Perceived costs and benefits of formal MCS used in response to dysfunctional behaviour
| Driver | Formal MCS used in response to dysfunctional behaviour | |
|---|---|---|
| Perceived costs | Perceived benefits | |
| Outcome | The potential of formal MCS to aggravate the dysfunctionality (M11) | An alternative to when informal MCS processes appear to be ineffective (A8) |
| Formal MCS penalties often proving to be minor or not enforced (A2) | Pertinent to when a significant threat to the organisation is perceived (M9) | |
| Prevailing organisational cultures reflecting the metrics-aggravated power imbalance between juniors and seniors (M2) | Demonstrates the existence of controls in place for compliance assurance and accreditation purposes (A7) | |
| Provides protection against legal liability (M11) | ||
| Processual | The recording complexity and resources required in a formal MCS process (A4) | Provides procedural clarity (M15) |
| The considerable time necessitated by the formal MCS process (A8) | Support and expert knowledge available typically from HR units (A1) | |
| The difficulty in stopping the formal MCS process once commenced (M12) | ||
| The difficulty in adequately identifying (e.g., with evidence) interpersonal dysfunctionality (M14) | ||
| The procedural knowledge of formal MCS required of academic managers for formal MCS implementation (M17) | ||
| Personal | The risk of managers being accused of subjectivity and bias (A5) | Provides protection against personal and organisational legal liability (A3) |
| The stress to management and staff involved in the formal MCS process (M10) | ||
| The reluctance of staff to engage in whistleblowing (M12) | ||
| Driver | Formal MCS used in response to dysfunctional behaviour | |
|---|---|---|
| Perceived costs | Perceived benefits | |
| Outcome | The potential of formal MCS to aggravate the dysfunctionality (M11) | An alternative to when informal MCS processes appear to be ineffective (A8) |
| Formal MCS penalties often proving to be minor or not enforced (A2) | Pertinent to when a significant threat to the organisation is perceived (M9) | |
| Prevailing organisational cultures reflecting the metrics-aggravated power imbalance between juniors and seniors (M2) | Demonstrates the existence of controls in place for compliance assurance and accreditation purposes (A7) | |
| Provides protection against legal liability (M11) | ||
| Processual | The recording complexity and resources required in a formal MCS process (A4) | Provides procedural clarity (M15) |
| The considerable time necessitated by the formal MCS process (A8) | Support and expert knowledge available typically from HR units (A1) | |
| The difficulty in stopping the formal MCS process once commenced (M12) | ||
| The difficulty in adequately identifying (e.g., with evidence) interpersonal dysfunctionality (M14) | ||
| The procedural knowledge of formal MCS required of academic managers for formal MCS implementation (M17) | ||
| Personal | The risk of managers being accused of subjectivity and bias (A5) | Provides protection against personal and organisational legal liability (A3) |
| The stress to management and staff involved in the formal MCS process (M10) | ||
| The reluctance of staff to engage in whistleblowing (M12) | ||