, magazines, comics and games. The idea had been to create a more relaxed and vibrant work space where more creativity and social interaction could take place. She and Mark allocated the desk spaces to all of the staff.

The senior partners, Jack and Owen, were opposed to mixing with the rest of the staff but were happy to share an enclosed corner office. Jack now worked only in the afternoons and Owen, whose appearances were becoming less and less frequent, often played golf in the afternoons. Mark and Cathy were to be part of the open-plan layout but their ‘spaces’ were located on the other side of the office, also facing the harbour.

A few weeks after the move the two senior partners were lunching, at the expense of the firm, at an upmarket restaurant and discussing the staff response to the new office setting. ‘Cheeky buggers’, said Jack, ‘I saw a fake memo claiming that some people are more equal than others. Probably referring to our office, Owen. And was that picture of two fat pigs supposed to be us? Of course we aren’t equal, never were, never will be! Some senior associates complain that they have lost status without their own offices and that the online booking system does not work properly. And I think that “playpen” that Cathy created just encourages them to loaf and chat. Law is a serious business.’

New Office Space and Open-Plan Design

‘That’s nothing’, claimed Owen, ‘I heard two secretaries moaning that they couldn’t talk to their boyfriends now that others could listen in. Ah, things are not what they used to be. Since we let our kids take over too much has changed. The office decor is revolting, and as for all these new people around . . . I don’t recognise the place. I was asking a group of people in the kitchen what they thought of the rugby test match and most said they didn’t watch rugby.’

‘Well, you can’t expect women to’, replied Owen, ‘but these Chinese and Indians just don’t care about that stuff. And another thing, I was telling a really funny joke the other day about Jewish lawyers, Mãori lawyers and Indian lawyers and nobody laughed. A few stalked out .

bloody cheek! This is our firm but I am beginning to feel like a stranger.’

At another lunchtime gathering, several of the administrative and paralegal staff were talking about the new offices. Some liked the modern feel of the place and its sweeping harbour views, while others were nostalgic about the old premises.

‘I don’t like this open-plan stuff’, complained Mai Ling, ‘you can’t talk without everybody listening to you. I have to go outside to speak to my boyfriend on my mobile. Costs a lot more, too.’

‘We are too far from the shops’, was the opinion of Candy Wood, ‘and the cafés here are just too expensive’.

‘Yeah, I got moaned at the other day for being on Facebook’, said Brian Talanoa, ‘even though it was about the new environmental initiative we are working on. You get the feeling everyone knows everyone’s business, and that big brother—and sister—are spying on you. But what I do like is that this is a nice place to go jogging.’

‘I like the open-plan thing’, said Candy, ‘I hated being stuck in that cramped coffin next to Mr Wynne’s office. We chat where we are; it’s much friendlier than before.’

‘I know’, replied Mai, ‘we can hear you all the time! And we do have other problems with the new set-up. Some lawyers have complained that they often need to discuss private matters with clients over the phone and can’t always take the calls in the meeting rooms. They moan that it is only the grumpy old men who have their own office. And no one got asked what they wanted in the new offices. Seems like Catherine the Great did it all by herself. And of course she is in the corner with the best views. From where I sit I can’t even see outside.’

Senior Partner and Staff Reactions

The old boys’ club

One day, Anand and Pauline were in a meeting room discussing an issue that had arisen with a Mãori community in the Bay of Islands. A plan to develop a new community centre had fallen foul of local council regulations because of concerns about the safety of the site on top of a cliff. The two lawyers had become firm friends since joining the firm within the same week two years ago.

‘This has been a fantastic career move for me’, enthused Anand. ‘Working for a distinguished law firm really opens doors. Mark and Cathy have been really supportive and winning some of the cases we have taken on is incredibly gratifying. I recall that time we won the case over the toxic fertilisers used on a farm near the Waikato River. Both Mark and Cathy came to court in Hamilton for a week to give me a hand.’

‘I am not so sure’, responded Pauline. ‘I was happy when they agreed to pay off my student loan when I joined. That really helped, so I should be more grateful. Working with Mãori communities and businesses is great but sometimes I get the feeling that I am just a token representative. There are only two female lawyers here too—it still feels like an old boys’ club to me. I have never been invited to the O’Connell Club for drinks with the grumpy old men, though they seem to take all the male lawyers there. But I am not even sure I want to go. There are only a few women or Mãori members.’

