• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Part 1: Uncertain Times, Managerial Functions, Communication

Incident 1-1

Who Needs Six Sigma?

Merrill Dawe, plant manager of a major food processing plant, had attended a meeting of an industry association in which he had been impressed by several presentations on Six Sigma implementation and employee involvement teams. Dawe was convinced that such approaches would be very appropriate in his plant because he felt they could help improve employee relations and perhaps improve productivity and reduce quality problems. Dawe decided to call a number of his supervisors, along with the local union president and several of the plant’s union shop stewards, to his office to discuss his plans to implement various improvement processes. At a meeting in his office, Dawe outlined his proposal. He said that he planned to have employee quality improvement meetings periodically, probably once a month, in which various departmental employee groups and committees, along with their supervisors, would discuss production problems, quality problems, and any other problems that needed attention. Dawe emphasized that employees would be paid for the time they spent in these meetings and that any ideas and suggestions would be given open consideration and attention by supervisors and higher-level managers. After listening patiently to Dawe’s presentation, Jerry Bruno, the plant’s local union president, responded, “Mr. Dawe, in my experience, TQM, Six Sigma, and Lean Manufacturing often mean ‘doing more with less.’ We believe that many companies simply use these as a way of trying to bypass the union contract and the grievance procedure. We feel that this can be just another tactic to lull employees into thinking that management is concerned about them. Frankly, I’d bet that TQM meetings will be little more than a place where the workers will say what’s on their minds, then company management will continue to ignore their concerns. Unless I’m convinced—and my fellow union representatives are convinced—that any such program in this plant will not be used to ignore the union and our labor agreement, we will not cooperate with you in this effort.” Dawe pondered what his response should be to Bruno’s comments and whether he should seriously attempt to implement a quality improvement program.

Questions

1. Do you think Dawe could have handled this situation differently, in a way that would communicate his vision and encourage people to embrace his plan?

2. Why do you think Bruno, the union president, was resistant to change? Does it have anything to do with the recent turbulence in the economy? Was it reasonable for him to express his concerns?

3. If you were Dawe, how would you respond to Bruno’s concerns? Incident 1-2

The Little Things Add Up!

Lynda Heredia has worked for Economy Parcel Service (EPS), a large package delivery company, for the past 22 years. She knows that pleasing the customer is key to operating a successful business. She is extremely proud of the “Employee of the Month” awards she has received. Several times before, Heredia has been offered various supervisory positions, but she has always turned them down because she does not want the extra duties and responsibilities that come with advancement. Management considers her the “ideal employee.” She rarely needs to be told what to do and never misses work. Her work is always done the right way the first time. Operations manager, Josh Simpson, has been overheard to remark, “I wish we could figure out a way to clone Lynda. She’s by far the best employee we’ve got.”

Heredia works the 11:00 P.M. to 7:30 A.M. shift. Her position is vital because she sorts packages on both sides of the master conveyor belt and directs them onto assorted belts where others load them into bins and then into delivery vehicles. Due to a downturn in the economy and increased competition, EPS’s business recently dropped off drastically. The company cut overhead and significantly reduced its number of employees. Business had picked up in recent months such that the number of packages handled daily approached previous levels, but those employees who remained after the cutbacks were expected to get the same amount of work done with fewer people and resources and increase productivity, tighten delivery schedules, and accept no pay raises. The last item was especially difficult for Heredia because she is principal caregiver for her elderly mother. All her mother’s Social Security income went for medical costs and other essentials. Heredia’s weekly paycheck usually covered all other expenses, but nothing was left over for recreation or investment. “The harder I work, the behinder I get,” Heredia lamented. Heredia came into work promptly one day, as always, and told her immediate supervisor, Tony Lehman, that she had to leave by 6:30 A.M. because her mother had an 8:00 A.M. appointment at the hospital for some much-needed medical tests. Lehman responded, “Fine. Just remind me later.” Lehman had been Heredia’s immediate supervisor for the past seven months, but they have known each other for about fifteen years. Heredia’s previous supervisor had been downsized, and Lehman’s duties had been expanded to cover several additional areas, including the one in which Heredia worked. Unlike Heredia’s previous supervisor, Lehman failed to tell his employees what he expected them to do and rarely gave them positive feedback. It might have been because he was expected to do more with less.

At 5:30 A.M., Heredia reminded Lehman about the appointment, and Lehman asked the operations manager if he had an employee to cover the hour of Heredia’s shift because she had to leave. The operations manager’s response was, “No, I don’t have anyone. In fact, we’re so short of people right now that I don’t know if we’ll meet the delivery schedule. If I would have known sooner, I might have been able to find coverage for you.” When Lehman told her she would be unable to leave early, Heredia immediately began to fume. “So this is the way they treat dedicated and loyal employees. After all, I asked my supervisor at the beginning of the shift if I could leave early—just like the handbook says,” Heredia lamented to anyone willing to listen. She stayed until her regular quitting time, but her full attention was not on her work. As a result, several mistakes occurred. After punching out, Heredia rushed home, hustled her mother into the car, and left for the hospital. While waiting for her mother to finish her tests, the psychologically “down and out” Heredia, in her dirty work attire, kept playing the day’s scenario over and over in her mind. “I don’t ask this company for much, and I bend over backward to get the job done. I’ll show them: I’ll call in sick tomorrow and see how they appreciate the inconvenience.” About 15 minutes before her assigned shift the next day, Heredia called her supervisor and said, “I’m not feeling well this evening. I think it might be that new strain of flu, and I’d hate to spread it to anyone else. I’ll call you tomorrow evening and let you know how I’m feeling because I’m also scheduled to work tomorrow evening.” Heredia still had several sick days and personal days left, and company policy only required employees to report their sicknesses at least 15 minutes before the start of their shifts. Of course, the employee assigned to perform Heredia’s duties lacked the skill or knowledge to do the job in a correct and timely fashion. Additionally, that employee feared making mistakes, so every package was checked and double-checked to ensure that it got onto the right conveyor. Work-in-progress backed up, and many trucks did not get loaded until mid-morning. In short, many customers received their packages late.

Questions

1. What are some of the factors contributing to Lynda’s current negative attitude toward her work? How and why has it changed over time? What do you think might happen in the future if the environment remains the same?

2. How would you describe her supervisor’s management style? What do you think prevented him from handling this situation well?

3. Do you think that this company should provide some type of support to workers like Lynda who have stressful or challenging circumstances at home? What could the organization do to help her?

Incident 1-3

You’re What?

Seaside Mortgage is a large financial services organization headquartered in Jacksonville, Florida. Seaside employs more than 3,500 individuals across all its southeastern U.S. operations. Susan Gregory, the vice president of human resources, believes that Seaside should conduct on-campus interviews on those college campuses within 100 miles of a Seaside facility. Martina Huston interviewed with Seaside during her senior year in college. Seaside did not have any openings at the time, but nearly a year later, Martina received a phone call from Rex Morgan, a Seaside HR assistant, asking if she would be interested in interviewing for a potential supervisory assistant position at the Palatka office. Martina jumped at the opportunity and scheduled the interview promptly. She was excited at the prospect of working for a company like Seaside. Several of her high school and college friends were employed there, and Martina was impressed with the picture that was painted of the company. The company provides a good salary and a competitive benefit package, flexible work schedules, and opportunity for advancement from within. Seaside is held in high regard as an “employer of choice.” After two interviews, Martina was offered a supervisory trainee position that began three weeks later. This gave her ample opportunity to look for housing in the Palatka area and to terminate her employment with her current employer. With the help of her parents and Ellie Corbitt—the employee assigned by Seaside to help Martina with the employment transition—she found a nice apartment close to her work at the Palatka office. Seaside’s policy for newly hired exempt employees is to have them go through a two-week orientation in the Jacksonville office where they learn about the company and its policies and procedures and shadow a variety of employees. The company believes that new employees should have a chance to see exemplary performers in action. Martina was impressed with the comfort and ease of the orientation program. On Friday afternoon, Martina said her goodbyes to the home- office folks and returned to her parents’ home to prepare for the move to Palatka. Three weeks later, Martina requested a private meeting with Ellie Corbitt, her assigned mentor at the Palatka office. Martina started to cry and proceeded to tell her, “I’m not sure how or when to tell you this, but I’m pregnant! I thought that my upset stomach and other problems were brought on by the excitement of the new job opportunity, but the pregnancy test confirmed my suspicions. My parents will kill me! I don’t know what to do.”

Questions

1. What are Ellie’s responsibilities in this situation? What should her role be?

2. Seaside has invested a lot of time and effort into recruiting and onboarding Martina into her new job. Why does the company do this? What do you think the company’s policy should be about this situation?

3. What advice would you give Martina if you were Ellie?

Incident 1-4

The Interfering Administrative Assistant Christine Moreno is vice president of manufacturing at Barry Automotive’s Doylestown plant. She has direct line authority over Ed McCane, plant superintendent; Charles Evans, chief engineer; Diane Purcell, purchasing and supplies supervisor; Ron Weaver, supervisor of maintenance; and Carol Shiften, supervisor of the shipping department. Two years ago, Moreno hired Bernice Billings as a secretary. Billings was diligent, capable, and efficient. She quickly won the admiration and confidence of her boss. Moreno felt fortunate to have such a capable secretary because Billings willingly assumed numerous duties that allowed Moreno to devote more time to her broad responsibility over the five departments. Moreno, therefore, changed Billings’s job title to “administrative assistant” and increased her salary. After receiving this elevation in status, Billings began to do even more than she had before. For example, Moreno’s supervisors at times received memos that clearly originated with Billings but that carried Moreno’s initials. Billings also took it upon herself to give oral directives to supervisors from time to time. For example, several times Billings approached the plant superintendent, McCane, and gave him instructions concerning plant scheduling problems. At other times, without seeing McCane first, Billings went directly to the production floor and asked employees to rush orders or to do other things. She often told maintenance employees to do various projects, which, she said, “Ms. Moreno would like you to do.” Similar occurrences took place in the shipping department, where Billings frequently left instructions for the special treatment of some customers’ orders. In most of these situations, Moreno was unaware that Billings had taken it upon herself to communicate directly with subordinates to solve problems that had come to her attention. Some employees complained that these directives should have come from Moreno or the appropriate departmental supervisor. In most cases, however, everyone realized that Billings had the best interests of the firm in mind, and they usually complied with her requests. However, as time went on, the supervisors began to feel that Billings was interfering more than she was helping. In several instances, some of the employees on the production floor did not check with McCane but went directly to Billings for instructions. Similar incidents took place in other departments. One day, over a cup of coffee, McCane, Shiften, and Weaver angrily shared their concerns. At the outset, they had looked upon Billings favorably, but now they considered her to be a disruptive factor that was undermining their supervisory positions.

Questions

1. How have Billings’s actions interfered with the normal supervisory chain of command and authority?

2. What are some of the different steps McCane, Shiften, and Weaver could take to correct this problem? What is their best option?

