MAIL ROUTE IMPROVEMENT VERSUS THE MA?ANA PRINCIPLE: CASE ANALYSIS
This research presents an analysis of the "Mail Route Improvement Versus the Ma?ana Principle" (Robey, 1991, pp. 546 553). The results of the case analysis are presented in discussions of (1) problem identification, (2) analysis of the problem, and (3) conclusion and recommendation.
This case is presented to direct the reader to a conclusion that members of the public service are somewhat dim, recalcitrant, and resistant to change, while simultaneously coming to the realization that university professors are paragons of intelligence who will rescue the country from inefficiency if they are just given the chance. The problem that the case writer would like for the reader to identify is that a clearly more economically efficient operation developed by a university professor was rejected out of hand by public bureaucrats for no justifiable reason. Further, the case writer went to some length to illustrate that preliminary participation in the project on the part of public bureaucrats was simply a ploy to cause the innovator (the university professor) and the public to think that the public sector organization (the United States Postal Service) was willing to consider beneficial change, while all along intending to nullify any real change. As that is the problem that the case writer so blatantly wanted identified, it is one aspect of the problem that will be analyzed in this case study. There are, however, two other important aspects of the problem presented in this case. First, the university professor assumes that the proposed routing model is the most efficient that can be devised. The USPS management pointed out some deficiencies in the professor's proposal that he (the professor) refused to seriously consider. It may well be the case that the professor's model is the most efficient; however, the arrogant stance assumed by the professor is unlikely to win ma...