Chapter 1

The Strategic Role of Human Resource Management

Cases and Exercises
Experiential Exercise: HRM As A Strategic Partner in Strategic Planning (page 29)
Examples of possible answers to the critical issues are:
Critical Issue Effect on existing employees Potential HR role(s)
(Example)
1. Distance learning
technology
(Example)
ee! "or #etter co$p%ter s&ills.
(Example)
Pro'i!e greater technical
training.
2. (o'ern$ent
re!%ctions in "%n!ing
to higher e!%cation
)ess $oney "or raises *
potential t%rno'er
+oc%s on HR progra$s that
increase ,o# satis"action.
-$pro'e$ents in pro!%cti'ity.
.. (reater /or&"orce
!i'ersity
0%rrent e$ployees $ay ha'e
co$$%nication !i""ic%lties1
c%lt%re shoc&
Di'ersity training nee!s /ill
increase
2. More international
st%!ents
(reater classroo$ !i'ersity1
co$$%nication challenge.
0ross c%lt%ral training "or
"ac%lty. 3rientation "or
-nternational st%!ents.
1. High percentage o"
"ac%lty to retire o'er
next !eca!e.
More "ac%lty /ill #e nee!e! Recr%iting progra$ to attract
"ac%lty. Retention progra$
"or existing "ac%lty.
Retire$ent progra$s "or
retirees.
2. )ocal large
#%siness is
!e'eloping its o/n
corporate
%ni'ersity.
May !ra/ "ac%lty to the
corporate %ni'ersity.
E$ployee retention
progra$s.
Questions:
1. !ic! en"ironmental c!ange #ould !a"e t!e greatest impact on t!e !uman
resource needs of t!e uni"ersity$ St%!ents /ill "or$ their o/n opinions (there is
no right ans/er). Pro#e st%!ents as to ho/ they reache! their !ecision. Most li&ely
either the re!%ctions in go'ern$ent "%n!ing or the local #%siness /ill !e'elop its o/n
corporate %ni'ersity.
%. !at en"ironmental c!ange #ill &e t!e most difficult for your HR group to
manage$ 4o% sho%l! expect a range o" responses #ase! on local con!itions.
Di'ersity /ill li&ely s%r"ace as a $a,or iss%e. Any o" the critical iss%es co%l! top this
chart. )oo& "or goo! rationale that !isplays an %n!erstan!ing o" the co$plications
that each one presents "or an HR sta"".
'. ("erall) !o# #ill t!is com&ination of c!anges affect your organi*ation$
5right st%!ents /ill consi!er iss%es li&e the sta""ing le'el o" the c%rrent HR
organi6ation. So$e $ay raise the iss%e o" 7/ho trains the trainers89 St%!ents sho%l!
note that in e'ery en'iron$ental change: there are so$e e""ect on the HR nee!s o"
the organi6ation an! there"ore on the HR !epart$ent itsel". ;hese changes /ill "orce
the organi6ation to #eco$e $ore responsi'e an! proacti'e to change: an! "oc%se!
on $eeting the co$petiti'e challenges o" the en'iron$ent.
Case Incident: +ac, -elson.s Pro&lem (page .<)
1. !at do you t!in, #as causing some of t!e pro&lems in t!e sa"ings and
loan !ome office and &ranc!es$ ;here is clearly a pro#le$ /ith co$$%nication:
an! the e""ects are "elt in the area o" e$ployee co$$it$ent. A!!itional contri#%ting
"actors incl%!e the lac& o" consistency in the policies an! proce!%res o" 'ario%s
locations. ;here is no cohesi'eness to the sta""ing acti'ities o" this organi6ation.
%. /o you t!in, setting up a HR unit in t!e main office #ould !elp$ 3" co%rse
/e thin& it /o%l!= Since there are HR>relate! pro#le$s #oth in the ho$e o""ice an!
in the #ranches: it is clear that i" a personnel o""ice /ere set %p: it /o%l! nee! to help
to coor!inate the HR acti'ities in the #ranches.
'. !at specific functions s!ould it carry out$ !at HR functions #ould t!en
&e carried out &y super"isors and ot!er line managers$ ;here is roo$ "or ?%ite
a #it o" 'ariation in the ans/ers to this ?%estion. 3%r s%ggeste! organi6ation /o%l!
incl%!e:
HR @nit: ,o# analyses: planning la#or nee!s an! recr%iting: pro'i!ing
a!'ising an! training in the selection process: orientation o" ne/ e$ployees:
$anaging /age an! salary a!$inistration: $anaging incenti'es an! #ene"its:
pro'i!ing an! $anaging the per"or$ance appraisal process: organi6ation>/i!e
co$$%nications: an! pro'i!ing training A !e'eloping ser'ices.
S%per'isors an! 3ther )ine Managers: inter'ie/ing an! selection o" ,o#
can!i!ates: training ne/ e$ployees: appraising per"or$ance: !epart$ental A
personal co$$%nications: an! training A !e'elop$ent.
Case 0pplication: 1urno"er in t!e 2an, (page .<)
;he 0onser'ati'e State Sa'ings 5an& /as a $e!i%$ si6e! #an& locate! in a large
so%thern city. A si6ea#le %nit o" the #an&: the chec& processing !epart$ent: /as
sta""e! #y /o$en age! eighteen to "orty. ;he !epart$ent ha! #een experiencing an
ann%al t%rno'er rate o" a#o%t 2< percent: greatly re!%cing operating e""iciency.
1. !at #ere some of t!e possi&le pro&lem +uanita -elson found in !er
in"estigation of employee turno"er$ ;he e$ployees pro'i!e! a 'ariety o"
reasons ($any o" /hich /ere !i""erent or $ore !etaile! then they pro'i!e! at the
ti$e o" their !epart%re). A$ong the pro#le$s e$ployees $entione! /ere: #oring
/or&: i$personal treat$ent: in"lexi#le /or& sche!%les (incl%!ing /ee&en! /or&):
co$pensation iss%es (a$o%nt an! con"i!entiality): s%per'isor in!i""erence:
7"orce! contri#%tion9 to the co$panyBs charita#le "%n!: an! poor s%per'ision. 3ne
e$ployee e'en s%ggeste! the co$pany nee!e! a %nion.
%. 3!ould -elson also sur"ey t!e super"isors &efore ma,ing
recommendations$ A#sol%tely= +irst: elson has only hear! one si!e o" the
story. Chile there is great consistency #et/een e$ployee acco%nts: the stories
also lac& a $anage$ent perspecti'e. Secon!: any sol%tion that elson
reco$$en!s /ill nee! the s%pport o" $anage$ent. She nee!s to %n!erstan!
/hat has stoo! in the /ay o" s%per'isors #eing $ore e""ecti'e in their ,o#s.
'. 2ased on t!e case) #!at role(s) could t!e HR department &eyond
recruiting$ A n%$#er o" strategic roles "or HR are i$plicitly i!enti"ie! in the case
incl%!ing: ?%ality o" /or&li"e $eas%re$ent: ,o# !esign: e$ployee selection
($atching e$ployees s&ills to ,o#s): training e$ployees: s%per'isory training:
co$pensation plans: an! la#or relations. HR co%l! #e a signi"icant a!'isor to
operations * i$pro'ing the ?%ality an! e""iciency o" the /or& /hile also #eco$ing
a #etter /or&place "or e$ployees.
Chapter 2
Equal Opportunity and the La
Cases and Exercises
Experiential Exercise: ;oo -n"or$al? (page 73)
1. Ho# could t!e EE(C pro"e ad"erse impact$ ;his co%l! #e pro'en "airly
easily #y sho/ing that none o" the 2< non>Hispanic can!i!ates "ro$ the state
e$ploy$ent o""ice /ere hire! /hile Hispanic can!i!ates /ere. A!!itionally: they
$ay /ant to "in! non>Hispanic can!i!ates /ho trie! to apply #%t /ere t%rne!
a/ay #eca%se the co$pany !oes not accept /al&>in applicants.
%. Cite specific discriminatory personnel practices at +o!n +ones4 company.
5y %sing the 7ol!>#oy net/or&9 $etho! o" recr%iting (see&ing re"errals "ro$
c%rrent e$ployees): the co$pany pre'ente! non>Hispanics "ro$ applying. ;here
/as a strong !isparate i$pact.
'. Ho# could +ones4 company defend itself against t!e allegations of
discriminatory practice$ May#e they co%l! plea! ignorance8 DonesB #est
!e"ense $ay act%ally #e to recogni6e the !e"iciency o" his co$panyBs practices
an! aggressi'ely see& to "or$ali6e its proce!%res.
5. ould it ma,e sense for t!is company to try to defend itself against t!e
discrimination allegations$ -t act%ally $ay not $a&e sense to try to !e"en!
itsel". ;he EE30 is $ore intereste! in co$pliance than in sanctions or
p%nish$ent. See&ing to change the process to reach co$pliance $ay #e the
#est !e"ense against "ines or la/s%its.
Case Incident: 0 Case of Racial /iscrimination$ (page E2)
1. !at do you t!in, of t!e #ay C!apman !andled t!e accusations from
Peters in !is con"ersation #it! 0nderson$ Ho# #ould you !a"e !andled
t!em$ ;here is no in!ication in the case that 0hap$an as&e! Peters opinion o"
/hat /as happening. -" that is tr%e: then 0hap$an $ay ha'e entere! the
$eeting alrea!y ha'ing pre>,%!ge! Peters. -" it /ere $y sit%ation to $anage: -
$ight #egin #y ?%estioning Peters $ore thoro%ghly as to the nat%re o" the notes
he recei'e!. - /o%l! also /ant to &no/ /hy Peters ha! not con"ronte! An!erson
!irectly an! as&e! her to stop.