‘Well, I’ve never been invited either’, replied Anand. ‘And I would not go. I don’t drink alcohol. And I heard Brian complain that he went a few times on Fridays but felt awkward there, and he didn’t like it that he felt he couldn’t leave till 9 p.m. His wife really moaned at him. I must say, they do demand a lot from us. I had to miss my son’s soccer tournament last weekend.’

‘Well, I don’t seem to have time for much of a social life myself’, Pauline remarked. ’I seem to get out of here well after seven most days and I have spent a lot of time out of town on business this year. I have asked for some help on cases, but when I spoke to Jack about it he was very curt with me. Said we were too short-staffed. Yet when the partners need more staff they even hire temps.’

Perspectives of Administrative and Paralegal Staff

Meanwhile, after a meeting, a few of the paralegal staff had stayed behind in one of the meeting rooms to talk about their jobs. Anna Ivanova was clearly unhappy. ‘When I joined I was told that that I would get a salary increase if I had a good performance review. So how good is 4 per cent? That is barely above the cost of living increase everyone else got. And since I got that contract for my brother’s property company, you would think I would have been given a bonus for that alone. Telling me I had done a good job is one thing—being properly rewarded is quite another.’ What she did not say was that she had given her brother some confidential information about one of his competitors, who was also a client of the firm. Jack had suspected this but could not prove it. He had, however, voiced his opinion to Owen, who had said nothing about it to Anna.

‘So you think that is bad!’ exclaimed Mai. ‘I got no increase except the 2 per cent everyone got. You don’t even know what they expect from you or how you are going to be judged in these performance reviews. In mine Mr Wynne said that I was too slow to process contracts and that I make too many mistakes. When I asked him what mistakes I had made he said he had seen quite a few but had just corrected them himself. I don’t know whether to believe him or not. And when I asked if I could handle the McArthur contract myself he told me I did not have enough experience. He did not say one nice thing about what I have done. He just dumps work on me then goes off to play golf!’

Candy chipped in, ‘I don’t think things are so bad here. We have a lot of fun. The Sunday hike and picnic was a great idea of Cathy’s and it was really funny when they put ants down Pauline’s top. Boy, did she squeal.’

‘Well, she was really angry’, Anna remarked, ‘and embarrassed too. She didn’t think it was so funny. And Anand did not like it when someone made a joke about the food he had brought.’

‘Some people have no sense of humour’, said Candy as she left.

‘She thinks she’s special, just because she is a sexy redhead’, was Mai’s opinion. ‘I think she and Mark are having an affair. I saw them the other day at Vinnie’s, laughing and giggling. I think she was quite drunk.’ Mai had also emailed a few ‘fiery redhead’ cartoons to her friends in the office and uploaded them to her Facebook and Instagram pages. She had also told some of her colleagues that Candy had had to pay a fine for driving over the alcohol limit and that she had heard she had been fired from her previous job for drinking at lunchtime.

John Carlton, the accountant, was pondering his future. He had been hired after a chance introduction to Jack and Owen at the O’Connell Club. Over a few drinks they had indicated that they were looking for an accountant, who, in due course, would take over the supervision of many of the administrative and paralegal staff. Jack had spoken of a ‘type of general manager role’ that would allow the partners to manage the lawyers while the accountant supervised the rest of the staff.

However, nine months later, John was still managing only four of the staff and the restructuring of the firm had not taken place. Owen had said this was on hold until people had settled into the new offices, but after three months in the new premises, despite several inquiries, John was still not convinced it would go ahead. He had also believed that when he had enrolled for an MBA his fees would be paid by the law firm. He based this on a conversation with Jack, also in the club, about supporting him financially. However, when Jack saw that the qualification would cost over $30 000 he said he had never agreed to pay such a high amount. He said that as far as he knew university fees were usually only about $6000 p.a. and that is the most the firm would pay.

1. a. Identify the reasons for employees resisting the change to an open-plan office approach.
   b.Explain what the partners might have done better to have minimised the resistance.

2. a. Analyse the barriers to communication (‘noise’) that appear to exist in the law firm.
   b.Discuss how they could be overcome.