3. If you were going to speak to Billings about the need to change her behavior, how would you approach the conversation? How would you monitor the situation in the future to ensure that she was changing her behavior? Incident 1-5

Clean Up on Aisle 3

Juan Sanchez is store supervisor at Store 16 of Sanders Supermarkets. For about three months, he has been talking to his district manager, Sandra Greenberg, about a major renovation for the grocery section in the store. At last, Greenberg called Sanchez to tell him that a meeting at the corporate main office would be held to discuss the renovation project for Store 16. The meeting was attended by supervisors from the sales and construction departments, several district managers, and the corporate operations manager. By the end of the meeting, it was generally agreed that Store 16 should be reorganized (or “reset,” in the language of the company) and that several main aisles should be relocated. The supervisor of the reset crew and the construction supervisor were to submit final plans and a cost estimate at the next meeting of the group, which was scheduled for a week later. During her next visit to Store 16, Greenberg told Sanchez about the meeting. Greenberg informed Sanchez about the plans for Store 16, adding that nothing was yet finalized. She failed to mention that part of the reset would include moving some aisles. The next week, plans and costs were submitted and approved by the corporate operations manager. Because new shelving had to be ordered and schedules made, the supervisor of the reset crew and the construction supervisor were assigned the job of putting the necessary paperwork into motion. Greenberg then called Sanchez and said, “The reset project for your store has been approved. I’ll let you know more as soon as I hear.” One month later, as Sanchez was driving to work on Monday morning, he made a mental note to call Greenberg to ask about the reset project. However, when Sanchez arrived at Store 16, he soon forgot his plan. He walked into the store to find three major problems: (1) the frozen food case had broken down, (2) the floor scrubber was malfunctioning, and (3) the grinder in the meat department had quit working. After some checking, Sanchez found that no maintenance calls had been made because each of his two assistant supervisors, Jane Oliver and Wally Withers, had thought the other was going to do it. The floor scrubber had not worked well for three days, the frozen food case had broken down the previous afternoon, and the meat grinder had just quit working. “It just doesn’t pay to take a day off,” Sanchez muttered to himself as he headed for the telephone. He called the maintenance department, explained what had happened, and requested immediate service. While waiting for the maintenance person, Sanchez called Oliver and Withers to talk to them about letting him and each other know about these kinds of problems and how to control them. “All it takes,” he said, “is working together, communication, and follow-through to ensure that our customers get the best service available. We can’t be out of merchandise, especially frozen food. And we have to make sure that when we are busy, as we will be this week, our customers aren’t stepping over workers in the aisles.” At about that time, Sanchez was called to his office. When he arrived, he was greeted by five carpenters and laborers. “We just wanted to tell you we’re here, and we’ll get started right away,” said the carpenter in charge. “How come it takes this many people to fix a frozen food case?” asked Sanchez. “We’re not here to fix a frozen food case,” said the carpenter. “We’re here to move the shelving in the aisles and to reset the store.” “Today?!” replied Sanchez. “Nobody told me that you guys were doing this today. I can’t have you moving aisles during the day. What are my customers going to do?” Sanchez then called Greenberg. “Sandy, did you know that they were going to start the reset project in the store today?” “No,” said Sandy, “I wasn’t notified either.” “Why wasn’t I consulted on this?” exclaimed Sanchez. “First of all, the first week of the month is always too busy for laborers to be working in the aisles. Second, this type of work must be done at night. Maybe other stores can handle this work in the daytime, but my customers will not tolerate that kind of inconvenience.” “Okay,” Greenberg said. “It sounds like things are really out of control at your store right now. What are you going to do about it?” “Sandy, don’t you mean, ‘What are we going to do about it?’”

Questions

1. Give several examples of breakdowns in communication from this case. Could any of these have been prevented?

2. In the final paragraphs of the story, it appears that Greenberg thinks that Sanchez should be entirely responsible for solving this problem, whereas Sanchez thinks they should solve the problem together. Who is right? Explain your answer.

3. Sanchez reminds his two supervisors that they need teamwork, communication, and follow-through to ensure their customers’ satisfaction. What do you think he means by this? Give some examples of how this philosophy relates to management and problem solving.

Incident 1-6

Micro Mike

Ann Wilson is 26 years old and a recent college graduate. She received her bachelor’s degree in business with a major in human resources management. After graduation, Wilson could not find employment in her field of study. She eventually took a sales position with a computer firm and worked part-time as a server at a local restaurant called Caruso’s American Cuisine. Wilson liked her restaurant job better than her sales job because she felt that the owner respected her and listened to her opinions. While the restaurant business was not exactly where Wilson thought she would end up in life, she decided to accept a full-time position as day-shift supervisor at the restaurant because it paid well and she felt that it was a good opportunity for her to develop her managerial skills. Several months ago, the owner of the restaurant, Joe Caruso, concluded that he needed someone to be general manager. Caruso owned several other enterprises, and he usually could be at the restaurant for only a few hours each day. To fill this position, Caruso recruited a local food company sales representative who had serviced the restaurant. Michael Morton, the sales representative, had been an assistant manager of a corporate-run steakhouse in the area. Joe Caruso thought that Morton would be a good candidate because he already had some managerial experience in the restaurant business. Morton jumped at the opportunity to be general manager. His arrival at Caruso’s American Cuisine restaurant was announced in a brief meeting with all employees. Wilson initially felt that having a general manager was a good idea. Too often, she had to make supervisory decisions without clear guidance. She thought that a general manager would make her supervisory position easier. However, she was sadly disappointed in what quickly transpired. When Morton took over, he set out to change just about everything. At an employee meeting, he stated that everyone should follow his lead without question. He instituted numerous policies and procedures and posted them along with memos that detailed additional rules. Each employee was given an employee handbook that outlined all the rules and policies. He even had all employees sign to acknowledge that they had received the handbook and agreed to abide by its provisions. Morton caused Wilson problems by frequently assigning work directly to the servers and kitchen crews. At times, he reversed Wilson’s directives and, for the most part, would fail to tell her what he had done. Additionally, Morton occasionally made decisions that appeared to contradict some of the rules he had created. In Wilson’s mind, Michael Morton was a micromanager, and a very poor one at that. Wilson was thoroughly frustrated. Other employees were heard to be grumbling about “Micro Mike.” Ann Wilson contemplated meeting with Caruso, the owner, but she feared that Morton would retaliate if she did. Further, Caruso might resent being accused of making a less-than-intelligent decision in hiring Morton. Even with her college major in human resources management, Wilson did not know what to do. She believed that the restaurant was doing about the same level of business as before. However, she also felt that both customers and employees would desert the restaurant in droves if the Morton situation was not corrected.

Questions

1. The case describes a number of new policies that Morton establishes in his first few months on the job. Analyze his ideas and determine if each one is a positive change or an unnecessary or negative change.

2. Morton has clearly been ineffective in communicating his vision and rationale for his new policies, which has resulted in poor morale. Is there anything he can do now to turn this situation around? 3. What advice would you give Wilson about dealing with her new work environment? Explain your answer.

Incident 1-7

The Picnic Conversation

Barry Automotive’s Glendale Plant’s annual picnic was well attended, as usual. It was a well-planned, day-long family affair for all employees of the firm, giving them an opportunity to get together informally. At the picnic, Charlene Knox, one of the supervisors, had a long chat with her boss, Jim Cross, the general manager. They spoke about many things, including some work problems. Cross greatly emphasized the need to cut costs and generally tighten the company’s finances. He told Knox that he had already received a number of written suggestions and plans from some other supervisors. He highly praised their efforts as appropriate and helpful. Three weeks after the picnic, Charlene Knox received a memo from her boss asking her why her “report in reference to cost cutting had not yet arrived.” At first, she wondered what Jim Cross was referring to, and then she remembered their talk at the picnic. She realized that was the only time Cross had discussed with her the need to cut costs. Knox pondered what her response should be.

Questions

1. Why was it inappropriate for Cross to address this topic with Knox at the company picnic? When and how could it have been handled better?

2. How would you advise Knox to respond to her manager now? Explain your answer.

3. It would appear that Cross had spoken to other supervisors even before the picnic and had already received some feedback from them, but he only spoke to Knox on this one occasion. Should Knox be concerned about being “out of the loop” with her supervisor? Is there anything she could do to improve her working relationship with him?

Incident 1-8

Facing Resistance to a New Program

Debbie Quarter, a new staff engineer at Barry Automotive’s Glendale plant, had been assigned the responsibility of administering the plant’s work-sampling program. This was the first assignment of this nature in Quarter’s career.

Her only knowledge of the program until this time came from friends working as team leaders or supervisors. Quarter heard that these people call the work-sampling program “bird dogging.” They seemed universally to regard the program as unfair, a waste of time, and a personal affront. She realized that only the line superintendents and upper management supported the program, and some of them regarded it as a necessary evil.

The work-sampling program, or “ratio-delay” as it is sometimes called, involves the statistical sampling of the activities of hourly production and maintenance department employees, which includes approximately two-thirds of the plant’s 2,000 employees. The sampling is conducted continuously by a full-time observer who walks the plant via a series of randomly selected, predetermined routes. The observer’s job is to record the activity of each worker as the worker is first observed. An activity could fall into one of seven categories, which are subclasses of

“working,” “traveling,” or “nonworking.” The data are compiled monthly, and results are charted for each group and sent to the various supervisors and top management.

The program has been in effect for about five years at the plant. At the time it was initiated, management stated that the program’s purpose was threefold:

1. Indicate supervisory effectiveness.

2. Help identify problems interfering with work performance.

3. Serve as a control measure of the effect of changes in work methods, equipment, facilities, or supervision.

Realizing that the program had widespread resistance, Quarter immediately began to conduct informational meetings for all team leaders and supervisors. In these sessions, she discussed the purpose of the program and its mechanics. She also attempted to answer any questions. The team leaders and supervisors were most vocal in their negative opinions about the program, and after a few meetings, Quarter noted that certain comments were being repeated in some form by almost every group.

Most supervisory groups identified aspects of the sampling program they thought biased results against them.

The most common complaint of this type was that the sampling was too often conducted when work was normally lightest, such as during coffee breaks and early or late in the day. Because the method of scheduling visits was complex, efforts to explain the program’s randomness and means of ensuring fairness had never been accepted.

Some basic statistical training had been attempted, but with little success—especially among the team leaders and supervisors who had traditionally risen through the ranks and had little technical background.

Another frequent complaint was that activities normally considered work (e.g., going for tools or carrying materials) were not recorded as such. It was explained to the team leaders that these activities were factors not directly accomplishing work, given that in these areas improvements could be made.

Several maintenance team leaders complained that results were repeatedly used to pressure them to, in turn, pressure their workers. When they would bear down, the supervisors said, the workers would resist, and less work was accomplished than before. One team leader quoted his boss as saying, “These figures [work-sampling results] better be up next month, or I’m going to have three new supervisors in here!” It was general knowledge that the superintendents greatly emphasized these results when appraising supervisors and team leaders.

Virtually no one at any level of supervision had a good understanding of how sample size could affect results.

Small groups with few samples said they had experienced wide fluctuations in results that “just couldn’t happen.”

This, of course, reinforced their distrust of sampling methods.

There had been few, if any, changes initiated by first-line supervisors as a result of work-sampling results.

Several staff projects had been generated—some, like motorized personnel carriers, were quite popular with the workers—but these were not generally associated with work-sampling results.

After the first few sessions, Quarter wondered whether her meetings with the team leaders and supervisors were doing more harm than good. The meetings seemed to upset everyone, and anything that was learned was probably lost in the emotional discussions. Quarter pondered what she should do next.

Questions

1. What advantages and benefits do you see in a work-sampling program? What negatives do you see in the program? What ideas do you have for making the program a “win” for everyone?

2. It seems as if every group has a different perception of this program. If you were Quarter, what would you want to communicate to both workers and supervisors about the program, and how would you communicate it?

3. What types of communication are demonstrated in this case?

Part 2: Motivation, Problem Solving, Positive Discipline

Incident 2-1

From Part Time to Full Time? Alice Toomer is supervisor of the clerical staff in the medical records department of Pine Village Community Medical Center (CMC). She has the authority to hire and fire for her department and is unaffected by a union contract because the hospital has no union. She has seven full-time employees working for her. Whenever a regular clerical employee does not show up, Toomer calls Benton Temporary Services. Normally, she requests Helen Drew, who works as a relief person on an as-needed basis. Drew expressed a preference for part-time work and likes the opportunity the hospital provides. Toomer observed that, whenever Drew came in to help out, there seemed to be friction between her and the full- time employees. Apparently, the full-time employees did not like Drew’s work habits. She had the ability to turn out ten hours of work in eight hours. Drew is older, with college- and high-school-aged children. Most of the full-timers are young, unmarried people in their early twenties. Toomer did not know whose fault it was, but there were numerous complaints about Drew from the other employees. Most common among these complaints were that she did not socialize with them during breaks or lunch hour and that she did not respond in a timely manner to requests for assistance. Toomer, however, was certain of the high quality of Drew’s work and knew that everything she assigned to her was done professionally and in a timely manner. Early one afternoon, Drew told Toomer that she would like to work full time because her youngest child would be in college next year and she could use the extra income. This request came as something of a surprise and a problem to Toomer. Only the previous day, Jody Williams had announced that she would be leaving in ten days to move to Dallas with her husband. Toomer pondered whether she should offer this job to Drew. Of course, Drew would be very pleased to get this position, and it appeared that she knew it would be open, but Toomer was concerned about the reactions of the other employees in the department.