%. /o you t!in, Peters !ad t!e &asis for a sexual !arassment claim against
0nderson$ !y or #!y not$ -" yo% allo/ the class ti$e to explore this: the
class /ill li&ely !i'i!e o'er this iss%e. An essential ele$ent is PetersB lac& o"
con"rontation o" An!erson. Peters $ight ha'e ha! a reasona#le clai$ o"
harass$ent ha! he in"or$e! An!erson o" his !isappro'al o" her #eha'ior
(in"or$ality: notes: an! calls) an! ha! she then persiste! in her actions. At this
stage: he appears to ha'e 'ery little legal gro%n!s "or harass$ent.

'. !at #ould you do no# if you #ere C!apman to a"oid furt!er incidence of
t!is type$ - /o%l! ta&e a n%$#er o" steps. +irst: - /o%l! $eet /ith the hospitals
attorney to re'ie/ /hat happene! an! get a "ir$ legal opinion. Secon!: - /o%l!
$a&e s%re that the hospital has a clear /ritten policy an! !oc%$entation "ro$
each e$ployee that they ha'e re'ie/e! the policy. ;he policy sho%l! incl%!e a
stan!ar! proce!%re "or han!ling this type o" pro#le$. +inally: - /o%l! /ant to
incl%!e this the s%#,ect o" harass$ent in orientation an! training progra$s "or
!octors an! sta"".
Case 0pplication: 0ll in t!e 6amily (page EF)
1. 1o #!at extent did 7inardi4s "acant position ad"ertisement correspond to
t!e 8ualifications 9ouis 7inardi #as loo,ing for$ Minar!i /as loo&ing "or
so$eone to s%per'ise eight $en /ho /ere ol!er an! /ho ha! /or&e! in a
#a&ery E>1< years. -t see$s he really pre"erre! so$eone /ith #a&ery
experience. ;he a!! s%ggeste! that either technical training or s%per'isory
experience /ere s%""icient. Minar!i /ante! so$eone he /as co$"orta#le /ith
an! his 7$en9 /ere co$"orta#le /ith.

%. 3uggested Question: !y mig!t 1a,ia feel s!e #as discriminated against$
;a&ia ha! the re?%ire$ents note! in the a!'ertise$ent. -n her inter'ie/: she $ay
ha'e "elt she /as not ta&en serio%sly (her inter'ie/ /as interr%pte! se'eral
ti$es. Minar!i as&e! her a#o%t her #oy"rien! (/hich $ight s%ggest to her that
she nee!s a $anBs per$ission to !o her ,o#): he as&e! her !irectly a#o%t her
experience s%per'ising $en (sent the $essage that s%per'ising /o$en /as not
'ali! experience "or s%per'ising $en) an! pai! little attention to her assertions
that she ha! e!%cation in her "iel! (a criteria liste! in the ,o# !escription). ;he
e$ploy$ent application as&e! ?%estions that !i! not relate to the ,o# (!o yo%
o/e $oney8). ;he person hire! appears to #e a#o%t her age.

