The Michael Scott Paper Company: A Perspective on Group Dynamics and Conflict

My favorite TV show of all-time is Greg Daniels' "The Office," (the U.S. version, as opposed to the less successful U.K. version). While the series is a "mockumentary" and is intended to humor its audience, there are numerous relevant examples of group conflict in the workplace present. The episode that I will focus on is called "Michael Scott Paper Company" and is the 23rd episode of the 5th season of the show, in case you would like to view it.

I will provide a brief synopsis of the series up to the point in the timeline that this specific episode takes place. Michael Scott (portrayed by Steve Carell) is the regional manager of the Scranton (Pennsylvania) branch of the Dunder Mifflin Paper Company, a small regional paper distributor. Michael is deluded, narcissistic, and inappropriate and much of the humor of the series stems from his failed attempts to successfully manage his employees. Michael's antics as a boss create uncomfortable situations for himself and his employees and most of the show's episodes focus on typical workplace situations gone awry. For example, diversity day, ethics training, performance reviews, and christmas parties are just a few of the themes that the show satirizes.

In season 5, Dunder Mifflin is undergoing changes at their corporate offices. The company is struggling to maintain financial viability as a provider of paper products in an increasingly paperless world and an economy going through a recession. The company CFO, David Wallace, has hired a new Vice President to oversee its regional sales in the northeast region named Charles Minor. In his role, Charles is also the direct superior of Michael Scott. Charles comes to the Scranton office and announces that he will be working out of the office's conference room as he analyzes the branch's strengths and weaknesses. Additionally,  Charles announces some unfortunate news about the employees' 401(k) plans, the possibility of layoffs, and a hold on non-essential spending. Meanwhile, Michael had been in the midst of planning a grand and expensive party in celebration of his fifteenth anniversary at the company. Charles no-nonsense attitude and focus on financial stability eventually leads to a cancellation of Michael's party. Michael drives to New York City to meet with David Wallace and express his dislike for Charles. David tells Michael that Charles is going to stay, but that the company would "move some money around" to make Michael's anniversary party possible. It seemed as though the problem had been resolved, but Michael abruptly stands up and announces "I quit."

Weeks later, an out of work Michael Scott is struggling to find his next career move. He eventually settles on a hilariously unoriginal idea; he would start his own paper company. The Michael Scott Paper Company takes form and with some tribulation, Michael convinces 2 former Dunder Mifflin employees to join him in his new venture. The first is Pam Beesly, a secretary at Dunder Mifflin with the ambition to become a salesperson. The other is Ryan Howard, whose story is slightly more interesting. Ryan started at Dunder Mifflin as a temporary employee while enrolled in an MBA program at night. He worked his way up to become the youngest Vice President in company history and was at one point in the position currently held by Charles Minor, and Michael's boss. However, Ryan created a website intended to increase the company's sales that in reality was enabling the company to commit fraud. Ryan was indicted and fired, and was employed at the Scranton bowling alley at the time that Michael approached him about the opportunity to join the Michael Scott Paper Company.

(Aside: I hope that the ridiculousness of the scenarios I am describing helps show the comical nature of the show for someone who may or may not have seen it.)

The Michael Scott Paper Company, consisting of Michael as the boss and Pam and Ryan as salespeople, has taken shape. They have even found an office space, a utility closet on the ground floor of the very same building of which Dunder Mifflin are tenants. The Michael Scott Paper Company's "office" is just big enough for Michael's Desk, a poker table and 1 computer shared by both Pam and Ryan, and a copy machine. For the first time in the company's short history, the singular phone rings. It rings again. Pam and Ryan look at each other, both expecting that the other to answer the phone. This is the issue from which the conflict I will describe stems.

This issue is in regard to who is going to become the 3-person company's de facto secretary. Pam, having just transitioned into the role of salesperson, knows that if she answers the phone she will just be assuming the role of secretary in the new office. Ryan, a former executive and holder of an MBA, thinks he is "above" the menial task of answering a phone. Michael, the boss, simply refuses. The issue of answering the phone led to other issues with task delegation and conflicts between Pam, Ryan and Michael. The group is suffering from what Bolman and Deal would probably describe as a lack of informal group norms. B&D note the importance of informal group norms and the role they play in the success of the group. Due to the fact that the Michael Scott Paper Company was new, the informal norms hadn't been established. Likewise, the team is suffering from a lack of leadership. The new company has no clients and has two employees who are searching for guidance. Michael assumes that he can continue his hands-off management approach that he had become accustomed to at Dunder Mifflin. From the B&D reading, you could call this a laissez faire management style. In the situation here, this was clearly not an effective management style.