Questions

1. The case gives a couple of specific examples of complaints about the temp worker, Helen Drew. Are these reasonable or serious complaints? How could or should Toomer address them?

2. What do you think Toomer should do about filling the open position in her department? What are her options?

3. How important are interpersonal relationships within a small department? Is there anything a supervisor can do to foster healthy relationships? Is that part of a supervisor’s job?

Incident 2-2

Fear of Being Passed on the Corporate Ladder Mark Wells is the evening shift warehouse supervisor for Sanders Supermarkets, a large grocery-store chain. Over the past twelve years, with only a high-school education, Mark had worked his way up from being a laborer to a supervisor. The 35-year-old Wells was married with two school-aged children, and he had been wanting to move to the day shift so that he could spend more time with his family.

Two days ago, Mark’s boss, John Swanson, told him that the current day-shift supervisor was retiring at the end of the month and that Mark was first in line for the job. This would be a lateral move; there would be no change in title and no pay increase. Actually, Mark would take a $20 per week reduction because the evening shift salary included a premium shift differential. Nevertheless, Mark Wells was very interested because he saw it as his only near-term opportunity to move to the day shift.

Mark’s assistant, or leadman, on the evening shift was Sam Melton, an energetic and intelligent young man in his mid-twenties who had been with the company for three years. Sam had been attending a local community college, and he recently completed a two-year management certification program. Mark felt somewhat intimidated by Sam’s credentials, his easygoing personality, his exceptional communications skills, and his ability to get work crews to go the “extra mile.” On several occasions, Sam was able to get work crews to complete difficult projects that Mark could not accomplish. Mark knew that if he took the day-shift position, Sam likely would be promoted to evening-shift supervisor. Then Sam would be able to demonstrate to upper management his superior supervisory skills. Because opportunities for advancement beyond the supervisory position were limited, Mark was concerned that Sam would soon pass him by on the corporate ladder. Thus, Mark would be forever trapped in a first-tier supervisory position with little hope for advancement.

Questions

1. Are Mark’s concerns about his career path reasonable? What could he do to improve

his chances of continuing to move up the ladder?

2. Mark has an ethical dilemma to deal with: He could conceivably choose to stay in his

position, thereby keeping Sam in his, in the hope that Sam would get tired of waiting

to get ahead and move on to another company. What do you think Mark should do?

3. What are the personal characteristics and qualities that make Sam such an exemplary

candidate for a management position? Incident 2-3

Could You Have Prevented the Crisis?

It was almost seven o’clock. Judy Burkett drew a deep breath as she was anxious for her shift to end. It had been a long day since her regularly scheduled day shift had begun almost eleven hours ago. Judy had worked as a packer for Christoff Packing, an Iowa meat packing plant, for the past eleven years. Shortly after her divorce, she applied for work at the soon-to-be-opened plant. She was hired, trained, and started work the first day the plant opened. The job provided a steady source of income to support her and her two children.

It was not long after the plant opened that the oppressive, authoritarian management style led the employees to support the unionization effort of the Amalgamated Meat Packers Union, Local 181. Judy supported the union and the benefits it gained for her. She rarely attended a union meeting except to cast her vote for or against contract proposals. This past March, after working under a ten-month extension of the previous contract, the workers approved a new contract by the barest of margins. The contract called for a $400 signing bonus, no wage increase for the first year, mandatory overtime with four hours’ notice, and a ceiling on what the company would pay for health insurance coverage. The employees now would have to pay substantially more for medical insurance premiums. Christoff Packing was only the latest in a long list of employers that had taken a hard-line approach in dealing with wage and health-care costs.

It had been a typical August day in Iowa. There were times when you couldn’t see from one end of the plant to the other because of the heat and humidity. The workers had complained that the air handling systems were not functioning properly, and they had threatened to call OSHA to complain. The plant manager, Oscar Grimes, constantly reminded complaining workers that they were lucky to have such good jobs. Times were tough in the meat-packing industry, and workers knew that if they lost their jobs at Christoff Packing, they might never find a job that paid as well as the one they currently had. Yet Christoff’s business had been good, and production was at an all- time high. Rather than hire new employees, management applied the mandatory overtime provision, i.e., four hours or more before a worker’s scheduled shift was to end, management had the contractual right to require the employee to work up to four hours of overtime that day. As such, many employees had been working at least ten hours a day for the past two months.

Like most workers, Judy Burkett welcomed all the extra hours she could get. She needed the money, and with her two children, she knew that she needed to start saving for their college education and to put some money aside for a rainy day. However, the overtime had its drawbacks. Burkett missed being with the kids, ages 14 and 12. They were on summer vacation, and she had difficulty balancing the uncertainty of her work hours with her child care needs.

Fred Rossiter was supervisor of the “B” line—the packing line that Judy worked on. Rossiter was the proverbial

“man in the middle”—squeezed between a rock and a hard place. Top management was demanding that he seek ways to increase quantity without sacrificing quality, but the increased production had put a strain on everyone and everything. The increased production also put a strain on the machinery, and delays often occurred while employees waited for maintenance. Rossiter was constantly fielding questions from his subordinates about when they could expect a let-up in overtime demands.

Rossiter also was being bombarded with questions from his wife. Until March of this year, all supervisors had been paid on an hourly basis, just like the people they supervised. If they worked overtime, they were paid at the rate of one-and-a-half times their base pay. In March, top management decided to elevate the status of the plant supervisors. They were put on salary, and their jobs were reclassified to “exempt status.” At that time, the new arrangement seemed to be more than fair as their new salary base was equal to fifty hours of pay per week.

However, during the past two months, most supervisors had been averaging sixty hours or more per week. Because of the mandatory overtime provision, Rossiter never knew when he left for work whether he would be home at the regular time or whether he would have to work overtime. Rossiter’s wife was tired of not knowing when he would be home, and she constantly reminded him that if he were still on the hourly rate he would be bringing home more money.

On his way to another production meeting called by top management, Rossiter passed by Burkett’s work area.

Feeling very frustrated with the uncertainty, Rossiter knew that regardless of the production, quality, safety, and maintenance results he reported, the plant manager would not be satisfied. Nothing was ever good enough for Oscar

Grimes.

“Judy, before you go home this evening, make sure you clean up around your machine,” Rossiter remarked as he hurried to the meeting.

She thought, “What is the matter with you? I work hard for this company, and no one seems to care.” The heat of the day and the long work day caused Judy to respond in an uncommon way. She moved away from her machine, placed both hands on her hips, and shouted after the rapidly moving Rossiter. “Hey, Freddie, wait a minute!” As

Rossiter turned, Judy continued, “I choose not to do that at this time!”

Rossiter moved quickly toward her and gestured by pointing the finger of authority at her. “You’re insubordinate. Punch out, and take three days off without pay!”

Judy was struck with pain. She thought, “He’s lost it. I’ve given the company the best years of my life, and no one seems to appreciate what I’ve done.” She gave him a sharp glance, then threw her apron on the floor, and responded over her shoulder, “I think I’ll take five!” And out the door she went.

Questions

1. Do you think Judy overreacted and was being insubordinate? Did she deserve to be sent home for three days without pay? Or did her supervisor overreact and allow his emotions to take control?

2. Describe this work environment from the workers’ point of view. Compare and contrast this against the management’s point of view.

3. What does this case reveal about the challenges of work-life balance? How can these various employees improve this aspect of their lives?

Incident 2-4

The Socializing Supervisor

Terry Miles was promoted to a supervisory position in the Glendale street department’s repair (chip and seal with new asphalt) section. He was chosen for the position by the manager of utility operations, Ronnie Callahan, who felt that Miles was the “ideal” candidate for the position. Miles had been hired five years earlier as a general-purpose employee. Utility operations cross-trained all new employees so that they were capable in a variety of functions.

Although two other employees had been in the division for at least twelve years, they had constantly expressed their dislike for supervisory responsibilities. In addition, Miles’s job performance ratings had been very good, his attendance was near perfect, and he seemed to be well liked by his colleagues and others who knew him well. When Callahan told Miles that he was to become supervisor of the repair section, Miles expressed apprehension about leaving the security that his union position afforded and worried that his fellow employees would see him as a

“turncoat.” He asked Callahan how he should handle the problem that his fellow employees now would be his

“subordinates.” Callahan told Miles not to be concerned about this and assured him that his former associates would soon accept the transition. Callahan also told Miles that the company would send him to a supervisory management training program sponsored by a local college just as soon as time became available.

After several months, however, Jerry Mitchell, general superintendent of the street department who reported to

Callahan and who was Miles’s immediate manager, was getting the impression that Miles was not adjusting to his new position. Although Mitchell had not been directly involved in Miles’s selection, he felt Miles was an excellent worker who was not progressing in the supervisory position. Mitchell was particularly concerned because he had observed Miles socializing with his employees during lunch periods and coffee breaks. Callahan had received reports that Miles often socialized with several of his employees after work, including going on double dates and to ballgames and parties arranged by these employees. Despite Miles’s assurances, Mitchell had received a number of reports directly from City Council members and the mayor’s office that the work of the repair section was not being performed as efficiently as it should be. Another utilities department manager even told Callahan, “Since Miles became supervisor, there is little discipline in the department, and it’s just a big social group that reluctantly does a little work.”

After reviewing various productivity reports, Mitchell realized that Miles had not made a good adjustment to supervising employees in his department. Overtime had been substantially higher when compared with the preceding two years. Rework had increased, and it appeared that the crews were not doing the job right the first time. Last evening, one of the local television stations announced a “pothole of the week” contest. He wondered how much of this was attributable to Miles’s lack of experience as a team leader, and he worried that Miles’s former colleagues might be taking advantage of him. At the same time, Mitchell was concerned that Miles perhaps did not have the desire to disassociate himself from socializing and being a “buddy” to his employees. Mitchell wondered what his next step should be.

Questions 1. What does this case reveal about the advantages and disadvantages of a supervisor being friends with his or her subordinates? Do you think companies should have policies that prevent supervisors from socializing with their subordinates?

2. Does a person’s ability to do a job well automatically mean that he or she will excel as a supervisor? Why or why not?

3. How should Mitchell, Miles’s supervisor, deal with Miles’s poor performance and his team’s poor results now that he is the supervisor? What are Mitchell’s options? What would be your best recommendation?

Incident 2-5

Losing Her Cool

Debra Allen was the branch manager at Big Bank’s Northwood branch. She was in charge of approximately twenty people, including two assistant managers. All but two of the tellers were women. Several were employees who had difficult lives outside the workplace. Often, their personal lives influenced the work environment in a negative way.

Allen regularly met with the employees, both individually and in small groups. She constantly reminded them of the need to work together to serve the customers. The bank’s motto was, “Two centuries of giving customers outstanding service.”

Janet Taylor was the lead teller at the Big Bank Northwood branch. She had started working at the bank shortly after her high school graduation about fourteen months ago. Taylor had been a model employee, coming in early for work, investigating every opportunity to learn, and seemingly enthusiastic about her job at the branch. Her work ethic was a positive influence on the other tellers. Unlike many of the tellers, Taylor still lived at home with her parents and had never experienced the personal problems or financial woes that many of her peers were experiencing. Yesterday, Bonnie Boyce, a single parent, showed up for work late without calling in. As head teller, Taylor had the responsibility of addressing the issue with Boyce and putting documentation in her file. Subsequent attendance issues within a two-week period were referred to Allen or one of the assistant managers. As one of the youngest people in the branch, Taylor found her responsibilities stressful. She was not comfortable dealing with performance or personal problems.

Today was another matter. It was the very busy first Friday of the month. Many senior citizens came in to deposit their retirement or Social Security checks, and most businesses paid their employees on Friday. The bank also handled utility payments for its customers. The customers appreciated the convenience, and it saved them postage. Rhodda Ayers was the oldest teller. She was in her sixties, and her disposition was annoying at times. She often tried to boss or “mother” most of the other tellers.

