Learning. There are numerous
facets involved in organizational behavior. Learning is one of the viewpoints
used to explain the employees’ behavior, including Susan. She is one of the
people in this case study whose conduct in the confinements of her work environment
has been influenced by learning and gaining experience. More so, the time she
spent in incarceration made her learn about the importance of changing her
behavior for the better. Also, Jack has decided to change through learning and
the motivation to be a better person. Both and Susan also learned about the
organization’s modus operandi and strived to be better employees.
Perception. It is essential to study
a human’s behavior and be able to make a meaningful judgment that might help
immensely in improving operations at the organization. In this case, Jack has a
criminal past. Thus, his colleagues start suspecting that he is behind missing
property and valuables at the firm. Susan has experience as a convict but has
learned someone can change for the better. In considering the external factors,
there has been no direct connection or substantial evidence of him being the
one behind the missing commodities. Through perception, Susan has to make
crucial decisions that will restore normalcy at the organization.
Attribution. In attribution, there is an imperative need
for understanding human behavior to make judgments. Susan has to link Jack’s
association with the missing property. Through attribution, Susan will be able
to make sound judgments to restore employees’ confidence and neutralize tension
at work. Nonetheless, through the same attribution, Susan understands that
people do change, and they need another chance for them to turn their lives
around for the better. However, she is afraid that they might also do a
background check on her and judge her harshly like Jack Reeds. Furthermore,
Jack has been consistent in terms of diligence and working hard to ensure that
his performance levels are impressive. Thus, it is hard to associate him with
negative behavior or character at work.
Q2. Judgment on whether Jack should be fired or not and
why?
Jack Reeds is facing a lot of backlash for alleged theft.
The most convincing theory from the case is that there are no reported cases of
theft or missing property. Nonetheless, there is no tangible evidence and the
bases of the allegations on circumstantial evidence. Reeds ‘judgment is unfair
as he is a suspect because of his past clash with the law. If there is
adherence to equality and fairness, it is easy to notice that Jack’s unfair
treatment and discrimination. First, his record was supposed to be discrete but
exposed to every single employee at the organization. There is a huge
possibility that most employees used perception to judge him unfairly and brand
him a thief. Jack’s dismissal should only take place if only there is
indisputable evidence linking him to theft. From the case study, Jack is a hard
worker and has learned a lot about the functionalities of the corporation. Such
admirable behavior could create contention and jealousy among the workforce. It
is important to note that numerous cases arise when Jack’s past is exposed.
This sudden development also raises a red flag. Therefore, Jack’s dismissal
from his job based on circumstantial evidence would be unethical. Such an
action would be wrong, unlawful, and unfair.
Jack should be allowed to keep his job due to a lack of
evidence. Also, such unfair treatment could set a bad precedent
that might negatively affect Susan too. There should be
fairness, credibility, and transparency within the work environment. For Jack’s
employment termination, attribution and perception should not be the sole basis
for the dismissal.
Q3. Does Personality play a role in this case?
Personality has been plastered all over this case. The
discrimination Jack is receiving is based on his prev record with the law. As
such, it has created a negative behavior whereby Jack is the suspect behind
every single missing item. For example, when a wallet is lost and found,
initially, Jack is not a suspect. But after his record is exposed, Jack is
blamed by the wallet’s owner of stealing and returning it. Jack’s colleagues
are manifesting high levels of neuroticism that entail anxiety, hostility, and
depression.
Another evidence of a personality case is Jack’s
behavior. He does not exhibit extreme hostility towards his accusers.
Additionally, when Susan confronts him, Jack does not mount a massive defense
to claim his innocence. Instead, he manifests high self-discipline behavior.
Susan’s personality has also influenced this case. She is sociable, friendly,
and, most important, understanding. Instead of listening to rumors, her
agreeableness allows her to summon Jack and ask him about the allegations.
Susan does not want neuroticism to overtake her and judge Jack unfairly. Also,
her experience as a reformed convict influences her to sympathize with Jack.
She wants to give Jack an opportunity, just as Henry Clarkston gave her a
platform to turn her life around.