'. 3uggested Question: !at could 7inardi !a"e done differently t!at #ould
!a"e reduced t!e li,eli!ood of !a"ing a t!is type of pro&lem$ Minar!i !i! not
appear to ha'e tho%ght"%lly consi!ere! the re?%ire$ents "or the position. His
a!'ertise$ent /as $islea!ing. He !oes not appear to ha'e consi!ere! the
possi#ility that a /o$an co%l! acco$plish the tas&. Chile it !oes not $ention the
age o" the person hire!: he also appears to #e yo%ng. Minar!i /o%l! li&ely ha'e
#ene"ite! "ro$ so$e pro"essional cons%ltation #e"ore he #egan the hiring
process.
C!apter '
+o& 0nalysis
Cases and Exercises
Experiential Exercise: The Job Description (page 11)
@se this exercise to help st%!ents:
3#tain so$e han!s>on experience /ith ,o# analysis.
;o gain so$e %n!erstan!ing that !i""erent $etho!s /ill li&ely yiel! !i""erent
res%lts.
Case Incident: Hurricane 2onnie (page 119)
1. 3!ould P!il and 9inda ignore t!e old:timers. protests and #rite up t!e ;o&
descriptions as t!ey see fit$ !y$ Ho# #ould you go a&out resol"ing t!e
differences$ -n all li&elihoo!: the ol!>ti$ers are acc%rate in their !escriptions.
;here are se'eral o" the$: an! it appears that all o" their !escriptions agree.
Also: since they /ere the ones act%ally !oing the /or&: it is li&ely that they /ere
the only ones /ho &ne/ /hat /as act%ally #eing !one. 3ne /ay to resol'e the
!i""erences /o%l! #e to exa$ine the speci"ic ite$s that Phil an! May#elline "eel
the ol!>ti$ers are pa!!ing their ,o#s /ith. As& "or e'i!ence "ro$ the ol!>ti$ers
that they !i! these "%nctions: an! as& "or e'i!ence "ro$ Phil an! May#elline that
so$eone else carrie! o%t those tas&s.
%. Ho# #ould you !a"e conducted t!e ;o& analysis$ 3ther options $ay ha'e
#een to con!%ct personal inter'ie/s instea! o" the ?%estionnaires. Ho/e'er: it is
%nli&ely that the res%lting !isagree$ent /o%l! ha'e #een a'oi!e! #y %sing
another $etho!. ;he $etho! that they %se! /as a goo! one.
Case 0pplication: /oes <our 3ecretary Ran, Hig!er 1!an 7ine (page 119)
5. !at do you t!in, t!e pro&lem is from =arrett4s point of "ie#$ (arrett has
expresse! concern that his secretary /ill #e ran&e! lo/er than the secretaries o"
other 'ice presi!ents: re!%cing her secretary. -" this happens: he "eels his
secretary /ill lea'e.
>. Ho# s!ould Eli*a&et! address eac! of t!e concerns expressed$ Chile
/anting to $eet (arrettBs concerns: Eli6a#eth $%st recogni6e her responsi#ility is
to the co$pany as a /hole. She $%st !e'elop a rational analysis that can
s%pport her reco$$en!ations.
?. !at can Eli*a&et! do to prepare !erself for any resistance to t!e analysis
from t!e secretaries t!emsel"es$. Eli6a#eth nee!s to in"or$ the secretaries o"
the tr%e p%rpose o" the s%r'ey. 0o$pensation at D%#lin sho%l! #e #ase! on ho/
/ell e$ployees per"or$ at partic%lar ,o#s. 3'er ti$e: it see$s the ,o#s at D%#lin
ha'e s%""iciently change! so that not all secretaries are per"or$ing the sa$e le'el
o" /or&. So$e secretaries $ay #e %n!erpai!.
@. =i"en current ad"ances in office tec!nology suc! as sop!isticated
spreads!eet programs) "oice mail systems) and e:mail as #ell as t!e
elimination of many middle:management positions t!roug! do#nsi*ing)
secretaries in many firms are ta,ing on 8uasi:management tas,s. Ho# can
Eli*a&et! account in !er ;o& analysis for t!e many degrees to #!ic!
indi"idual secretaries at /u&lin are doing so8 Eli6a#eth nee!s to capt%re as
$%ch in"or$ation as possi#le a#o%t the 1) technical nat%re o" the /or& an! 2) the
/or& 'ol%$e. ;hese t/o !i$ensions: in a!!ition to her other in"or$ation: /ill
help her !eter$ine the #o%n!aries o" ,o#s (/hat s&illsGco$petencies they
contain).
C!apter 5
Personnel Planning and Recruiting
Experiential Exercise
+orecasting Personnel Re?%ire$ents (pages 1HH>1HE)
. 2ased on t!e admittance trends) #!at num&er of nurses do you estimate
Par, =eneral Hospital #ill need o"er t!e next % years$ ext year I H2F. 4ear
a"ter next I H.H.
%. 2ased on turno"er forecasts) !o# many nurses do you estimate Par,
=eneral Hospital #ill need to replace in t!e next % years$ ;otal "or next year
sho%l! #e HF an! the "ollo/ing year sho%l! #e E<.
'. =i"en your ans#ers to items 1 and %) !o# many nurses does your
department need to recruit$ ;he charts are not entirely clear a#o%t the c%rrent
n%$#er o" n%rses e$ploye!. ;he a!$ittance tren!s chart see$s to s&ip the
c%rrent year. ;his $ay thro/ o"" so$e st%!ents. Ho/e'er: they sho%l! %se tren!
analysis to concl%!e that there are $ost li&ely H2< n%rses c%rrently. 5ase! on
this: the nee!s /ill #e:
ext year: H2F > H2< J HF I E<
4ear a"ter next: H.H * H2F J E< I K1
0ase -nci!ent: A ;ight )a#or Mar&et "or 0leaners (page 1HE)
1. Pro"ide a detailed list of recommendations concerning yo# +ennifer s!ould
go a&out increasing t!e num&er of accepta&le ;o& applicants so t!at !er
company need no longer !ire A;ust a&out anyoneB #!o #al,s in t!e door.
3pecifically) your recommendations s!ould include:
a. Completely #orded classified ads. St%!ents /ill 'ary in their creati'e
approaches. A goo! teaching $etho! is to ha'e the$ e$ail their a!s to each
other an! ha'e the st%!ents ran& or!er /hich a! they /o%l! apply to.
Deter$ine /hat $a!e the a! attracti'e an! as& the other st%!ents to $o!i"y
the a! accor!ing to /hat they ,%st learne!.
&. Recommendations concerning any ot!er recruiting strategies you
suggest t!ey use. St%!ents /ill o""er a /i!e 'ariety o" s%ggestions. A$ong
the li&ely responses are: ra!io a!s: "lyersGhan!#ills: an! !irect $ail to "or$er
e$ployees (/e $iss yo%L$ay#e the grass !i!nBt t%rn o%t to #e greener on
the other si!e). So$e st%!ents /ill consi!er target $ar&eting. +or exa$ple:
Denni"er co%l! re>engineer the ,o# to "e/er ho%rs an! recr%it part ti$e
/or&ers: greatly increasing the pool o" potential e$ployees.

%. !at practical suggestions could you ma,e t!at mig!t !elp reduce
turno"er and ma,e t!e stores a more attracti"e place in #!ic! to #or,
(t!ere&y reducing recruiting pro&lems)$ Denni"er can !o a ?%ic& analysis on
/hat it costs her to recr%it an! train a ne/ e$ployee (incl%!ing the cost o" lo/er
pro!%cti'ity as a person learns a ne/ ,o#). E'ery re!%ction in e$ployee t%rno'er
can #e translate! to !ollars. -n "act: Denni"er can i$pro'e /or&ing con!itions
/itho%t any change in her pro"it i" she pays "or i$pro'e$ents "ro$ sa'ings in
e$ployee t%rno'er costs. ;he #est so%rce o" i!eas "ro$ i$pro'e$ent $ay co$e
"ro$ exit inter'ie/s (/hat /o%l! /e ha'e !one to o%r /or& en'iron$ent that
/o%l! ha'e $a!e yo% $ore li&ely to stay8): an! "ro$ existing e$ployees.
St%!ents are also li&ely to s%ggest so$e o" the "ollo/ing1 air>con!itione! /or&
space: $ore e$ployees (so /or&ers /or& "e/er ho%rs): longer or $ore "re?%ent
#rea&s. 3ther st%!ents /ill consi!er $ore co$plicate sol%tions li&e ,o# rotation.
Still others $ight s%ggest the %se o" !e"erre! co$pensation or pro"it sharing to
&eep e$ployees a "%ll year (e.g.: MK.F< per ho%r: ME.F< no/: one !ollar per ho%r
pai! at year en! to the re$aining e$ployees).
Case 0pplication: 6inding People !o 0re Passionate 0&out !at 1!ey
/o
(page 1HK)
;rilogy So"t/are is a "ast gro/ing so"t/are co$pany /ith a %ni?%e an! highly
%northo!ox c%lt%re. ;he case pro'i!es a "ra$e/or& "or !isc%ssing iss%es relate! to
person co$pany "it an! the role o" recr%iting in that process.
C. Identify some of t!e esta&lis!ed selection tec!ni8ues t!at underlie 1rilogy4s
uncon"entional approac! to !iring$ ;rilogy acti'ely recr%its potential
e$ployees early in the hiring cycle. ;heir techni?%es incl%!e re'ie/ing res%$es
(o'er 1F:<<< in one year): atten!ing ,o# an! career "airs: con!%cting on ca$p%s
inter'ie/s (o'er 2:<<<): "lying in prospects "or inter'ie/s: an! ha'ing $ore
personali6e! proce!%res "or han!ling top recr%its.
D. !at particular elements of 1rilogy4s culture most li,ely appeal to t!e ,ind
of employees it see,s$ Ho# does it con"ey t!ose elements to ;o&
prospects$ A n%$#er o" co$pany characteristics $any appeal to progra$$ers:
incl%!ing: no !ress co!e: no reg%lar /or& sche!%le: sel">!irecte! sche!%ling:
/or&ers /ith si$ilar interests an! technically challenging /or&.
1E. ould 1rilogy &e an appealing employer for you$ !y or #!y not$ If not)
#!at #ould it ta,e for you to accept a ;o& offer from 1rilogy$ St%!ents $ay
ans/er this either /ay. St%!ents /ho re?%ire $ore str%ct%re $ay /ant to &no/
a#o%t career paths: $entoring an! $eas%res o" s%ccess. ;hey $ay /ant the
co$pany to $a&e so$e sort o" sy$#olic co$$ent to the$.
C!apter >
Employee 1esting and 3election
Cases and Exercises
Experiential Exercise: ;he Re"erence 0hec& (page 2<K)
1. !at are t!e most important issues raised &y t!is in8uiry$ ;he $ost
i$portant iss%e to the e$ployer is the ris& o" a la/s%it. E'en i" yo% pro'i!e
in"or$ation an! are care"%l an! !oc%$ent e'erything: the "or$er e$ployee $ight
choose to s%e. S%ppose yo% ha'e #een care"%l an! /in the s%it: !e"en!ing the
s%it has cost yo% $oney an! a consi!era#le a$o%nt o" ti$e. +or this reason:
$any e$ployers li$it the in"or$ation that they pro'i!e to the #are #asics: !ates
o" e$ploy$ent an! ,o# titles. Stan!ing on principle o'er the right to gi'e speci"ic
in"or$ation a#o%t a "or$er e$ployee is har!ly /orth the e""ort: nor the expense.
%. Ho# s!ould t!e HR manager respond to t!is in8uiry$ ;he HR $anager
sho%l! alrea!y ha'e in place speci"ic g%i!elines an! policies a#o%t /hat &in!s o"
in"or$ation /ill #e release! to a re"erence chec& an! /hat /ill not. -" those
policies are not in place: they nee! to #e !e'elope! an! p%t in place #e"ore
ans/ering anything $ore than ?%estion N1. -" the policies are in place: "ollo/ the
policies. S%ggeste! policies /o%l! incl%!e only pro'i!ing !ates o" e$ploy$ent
an! ,o# title. Cith /ritten per$ission o" the e$ployee: one $ight pro'i!e salary
in"or$ation. 5eyon! those iss%es: there is a legal ris&.
Case Incident: 1!e 1oug! 3creener (page 2<9)
1. !at specific legal pro&lems do you t!in, Rosen can run into as a result of
!is firm.s current screening met!ods$ !at steps #ould you suggest !e
ta,e to eliminate t!ese pro&lems$ ;here are a co%ple o" speci"ic pro#le$s
/ith /hat Rosen is !oing. +irst: he /ill nee! to con!%ct a 'ali!ity st%!y o" the
honesty test an! $a&e s%re that it is %se"%l an! that it !oes /hat it says it !oes.
;here are three pro#le$s /ith the cre!it chec&: +irst: he nee!s to get the
applicantOs
per$ission "or the chec& an! allo/ her to see the res%lts: i" she !esires. Secon!:
he nee!s to
!e$onstrate the #%siness necessity o" s%ch a chec&: an! thir!: he nee!s to
con!%ct a st%!y
to ass%re that it is not ha'ing an a!'erse i$pact. Screening o%t can!i!ates #ase!
on
/or&ersO co$pensation clai$s is: $ost li&ely: co$pletely illegal. Discri$inating
against those
/ith !ri'ing 'iolations are also 'ery ?%estiona#le: %nless he can !e$onstrate a
#%siness>
relate! reason "or it.
%. =i"en #!at you ,no# a&out Rosen.s &usiness) #rite a t#o:page proposal
descri&ing an employee testing and selection program t!at you #ould
recommend for !is firm. 3ay a fe# #ords a&out t!e sorts of tests) if any)
you #ould recommend and t!e application &lan, 8uestions you #ould as,)
as #ell as ot!er met!ods including drug screening and reference c!ec,ing.
;here are so$e 'ery speci"ic things Rosen is !oing that sho%l! #e &ept: ;he
strong re"erence chec&ing process is 'ery goo!. Any o" the ite$s "ro$ the
pre'io%s ?%estion that pass the #%siness necessity tests $entione!: or are
!eter$ine! to #e 'ali! an! /itho%t a!'erse i$pact: sho%l! #e %se! as /ell.
A!!itional in"or$ation that sho%l! #e gathere! incl%!es e!%cational an! any
"inancial planning certi"ications. (i'en the nat%re o" his #%siness: it $ight #e
/ise "or Rosen to %se only 0erti"ie! +inancial Planners. He $ay also /ant to
enlist the ser'ices o" a #on!ing co$pany to #on! his e$ployees since they /ill
ha'e access to con"i!ential in"or$ation a#o%t his clients.
Case 0pplication: Carter Cleaning Company (page 21<)
Denni"er an! her "ather are consi!ering $etho!s "or screening applicants "or their !ry
cleaning #%siness. -n partic%lar: the 0arter $anage$ent tea$ is consi!ering honesty
tests: especially "or e$ployees /ho han!le cash.
11. !at #ould &e t!e ad"antages and disad"antages to +ennifer4s company of
routinely administering !onest tests to all its employees$ Polygraph testing
raises a large n%$#er o" legal an! $oral iss%es1 iss%es 0arter 0leaning /o%l!
#est a'oi!. @se so$e o" the a'aila#le 7paper an! pencil9 honesty tests $ay #e a
possi#ility. -n general: these ha'e #een sho/n to #e reasona#ly relia#le an!
'ali!. ;hey are still contro'ersial. ;he costs associate! /ith these tests $ay
also $a&e the$ prohi#iti'e to a s$all operation li&e Denni"erBs.
1%. 3pecifically) #!at ot!er screening tec!ni8ues could t!e company use to
screen out t!eft:prone employees$ Ho# exactly could t!ese tec!ni8ues &e
used$ More thoro%gh $a&e #ac&gro%n! chec&s are a reco$$en! techni?%e to
eli$inate potential thie'es. So$e "ir$s chose to contract this o%t to a pri'ate
sec%rity agency (0ost $ay #e an iss%e to Denni"er. Ho/e'er: the co$pany can
?%ic&ly chec& to see i" sa'ings "ro$ re!%ce! the"t /o%l! o""set the cost o" an
o%tsi!e agency. As part o" the ,o# pre'ie/: 0arter $%st co$$%nicate that ,o#s in
her co$pany are /orth &eeping1 !ishonesty an! the"t /ill not #e tolerate!.
+%rther co$pany policies regar!ing the"t sho%l! #e clearly co$$%nicate! to ne/
an! existing e$ployees.
1'. Ho# s!ould !er company terminate employees caug!t stealing and #!at
,ind of procedure s!ould &e set up for !andling reference calls a&out t!ese
employees #!en t!ey go to ot!er companies loo,ing for ;o&s$ ;er$inating
e$ployees "or the"t sho%l! incl%!e the in'ol'e$ent o" proper a%thorities an!
sho%l! only #e !one /hen there is a#sol%te proo" o" the the"t an! /ho co$$itte!
it. S%ch an action /ill also sen! a $essage to the other e$ployees that yo% /ill
not tolerate the"t o" co$pany reso%rces . Chile $any e$ployers are rel%ctant to
prosec%te e$ployees "or the"t : !e'eloping e'i!ence /ith police an! thro%gh the
co%rts can #e #ene"icial in pro'i!ing "%t%re e$ployers o" the in!i'i!%al /ith
tr%th"%l an! "act%al in"or$ation.
C!apter ?
Inter"ie#ing Candidates
Cases and Exercises
Experiential Exercise: -n>0lass Moc& -nter'ie/ (page 22<)
;his exercise is /ell explaine! in step>#y>step instr%ctions in the text. -t gi'es
st%!ents the opport%nity to practice !e'eloping a str%ct%re! inter'ie/ "or$ an! in
con!%cting a str%ct%re! inter'ie/.
Case Incident: 1!e (ut:of:Control Inter"ie# (page 221)
1. Ho# #ould you explain t!e nature of t!e panel inter"ie# 7aria !ad to
endure$ 3pecifically) do you t!in, it reflected a #ell:t!oug!t:out
inter"ie#ing strategy on t!e part of t!e firm) or carelessness on t!e part of
t!e firm.s management$ If it #as carelessness) #!at #ould you do to
impro"e t!e inter"ie# process at 0pex En"ironmental$ -t is "airly clear that
the panel inter'ie/ /as a stress inter'ie/ !esigne! to see ho/ /ell she co%l!
han!le !i""ic%lt sit%ations. -n this respect: it see$s to ha'e #een a /ell>tho%ght>
o%t inter'ie/ing strategy: #%t there /as a 'ery clear ele$ent o" carelessness on
the part o" the "ir$Os $anage$ent. ;he panel /as o#'io%sly not /ell>traine! an!
/as careless in the choice o" ?%estions that they %se!. Many o" the ?%estions
/ere clearly !iscri$inatory an! co%l! #e %se! against the$ in a gen!er>#ase!
!iscri$ination s%it.
%. ould you ta,e t!e ;o& offer if you #ere 7aria$ If you.re not sure) is t!ere
any additional information t!at #ould !elp you ma,e your decision) and if
so) #!at is it$ Maria nee!s a!!itional in"or$ation. Chat she !oes &no/ is the
nat%re o" the ,o# an! the clear "it /ith her training an! s&ills. ;he a!!itional
in"or$ation that she sho%l! see& in'ol'es the n%$#er o" /o$en /ho /or& at
Apex: the le'els o" $anage$ent /hich they ha'e attaine!: an! the satis"action o"
those /o$en /ith their treat$ent #y the Apex $anage$ent. ;he "act that the
entire inter'ie/ panel /as $en an! their choices o" ?%estions lea'es %s /ith
reser'ations a#o%t ho/ she /o%l! #e treate! once hire!.
'. 1!e ;o& of applications engineer for #!ic! 7aria #as applying re8uires: (1)
excellent tec!nical s,ills #it! respect to mec!anical engineeringF (%) a
commitment to #or,ing in t!e area of pollution controlF (') t!e a&ility to
deal #ell and confidently #it! customers #!o !a"e engineering pro&lemsF
(5) a #illingness to tra"el #orld#ideF and (>) a "ery intelligent and #ell:
&alanced personality. !at 8uestions #ould you as, #!en inter"ie#ing
applicants for t!e ;o&$ ;here are a /i!e 'ariety o" speci"ic ?%estions that co%l!
#e pose! to a!!ress these iss%es. P%estions nee! to #e ,o#>relate!: speci"ically
to the re?%ire$ents liste! a#o'e. ;hey also nee! to clearly a'oi! any
!iscri$inatory areas. P%estions $ight #e spec%lati'e or ,o#>relate!.
Case 0pplication: 1!e 9ost Inter"ie# (page 221)
;/o s%per'isors nee! to inter'ie/ an assistant they /ill share. St%!ents are as&e!
to e'al%ate the inter'ie/ing style an! i!enti"y areas "or i$pro'e$ent.
15. Is Rosa4s fourt! inter"ie# li,ely to &e more successful t!an t!e first t!ree$
!y or #!y not$ ot li&ely. RosaBs "irst ?%estion co%l! #e 'ery !e"ense
aro%sing. She nee!s to p%t the can!i!ate at ease an! get the$ spea&ing #e"ore
she as&s the $ore !i""ic%lt ?%estions8
1>. /o you see any fla#s in Rosa4s preparation for t!e inter"ie# process$ In
Geit!4s$ Chile the st%!ents !onBt ha'e a list o" RosaBs ?%estions they can $a&e
so$e ass%$ptions. +or exa$ple: Qeith an! Rosa ha'e so$e share criteria "or
s%ccess as /ell as so$e in!i'i!%al criteria. 5oth sho%l! ha'e so$e ?%estions
that relate! to their e'al%ation criteria. -t is also not %nco$$on to !eci!e /hich
person /ill as& a partic%lar ?%estion. ;hat Rosa cannot re$e$#er one o" QeithBs
?%estions !oesnBt say $%ch a#o%t his s&ill.
1?. !at could Rosa and Geit! do differently) &ot! indi"idually and as a team$
Sharing their ?%estions an! e'al%ation criteria ahea! o" ti$e /o%l! ha'e allo/e!
the$ to consoli!ate their i!eas an! select the #est ?%estion set. ;hey also nee!
to agree on criteria other than age. Qeith appears #etter at getting the can!i!ate
to tal&: #%t not at eliciting $%ch in the /ay o" %se"%l $aterial. Rosa as&s
$eaning"%l ?%estions #%t is %na#le to get the can!i!ate to !isclose the$sel'es. A
co$#ination o" their t/o s&ills /o%l! $a&e a "or$i!a#le inter'ie/ing tea$.
C!apter @
1raining and /e"eloping Employees
Cases and Exercises
Experiential Exercise: De'eloping a ;raining Progra$ (page 2K2)
;his exercise /ill gi'e st%!ents the opport%nity to experience the acti'ities in'ol'e! in
creating a training progra$. As /ith any exercise: st%!ents $ay r%sh thro%gh an!
#r%sh asi!e !etails: or they $ight painsta&ingly a!!ress all the !etails nee!e!. )oo&
"or ?%ality an! "or those that ta&e the ti$e to !eal /ith the !etails that $a&e a
progra$ a s%ccess.
Case Incident: Rein"enting t!e !eel at 0pex /oor Company (page 2KF)
1. !at do you t!in, of 0pex4s training process$ Could it !elp to explain #!y
employees Ado t!ings t!eir #ayB and if so) !o#$ ;here is a /ea&
acco%nta#ility syste$. ;he person assigne! to per"or$ training is li&ely to 'ery
lo/ $oti'ation (a !eparting e$ployee). Cith no "or$al !escriptions the trainer
/ill teach 7their /ay9 o" acco$plishing tas&s. ;here is no training !oc%$entation.
3ne recei'es training in 7ho/ to train.9 ;here are no o%tco$es $eas%res to
!eter$ine i" the training /as s%ccess"%l.

%. !at role do ;o& descriptions play in training$ Do# !escriptions set the
#o%n!aries o" ,o#s in ter$s o" re?%ire! &no/le!ge an! s&ills. 5y %n!erstan!ing
the ,o# !escription: a trainer can !e"ine the learning re?%ire$ents "or a ne/ or
transitioning e$ployees.
'. Explain in detail #!at you #ould do to impro"e t!e training process at 0pex
(ma,e sure to pro"ide specific suggestions) please). E'ery position /o%l!
ha'e a "or$al (/ritten) !escription. ;raining proce!%res /o%l! #e !oc%$ente!
"or each position. S%per'isors /o%l! #e "or$ally acco%nta#le "or training.
Case 0pplication: 0 1raining and /e"elopment Pro&lem at 3umerson
7anufacturing
(page 2KH)
S%$erson Man%"act%ring is planning on opening a ne/ plant in 1H $onths. 4o%
ha'e #een as&e! to !e'elop a plan to recr%it: select an! train the approxi$ately one
tho%san! ne/ /or&ers that /ill #e nee!e! o'er the next three years.
1@. /e"elop a plan outline of !o# to !ire and train an entire staff of ne#
employees &elo# t!e second le"el of management in one year and !a"e
t!em ready to open t!e ne# plant$ St%!ents /ill nee! to !ra/ "ro$ se'eral
chapters. -n or!er to !e'elop a hiring plan: the co$pany /ill nee! to ha'e
i!enti"ie! speci"ic ,o#s an! the &no/le!ge an! s&ills associate! /ith those ,o#s.
So$e st%!ents /ill li&ely reco$$en! that S%$erson re'ie/ their existing ,o#s.
5right st%!ents /ill note that S%$erson /ill $o'e so$e o" its #est e$ployees to
the ne/ plant (this raises an interesting set o" iss%es a#o%t /hat the c%lt%re /ill
#e li&e in the existing plants).
;he training plan /ill li&ely in'ol'e the F steps note! in the chapter:
1. ee!s analysis
2. -nstr%ctional !esign
.. Rali!ation
2. -$ple$entation
F. E'al%ation A "ollo/>%p
1C. Ho# s!ould you go a&out procuring t!e &alance of t!e t!ousand
employees needed to staff t!e plant &y t!e pro;ected full:operations date$
HR /ill /ant to in'ol'e the s%per'isors at the ne/ plant an! get their inp%t in any
recr%iting plan. ;he plant pro'i!es an opport%nity "or S%$erson to re'ie/ its prior
practices an! esta#lish ne/ #ench$ar&s.
C!apter C
7anaging (rgani*ational Rene#al
Cases and Exercises
Experiential Exercise: @n"ree6ing an 3rgani6ation (pages .12>.1F)
St%!ents sho%l! en,oy an! per"or$ /ell in this exercise. +or each sta&ehol!er:
st%!ents sho%l! i!enti"y reasons relate! to their ,o#: %nion: ten%re: pay: or stat%s
that they $ight resist change. +or exa$ple: the sales "orce /o%l! pro#a#ly resist
change #eca%se it $ight threaten their salarie! pay stat%s. ;here $ight #e a real
"ear that yo% /ill $o'e to co$$issions. )ong>ter$ e$ployees $ight "ear change
#eca%se they ha'e only &no/n one /ay to !o things an! are not s%re i" they co%l!
per"or$ !i""erently. )oo& "or st%!ents to analy6e an! loo& at things "ro$ each
sta&ehol!erBs point o" 'ie/.
Case Incident: Ae4re =etting -o#!ere 6astB (page .1F)
5. !ic! organi*ational c!ange and de"elopment tec!ni8ues discussed in
c!apter C #ould you recommend 7r. 3tar use to try to determine #!at t!e
pro&lems are at t!e company$ Please &e specific. Star nee!s to !iagnose the
organi6ation an! !eter$ine i" the iss%es re?%ire an inter'ention at the strategic
le'el: c%lt%ral le'el or gro%pGinterpersonal le'el. He $ight %se techni?%es li&e
action research: e$ployee "ee!#ac& s%r'eys: inter'ie/s an! process re'ie/s.

>. =i"en t!e admittedly limited information in t!e incident) #ould you
recommend t!at 3tar implement a team:&ased organi*ation$ !y or #!y
not$ A tea$ #ase! organi6ation co%l! /or&: #%t it /o%l! re?%ire $a,or changes
in the philosophy: control syste$s an! c%lt%re o" the co$pany. ;here are se'eral
other actions Star co%l! ta&e to i$pro'e per"or$ance incl%!ing changes in the
/ay per"or$ance is appraise! an! re/ar!e!.

?. /o you t!in, it #ould &e !elpful for 3tar to implement a total 8uality
management program$ 2e prepared to tell 7r. 3tar #!at t!e pros and cons
of implementing suc! a program in !is company mig!t &e$ P%ality has
increasingly #eco$e a necessary (#%t not s%""icient) re?%ire$ent "or s%ccess.
StarBs co$pany cannot a""or! to o'erloo& ?%ality: so in one sense: ?%ality
$anage$ent is not an option. A!'antages o" a ?%ality $anage$ent syste$
incl%!e: #etter traine! e$ployees: greater e$ployee in'ol'e$ent an!
co$$it$ent: i$pro'e! ?%ality o" pro!%cts an! ser'ices. ;he !isa!'antages are:
;PM is not a s%#stit%te "or goo! $anage$ent * Star still nee!s to ha'e an
appropriate strategy an! str%ct%re1 the process is 'ery ti$e cons%$ing an!
re?%ires exec%ti'e in'ol'e$ent1 there is no g%arantee o" i$pro'e$ents in
e""iciency or early i$pro'e$ents in pro!%cti'ity1 an! the co$pany nee!s to $a&e
a s%#stantial co$$it$ent to e!%cation.
Case 0pplication: Is t!e Honeymoon ("er at 6lat Roc,$ (page .1H)
Ma6!a ha! opene! a plant in +lat Roc&: Michigan: a s%#%r# o" Detroit in the early
19K<s. ;he plant ha! great pro$ise an! /as expecte! to e$ploy tho%san!s o"
e$ployees. 5%t #y 199<: con!itions ha! serio%sly !eteriorate!. ;he operation /as on
its "o%rth la#or relations !irector an! %nion /as #oycotting the s%ggestion #ox (a
hall$ar& o" Dapanese $anage$ent).
1D. !at do you t!in, accounts for t!e fact t!at #it! all t!e plant4s emp!asis
on team#or, and on total 8uality t!e personnel pro&lems #ere still so
serious$ ;here appear to #e a n%$#er o" potential reasons. ;here is generally a
lac& o" !ialog #et/een the A$ericans an! Dapanese an! #et/een the /or&ers
an! $anagers. ;his has res%lte! in a #rea&!o/n o" tr%st. ;he @nion $ay ha'e
exploite! this lac& o" tr%st: helping /or&ers interpret Dapanese pro!%cti'ity as a
$eans o" re!%cing ,o#s. ;here are also s%#stantial c%lt%ral !i""erences #et/een
the Dapanese style o" $anage$ent an! the @S style. @S $anagers interprete!
the lac& o" a%tono$y as a re,ection o" their i!eas.
%E. 0s t!e consultant to t!e ne# 6ord plant manager) outline a detailed plan
(&ased in large part on t!e contents of t!is c!apter) for transforming t!e
culture and 6lat Roc, and for ma,ing t!e plant more producti"e$ ;he text
o%tlines a ten step process "or lea!ing organi6ational change that /ill /or& as a
"ra$e/or& "or this case ill%stration.
1. Esta#lish a sense o" %rgency
2. Mo#ili6e co$$it$ent #y ,ointly !iagnosing the #%siness
.. 0reate a g%i!ing coalition
2. De'elop a share! 'ision
F. 0o$$%nicate the 'ision
H. Ena#le e$ployees to "acilitate the change
E. (enerate short ter$ /ins
K. 0onsoli!ate gains an! pro!%ce $ore change
9. Anchor ne/ /ays o" !oing things in the co$panyBs c%lt%re
1<. Monitor progress an! a!,%st the 'ision as re?%ire!.
So$e st%!ents $ay also /ish to in'o&e the )e/in $o!el in regar! to the iss%e o"
%n"ree6ing the existing c%lt%re.
C!apter D
0ppraising Performance
Cases and Exercises
Experiential Exercise: Per"or$ance Appraisal (page .FF)
St%!ents are as&e! to re'ie/ a per"or$ance appraisal "or$ an! to !e'elop an
appraisal "or$.
1. -n e'al%ating the appraisal "or$ in +ig%re 9>1<: there are se'eral iss%es that
st%!ents $ight note "or possi#le i$pro'e$ents: consi!er re!%cing the rating scale
"ro$ se'en points to "o%r or "i'e points: #e $ore speci"ic a#o%t s%#,ects to #e
rate! (e.g.: Ho/ !o yo% rate the interest o" the teacher in the s%#,ect8): an! %se
#eha'ioral anchors to clearly !e"ine /hat #eha'iors or actions yo% are rating.
2. St%!ents sho%l! !e'elop their o/n tool "or appraising the per"or$ance o" an
instr%ctor. )oo& "or the$ to apply concepts !isc%sse! in this chapter.
.. St%!ents sho%l! present their tools to the class. Ho/ si$ilar are the tools8 Do
they all $eas%re a#o%t the sa$e "actors8 Chich "actor appears $ost o"ten8
Chich !o yo% thin& is the $ost e""ecti'e tool8 Enco%rage st%!ents to re"lect on
the "actors that they chose: or !i! not choose. Share yo%r perspecti'e on /hat
$a&es goo! teaching.
Case Incident: 2ac, #it! a Hengeance (page .FH)
'. Could a company #it! an effecti"e appraisal process !a"e missed so many
signals of insta&ility o"er se"eral years$ !y or #!y not$ +or an appraisal
process to capt%re these signals: it /o%l! ha'e ha! to $eas%re so$e aspect o"
the e$ployeeBs interpersonal relationships: anger: o%t#%rsts: etc. Many appraisal
syste$s "oc%s excl%si'ely on ,o# relate! o%tco$es. -n this case: i" an e$ployee
/ere pro!%cing stan!ar! or higher o%tco$es: his interpersonal pro#le$s $ight
not #e note!.

5. !at safeguards #ould you &uild into your appraisal process to a"oid
missing suc! potentially tragic signs of insta&ility and danger$ Personnel
syste$s nee! to recor! any anti>social #eha'iors that inhi#it an e$ployee or his
or her colleag%es "ro$ e""ecti'ely !oing their ,o#s. -n a!!ition to the pro#le$ o"
/or&place 'iolence (/hich is o" co%rse the $ost serio%s iss%e) there sho%l! also
#e concern on the part o" $anage$ent to not allo/ a hostile /or& en'iron$ent to
!e'elop.

>. !at #ould you do if confronted during an appraisal inter"ie# &y someone
#!o &egan ma,ing t!reats regarding !is or !er use of firearms$ - /o%l!
exc%se $ysel". ;ell the person - /ant to "inish this con'ersation an! that - /o%l!
#e right #ac&. (- /o%l! not /ant to call sec%rity in "ront o" the person as it $ight
"%rther anger the$). - /o%l! get to the nearest telephone: call sec%rity: an!
explain the sit%ation. - /o%l! ha'e sec%rity $a&e s%re o" $y sa"ety #e"ore -
res%$e! $y con'ersation. - /o%l! /ant the e$ployee to recei'e pro"essional
co%nseling to ass%re that the co$pany or the s%per'isor /as not "acing the threat
o" retri#%tion "or their actions.
Case 0pplication: 0ppraising t!e 3ecretaries at 3#eet#ater I (page .FE)
1. /o you t!in, t!at t!e experts. recommendations #ill &e sufficient to get
most of t!e administrators to fill out t!e rating forms properly$ !y or
!y not$ !at additional actions (if any) do you t!in, #ill &e necessary$
Chile contro'ersial: the reco$$en!ations /o%l!: in "act: enco%rage
a!$inistrators to "ill the "or$s o%t correctly. @sing the $ore !etaile! "or$ an! not
tying the per"or$ance ratings to salary increases /o%l! allo/ the $anagers to
"eel $ore "ree a#o%t rating the secretaries acc%rately. ;here /o%l!: ho/e'er:
nee! to #e so$e strong training sessions (#oth "or a!$inistrators an!
secretaries) to help the$ %n!erstan! the ne/ syste$. Since all secretaries ha'e
tra!itionally recei'e! the sa$e salary increases: an! ha'e #een please! /ith
that: it /o%l! #e a!'isa#le to consi!er lo/ering the $axi$%$ increase to an
a$o%nt that co%l! #e gi'en to all secretaries /hile staying /ithin #%!get. ;hen all
secretaries /ith a satis"actory rating or #etter /o%l! recei'e that increase.
2. /o you t!in, t!at Hice President inc!ester #ould &e &etter off dropping
grap!ic rating forms) su&stituting instead one of t!e ot!er tec!ni8ues #e
discussed in t!is c!apter suc! as a ran,ing met!od$ 0ertainly other
$etho!s co%l! #e %se!. He has alrea!y ha! a taste o" /hat /o%l! res%lt i" he
/ent to a "orce! !istri#%tion or other ran&ing $etho!. A 5ARS syste$ $ight #e
#est: #%t it co%l! #e costly to !e'elop i" the clerical sta"" ha'e positions that are
signi"icantly !i""erent.
.. !at performance appraisal system #ould you de"elop for t!e secretaries
if you #ere Ro& inc!ester$ /efend your ans#er. -" the !e'elop$ent costs
are not too great: the 5ARS syste$ /o%l! gi'e the strongest sol%tion to the
c%rrent sit%ation. ;he #eha'ioral anchors /o%l! $a&e it $ore !i""ic%lt to ,%st rate
e'eryone at the top. -t /o%l! also help to eli$inate the !i""erent interpretations o"
/hat the rating scales $ean.
C!apter 1E
Managing Careers and !air Treatment
Cases and Exercises
Experiential Exercise: Disciplinary Actions (pages .KK>.K9)
;his exercise !escri#es a sit%ation /here an e$ployee $a!e a critical error "or /hich
she /as s%spen!e! "or three !ays an! a pre'io%sly appro'e! pro$otion /as
re'o&e!. ;he ar#itrator %phel! the s%spension: #%t reinstate! the pro$otion. 3"
pri$ary i$portance here is the iss%e o" past practice. Point o%t to st%!ents that "or
#oth actions: the pri$ary iss%e "or the ar#itrator /as not 7/hat sho%l! ha'e #een
!one:9 #%t 7/hat has #een !one in the past.9 ;his is /hy it is critical to #e consistent
an! to clearly co$$%nicate any changes in policy in a!'ance.
Case Incident: +o& Insecurity at I27 (page .K9)
?. !at do you t!in, accounts for t!e fact t!at a company li,e I27 can !a"e
!ig! ;o& security &ut still lose mar,et s!are) sales and profita&ility$ In ot!er
#ords) #!y do you t!in, ;o& security did not translate into corporate
success as #ell as it mig!t !a"e at I27$ ;here are a n%$#er o" i$portant
iss%es here. +irst: there is little in the literat%re to s%ggest that ,o# sec%rity is
s%""icient to &eep e$ployees at pea& per"or$ance. Secon!: the iss%e o" ,o#
sec%rity: /hile i$portant: !oes not ta&e into acco%nt the !yna$ics o" the $ar&et.
Chile a co$pany $ay ha'e exe$plary HR practices: it still $%st pay close
attention to the actions o" its co$petitors: s%ppliers: host go'ern$ents: etc.