Shortly before noon, the teller lines were long, and Bonnie Boyce strolled in—two hours after she was scheduled. Because of the workload, Taylor immediately assigned her one of the vacant windows with the comment that she would talk with her at break time.

Taylor was having lunch in the break room when Ayers came in. Everyone could tell that Ayers was upset, and

Taylor made an effort to cheer her up.

TAYLOR: Rhodda, what’s the matter? Is something wrong?

AYERS: (Tries to ignore Taylor.)

TAYLOR: Well, go ahead and ignore me. I was just trying to help.

AYERS: You’d help if you’d get that problem out of here. I’m tired of always having to work harder because of that woman.

TAYLOR: What do you mean?

AYERS: You know exactly who I mean—Bonnie Boyce. She’s lazy, inconsiderate, and a slob.

TAYLOR: What exactly has she done?

AYERS: Yesterday, she was late, and you did nothing. Today, she showed up mid-morning on our busiest day of the month, and you welcomed her like she was the prodigal son. You never should have been promoted to head teller.

(Getting louder) Your good looks might have dazzled some of the guys downtown, but I’ve never been impressed with you. TAYLOR: Stop that right now. I’m just doing my job. If you’d do yours without being so rigid and motherly, things might be a lot better around here.

AYERS: You are nothing but a naïve little pipsqueak!

TAYLOR: Why don’t you just back off! (She stormed out of the break room.)

Questions

1. Review the conversation between Taylor and Ayers. Describe some of the problems that led to this conversation spinning out of control. How could Taylor have handled this better? What should Ayers have done differently?

2. Based on the facts given, Taylor is probably about 19 or 20 years old. What challenges does her age pose for her in this work environment? Is there anything she could do to overcome these challenges?

3. If you were Taylor, what would you do now? How would you discipline Bonnie Boyce? How would you deal with Rhodda Ayers?

Incident 2-6

Locker-Room Theft

For a number of months, Charlie Blair, the supervisor of the dry goods (nonperishable items) warehouse servicing for all Sanders Supermarkets stores, had been concerned about reports of valuables missing from employees’ lockers in the warehouse’s employee dressing room. The company gave employees metal lockers to use, but the lockers had no locks. Employees shared these lockers on a rotating shift basis; the company never considered it necessary to assign lockers. The lockers were provided mainly so that employees could store their jackets and other items while working in the warehouse.

Blair had reminded employees on a number of occasions not to leave valuables in the lockers. He told the employees that, according to company rules posted in the warehouse, the company assumed no responsibility for any loss, and he also told them that anyone found guilty of stealing a valuable would be terminated immediately for theft.

However, for the past several months Blair had received reports of numerous items missing from employees’ lockers. These items included a sweater, a lunchbox, food from several lunchboxes, and a baseball glove. For a number of reasons, including several rumors that had been circulated to Blair, Blair was suspicious of a fairly new warehouse employee named Eric Raleigh. Raleigh was a young warehouse worker who operated a tow truck. He was about 22 years old, and he had been employed by the company for about six months. Coincidentally, the reports of missing items from the locker room seemed to have become more frequent during the past several months.

On a Tuesday morning, Blair received a report from a warehouse employee named Willie Jeffries that a small transistor radio was missing from his locker. Jeffries stated that he had placed the radio in his locker when he reported to work at 7:30 a.m. and that he noticed it missing when he returned to his locker during his morning coffee break.

Upon receiving this report, Blair decided to search various lockers while all the employees were working in the warehouse. At about 11:00 a.m., Blair entered the locker room and searched the locker where Raleigh had stored his clothing and lunchbox. At the bottom of the locker, underneath a number of magazines, Blair found a transistor radio. Blair returned to the office and summoned Jeffries to identify the radio. Jeffries identified the radio as his own, but Blair did not disclose to Jeffries where he had found it.

Shortly thereafter, Blair asked Raleigh to come to his office. Blair explained to Raleigh the report he had received, what he had done, and how he had found the missing radio in Raleigh’s locker. Blair did not directly accuse Raleigh of theft, but he suggested that Raleigh might want to consider resigning from the firm because of the suspicions that had been circulating about his connection to the other items missing from lockers.

At this point, Raleigh became very angry. He stated that he would not resign because he was innocent. He felt that someone else had been stealing items from employee lockers and that whoever it was had planted the radio in his locker to blame him. Raleigh even said he would be willing to take a lie detector test to prove his innocence. He told Blair, “If the company decides to fire me for this, I’ll get the union and a lawyer to sue the company for everything it has for false accusation and unjust termination.” With that, Raleigh left Blair’s office and returned to his job.

Blair, taken aback by Raleigh’s adamant denial of any involvement in the locker-room thefts, was unsure what to do in this situation. He recognized that the union contract for employees in the warehouse required that any disciplinary action must be for “just cause.” Blair decided he would discuss the situation with Elaine Haas, the company’s director of human resources. Questions

1. Do you think Blair did the right thing in searching Raleigh’s locker for the stolen radio? Do you think this is legal? Do you think it’s ethical?

2. If you were Blair and you had to figure out who was stealing, what would you do? How would you have handled your suspicions about Raleigh?

3. Do you think a company has a responsibility to protect its’ employees from theft and other crimes committed on the job by current or former employees and customers? What can companies do to protect employees from harm?

Incident 2-7

Romance on the Assembly Line

Lisa Nance has been working on the assembly line of Jackson Manufacturing Company for about six months. During recent weeks, Nance’s supervisor, Ben Miller, has noticed that her production has gone down to such an extent that she cannot keep up, and she has caused serious delays. When Miller called this to her attention, Nance told him about the difficulties she was having at home. Her husband had recently left her without any explanation. Miller replied that her personal affairs were of no interest to him and that he was concerned only with her work. He warned her that unless her production improved she would be separated from the company. Shortly thereafter, Miller was promoted to a high-level management position. His supervisory position was filled by Jack Armstrong, who had joined the company recently. Armstrong immediately took a liking to Nance and started dating her. Although she told Armstrong about her marital difficulties, he kept seeing her. When she remarked to him one day that her car needed some repairs, he offered to see whether he could fix it for her. On the following Saturday, Nance’s estranged husband appeared and found Armstrong repairing her car, which was parked on the street in front of her apartment. The two men got into a fight on the street, and police were called to separate them. The local newspapers carried a short report about the incident, mentioning that Nance and Armstrong were employed at Jackson Manufacturing Company. A few days later, Armstrong was called into the office of Kay McCaslin, the human resources director, who had read the newspaper report. McCaslin advised Armstrong to stop seeing Nance or risk being fired. McCaslin reminded Armstrong that informal company policy discouraged close fraternization between supervisors and employees because it tended to weaken a supervisor’s authority in dealing with employees. Moreover, publicity of this sort would undoubtedly hurt the company’s image in the community. Armstrong replied that this was none of the company’s business and that he could spend his time away from the plant any way he chose. He stated that a threat of discharge was totally improper because his private life was his own and not subject to company regulations. Furthermore, he pointed out that Nance’s work record had improved under his supervision, and it was now at the same level as most of the other people on his line. Armstrong left McCaslin’s office with the comment that he would continue to date Nance because they were very much in love. McCaslin wondered whether she should drop the matter or discuss it with higher-level management, including Miller, who now was Armstrong’s superior.

Questions

1. What does this case reveal about the advantages and disadvantages of a supervisor being romantically involved with a subordinate? Do you think companies should have policies that prevent supervisors from dating or being married to their subordinates?

2. Nance and Armstrong both knew they were violating company policy so Armstrong should not be surprised that he is being disciplined for this situation. Is there some way he could have worked with Kay McCaslin to resolve the situation in a more positive way?

3. McCaslin feels that Armstrong’s actions in his personal life may reflect badly on their employer, but Armstrong states this his personal life is his own business and has no connection to his employer. Who do you think is right? Explain your answer.

Incident 2-8

Hands Up? Time’s Up

Luis Siqueira had worked for Jiffy Mart for the past ten years. Jiffy Mart was a 24/7, standalone gas station located on North Anthony Boulevard. Customers prepaid for the gasoline, either at the pump or at the customer-service window. Customers also could purchase milk, soda and snack foods, tobacco products, and other high-margin incidentals through the customer-service window. Company policies stated specifically that no one other than authorized personnel was allowed inside the building. Because of the proclivity of gasoline drive-offs and hold-ups, the parent company had installed surveillance cameras to record suspicious behavior. As a cost-control measure, only one employee was scheduled to work at any one time. One of the three district managers visited each store every day. During these visits, the district manager collected the cash from the drop safe, reconciled credit card purchases with inventory, brought fresh supplies, and helped the employee restock the shelves. Generally, these visits occurred between 10:00 A.M. and 3:00 P.M.

One night, around 10:00 P.M., as three customers were at the customer-service window, a car stopped directly between the customer-service window and the gas pumps. Two men wearing ski masks, one with a shotgun and the other with a revolver, jumped out. The robbers demanded that Luis fill a garbage sack with money that he had on hand. Frightened, Luis pointed to the sign that said “No cash on hand except for $25. Cash transactions go immediately into the dump safe.” The robber with the shotgun then placed a garbage sack on the window ledge and demanded that Luis fill it with cartons of cigarettes. The other robber demanded that the three customers place their jewelry, purses, and wallets in another garbage sack. The robbers threatened to kill the three customers if Luis pushed the silent alarm button. Luis and the customers chose to play it safe and complied with the robbers’ requests. As the robbers retreated with their loot but before they could leave the scene, Luis burst from the building blasting away. Unbeknown to anyone, Luis had a permit to carry a handgun. Shortly after he began working at Jiffy Mart, he started carrying the gun to work. Luis fired the gun three times at the fleeing vehicle. Simultaneously, the police and the Channel 4 camera crew arrived. The television crews routinely traveled the area looking for news as it happened. They monitored police channels, and did live reports on what was happening almost as it happened. No one was able to provide the police with the license number of the car. A review of the surveillance tapes showed clearly the make and model number but not the license number. One of the robbed customers described Luis’s actions as “John Wayne–like. The robbers were fleeing the scene, and then that employee came out blasting away. Sure I was scared, but when the bullets started flying, I really became frightened!” Another customer stated, “I’m going to start carrying a gun. I wish that employee would have shot them both! It’s not safe to go anywhere!” Within minutes of the robbery, the management of Jiffy Mart was fully aware of the happenings at the North Anthony store. An hour later, Channel 4 reported that an unidentified person had been dumped on the steps of Community General Hospital. The person had been shot several times. Ballistics tests later confirmed the bullets were fired from Luis’s gun. The next day, Luis was summoned to the general offices of Jiffy Mart. The president and the three district managers met him and immediately informed him that he was no longer employed by Jiffy Mart. He was told that he had violated several company policies: (1) Jiffy Mart’s policy for robbery was to fulfill the robber’s request without trouble and report it to the authorities and company officials when the danger had passed; (2) Jiffy Mart’s employee handbook stated that weapons were not permitted on company premises; (3) Luis had seriously injured someone and had created a situation where customers could have lost their lives; and (4) Luis had not used good judgment. They demanded the return of his keys, company ID, and other work-related items. Luis was handed a termination notice and was told that he would receive his final check in the mail.

Questions 1. Do you think the punishment fits the action in this case? Does Luis deserve to be fired, or should he face a less severe degree of discipline, given that he is a long-term employee with presumably a good record?

2. In your opinion, is Luis a hero or a fool? Does he have the right to protect himself in his work environment, or should he have followed company policy?

3. What was Jiffy Mart’s role in this situation? Is there anything the company could have or should have done differently to prevent this event from happening?

Part 3: Planning, Organizing at the Departmental Level, Staffing

Incident 3-1

The Looming Deadline

Gil Pietro is the accounting department supervisor for a manufacturing plant that employs approximately 600 people. Reporting to Gil are two accountants and four data-entry clerks. They work in an office area that is separate from other departments. Gil’s department is involved in virtually all aspects of internal and external accounting responsibilities although some work has been outsourced to local consulting firms.