3. a. Discuss the sources of power the partners and others appear to have and the impact this may have on other employees.
   b. What influence tactics have been used by some of the partners and employees and how effective might they have been?

History and Specialization of Cheetham and Wynne

Employees resist the transition to an open plan office approach as they have a lot of distractions from colleagues (Oldham and Brass, 2017 p.267). Open plan offices sometimes are very noisy due to ringing phones, phone conversations with clients and discussions from colleagues which create a non-conducive environment making concentration difficult. As lawyers need a quiet atmosphere to work, open plan office approach may not provide that environment as one is distracted by other employees leaving them unfocused hence increasing their chances to make mistakes (Smollan, 2015 p.301).

In an open plan office approach, there is a lack of privacy. Lawyers require a certain measure of privacy such as meetings and calls with clients to discuss confidential matters. I open plan office it is difficult to achieve intimacy as computer screens can be overseen and conversations overheard by other staff members. Employees also resist the change as they believe that their personal preferences may not be achieved in an open plan office (Lam and Choi, 2009 p.1452). Everyone has own choice of heating, air conditioning and lightning and in an open plan office, it would be difficult to satisfy everyone at the same time. The workers also resist the change as they believe it increases supervision form their seniors as they will be in constant contact, although guidance raises their productivity it diminishes their freedom.

Another reason to resist the change is that senior employees may feel like they are losing their status as they do not have their own offices and work with the junior employees.  There is reduced security in an open plan office as each employee does not have a lockable door and this can lead to issues and risks of confidential information landing to unauthorized hands or theft cases (Farley and Newsham, 2017 p.177). In an open plan office, there is a high risk of spread of illness as employees share the same stationery, phones, and keyboards. During seasons s of flu, colds or coughs all employees will catch it.

The partners should have effectively engaged the employees to reduce resistance. They should have been willing to receive and respond to the employees’ views. The employees are the ones who make clients happy and get work done hence engaging them is very vital. They could have used the feedback from the employees to change the plan accordingly.

They should have communicated the change effectively and early before they shift to the new open-plan office (Van Dijk and Van Dick, 2009 p.143). Through informal and formal communication the partners should have encouraged the workers to take the change positively. They should have told them the many advantages associated with the open plan office than in the closed plan office.  They should have said to them that in the open plan office they would be able to have interaction and communication, increased flexibility and it is cost effective which may boost their productivity leading to an increase in salaries.

New Partners and Areas of Growth

The partners should have focused on overcoming opposition. They should have engaged those who oppose the open plan office layout and actively get to know their concerns and alleviate the problems. The partners should have been straightforward, truthful, and communicate in timely about the change. They should have conveyed the need for the change and explain to the employees the advantages they will enjoy exceed the disadvantages (Kirkman and Shapiro, 2010 p.74). The partners should also have arranged the office according to status to ensure the senior employees do not feel like they are losing their status. The partners should have also set a place for phone calls, discussions to ensure confidentiality and privacy and reduce distractions which make many employees resist the change.

In the law firm there exists noise as a barrier to communication. In the open plan office layout, the environment is noisy which distracts the staff members communicative thought. In a noisy environment the receiver may not receive the message as the sender intended. In return, the receiver does not provide appropriate feedback if they did receive the message appropriately and did not understand it clearly (Lunenburg, 2010 p.5). Noise as a communication barrier distorts messages in the law firm making the staff members, clients and partners to waste time and money as it causes confusion and misunderstanding.

The language barrier is also present in the law firm. The lawyers may use specific terminologies and jargons which clients may not understand. In written messages to clients, they may use abbreviations and languages which the clients may not be familiar with hence fail to understand. Lack of communication skills is also another barrier. The lawyers and the other employees meet some clients who are unable to use the right words hence send the wrong impressions. Some clients cannot say their words authentically and adequately, and in the presence of noise, the lawyers and the paralegal staff may not understand the message.

Lack of sufficient knowledge is also another barrier. Some clients do not have enough knowledge of the subject and if the lawyers cannot explain to them in simple ways can cause misinformation hence losing potential clients (Welch and Welch, 2016 p.421). Another communication barrier present is information overload whereby the clients or the lawyers may convey too much information which the receiver may not grasp thus bring difficulty in interpreting it. Use of the wrong mode of communication is also another barrier. Sending some messages verbally may be forgotten hence it needs written message.

