SPS Chief Breakdown Summary

Respect- need to discuss openly any similarities and differences in their professional values and standards. Respect is incorporated with trust.

During the conversation between Ron Davis – the relatively new general manager of the machine tooling group at Parker Manufacturing and Mike – a plant manager who reported to Ron, Ron had violated some principles of supportive communication and supportive listening. First of all, Ron had violated Descriptive and Problem-Oriented principles. For example, Ron expressed his thinking and opinion about what Mike did and stated Mike’s personalities: “I think you’re too chummy with some of your female personnel” or “I think you’re creating a substandard impression by not wearing a tie” and “Having things in

Poor communication is often responsible for the hostile work setting, therefore it is preeminent of the employee to start with a respectful confrontation about the present work environment in a face to face meeting. In cases where respectful confrontation does not resolve the situation Robert Sutton suggest limiting contact with the jerk as much as possible.

The primary problem in this case deals with a source of tension between two employees that have recently received promotions. There are various individual factors that may be a source of conflict that the case points to; however both parties need to look beyond their own personal perspectives in order to move towards the organizational goals. In the case of Thomas Green, he certainly has a lot of maturing to do before he is able to perform well as the next stage in his career development. In the case of his supervisor, Mr. Davis, he must also learn how to help disgruntled employees fill into their position in their new roles without any personal feelings get in the way. Several observations were made as to how both employees could address the problems. However, given the fact that both employees are new to their roles, the best case solution may involve a more senior management professional getting involved and setting a good example for both employees by resolving the sources of conflict and aligning them towards organizational goals.

• Employer or manager: Make sure all members of staff are aware of their own responsibilities work to the agreed ways of working. Correct and working equipment is available.

As outlined by Jones and Pound (2010, pg.15) “The responsibilities of leaders include both to the team and responsibility for the team.” This incident prompted a change within our setting were by each child now knows that they are allowed the time to explain their point of view with ambiguity. This means most incidents or disagreements between the children are resolved more effectively. Strategies for dealing with challenging behaviour was then discussed at our following staff meeting and new ideas were introduced. New outcomes were decided up on and then revised into the behaviour policy which was then updated in line with current legislation.

Fiedler’s research focused on self-reported interactions with their least preferred co-worker (LPC) and assigning a number value to their responses. Although he indicated over 800 work groups were involved, neither he nor others could develop a correlation between groups scoring high and related leader effectiveness (1967). Although no publication of hers (310) has been cited a tenth as often as Fiedler’s work, beginning in 1988 Dian Hosking has been independently and in collaboration with others a prolific scholarly writer and researcher on this topic. Her early work set forth to disprove Fiedler’s work. Hosking identified four key points of contention, all of which focus on Fiedler placing too much emphasis on one person, the leader, and not enough in the context or environment (Sage Chp 33). In the remainder of the chapter 33 (Sage), Hosking highlights her work and that of others that corroborates her work. Of particular interest is her work on the conversation and it components: the people, the domain (public or private), and the content (verbal and

* Bulling to individual staff members by other staff member’s results in the individual not performing to the best of their knowledge or ability.

I am writing this letter to make you aware of the ongoing situation that is happening in Eastleigh JCP between myself and my fellow colleague Steve B.

SFC Harris was part of the USAREUR OIG Team that were sent down to Poland from 4/15/2016 to 5/1/2016 to conduct an assessment of OPERATION AN16. The Soldier unanticipated that he would be in the field environment with no access to a computer. Due to military reason the Soldier was not able to complete his college course during the time it was schedule.

Annette Johnson, as supervisor, is encountered with two incompatible employees, in a group, that seems to have resentment and disagreement with one another. Often, in a situation like this where there are incompatible employees with friction, it affects the moral of the group and productivity of getting work done. In this situation, Annette needs to do verbal counseling by communicating with both incompatible employees to avoid further disruption to the group by having a mutual understanding, not taking ones side or the other, and setting ground rules as an autocratic leader and a visible supervisor as being part of the group with concern and being available for the two incompatible employees with an open-door attitude to listen

On 04/28/2017, I was notified by email (see attached PDF) from my section chief that Carol Kemker wanted to meet with me and see how things were going. That meeting occurred on 05/04/2017. During that meeting, Carol briefly asked how I was doing but then quickly moved into topic of my position and where do I see myself working moving forward. I was told that the objectives of the administration have changed and that the division needs to start looking at resources and how things are going. Carol discussed how FTE dollars from another branch is funding my position. She also stated “I moved you to a different branch….”, almost as a favor not in relation to the

The same employee may have had close relationships with subordinates before they became supervisor. This example shows how occupation impacts behavior and how a change in position can alter individual behavior.

As these measures of negativity persisted in the work group it becomes very challenging for all others including the manager. The conflict that several parties are currently observing has be-come extremely divergent, and is negatively affecting employees in the work group. Finally after several complaints about a certain individual to management, it was decided there was a strong need for intervention. The group was assigned a Human Resource Liaison Ms. Helpful.

Office gossip is one of the worst problems that can happen in the workforce. When an employee tries to spread a rumor or something that an employee did, it can have a negative effect in the work space. There are multiple ways that office gossip can happen and there are ways to remedy the situation as well. Unfortunately, office gossip is something that cannot be avoided as it is human nature to bring rumors into the office. There are, however, ways to avoid the situation. Most workers would choose to avoid talking with others and not sharing their personal life with fellow coworkers. While it is acceptable to avoid talking about personal lives with other staff, keeping to themselves do not make an effective team.