Upper management had challenged members of the management team to find solutions to some of the problems facing the organization. They were convinced that most processes and procedures would be more efficient and effective if the company would embrace some of the systems-engineering principles. Initially, two questions were asked of Gil: “How do you get rid of some of the paperwork with a more automated system, and how can your department help reduce errors?”

Several new software packages have been successfully implemented in the accounting department. A new streamlined software system for processing accounts payable and receivable was a project recently given top priority. It was so important that Gil decided to develop and carry out the project himself. His boss, the controller, specified a deadline for completion that was very tight. In developing the software package, Gil met with the data processing manager, the controller, and outside consultants that he hired to write the software package.

Gil’s staff, who will be the software’s primary users, were only recently told about the project, its implementation date, and scheduled training sessions.

This morning, a day after the second training session, several members of Gil’s staff walked into his office quite upset. They claimed that the project’s proposed implementation date was “totally unrealistic” and could not be met due to “serious flaws” in the new software package. They asserted that the new package would create more work than the old system, would confuse some customers, and would require extra time that simply was not available with existing staff. Ellen Bond, a data-entry clerk in the group, summed up the group’s feelings by stating, “All this could have been avoided if we had been part of the project planning from the start!”

The group has just left Gil’s office, and he is now rather distressed. The project’s scheduled implementation date is two weeks away, only one training session remains, and it would be impossible to rewrite the package in time.

Questions

1. Review the sequence of events in this case. What should Gil have done differently in terms of planning in order to prevent this problem?

2. Examine Gil’s options for solving the problem from this point moving forward. What steps would you recommend he take to achieve the best possible outcome?

3. How could Gil better utilize his staff and their expertise to help plan and organize his department’s work in general, and especially for special projects like this?

Incident 3-2

The Opportunity of a Lifetime?

Randy Harber, a 36-year-old construction crew chief, is employed by one of the largest mechanical contractors in the country. His employer operates in forty-four states and fourteen foreign countries. Randy and his spouse, Eileen, have two children, 7-year-old Kelly and 3-year-old Jason. Eileen is a registered nurse and works part time in a family-practice office. Randy began his career in the construction field by entering the apprenticeship program immediately upon completing high school. He served as an officer in the local union and became a crew chief three years ago. His technical skills rank among the best. During the past two years, he has taken evening courses at the local community college to enhance his supervisory skills and to improve his chances of becoming a field superintendent. However, the construction industry has experienced no real growth, and opportunities for advancement are slim. During the past winter, Randy and others suffered reduced work weeks and had their use of the company truck severely restricted.

Randy Harber had been called to meet with Kevin Cook, vice president of field operations, in Cook’s office. The following conversation took place:

KEVIN: Randy, you know that our revenues are down about 25 percent from last year.

RANDY: Yes. (Thinking to himself, “Here it comes: I’m going to get laid off.”)

KEVIN: We’ve been trying to expand our base of operations and have bid on contracts all over the world. I think we have the opportunity of a lifetime, and you figure to be one of our key players. The United Methodist Church is collaborating in a joint venture in Liberia to build a hospital on the outskirts of Monrovia, the capital city. They have a medical missionary program there, and this hospital is a $23 million project. The general contractor will be out of

Milan, Italy, and we have received the mechanical portion of the contract.

RANDY: That’s great! We can use the work.

KEVIN: This project will give us a strategic advantage in the European-African corridor. Top management has talked it over, and we would like for you to be our field superintendent on this project. Not only is this a great opportunity for us, but it will give you invaluable experience. In addition, your salary will almost double. All the people on this project will be our very best. You’ll be leaving in three weeks, and we’d expect you to be on-site for fourteen months. What do you think?

RANDY: Geez, that sounds fascinating. How soon do you need an answer?

KEVIN: Go home, think it over, talk to Eileen, and let’s get back together tomorrow afternoon at about 3:00.

Questions

1. What are some of the factors that Randy and his wife need to consider in making this decision? What additional questions should they ask, and what research do they need to do?

2. Why do you suppose this company wants to send one of its’ American employees all the way to Liberia to perform this work? What are the benefits to the company? What might be the disadvantages to the company? 3. Have you ever considered going to work in a foreign country? If you were offered such an opportunity, what would you say and why? How do you think it might affect your life and your career?

Incident 3-3

Preferential Treatment

Georgia Mason is supervisor of the laundry at Pine Village Community Medical Center (CMC). Most of the time, she supervises eight to ten people. One of her employees is Paula Whisler, a widow with five school-age children. Whisler is a very good worker, but she is almost always late for work in the morning. Mason had spoken to Whisler numerous times about her tardiness to no avail. Just last Wednesday, Whisler assured Mason that she tried hard to be at work on time, but she “just did not seem to be able to make it” by 6:30 A.M. because she had to get her children off to school. She argued that she worked twice as hard as anyone else and that she stayed over in the afternoon to make up for the time she lost in the mornings. There was little doubt in Mason’s mind that Whisler produced as much as or more than anyone else and that she did stay later in the evening to make up the time she lost by being late in the morning. One Monday morning, however, Paula Whisler’s tardiness was holding up a job that had to be finished by noon. Regardless of how hard Whisler might work during the morning, it would be difficult to finish the job on time because the items had to dry for three hours before they could leave the department. While some other worker could have performed the operation, Georgia Mason felt that Whisler was most qualified to do it. However, should she arrive late again, the entire operation’s schedule would be thrown off. All of this was going through Mason’s mind when she heard one of the workers say to another worker, “Whisler is getting preferential treatment. Why should she be given any favors, like she’s better than the rest of us?” Sure enough, Paula Whisler arrived 45 minutes late. Georgia Mason realized that the situation required action on her part, but she did not know what that action should be.

Questions

1. Whisler’s co-workers resent the fact that she has not been disciplined for her tardiness. Is it ever okay for an employee to be allowed to follow a different set of rules, such as a different time schedule? How would this affect the other workers?

2. How do you think Georgia Mason should handle this situation? What are her options, and what would you recommend she do? 3. The case suggests that Whisler is the best employee in the group, and perhaps the only one with the ability to do certain tasks. Do you see this as a problem for the employer, Pine Village Community Medical Center? If so, how do you think Mason should resolve it?

Incident 3-4

Someone Failed to Check!

Carrie Webster was hired a little over a year ago for an accounting analyst position in the administrative office at Sanders Supermarkets. The knowledge and skills required for the job indicated that the employee should have a college degree in accounting and at least three years of job-related experience, preferably in the supermarket/retail industry. A review of Webster’s most recent performance appraisal showed that her immediate supervisor rated her as a “good” performer in relevant job categories. On Sanders’ employee appraisal form, a “G” or “good” means that the employee has performed substantially all tasks assigned in a competent manner. Sam Zehner, an eight-year veteran of Sanders who was eliminated from consideration for Webster’s position because he did not possess the required degree, confronted Bill Barton, the manager of Store 11, and asked some very pointed questions. Zehner, who is currently working toward his degree at a nearby college, stated that Webster was enrolled in one of his undergraduate accounting courses. Zehner asked, “How could she have met the degree requirement when she is taking the same course I am?” Zehner contends that Webster is also going to school at night to get the degree that she claimed to already have in order to get the job. Bill Barton, in turn, called John Morris, the vice president of financial services and told him of Zehner’s concerns. Morris, along with Stacie Stephens, the accounting department manager, and Cornell Patterson, Sanders’ human resources manager, reviewed the job file and saw that the competition for the job had been keen. Stephens had interviewed six candidates—four outsiders plus one other internal candidate besides Zehner. The postinterview evaluation forms indicate that the two internal applicants were eliminated from consideration for the position because they did not possess the required degree. Further, under educational attainment, Webster cited a B.S. in business administration, with a concentration in accounting, from Midwestern State University. However, on both her application and on her resume, Webster did not mention a specific completion date. Before Webster was offered employment, Jane Bradley, one of the HR assistants, verified Webster’s employment record and found it to be very good. Apparently, no one checked Webster’s educational background. Upon further investigation, it was discovered that Webster does not have a college degree and barely has enough credits to qualify as a senior. She is currently enrolled in two courses, and her degree completion is at least 18 months away. Stacie Stephens knows that if Webster is dismissed, it will take several months before a replacement can perform at Webster’s level. Questions

1. Webster has demonstrated that she is capable of performing this job, even though she does not have the required education. Should she be allowed to continue, or should she be demoted or terminated? Explain your answer.

2. Suggest some new HR procedures for Sanders Supermarkets to follow that will prevent problems like this from occurring in the future.

3. Statistics show that people frequently “misrepresent” their credentials and work background on their resumes. Debate the ethical and practical implications of this practice.

Incident 3-5

The Stress Interview Approach

Bradley Distributors, Inc. employs 500 employees in its warehouse and retail outlets. Sterling Durbin has been the director of human resources for the past seventeen years. He prides himself on his ability to conduct interviews effectively. When Patricia Sutton was hired as a new assistant human resources manager, Durbin took great pleasure in “breaking in” this recent college graduate on the practical aspects of effective interviewing. “I can size anyone up in ten minutes or less in an interview,” Durbin told his new assistant. “My record shows how good I am at this, and I’ll give you a few tips. We don’t use written tests anymore because of EEOC hassles with them. It’s just as well because I didn’t put much faith in what those tests showed anyway. As for personal interviews, we use several interviewers for important positions to get the effect of a group interview. All the interviewers ask the questions that they feel are important, and they report to me anything outstanding or particularly negative that turns up. My interview with a prospective employee is the one that usually counts the most, though. I’m looking for ‘hard drivers’ and people who I think will succeed around here. In just a few minutes, I can tell by the way they look at me, the kind of clothes they wear, and their general confidence in themselves whether they’re likely to be good employees. For example, you can tell a lot about a man by the kind of shoes he wears and how well they are polished. Also, I put a lot of stock in whether the applicants have finished the education they began, whether it’s high school, junior college, or university. It shows that they can finish things and can stick to their tasks.” Durbin continued, “The best technique I’ve found to separate poor applicants from those with real promise is to ask them how they would handle the following situation. I give them two alternatives to stop employees from arguing constantly with each other. First, the employees could be told to work it out among themselves or to get a transfer out of the department. Second, the supervisor could sit down with the employees and work out the difficulties together. Whichever approach the applicant picks, I tell them they are wrong. If they select the first method, I tell them that their job is to develop and help employees to perform better. If they select the second, I tell them they have more important things to do than to work out personal problems between employees. By doing this, I see how applicants handle stress and find out what they’re made of. Good potential employees will stick by their guns and give me some good reasons why their approach should be followed. With all this information, I can usually make a good decision in a pretty short time. I’ve found that I am seldom wrong.”

Questions

1. Describe three or four of Dubrin’s practices, and explain why you think they are or are not good practices.

2. Based on what you know about legal interviewing practices, do you think Dubrin’s approach is legal? Explain your answer.

3. Given that Dubrin has been basing his hiring decisions on his intuition, what assumptions can you make about diversity in this organization—diversity of backgrounds, ideas, and abilities? How do you think this hiring philosophy has benefitted or hurt Bradley Distributors?

