Paul Wagner, chief of the section, supervised four engineers, one technician, an
ID: 385608 • Letter: P
Question
Paul Wagner, chief of the section, supervised four engineers, one technician, and one secretary. Three of the engineers were relatively new to the agency. The senior engineer, Waymon Burrell, had approximately three years' experience in the grants management program. Because only Waymon Burrell had experience in grants management, Wagner assigned him the areas with the most complicated projects within the state. The other three engineers were given regions with less complex projects; they were assigned to work closely with Burrell and to learn all they could about the program. At the beginning of the year, Wagner decided the new engineers had enough experience to undertake more difficult tasks; therefore, the division's territory could be allocated on a geographical basis. The territory was divided according to river basins, with each engineer assigned two or three areas. This division according to geography worked fine as the section proceeded to meet all its objectives. However, three months ago, Wagner was offered a job with a consulting engineering company and decided to leave the EPA. He gave two months notice to top management. Time passed, but top management did not even advertise for a new section chief. People in the section speculated as to who might be chosen to fill the vacancy; most of them hoped it would be Waymon Burrell, since he was senior in the section and also knew the most about the workings of the section. On the Monday of Wagner's last week, top executives met with him and the section members to announce they had decided to appoint a temporary section chief until a new one could be hired. The division chief announced that the temporary section chief would be Sam Kutzman, a senior engineer from another EPA division. This came as quite a surprise to Burrell and the others in the grants management program Sam Kutzman had no experience in the program. His background was in technical assistance. His previous job required that he do research in certain treatment processes so that he could provide more technical performance information to other divisions within he EPA Questions 1. Do you think Sam Kutzman was a good choice for temporary section chief ? 2. How well has human resource planning worked in this situation?Explanation / Answer
1. It's better to take risk for a temporary position with a research background, but this risk should have been taken and tested during the 2 month notice period. Right now it is not the good option to choose Sam at the last moment.
2. As mentioned earlier, the human resource should have done a succession planning and if they wanted to try out Sam, they should have done it atleast in that 2 months period. Hence HR didn't do a great job as far as their work is concerned.