At the heart of the conflicts with the Michael Scott Paper Company were related to roles and task significance, and a lack of communication. Once the conflict became apparent to everyone, the reactions were varied. Pam attempted to practice conflict resolution by discussing the idea of a compromise and trying to distinguish her and Ryan's roles. She proposed to alternate the receipt of calls and new sales. Pam was attempting some of the tactics for dealing with conflict in groups that Bolman and Deal outline. It is clear that she attempted to "agree on the basics," "experiment," and "treat differences as a group responsibility." On the other hand, Michael and Ryan were both apathetic in their own unique ways. The conflict between the 3 employees, especially Pam and Ryan, did fester until it reached a breaking point. Pam even retreated back to Dunder Mifflin and asked for her old job back. The conflict had reached the point where she was willing to sacrifice her aspiration of becoming a salesperson in favor of avoiding further conflict. The other breaking point it reached was the lack of work that was being accomplished at the new company. Michael Scott Paper Company was proving to be an unsuccessful venture due to weak group dynamics and mismanaged interpersonal conflict within the group. The problems with the company and group could have been avoided had Michael done a better job of delegating tasks to his employees, identifying their roles, and practicing more effective conflict resolution strategies, albeit the fact that this scenario was created for humor.

While this scenario may not be the most complex or serious example of group dynamics and interpersonal conflict, the humor of it does help exemplify an extreme example of how a lack of leadership can lead to problems within the group. Even though "The Office," is not a true example of workplace conflict, the show and this episode specifically reminded me of the need for groups to manage informal group roles, group norms, interpersonal conflict, and leadership after I read Chapter 8 of Bolman and Deal. The ideas outlined by B&D have become abundantly clear as I have gone through my own work experiences and group settings. I hope that my description of the scenario was easy to follow and enjoyable because I thoroughly enjoyed writing a post about "The Office."

Comments

  1. You must really like this show. You've written quite a lengthy post here. On Tuesday in class we'll discuss mainly not how to resolve conflict once it has happened, but rather how to prevent conflict before it has a chance to start. Suppose you took the scenario with the phone seriously and envisioned the new organization doing things not in the show - being proactive to alleviate the apparent tension. How should that have played out.

    You said there was a lack of leadership and that cause the problem. Undoubtedly that is true. But does it mean that Michael should have been the one to initiate with Pam about the phone calls? Or might Pam taken the initiative and said something to the effect - for this job to work for me the answering of calls has to be shared between us. Would that have worked had she done so? Or was the venture destined to fail from the get go because the expectations of the participants were too far out of line to reconcile?

    These sort of questions aren't going to contribute to the humor. But they will help to understand the issues we are trying to deal with in the class. So while you seem quite engaged in writing the post, I thought you could have connected it more with the course. Also, I said in class yesterday that this post is in some sense the opposite situation from the previous post (sharing the marbles, altruism, fairness). The way you've described the characters, they are each very selfish. Is that written in stone or would there be some way to change that?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I definitely agree that I could have done a better job connecting the narrative to the course. I think that the issue in the Michael Scott Paper Company was intended by the writers to ultimately lead to the failure of the company and push the narrative of the show. However, if this was a real life scenario, there could have been steps taken to avoid the conflict. For example, any of the 3 employees could have acted less selfishly if they truly cared about the success of the company. Each individual had their own ulterior motive for joining the company. Michael- to prove his former bosses wrong, Ryan - to have a job other than bowling alley attendant, and Pam - to prove that she can be a salesperson. Each of these motives gets in the way of the success of the company from the first ring of the phone.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I haven't seen The Office but I think I should watch it soon as everybody says it's the best serie. I have seen a lot of videos on Facebook about The Office and it indeed looks hilarious sometimes. In the described secretary conflict we see again that it is often due to miscommunication or a lack of communication. I believe that starting a new company with 2 others requires a good task diversion and as you said roles and task significance.

    Once the conflict became apparent to everyone, everyone reacted in a different way. I agree with you that Michael could have done a better job, but sometimes it might have been hard to delegate tasks etc. in this situation because Pam and Ryan even feel theirselves 'above' the menial task of answering a phone. It might just not been the good mix of personalities and of course a lack of communication.

    I can imagine that Pam's final decision to even ask her old job back and not follow her dream of becoming a salesperson is a hard one. Do you think she should stayed longer with the Michael Scott Paper Company or made she a good choice? I can imagine that there are a lot of different factors too which play a role in making such a decision.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Life is a Highway: Opportunism on the Interstates

Discussion on Managing Income Risk and Impacts of Past Choices and Decisions