Incident 3-6

Orientation of a New Employee

Max Brown was one of the most promising young applicants Nancy Brewer had interviewed and hired in months. As the employment manager of Sanders Supermarkets, Brewer had instructed Brown on company policies, pay periods, rate of pay, and so forth and had given him information about the union. Brown then left with his referral slip to report to Store 21, located in a suburban shopping center. Before Brown went to his new job, he stopped at his favorite clothing store and bought new white shirts to conform to the company dress code described by Brewer. He then went to the barber shop for a haircut, his first since graduating from high school several months ago. Upon arriving at Store 21, Brown introduced himself to Carl Dressel, the store supervisor. Dressel told Brown to go over to Aisle 3 and tell Sean Kelly, the head stock clerk, that he was to work with him. Brown walked into Aisle 3, but no one was there. Not knowing what to do next, he just waited for someone to show up. About 20 minutes later, Kelly came into the aisle with a stock truck full of cases. Brown introduced himself and said, “Mr. Dressel told me to come and work with Sean Kelly. Is that you?” “Yeah,” said Kelly, “I was just going to lunch. Here’s my case cutter and stock list. You can figure it out. I’ll see you in 30 minutes or so.” Kelly then left the aisle with Brown standing there rather confused. “Some training program,” he thought to himself. Brewer had said that there would be lockers in the store for his personal items, but he wondered where they were. Brewer had also told him about punching a time card, so he wondered where the time cards were. Because Kelly had an apron on to protect his clothes, Brown tried to figure out where he could get one, too. He thought he might look in the back room to see whether the answers to some of his questions might be back there. Walking into the back room, he introduced himself to a young woman who said she was Evita Chavez, one of the store’s produce department clerks. Brown asked her whether she knew where he could hang his coat, get a time card, and find an apron. Chavez responded, “For the most part, we just throw our coats on top of the overstock; the aprons are in the office, and so are the time cards.” “At last,” thought Brown. “Now I’m getting someplace.” On his way to the office, he saw several stock clerks working in Aisle 1. He had seen four stock clerks so far, and only one wore a tie. Two had on plaid shirts, and the other had hair at least 3 inches below the collar. “I don’t understand why Nancy Brewer was worried about the way I looked,” he thought. Finally, Brown found an apron and a time card. To find the time clock, he went toward the back room again and asked one of the meat cutters where the time clock was. He was given directions to go through the meat department to the other side of the store. He went through the door he was told to go through, but it had a sign on it saying, “Authorized Personnel Only.” He was worried that he might not be an “authorized” person. He finally found the time clock, and, with a little difficulty, he figured out how to clock in. This done, he hurried back to Aisle 3, where Dressel stood waiting for him. “Where have you been?” asked Dressel. “And where is Kelly?” Brown explained that Kelly had gone to lunch and that he had been looking for an apron, the time clock, and a place to hang his coat. “You might as well learn right now that your job is putting up the loads of stock—and fast! I don’t want to hear any more excuses. Now get to work,” said Dressel. As Brown started to open the top of the first box of cases, he thought to himself, “The only thing I know for sure right now is that Nancy Brewer has never worked in this store!”

Questions

1. Store 21’s lack of an orientation or onboarding procedure has affected everyone involved. Describe how it has affected the new employee, the store supervisor, and the relationship between the two. How has it affected the other employees and the customers? 2. The case describes several questions that Max Brown had about his new job on his first day. List at least four other questions that he probably had before starting.

3. Sanders Supermarkets obviously needs an onboarding procedure that will work for all new store employees. Develop this procedure, including how you would ensure that the procedure is put into practice at all of the stores.

Part 4: Leadership, Change Management, Teams, Morale, Diversity

Incident 4-1

To Accept or Not to Accept

Dave Harris is a newly hired information services (IS) supervisor for Cedarville Wholesale Supply and Distribution Center (CWSADC). He joined the firm three months ago after a ten-year stint with Washington Insurance’s office of information services. In contrast with the publicly owned Washington Insurance, CWASDC is a family-owned, $30 million enterprise. The owner of the firm has instituted a number of personnel policies, including a “no-gift, no- gratuity” policy. Although the owner has issued the policy to all employees, it is well known throughout the organization that, over the past year, the owner has received gifts, tickets, vacation trips, and other perks from vendors, customers, government officials, and the like. Stewart Clark, the operations vice president, asked Dave Harris to join him in a vendor-sponsored golf outing to be held at a prestigious country club. Harris likes golf, played on his college team, and won several men’s amateur golf tournaments. He decided to participate in the golf event, believing it to be acceptable under company policy. However, at dinner following the golf festivities, the vendor had a door-prize giveaway. Stewart Clark was announced as the winner of a four-day golf trip to Hilton Head Island, South Carolina. The final name drawn was Dave Harris, and he was summoned to come forward and accept a new 35-inch television set. As Harris walked to the award stand, he contemplated his alternatives.

Questions

1. Harris faces an ethical dilemma: what to do about this award. What are his options, and what would you do if you were Harris?

2. Why would a company have a policy preventing its employees from accepting gifts and awards? Is this a reasonable policy? If not, what do you think would be a reasonable policy? Explain your answers. 3. Do you think a company president—the leader—should be allowed to operate under a different set of rules than other employees? Why or why not?

Incident 4-2

It Takes Two to Tango

There wasn’t a speck of dust in the place. You could literally eat off the floor. Tyler Morgan, one of the three shift supervisors of Carriage House Inn, knew well enough that his employees were doing a great job. The Carriage House was the most successful upscale restaurant in the Jacksonville, Florida, area. The Carriage House had received numerous awards of distinction, including the coveted “Two Forks Up” award, for its outstanding customer service, responsiveness, quality, and presentation of food.

Morgan and the other two shift supervisors used a management style that was firm and fair and embellished the “ideal team” cooperation and esprit de corps. This strong leadership holds employees personally accountable for delivering exceptional customer service and conducts weekly team meetings to discuss ways to improve process and procedures. The highly engaged workforce has been very stable. Carriage House has a unique system of rewarding employees. All employees are paid above the industry average for comparable work. The wait crew for a particular table shares 50 percent of the gratuity. The remainder goes into a pot that is shared equally by employees in proportion to their hours worked during that particular week. Employees like this process because it does away with the “them-versus-us” mentality that is present in some other food-service establishments. Dealing with customers was sometimes difficult for the employees as the customers often expected individualized attention and devotion to them and them alone. The teams worked hard to exceed customer expectations. Responsibility and rewards were shared by all. The opportunity to make decisions, be involved in process and procedural change, and receive positive feedback on their performance had generated a climate that enhanced employee satisfaction. There was a long list of people wanting to become part of the Carriage House team. Last Saturday evening was one of the busiest of the year. A prestigious golf tournament brought many visitors to the area and many out-of-towners wanted to dine at the Carriage House. One group of eight who had spent the better part of the day soaking up the sun and drinking at the golf course was loud upon arrival. They were more than an hour late for their reservation and, pursuant to policy, their table had been assigned to another group. They spent twenty minutes in the bar while another table was readied for them. They became louder and more obnoxious and continued to drink, but they were still customers. Morgan and another supervisor had twice asked them to be patient and reminded them that there were other customers present. Ahmed “Ali” Bin Shiek, a graduate student who had worked at the Carriage House on Wednesdays and Saturdays for the past three years, became their target. A couple of ethnic slurs were hurled his way. One member of the group loudly yelled an insult at Ahmed, and another member of the group bumped into him on his way to the men’s room, causing Ahmed to spill another table’s desserts on the floor. When the General Manager, Loretta Villarreal, finally seated the party at their table, she politely told the group that they needed to be considerate of other diners in the dining room while they enjoyed the meal. Villarreal also told them that they would be served no more alcoholic beverages and that coffee would be served with the compliments of management. Two of the group, obviously embarrassed by the behavior of the others, asked for calm and said that the group would behave appropriately. As Ahmed and another server, Ben, were serving the soup and salad, one of the group made a comment regarding Ahmed’s and Ben’s sexual preferences. Ahmed, apparently seething from those comments, “accidentally” dropped a bowl of steaming hot soup into the lap of the perpetrator. Punches were thrown, the police were called, and disorderly conduct charges were filed against two members of the group. Of course, the area newspapers carried news accounts of the event.

Questions

1. Villarreal, the manager, tried to calm the situation by asking the drunken diners to be quiet. What else could she have done to avoid any further problems?

2. What is your opinion of Ahmed’s actions? What could he have done to handle the situation better? What sort of discipline should he receive, if any, for his actions?

3. If you were the owner of The Carriage House, would this incident and the bad publicity that came along with it prompt you to establish any new policies regarding employees and/or customers? What would they be? Explain your rationale.

Source: The names of the business and all parties are disguised. Case adapted with permission from Edwin C. Leonard, Jr., and Roy A. Cook, Human Resource Management: 21st Century Challenges (Mason, OH: Thomson Custom Publishing, 2005), pp. 147–48.

Incident 4-3

Harry Brown’s Delicate Choice Harry Brown is the technical services supervisor for a regional accounting firm. The firm professes to be an equal opportunity employer. Brown coordinates and directs the job activities of six male staff members who provide technical assistance and advice to other departments in the firm and to outside clients. In a world seemingly overpopulated with consultants, the firm enjoys an excellent reputation for the quality of its advice. The six men Brown oversees are all bright, Caucasian, and mostly in their thirties. They were all hired immediately upon graduation from college, and most of them have MBAs. Brown had created a fun place to work. Mutual trust and respect, coupled with a high degree of caring, sharing, and celebrating successes, marks the relationship between Brown’s team members. Shelly Klone, a 41-year-old single parent of two children, graduated in May from the local university. She was an honor student, president of the collegiate accounting society, and deemed by her fellow students as “most likely to succeed.” However, because of her parental responsibilities, she was unable to engage in the school’s accounting co-op or internship programs. She worked in the university bursar’s office as a work-study student so that she could use the university’s child-care services. Klone had many initial interviews, arranged through the campus placement office, but no second interviews. Over time, it seemed to Klone that accounting firms were unwilling to take on the challenge of hiring an older, mature graduate. Klone had talked to several professors, who confidentially told her that her chances were slim of receiving an offer comparable to offers made to classmates who were younger and who had lower grades. Brown knew he needed to hire another accountant who would be the best possible person to join his team. Since he became supervisor several years ago, it had bothered him that there had been an increasing number of older, single parents seeking entry-level accounting positions who had been turned down for the positions. He personally had no qualms about hiring a more mature person. His immediate manager, a partner of the firm, felt very strongly about the subject, however, saying, “I don’t want us hiring any of those older people for entry-level accounting positions. They think they know everything. Besides, they’ll never accrue the years of service to qualify for a partnership position. My theory of hiring is to bring in the best young college graduates, work them to death over the first six to ten years, and see where the cream rises to the top.”

Questions

1. Analyze the partner’s approach of always hiring young people just out of college. What are the advantages and disadvantages to this approach?

2. Why do you think Shelly Klone is a good candidate for this opening? What does she have to offer that this accounting firm needs? Are there any reasons she shouldn’t be hired? 3. By law, this policy is considered age discrimination and is illegal, which puts Harry Brown in an awkward dilemma—to follow his boss’s secret demands or to speak up for what is legally and ethically right. What would you do if you were Harry?

Incident 4-4

It’s Not Fair!

Elaine Thornton began working at Erie Bedding and Upholstery at age 17 and, in time, became the second-shift supervisor. Although Thornton had not finished high school, her 20-plus years of hard work paid off when she was promoted three years ago. She was proud of her promotion and the work she had done to deserve the position. Thornton was known as being thorough and conscientious in her efforts to train and develop employees. Thornton had been pleased with her success as a supervisor, but she also knew there was an area that needed attention. She reflected on the events of the past 24 hours. In recent years, it had been increasingly difficult for the firm to hire good employees. Thornton’s theory was to “take people who have the potential to be winners and turn them into winners.” Even though the starting wage had risen, the number of job applicants had decreased. Erie’s starting wage was not quite as high as that of other area manufacturing/production firms. The shortage had been adversely impacting Erie’s ability to meet customer demand. By contacting several social service agencies, Marie Sorg, Erie’s human resources manager, attracted a number of Bosnian and Asian refugees into Erie’s workforce. The company offered employees English-as-a-second- language courses and other personal-development and social-skills courses. In addition to paying the full cost of these courses, Erie paid each new employee for four hours of training per week. Toward the end of the evening shift, Thornton was approached by Olga Stults, who expressed her concern about the unfair pay policies. Raises were given annually at the beginning of the calendar year, and wage compression had been a concern of management for some time. (Labor-market factors often drive the wages of new hires to a level near, or even above, that of long-term employees.) Stults was upset because she had learned that Hu Twong was making $0.50 per hour more than she was. According to Stults, Twong had been employed by Erie for seven months while Stults had been employed for eleven years. In addition, Twong was getting six extra hours of pay per week because he does not speak English well. “I was under the impression that pay was a reward for doing the job and being loyal to the organization for a long time,” Stults said. “Experience doesn’t seem to matter. It’s not fair, and I’d like an explanation.” After consultating with Sorg, Thornton was really confused. Sorg explained that the human resources department determined all pay rates. Each job classification had a wide wage range, but seniority and experience differences had become nonexistent. Sorg confirmed that some of the new employees had been hired at higher rates than longer-term employees but that it was a necessity of doing business in the new economy. Sorg reminded Thornton that management looked unfavorably on discussing wages with fellow employees, and the company handbook contained a clause that employees were not to discuss their wages with anyone else. Sorg reminded Thornton to reaffirm that the firm was very pleased with Stults’s work performance and that the situation was beyond the firm’s control. In conclusion, Sorg asked Thornton to try to soothe Stults’s feelings about pay as much as possible and to be patient. “Things will change sooner or later, and the more senior employees will be taken care of,” Sorg assured Thornton.

