Maslows Need Theory
Mr. Davis knew that his colleagues did not like the fact that he is being promoted he had been serving the organization for some considerable time thus he would have surely known the reasons behind this attitude of his mates but even then he kept quiet. This behavior of Mr. Davis is completely human he was being promoted so there was no reason for him to refuse the perks that he was about to get he worked hard for the post and if the boss perceived him to be the best choice then why should he bother about what the fellows are saying. This promotion resulted in satisfying the esteem needs of Mr. Davis thus he was glad to accept the post he was promoted which means that he could enjoy a better salary and obviously his span of authority will also grow (Miner, 2007). These are some of the reasons for which he behaved in this manner. The frustration which is depicted at the end of the case is also justifiable Mr. Davis did not want to let the chance go off his hands thus he was trying his level best but the staff was not cooperating with him. He knew that Mr. Hageman wanted results and if he was unable to produce them then his boss will not even hesitate in taking the office back from him. Demotion remains a nightmare for any employee and Mr. Davis too was not an exception downgrading would surely result in dissatisfaction of a higher level need. The behavior of the three department heads was expected as they too were aiming for the slot which was awarded to Mr. Davis they were performing at their full capacity and the motivating force for all of them was the same. All of them wanted to get promoted as this would satisfy their esteem needs. But when Mr. Davis was promoted the motivating force died out and they could not find anything to aim at and to work for. Mr. Davis was also a junior to all of them, thus they also made it an ego issue and felt as if they were being degraded. Furthermore when they discussed the issue with Mr. Hageman he ruled out all their concerns brutally and did not even try to consider their viewpoint. This made the three heads feel as if they were not respected by the boss and as mentioned above they were on a higher level need thus one deliberately started to underperform while the other left the firm as he found nothing to work more for in the organization. The attitude of Mr. Silvermann was interesting and depicts that not all managers are aiming for a higher spot just because to fulfill the higher level (esteem) needs there are some for whom other benefits are more important. Mr. Silvermann was one of those managers who work for money more than anything else, his behavior depicted that fact that he was placed at a lower need level than his fellows unsound financial situation can be a reason for his behavior.
Equity Theory
The behavior of Mr. Davis and the three department heads is described in this section with reference to the Equity Theory. Distribution of perks and other resources has to be done in an immaculate and justified manner by the employer as this is the outcome for which the managers are working. The efforts of the managers is the input for which they expect desired if they do not get the wanted outcome then they find themselves in an inequitable relationship which causes frustration and distress. The attitude of Mr. Davis is so because he thinks that he was given what he worked for and deserved that is why he kept quiet even though he knew that his colleagues had issues with his promotion. But at the end of the case we find Mr. Davis in hot water where his frustration was evident this is because he might be feeling that he was overcompensated by Mr. Hageman and that his colleagues were justified at their viewpoint. Even overcompensation makes an employee find himself in an inequitable situation which results in shame, guilt and annoyance and the behavior of Mr. Davis epitomizes this. The rest of the managers certainly found themselves to be undercompensated and felt that equilibrium was not there in between the inputs and outputs. All of them found themselves in an inequitable situation which caused distress to them. Social comparison was also one factor behind this attitude of the department heads because once they compared their performance and qualification with Mr. Daviss they concluded that Mr. Davis was provided with more perks even though all of them put in the same extent of inputs. This caused further frustration to them, which is why one of them started to distort the input and underperformed while one of them released his distress by leaving the organization.
Expectancy (VIE) Theory
The behavior of Mr. Davis and the three department heads is described in this section with reference to the Expectancy (VIE) theory. The behavior of Mr. Davis could be justified before he got what he expected so he did not consider the issues which were brought forward by his fellow managers (Harold Heinz, 2006). This was the reason that he started to emphasize more on improving his performance than anything else because he perceived that the better he will perform, the more he will get in return in short he found a positive correlation between performance and rewards. On the other hand, the attitude of three department heads was so because they established a negative relationship between efforts and rewards they were expecting the perquisite to come their way but that did not happen. This was damaging for their motivational level as they perceived the instrumentality to be lower than what they expected.