New Office Space and Open-Plan Design

A long communication channel is another barrier. In the law firm, some messages may pass through the receptionist to the paralegal staff before it reaches the lawyer. The lawyer may end up receiving distorted, altered and distilled information hence may not provide the appropriate feedback. Lack of feedback is another barrier where some clients do not provide feedback. Impolite language is also present. Some clients use abusive, rude and slang language. Differences in the viewpoint and perceptions between the clients and the lawyers are other barriers. Stereotyping, prejudices, and expectations affect the way the receiver understands the message. Physical disabilities such as speech difficulties and hearing problems are another barrier. Attitudinal barriers resulting from resistance to change, personality conflicts and lack of motivation prevent employees from communicating effectively.

Active listening can help the stakeholders overcome noise and the other communication barriers. Active listening calls for full concentration and attention hence they can overcome the noise challenge. Active listening also makes the sender communicate more openly, efficiently and honestly, therefore, communicate effectively (Cable and Aldrich, 2012 p. 83). Use of simple language will overcome the communication barriers. When the lawyers are speaking to the clients, they should avoid jargons and professional terminologies for the clients to understand their message. In the presence of noise, the lawyers and paralegal staff should pause occasionally to allow the clients to ask questions and clarifications to overcome misunderstandings.

Lawyers and the paralegal staff should be clear on the message they want t to convey. They should be able to arrange their thoughts and communicate accordingly to the clients to avoid misleading information. The staff should understand the needs of their clients and be sensitive towards them. They should understand their clients’ nature, religion, and culture and show respect to them as they express their views. The staff should also structure their messages depending on the clients’ ability and level of understanding. When addressing clients their language should have professional maturity and sophistication.

The staff should keep their emotions in control if they do not agree with the clients’ point of view and reflect positivity by expressing their opinions politely. The partners should ensure the communication chain is short by providing senders for communicating directly to the concerned person to overcome distortions. If possible the workers should reduce noise to avoid disturbance when communicating (Bates, and Kaushal, 2014 p.184). Avoid information overload by only delivering useful, informative and message with value to clients. The staff should maintain consistency in their information and clear doubts to clients. The paralegal staff should also seek advice from the lawyers to gain more experience, knowledge, and ideas to deal and communicate with clients. The team should eliminate perceptual differences when communicating. The staff should use proper media of communication such as conveying complex messages through writing but simple ones verbally.

Senior Partner and Staff Reactions

Owen Cheethan, Jack Wynne, Mark Cheetham, and Cathy Wynne have legitimate power which comes from the position they hold in the law firm. They have the authority to assign duties to their employees. The lawyers have expert power which they derive from their expertise and knowledge in law. They have high problem-solving skills and are deemed indispensable by the paralegal staff and other employees as they can perform critical tasks (Ibarra and Andrews, 2013 p.277). The other employees hold regarding their decisions, ideas, and opinions as they greatly influence their actions. The expert power gives a stepping stone to the lawyers as they can be promoted hence giving them legitimate power.

Mark Cheetham and Cathy Wynne have referent power which they derive from the interpersonal relationships they have with the owners of the law firm who are their parents (Smollan and Sayers, 2009 p.435). The employees respect them as their parents hence they can generate their powers over the employees. Mark Cheetham and Cathy Wynne also have coercive power which they derive from their ability to influence the employees through sanctions, threats, and punishments. The power affects the staff to work effectively to avoid disciplinary action from the partners. The partners’ use of the coercive power to control the employee’s behavior by ensuring they adhere to the norms and policies of the organization (Fiske, 2018 p.101). The paralegal staff and the employees have reward power which they derive from their ability to influence incentives allocation in the law firm. The incentives they can influence are positive appraisals, salary increments and promotions hence they influence the other employee's actions. Reward power motivates employees, but it can diminish their output or demoralize them if applied with favors.

The powers give the partners the opportunity to tell the employees their responsibilities hence they can be responsible for their duties. The partners can also set standards of excellence, recognize employees’ achievements, provide training, pass information and knowledge to employees and treat them with respect hence improving employees’ productivity.

Influence tactics are the strategies the partners and employees can use to achieve specific outcomes in the law firm. The partners used rational persuasion by using logical arguments, facts and data to convince the employees to accept the changes in the open plan office. They presented the employees with timely, relevant and specific factual information to deal with resistance to change (Clarke and Ward, 2016 p.1175). The paralegal staff used inspirational appeals to gain support from other employees to request salary increments. They used enthusiastic, personal and authentic inspirational appeals to achieve the two percent salary increment.

Perspectives of Administrative and Paralegal Staff

The partners used consultations to influence the employees to accept the changes in the law firm. The partners also used pressure tactics by influencing employees to work effectively through threats, punishments, and intimidation to convince them to comply with the firm's policies. Another tactic the partners used is assertiveness by repeatedly making requests to the employees, expressing anger towards those who miss expectations and setting project completion timelines. The lawyers used legitimating tactics to the paralegal staff to influence them to comply with their work as their junior workers (Safko, 2010 p.147). The partners used coalitions by using the lawyers to influence the paralegal staff to perform their duties effectively to increase productivity. The partners used exchange tactics by promising the employees to raise their salaries if they do not make mistakes and maintain confidentiality hence its effective as it boosts employee performance.

The lawyers used personal appeals to influence the paralegal staff. They helped the ones they like and the ones they had established interpersonal relationships with hence increasing their work experience. The partners use ingratiation to make their employees feel good about their professional status. The tactics were honest, well-intended and infrequency is hence increasing organization effectiveness as it boosts employee performance. Responses to the influence tactics include commitment and compliance with the organizational objectives.

References

Bates, D.W. and Kaushal, R., 2014. Overcoming barriers to adopting and implementing computerized physician order entry systems in US business. business Affairs, 23(4), pp.184-190.

Cable, D.M. and Aldrich, H.E., 2012. Smaller but not necessarily weaker: How small businesses can overcome barriers to recruitment. In Managing People in Entrepreneurial Organiztions pp. 83-106.

Clarke, S. and Ward, K., 2016. The role of leader influence tactics and safety climate in engaging employees' safety participation. Risk Analysis, 26(5), pp.1175-1185.

Farley, K.M. and Newsham, G.R., 2017. A model of satisfaction with open-plan office conditions: COPE field findings. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27(3), pp.177-189.

Fiske, S.T., 2018. Controlling other people: The impact of power on stereotyping. In Social Cognition pp. 101-115.

Ibarra, H. and Andrews, S.B., 2013. Power, social influence, and sense making: Effects of network centrality and proximity on employee perceptions. Administrative science quarterly, pp.277-303.

Kirkman, and Shapiro, D.L., 2010. Why do employees resist teams? Examining the “resistance barrier” to work team effectiveness. International Journal of Conflict Management, 11(1), pp.74-92.

Lam, K.P., D. and Choi, J., 2009. Occupancy detection through an extensive environmental sensor network in an open-plan office building. IBPSA Building Simulation, 145, pp.1452-1459.

Lunenburg, F.C., 2010. Communication: The process, barriers, and improving effectiveness. Schooling, 1(1), pp.1-11.

Oldham, G.R. and Brass, D.J., 2017. Employee reactions to an open-plan office: A naturally occurring quasi-experiment. Administrative Science Quarterly, pp.267-284.

Safko, L., 2010. The social media bible: tactics, tools, and strategies for business success. Academy of Management Perspectives, 19(1), pp.147-156.

Smollan, R.K. and Sayers, J.G., 2009. Organizational culture, change and emotions: A qualitative study. Journal of Change Management, 9(4), pp.435-457.

Smollan, R.K., 2013. Trust in change managers: the role of affect. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 26(4), pp.725-747.

Smollan, R.K., 2015. Causes of stress before, during and after organizational change: a qualitative study. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 28(2), pp.301-314.

Van Dijk, R. and Van Dick, R., 2009. Navigating organizational change: Change leaders, employee resistance and work-based identities. Journal of change Management, 9(2), pp.143-163.

Welch, D. and Welch, L., 2016. In the shadow: The impact of language on structure, power and communication in the multinational. International Business Review, 8(4), pp.421-440.