Problem: The Most Stressful Conditions

How can effective choices be made when there is no time, when your employees, your company, and your community are in imminent danger? Decision making under these conditions takes on a different character, as shown in the response of Sidley Austin Brown & Wood to the tragic events of September 11, 2001.

The giant law firm was formed in May 2001 when Brown & Wood merged its Wall Street financial law offices with those of Chicago-based Sidley & Austin, corporate law specialists, creating the nation's fourth-largest practice, with 1,400 lawyers worldwide. Many of the firm's lawyers are headquartered in New York City, with 600 formerly housed at 1 World Trade Center on floors 52 to 57 and another 100 seven miles away in midtown Manhattan. On September 11, the first plane struck overhead. Workers noticed the explosion's tremors and the smell of jet fuel. Director of Administration John Connelly asked workers to evacuate, helping the frightened and confused employees to the stairs. Being unaware of the extent of the danger, Connelly and others went from floor to floor to ensure that everyone was safely out, then left the building just as it collapsed. Only one company employee perished in the attack.

In the aftermath, with damaged facilities and workers in shock, Sidley Austin employees faced the most trying circumstances of their careers. When their attempts to contact the midtown building failed because cell phone towers had been destroyed, many employees walked to the site. At the midtown location, partner Alan S. Weil anticipated the need for additional office space and called his landlord, who granted immediate leases on two floors and also got another law firm to gibe up two newly leased floors. By the end of the day, hundreds of desks, computers, and cell phones were arriving, and contractors were installing computer cables. "It's just amazing what you can get in New York overnight," says partner Thomas R. Smith Jr. According to New York writer John Schwartz, "The normal rules of business engagement-deliberate negotiation, adversarial wrangling and jockeying for advantage-were swept away. The infamously in-your-face New York attitude was nowhere to be found."

The partnership's directors were supposed to meet in Los Angeles on September 12 but were stranded elsewhere as airlines ceased operations. The executives used conference call to begin "issue-spotting," according ti Thomas Cole, partner. He explained, "The lawyers who assembled that day and in the days thereafter were people who had spent their entire working lives engaged in solving complex problems for clients.

But that was under normal conditions. Would we succeed under the most stressful conditions...?" Issues involving people, insurance, and communications were complex; for example, the people issue covered such items as payroll continuity, trauma counseling, and safety and security. The organization pulled together-staffers from the Chicago headquarters drove all night to assist. When the firm's backup data tapes needed transport from a New Jersey warehouse to Chicago, the storage companies offered to have their employees drive overnight because no planes were flying. Dennis J. O'Donovan, head of the firm's technology section, says, "[Disaster recovery seminars] always prepare you for the worst-people not being available, people not being cooperative; the opposite has happened."

On September 17, firm employees met, and partner Charles W. Douglas told the crowd, "The assets of the law firm are not the desks in the offices, the woodwork that's on the walls or the paintings that are hung in the corridors. The assets of the law firm are its people." Smith agreed, saying, "Being able to keep the business going is great, but it's the people that count." Employees and partners at Sidley Austin have taken on the added work with few complaints; many say that work is therapeutic. The lawyers have completed many financial deals on time, believing that it's their patriotic duty to continue working as before. Employees claim that the tragedy drew them closer together, creating intimate friendships. Others are still suffering from stress, and some may choose paid disability leave, Nancy L, Karen, chief information officer, says the firm has learned a lot about crisis conditions. "We ought to be able to recover in less than a say next time," she says, adding with a nervous laugh, "God forbid!" Perhaps Thomas Cole best asked...if the disaster has been a setback to the full realization of the anticipated benefits of our merger. I answer that "[b]because of the way few have risen to this challenge together, the most important yet most elusive goal in any merger integration, namely the creation of a true partnership, occurred overnight."

References: "About Sidley," "Our Offices," "Our Practices," Sidley Austin Brown & Wood website. www.sidley.com

Case Questions
1. Using the rational approach to decision making, describe the ways in which these crisis conditions affected each step of the decision-making process. Could please elaborate in theory of stephen and robbin (I mean) as follows: Steps in the Rational Decision-Making Model 1. Define the problem. 2. Identify the decision criteria. 3. Allocate weights to the criteria. 4. Develop the alternatives. 5. Evaluate the alternatives. 6. Select the best alternative.

2. Based on your answer to question 1, what are some potential problems that firm should be aware of when they must make decisions during a crisis? What are some steps that firms can take to avoid those problems or to minimize their negative impact?

3. Due to the extraordinary circumstances in New York City during and just after September 11, many individuals and firms changed their behavior, acting more altruistically and ethically. In your opinion, why did this occur? Do you think the change is likely to endure for a long time, or is it only temporary?