Answer Two
The behavior of Mr. Hageman was a dictatorial in fact he behaved in a childish manner which resulted in causing more distress and frustration for Mr. Davis who was in reality trying his level best to complete the project within the deadline. The behavior of Mr. Hageman was thoroughly unprofessional firstly he made the decision of promoting Mr. Davis without taking into confidence the key performers of the department who were strong candidates of the position. He must have held a meeting before taking the decision this would have been a better way of dealing with the situation. He must communicate his standpoint to the candidates as they had full right to know the reasons which made him prefer Mr. Davis over them. There is a fair chance that if Mr. Hageman had good reasons to support his choice then the department heads would have agreed to his decision and the things could have been a whole lot better. In addition to this, Mr. Hageman ruled out the concerns of the department heads without even comprehending them even at that stage he would have behaved sensibly the problem could have been solved. Lack of communication from the part of the employer ignited the situation and hurt the sentiments of the department heads. Goal setting process if was implemented in an adept manner by Mr. Hageman then these issues would have been solved automatically but unprofessional attitude of the employer ruined the whole setting.
Goal setting process at the end makes it easier for the employer as well as for the employees to evaluate their performance. For instance if SMART (short-measurable-achievable-positive-time sensitive) goals are delegated to the staff then there is fair chance that they would them and will work harder as they could see a clear plan of action. On the contrary, in this case Mr. Hageman assigned just a goal to Mr. Davis and did not look into the fact that how will he get this all done. He did not help him when he sought for it, instead left it all on him. This sort of behavior is denting for the confidence level of the subordinate as he perceives the management to be unfair and irrational. Mr. Hageman in the first place must have set up the goal in an adept and diligent manner and should have communicated this to Mr. Davis so that he could come up with any suggestions if he had. The strategy of the firm has to be formulated by the top management while taking into confidence the line managers after that it is the responsibility of these line managers to communicate this all to their subordinates. But in this case even a top level manager was not communicated the plan of action just assigning targets is not what actually top management does, its span of responsibilities is far more wider than this.
In addition to this, problem solving and decision making is also a responsibility of top management along with the managers but when Mr. Davis went to his boss he did not even look interested in listening to him, instead he just passed on the bucket to him again. The suggestion of Mr. Davis was ruled out by him without giving a rational answer even if budget was not permitting the allocation of overtime then Mr. Hageman should come up with an alternative simply turning down is not what a manager expects from a top level official.
Answer Three
The crux of the theories of frustration and aggression is that if a person is being restrained from getting to his target this causes frustration to him the closer he gets to achieve the target the more the level of frustration increase. Unexpected occurrence of frustration increases the likelihood of aggression. Frustration and aggression can be used in both positive and negative manner depending upon the character a person possesses if a person is one who is willing to take challenges and could turn the tide then there is every likelihood that he could use his aggression in a positive manner and will make the most out of the opportunities presented to him. But on the other hand if the person has weak nerves then the frustration could possibly play on him and all his endeavors will end up in vain. In this case we can clearly see that Mr. Davis was committed to get the desired outcome but unsound organizational atmosphere came in his way and to his dismay even Mr. Hageman passed the bucket back to him. All this was causing frustration even to such a competent and proficient manager and that was the reason that he was unable to find any solution (Myers, 2006). In the case it is clearly stated that Mr. Davis was good at problem solving but this time around he was finding himself in no mans land this depicts what frustration and aggression can do even to the best. Mr. Davis was finding himself in hot water because the nerves started to play on him and as the time was passing by his frustration was mounting.
Answer Four
In order to get the work done in an adept manner Mr. Davis has no option but to motivate his workforce as they are the ones with the support of whom he could fight with this odd situation. First of all Mr. Davis should address the entire workforce irrespective of the hierarchical, and must take all the workers in confidence (Armstrong, 2006). He should present his case in front of his workforce and should ask suggestion from them as this will make the staff men feel confident. In addition to this he must tell the workforce that the budget is not permitting him to allocate overtime to them so he is not in a position to help them in this regard. He should promise the workers that if the project gets completed in time and everything goes in the projected manner then he will ask Mr. Hageman to present some sort of bonus to the workforce this might work as a motivating force for the workers (Lubit, 2004). In addition to this he must use goal setting theory to formulate goals for his men communication again remains the key in this manner as he has to take into confidence each and every person. After doing this he must talk to Mr.Silvermann and Ms. Jefferson and try to reconcile because without their support and assistance it would be impossible for him to accomplish the goal. He must tell them that the decision of his promotion was made by Mr. Hageman even without informing him thus there was nothing much he could do. He must acknowledge the previous performance and efforts of these two managers and should tell them that he needs their support desperately as it is impossible for him to make the things work his way without them.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment