Government Services You are the newly appointed deputy minister of a provincial government department. There are 6,000 employees in the department, grouped into a corporate office plus six regions. Each region has a regional director. The corporate office has 400 employees who provide policy development and centralized services. Each region is an autonomous unit run by a powerful regional director. The power is in terms of certain political and community support. The minister and his cabinet colleagues want these regional empires reduced in power and brought under vour control. There have been problems because the regions have been delivering programs according to the regional directors' wishes, rather than as legislated. When you explain to the regional directors what vou want done in the way of program stan-dardization, they all agree, but nothing changes. You cannot terminate these regional directors because they have many years of service with performance evaluated at excellent for all recent years. The process of documenting poor perfor-mance, and by that terminating regional directors, would take years. These regional directors are all well paid, and unlikely to leave on their own. The story circulating is that they do not need to change because you will soon leave, just like your prede- cessors. You have a problem. You have promised the minister and the premier that you will standardize program delivery, but the regional directors who must do it for you will not co-operate. You have one year, or be terminated. As an "order-in-council" appointee, the minister can terminate you on short notice. However, you cannot terminate the regional directors in the same way as they are appointees of the public service commission. You are at a loss for a solution. Responsibility accounting does not seem to work. Required With the case approach, put forth alter-natives, evaluate their likelihood of success, select the most appropriate, and then suggest an implementation plan.

So the structure of your case analyses would be as follows: (1). Identification of the main problem: one word, or maximum one sentence consisting of 10 words (max). (20 points) (I). Rationalization or say justification of the identified problem. You can write as much as you can to justify, i.e. why do you say so, e.g. control, budget, calculation error or alike problem (whatever you identified, you need to justify your rational/identification of the problem. Identification of the problem may very but as long as it is justified, it is fine. Rational explanation/justification itself would carry some weight. (40 Points) (III). Recommendation/solution to the identified problem, i.e. to your own identified problem. You'd write, how the problem can be solved as per your rational in section II. Recommendation can be bullet form like 1,2,3 and then the brief explanation.