Questions

1. Imagine that you are Thornton. The next time you see Stults, she is still angry and insists that you explain the company’s pay policies to her. What would you say to try to boost this valued employee’s morale?

2. What do you think of this company’s pay policies? What do you think of the company rule forbidding people from discussing wage rates? Debate the HR manager’s rationale behind the policies.

3. What do you think of the company’s policy to offer language-training skills as a way to help build up a reliable, competent, diverse workforce? What are some advantages and disadvantages of this company’s plan?

Incident 4-5

No Place for Women in the Maintenance Department

Curt Miller has been a supervisor for the Jefferson City water maintenance department for the past eleven years. He started out in an apprentice program about twenty years ago where his technical skills were among the best. He has attended several supervisory and leadership development courses and various motivational seminars during his tenure as supervisor. Problems developed two months ago when the city, in an effort to bring more diversity into its workforce, transferred Maria Chavez from the transportation garage. Immediately upon arrival, Chavez entered and won a maintenance skills contest held at the regional vocational center. Chavez is the single-parent of a six-year-old child, and her mother and father live with her. Catholic Social Services has been instrumental in helping Chavez and her parents. Her parents work as janitors at St. Paul’s Catholic Church and are enrolled in an ESL (English as a second language) program. This morning, Miller was approached by Eddie Elliott, a very opinionated employee. At best, Elliott’s performance is marginal, but he knows how to work the system. He has been repeatedly reprimanded for absenteeism, tardiness, violation of safety standards, and other minor infractions of work rules. Three times he has been suspended for short periods of time without pay. But his infractions have never been severe enough to warrant termination. “Listen, Curt,” Elliott began. “We’ve got a great work group here, but there is no place for a woman in our maintenance department. She ain’t cutting it. Just yesterday she lit into Gary for that girlie calendar he has on his tool box. He was this far (spreading his finger and thumb about two inches apart) from punching her out. She isn’t a team player. We rely on cooperation to get the work done. She just does her little bit and nothing more. There’s just no room for a woman in our department.” A little later in the morning, Gary Simpson asked to speak to Miller, and he echoed similar concerns. “When we need her to work on a project, what do we get? She’s running around sticking her nose in stuff that doesn’t concern her. The guys on the ninth floor of City Hall (the location of the Mayor’s office as well as the Director of Utilities) think she’s great ’cause she won some stupid skills award, but she’s tearing this group apart.” “What’s going on here?” Miller thought to himself, “She’s ambitious and has great drive and determination. She helps fulfill the Mayor’s commitment to diversity, and she has the potential to be the best maintenance person we’ve ever had.”

Questions

1. What is going on here? Why do you think the men on the team dislike Chavez?

2. If you were Curt Miller, what would you have done differently to manage change and prepare the team for the arrival of a new and very different team member? What would you do now to restore positive morale after getting off to a bad start?

3. As a woman in a predominantly male profession, Chavez will probably face resistance and discrimination more than once. What steps could she take to try to fit into an existing team when she joins a new one? Does this apply to all new members of teams?

Source: This case was adapted with permission from Francine Segars and Ed Leonard of IPFW, “No Place for Women in the Maintenance Department,” 2004 Proceedings of the Society for Case Research, pp. 51–59.

Incident 4-6 Resentment Toward the African-American Supervisor

“What’s the matter with you, coming down so hard on me about my work? Why don’t you get off my back and deal with the white employees in this department who are getting away with murder? You’re worse than a white boss!”

These words, uttered by Sarah Washington, one of his African-American subordinates, worried the department supervisor, Antonio Key. The thought that other minority employees might resent his supervisory management position had disturbed him ever since he took over the department. Although no one had called him an “Uncle Tom” to his face, Key knew that some of the employees thought this of him.

Key had graduated from a small religious college. He received a special fellowship for minority students that enabled him to complete an MBA degree at a Midwestern university. Upon receiving his MBA, Key accepted a position with a major department store chain in its accounting-services division. After a year and a half in several staff positions, he was promoted to supervisor of the customer-accounts department. Of the twenty-four employees in this department, all were women except for two male computer programmers. Eight of the employees were minorities.

Since Key had become department supervisor about a year ago, the human resources department had received several complaints from African-American employees about Key’s tendency to set higher standards for black employees under his supervision than for white employees. These complaints were passed on to Key by Mark

Bonham, the director of human resources. Key had responded that the charges were invalid. He told Bonham, “I let everyone set their own pace. Some employees are going to come out ahead of others. I reward the ones who come out in front. That’s my job.” The manager of accounting services, Phillip Freeman, believed that Key treated all employees fairly. Freeman evaluated Key’s overall performance as very good.

This most recent comment was not the only occasion on which certain employees had suggested to Key that the black employees in the department felt they did not receive the same treatment as whites. However, the previous comments had involved the grapevine rather than a direct verbal confrontation.

Sarah Washington had joined the customer-accounts department in an entry-level clerical position. Over five years, she had advanced through a series of promotions to one of the highest-level clerical positions in the department. Her job was complex, involving maintaining and adjusting billing records. The billing system had undergone a major transition to a state-of-the-art computerized system. During this transition, a number of intermediate systems had been used. Washington was one of the few people in the department who understood the intermediate systems and methods of adjusting records under each system. She would occasionally try to impress

Key with her knowledge of the billing system by asking him questions for which she knew he had no answers. She once asked Key in front of several employees, “How do you expect to know in a few months what took me five years to learn?”

Washington was an extremely ambitious young woman. On several occasions, she had complained to the human resources department about being passed over for promotion to a supervisory position. Freeman had passed her over for promotion to supervisor because he said she lacked the tact and interpersonal skills needed in a supervisory position.

Key decided it was time to respond to these issues, and he pondered what his response should be. At least, he knew he must be prepared to respond to Washington’s next insinuation.

Questions

1. If you were Key, how would you respond to Washington’s accusation? Is there something you could say that would let you defend your position and maintain your authority while at the same time helping to ease her anger and build good morale?

2. How can the HR department and Key himself ensure that Key is, in fact, treating all of his subordinates equally?

3. As this case confirms, racial diversity in the workplace has both benefits and challenges. Can you think of any actions or policies a company could enact that would help foster harmony in a diverse work environment?

Part 5: Controlling, Improving Employee Performance, Resolving Conflicts

Incident 5-1

Is She on Our Team or Isn’t She?

Bob Haddad has been a team leader with Barry Automotive’s Lancaster plant for the past year; he has been with the company for about five years. As team leader, Haddad has experienced new work challenges. Recently, some of Haddad’s team members have complained about Rina Amin’s slow pace and her failure to keep up with the rest of the team. In response, Haddad has told the complaining team members that Amin is a solid employee who always shows up for work on time. While she works a little slower than the rest of the team members, she gets the job done. That seemed to satisfy the team members temporarily, but several days later, Steve Brennan came to Haddad and said that most of the team members had indicated that they were going to slow their work pace if something was not done about Amin. At that point, Haddad asked Brennan whether he or any of the other team members had confronted Amin about her work pace, and Brennan replied, “Yes, we have told Rina on numerous occasions to pick up speed and get the lead out, but she just continues to work at her usual, slow pace. Dorothy Kent has spent an excessive amount of time instructing Rina in some of the more efficient ways to do the job. Even that doesn’t work. Maybe she’s just too fat to cut the pace around here!” Haddad decided to consult with human resources director Steven Taylor. Haddad and Taylor discussed how Haddad’s team previously had been one of the most productive and how Amin had joined the team about three years ago. According to Haddad, Amin’s weight had ballooned in the past two years, and she appeared to carry about 250 pounds or more on her 5’ 4” frame. Work records indicate that Amin has been unable to keep the pace set by other team members but that the team had been reluctant to address the issue in her most recent performance review. In fact, Amin had scored 80 points, which was an overall “good” evaluation under the company’s 360-degree performance evaluation system. Haddad said that Brennan’s assessment probably reflects the views of other team members, but they had been uncomfortable or unwilling to address Amin’s performance problems in the formal evaluation process. Haddad told Taylor, “I would welcome any advice you can give me.”

Questions

1. Do you think that Amin’s weight gain is the cause of her slow pace? What are some other possible causes or explanations? Should she be allowed to continue at her slower-than-average pace, or should she be forced to improve or be fired?

2. To what extent has the company’s 360-degree performance evaluation system been successful, and how has it failed?

3. It appears that Barry Automotive has some type of controls in place to monitor each team’s production levels. What types of controls do you suppose they use? Is this fair, or should the company only monitor each individual worker’s results?

Incident 5-2

I Hate Performance Appraisals! Patrick James was distribution center supervisor for Barry Automotive’s Ashton Plant. When the 12-year veteran was promoted to supervisor six years ago, there was no resentment on the part of employees because he was generally well-liked and deserving of the supervisory position. James had practiced open and honest communication with his employees and had developed a climate of mutual trust and respect. The employees would “go to the wall” to get their jobs done effectively and efficiently. However, there was little possibility for James to advance beyond his present position. A lateral move within Barry might be possible, but James did not want to uproot his family. Barry had instituted a formal appraisal system. It consisted primarily of having each supervisor complete a rating-scale evaluation form with space for comments and then discuss the appraisal with each employee. In three weeks, James would have to conduct appraisals on all his employees. He looked forward to doing them, with one exception: Cheryl Reynolds. The 33-year-old Reynolds was promoted to assistant supervisor about two years ago. She was regarded as an effective supervisor, was knowledgeable about the technical aspects of the job, and had shared this information with all employees. She emphasized that the success of Barry depended on how fast an employee could learn new processes and apply them to better serving the customers. A perfectionist, Reynolds demanded no less from other employees. A few employees considered her pushy and strong-willed. Reynolds was to receive her degree from a local college at the end of this term, and Barry knew that she expected to advance in the organization. Reynolds would be the first person in her family to graduate from college, and she wanted a job with additional responsibility. Generally, Reynolds’s employees got the work done in an exceptional manner, but every once in a while, she overstepped her bounds. She required strict adherence to company rules in all times and circumstances. Occasionally, when Reynolds was within hearing distance, employees could be heard sharing the latest “dumb blonde” joke. Twice in the past two months, James had reprimanded employees for their behavior. He knew that Reynolds had expected him to do more to eliminate the jokes. Barry’s sales and profits had been declining over the past fifteen months. People in other area industries had been laid off. Kmart closed its northside store, and one of the telecom firms had shuttered its doors. The area’s unemployment level was at a five-year high. The Fisher’s plant had chosen to reduce employment through retirement and normal attrition. James had five unfilled positions because replacements had not been authorized. The consolidation of duties forced managers and supervisors to find creative solutions to problems and to do more work with fewer resources. James knew that Reynolds’s performance was very good and that she very much wanted to be a full-fledged supervisor. There was little likelihood that such a position would be available at the Ashton plant. He was not looking forward to her performance appraisal.

Questions

1. Reynolds is described as a competent employee with a good performance record, yet James wishes he could avoid her performance review. What issues would he like to avoid discussing with her? What does this tell you about the scope and purpose of a performance review?

2. Reynolds has high expectations for herself and others, which makes her somewhat intolerant and leads to conflict. If you were her manager, would you try to change this quality in her? If so, what would you say or do?

3. It’s possible that the best thing Reynolds can do for her career is to look for employment with another company. What could she do to make herself a more attractive candidate on the job market?

Incident 5-3

Can Everyone Be Excellent?

Berne Printing utilized a modified 360-degree performance evaluation system. Employees received direct feedback on their performance every six months. Ratings of excellent, good, satisfactory, or unsatisfactory were determined by a point system with the final ratings classified as follows:

Excellent 85 to 100 points Good 70 to 84 points Satisfactory 50 to 69 points Unsatisfactory fewer than 50 points

A maximum of 25 points was possible in each of four categories—attendance, quality and quantity of output, suggestions made for improvement of process or procedures, and cooperation. Each category was weighted equally, and the total point system determined the employee’s share of a year-end profitability bonus. Last year, approximately $2.5 million was distributed among the 340 employees based on each employee’s percentage of the total employee points. Work-team members reviewed the information for each team leader and tabulated the results. The team leader’s input was to provide data on attendance, quality and quantity of output, and suggestions made. Each work team was left to its own discretion as to how it calculated cooperation. From surveys conducted by the human resources department, it appeared that most employees were satisfied with the appraisal and compensation process. A review of the system indicated that 90-plus percent of the employees had scored above 80 points in the most recent evaluation period. The other employees all had ratings ranging from 65 to 79 points. Ruth Davies, a work-team leader on the Commercial Line, was concerned about how to respond to written complaints from two employees on her line. Even though the company policy clearly stated that the decision of each work team was final and binding, these two employees who were rated “good” were challenging their ratings as being unfair. A meeting with Human Resources Manager Bonnie Brant revealed that all other members of the Commercial Line had been identified as being “excellent.” Davies wondered what she should do.

Questions

1. The two employees who’ve registered complaints obviously feel that their work is on a par with the others who received excellent ratings, but Davies clearly feels their work is not quite as good. What procedures should Berne Printing put in place to ensure a fair and equal evaluation for all employees?

2. Given that employees work in close-knit teams, perhaps the entire team should be given an overall rating of good or excellent, and then that rating should be applied to all individuals within the team. Discuss the pros and cons of this proposal.

3. In what ways do you think the year-end bonus program might influence team members’ attitudes toward their evaluations? Discuss the pros and cons of having a bonus program.

Incident 5-4

Fear or Exaggeration?

For almost a decade, John Stephens has been the service-department supervisor for Jentag Commercial Sales and Appliance Repair at its small office in Fort Wayne, Indiana. This office serves as a regional office since the company headquarters are in Cincinnati. Because he works in a small office, Stephens is the only local company supervisor, and he reports to the manager of the sales and parts division in the Cincinnati office. Reporting to Stephens are Karen Mullens, the service department dispatcher; Ben Griggs, the parts facilitator; and several appliance repairmen. Stephens’s responsibilities usually are split between his supervisory duties and outside customer-service tasks with large industrial accounts. An integral part of the service department’s success resides in having parts in stock to complete repairs in a timely fashion. Griggs has held his position for about five years. Griggs has always been rather quiet, but he has done a commendable job, and most customers like him. Stephens has told upper management that Ben Griggs has the ability and experience to be promoted to some larger office, but management has not yet found another position for him. Recently, Mullens confided to Stephens that on several occasions when Stephens was out of the office, she has heard Griggs cursing customers and continuing to curse loudly when hanging up the phone. She said she has seen Griggs throw small items during his tirades. Mullens said she is worried that one day she might be the one to anger Griggs, and she fears that she could be physically harmed by him. Mullens also said that because she is the only person to have seen Griggs’s tirades, if Griggs were confronted about this, he would know who passed on the information. Stephens assured Mullens he would look into the situation and take appropriate action. Later, as Stephens sat in his office privately, he reflected on the fact that on some occasions, Mullens has tended to exaggerate problems and issues. Stephens is concerned that something really could be amiss, but because Stephens has never seen Griggs lose control with anyone, he is unsure what he should do.

Questions

1. Stephens is wise to reserve judgment about Griggs’s behavior, since he only has Mullens’s accusations to go on. How might he go about determining whether Griggs is actually having trouble controlling anger on the job?

2. If it turns out that Griggs really is having an anger management problem, what could Stephens do to help him overcome it?

3. If it turns out that Griggs actually does not have an anger problem, it suggests that perhaps Mullens and Griggs have some type of conflict between them. Should Stephens get involved? If so, what could or should he do?

Incident 5-5

Sexual Harassment in the Accounting Office

Charlie Gillespie is office manager of a group of accountants and accounting clerks in the corporate budget office of Sanders Supermarkets. He is known as a “happy-go-lucky” supervisor who finds it difficult to confront inappropriate behavior or to take disciplinary action. Gillespie normally tries to avoid conflict by pretending he does not observe inappropriate conduct. On a number of occasions, Gillespie observed one of his accountants, Oliver Olson, making crude and suggestive comments to a group of female accounting clerks in the department. While Gillespie did not like what he heard and had observed, he thought that most of the employees accepted Olson for what he was and did not take him seriously. However, one day an accounting clerk named Julie Lowe entered Gillespie’s office. She claimed that Olson’s comments were a form of sexual harassment. Lowe stated that she understood the company had a policy prohibiting sexual harassment and that, even though Olson had not made any direct sexual overtures to any of the female employees, his vulgar language and crude questions no longer could be tolerated by the women in the office. Gillespie responded that Olson was just a “good old boy” and that if the women would just ignore him, the problem would take care of itself. Several weeks later, Lowe resigned without explanation. One week after Lowe left, the company received a notice that she had filed charges with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), claiming that she had been discriminated against because of her gender. In her complaint, Lowe stated that there was an “atmosphere of sexual harassment in the office” and that because of this continued harassment, the “hostile work environment caused her severe tension and distress,” which she could no longer tolerate and which forced her to end her employment with the company. Gillespie received a copy of Lowe’s discrimination and harassment charges from Pamela Richter, the company’s director of human resources. Richter asked Gillespie to come to her office to discuss the company’s response to these charges.

Questions

1. What could Gillespie have done differently to avoid this entire problem and lawsuit?

2. Did Gillespie respond appropriately to Lowe’s complaints of sexual harassment? What, if anything, should he have done differently?

3. Is Gillespie in any way responsible for the lawsuit that his company now faces? If you think he is, do you think he should be subject to some type of discipline?

Incident 5-6

Michele’s First Hire

When Michele Stanley became front-end manager at Qwik Lumber and Homecenter’s Brunswick facility, her boss gave her a mission—slow down turnover. Her boss, Paul Sullivan, explained that the turnover rate among front-end workers was 80 percent last year, with the rate for stockers being 150 percent. After doing the math, Stanley realized that her predecessor had spent a lot of time recruiting, hiring, and training people for the six stocker positions.

Sullivan had been clear in his charge to Stanley: “The company is willing to let you try all sorts of things to retain hourly employees—short of paying them more money!”

Stanley’s first challenge began at the end of her first week on the job. Donte Jones, a stocker, failed to report for work on Sunday morning. No one had heard from Jones, who had last worked the previous Thursday. A call to his home revealed that he wasn’t coming in—he had quit. He had begun working at a fast food restaurant on Friday for slightly higher pay than he was making at Qwik. Stanley spent most of Sunday completing some of the work that

Jones normally would have done or orchestrating the tasks of other employees.

Stanley thought about one thing she had learned—“good employees want to work with good employees”— therefore, ask those good employees if they would recommend someone for the opening. One employee suggested that Michele contact Susan Whitlock, placement director at the regional developmental workforce office. Whitlock was always searching for employment opportunities for some of their handicapped trainees. Knowing that Qwik promoted itself as an equal opportunity employer, Stanley made contact with Susan Whitlock. Whitlock recommended Jim Garcia for the stocker job. Garcia had a learning disability—he could only read at the sixth grade level—and walked with a noticeable limp. After reviewing Garcia’s file, conducting an interview, and checking with

Qwik’s HR director, Stanley decided that there was no reason that Garcia was not capable of performing the stocker duties.

During the first week on the job, Stanley noticed that Garcia seemed to have a difficult time catching on. It seemed that the busier the store was or the better the weather outside, the harder it was to get Garcia to focus on the job at hand. Time after time, Garcia would be found walking around the greenhouse or the loading yard. When a customer would approach him with a question, he would walk away. No matter how many times Stanley stressed the importance of remaining near the front of the store, her message seemed to go in one of Garcia’s ears and out the other.

Almost immediately, other employees started to complain that Garcia was not doing his part and that he was receiving special treatment because of his “handicap status.” Comments like “I’m tired of doing his work while he wanders around the store” and “He’s getting paid for loafing” were becoming common.

Just before Stanley was getting ready to call Susan Whitlock to discuss the problem, Katie, a part-time cashier, asked to discuss some concerns in private. “I don’t know how to say this,” she began. “I know that you’re hearing lots of complaints about Jim’s work performance but I wanted to let you know that a few of the employees have been very mean towards him. I don’t want to mention any names but there are a few of the guys who make fun of him and refer to him as the ‘retard’ or ‘crip.’ I just wanted to let you know that perhaps part of his problem is some of the people he works with.”

Stanley wondered whether the problem was Garcia, the other employees, or her inability to adequately monitor what was going on. At the risk of losing her very first hire, she needed to decide on a course of action and quickly.

Questions

1. Do you think Michele Stanley made a good choice in hiring Garcia? Did she screen him as thoroughly as necessary? Would more pre-screening or pre-testing have changed the outcome?

2. Is there anything Stanley should have done to help prepare her existing employees for the arrival of a new hire with learning disabilities? Explain your answer.

3. Now that Stanley is aware that other employees are bullying Garcia, what should she do? Should she discipline these other employees?

Incident 5-7

Cubicle Drama

Janet Mosby looked over at Harvey Harrison’s cubicle, just beside hers. He was looking at nude women on his computer in full view of everyone walking by. “Oh, no!” she thought. Janet’s experience with Harvey had been mixed. When she had the opportunity to work with him on the Minotaur project, Janet found him to be intelligent and responsible as well as good looking. But he started calling her every evening and giving her extra attention at work although she had made it very clear that she was in a committed relationship. Although she did like him at the beginning, she let him know that her feelings toward him were of friendship only. She talked honestly about her intentions with her boyfriend, Greg, but Harvey didn’t seem to understand. When they renovated the office complex, the cube designers and top management maintained that the open- office concept would allow for “a free flow of ideas.” But it had not worked that way. Janet’s boss, John Davis, had expected the Minotaur project to draw everyone into a closer work group, but it had backfired with Harvey. More than once, John had asked Janet to help Harvey integrate into the team. As she sat at her computer trying to avoid looking at Harvey’s computer screen, a colleague, Peter Reed, came into her cubicle. “What is Harvey doing?” he whispered. “Doesn’t he know we can see it?” Janet turned to Peter and said, “I don’t think he cares. He has been so combative and isolated since we finished the Minotaur project. He has backed out of any social activities with our work group.” “Should we let John know about this?” asked Peter. “I don’t want to see it when I walk by, and you can see it just by turning to your desk.” “I don’t want to tell John, and I don’t know what steps he could take. But, I am uncomfortable knowing that he is looking at those pictures while he can see me. I’m not a prude, but looking at pictures of naked women at work is a bit inappropriate, to say the least.” Turning to her computer again, she said, “And there is no specific policy about it. I looked it up so that I could show it to Harvey, but there is nothing in our company about pornographic pictures or sites on the Internet.” “Janet, as a female, you could take a harassment complaint against him for this and for the treatment he gave you during the Minotaur project.” “Yes, I know that, but I hate causing trouble and being seen as a whiner. You just don’t do those things!” “He shouldn’t be doing those things,” Peter responded.

Questions

1. Harvey is viewing pornography privately at his own desk. Do you think he is entitled to do this as long as he is not sharing it with others, or do you think it is a form of sexual harassment?

2. How should Janet and Peter handle this situation? What are their options, and what would you recommend they do? Does Janet’s personal experience with and rejection of Harvey change or influence your recommendations at all?

3. Are you surprised that there is no company policy regarding pornography at work? If you needed to write such a policy, what factors would you address and how would you enforce it?

Source: This case was adapted with permission from Karen Moustafa and Ed Leonard,“Cubicle Terror,” The Proceedings of the Society of Case Research (2006), pp. 70–77.

Load more

  51

Copy Link