@. !at steps do you t!in, I27 could !a"e ta,en in order to continue to a"oid
layoffs$ If you don4t t!in, any suc! steps #ere feasi&le) explain #!y$ -5M
appeare! to respon! 'ery slo/ly to changes in the en'iron$ent. Ha! -5M
en'isione!: "or exa$ple: the change to/ar! P0s: they $ay ha'e re!%ce! their
hiring in the 19E<s o" $ain"ra$e co$p%ter /or&ers. ;his /o%l! ha'e $a!e -5M
less o'ersta""e!. So$e st%!ents /ill arg%e that these steps are not "easi#le. +e/
#%sinesses ha'e per"ect "oresight into $ar&et changes. o #%siness can legally
attain per"ect insight into the propose! actions o" their co$petitors. As s%ch:
#%siness /ill nee! to react to changes in the $ar&ets. 3pponents o" this 'ie/ /ill
arg%e that the expenses create! #y a !o/nt%rn in the $ar&et sho%l! #e #orne #y
the ris& hol!ers (sharehol!ers) an! not e$ployees.
C. =i"en I274s experience #it! its full employment policy) #!at do you t!in,
are t!e implications for ot!er companies t!in,ing of instituting full
employment policies of t!eir o#n$ -t is a 'ery !i""ic%lt policy to i$agine
$aintaining. 0o$panies /ill li&ely consi!er the "ail%re o" -5M as a s%""icient
reason not to p%rs%e s%ch a policy. Ho/e'er: in a tight la#or $ar&et: an
enterprising co$pany $ay o""er li"eti$e e$ploy$ent as a $eans o" !i""erentiating
itsel" in the la#or $ar&et an! there"ore ena#le it to attract s%perior h%$an
reso%rces.
Case 0pplication: 1!e 7entor Relations!ip 1urns Ipside /o#n (page
.9<)
%1. Is t!ere any e"idence in t!e case t!at Carol4s assumptions a&out alter4s
feelings regarding t!e situation are correct$ 0arol &ne/ she /o%l! ha'e to
%n!%e $any o" CalterBs !ecisions. ;here is no speci"ic e'i!ence in the case o"
ho/ Calter $ight respon! to this: #%t 0arol has ha! a long>ter$ pro"essional
relationship /ith hi$ an! /ill li&ely ha'e seen hi$ in si$ilar sit%ations.
%%. !at ad"ice #ould you offer Carol for approac!ing alter$ 0arol /ill li&ely
"eel a !e#t o" gratit%!e to Calter "or his help. She /ill li&ely /ant to $aintain a
positi'e /or&ing relationship /ith Calter. She $ight #e a#le to help Calter
process so$e o" his "eelings an! "r%strations #y as&ing hi$ a#o%t !i""ic%lties they
$ight enco%nter in their /or&ing relationship8 She $ay /ish to as& a general
?%estion li&e: 7Ho/ !o yo% thin& yo% /ill respon! i" - "eel - nee! to %n!o so$e o"
yo%r original !ecisions. 0arol has sho/n s&ill in the past at helping s%#or!inates
get o'er the initial a/&/ar!ness o" the sit%ation #y $eeting one on one.

%'. !at s!ould Carol4s ultimate goal &e in t!is assignment$ Regar!less o" her
not /anting to h%rt CalterBs "eelings: she is still charge! /ith the s%ccess o" the
'ent%re.
%5. 0ssume Carol !as !eard a rumor t!at alter !as considered resigning.
!at (if anyt!ing) s!ould s!e do a&out it$ ;ho%gh Calter /as not s%ccess"%l
in this 'ent%re: his position s%ggests he has ha! $any other s%ccesses in the
"ir$. Most co$panies /o%l! not /ant to lose so$eone /ith CalterBs experience
an! expertise. She $ay /ish to cons%lt /ith her s%per'isors an! in"or$ the$
/hat she has hear! an! !isc%ss strategies "or retaining Calter. -" her personal
relationship /ith hi$ is strong: she $ay /ish to con"ront hi$ /ith the r%$or
!irectly: pro#e his reasons "or lea'ing an! try to i!enti"y /hat it /o%l! ta&e to
&eep Calter an! his expertise /ith co$pany.
C!apter 11
Esta"lishing #ay #lans
Cases and Exercises
Experiential Exercise: Job E!aluations (page "#$)
;his exercise /ill gi'e st%!ents experience in per"or$ing a ,o# e'al%ation %sing the
ran&ing $etho!. Chen st%!ents ha'e co$plete! this exercise in their s$all gro%ps:
yo% sho%l! consi!er co$paring res%lts an! !isc%ssing the si$ilarities an!
!i""erences.
Case Incident: 3alary Ine8uities at 0cme 7anufacturing (page 2.<)
D. !at #ould you do if you #ere 2lan,ens!ip$ ;his sho%l! generate li'ely
!isc%ssion. +e/ st%!ents /ill arg%e "or a 7!o nothing9 approach: as the ris& o"
legal !a$ages is too high. So$e st%!ents /ill arg%e that the !iscrepancies in
salaries /ill not re$ain secret. -" this is tr%e: then /o$en s%per'isors /ill
!isco'er they are %n!erpai! an! $ay see& a!!itional #ac& pay. So$e st%!ents
/ill s%ggest the co$pany in"or$ the s%per'isors that as a res%lt o" a recent
co$pensation st%!y: it /as !eter$ine! that these ,o#s /ere %n!erpai!. ;he
/o$en in ?%estion /ill recei'e a larger raise at the ti$e o" their next per"or$ance
re'ie/. St%!ents in "a'or o" this proposal /ill arg%e that #y $a&ing it p%#lic #%t
!e"erring the a!,%st$ent: they /ill signal that it is not a $a,or crisis.

1E. Ho# do you t!in, t!e company got into a situation li,e t!is in t!e first
place$ ;he in"or$al syste$ s%ggests that the local c%lt%re has o'erly in"l%ence!
the co$pensation process. -ss%es li&e /hether a spo%se is /or&ing are not part
o" a pro"essional co$pensation practice.

11. !y #ould you suggest 2lan,ens!ip pursue t!e alternati"e you
suggested$ St%!ents /ill pro'i!e a 'ariety o" reasons. ;hose s%ggesting #ac&
pay as /ell as a raise /ill arg%e that:
a. ;he co$pany nee!s to $aintain "airness (a social ,%stice approach).
#. ;hey /ill signal to e$ployees that %n"air practices /ill not #e tolerate!.
c. ;hey /ill gain the s%pport o" a gro%p o" sta&ehol!ers.
;hose s%ggesting raises #%t no #ac& pay $ay arg%e:
a. ;he /o$en /ill li&ely "eel their nee!s ha'e #een a!!resse!.
#. -t /ill #e less expensi'e.
c. -t /ill #e less li&ely to !ra/ a negati'e response "ro$ Chite $ales.
!. -" the /o$en p%sh "or #ac& /ages: they can #e grante! later.
Case 0pplication: 3alary 0dministration in t!e Engineering /epartment
(page 2.1)
Ma,estic is a $%lti>location che$ical co$pany. ;he $ore than one h%n!re!
engineers in the engineering !epart$ent per"or$ ser'ices "or $any o" Ma,esticBs
locations. ;he case re'ie/s Ma,esticBs co$pensation pac&age "or engineers. ;o$
(reen is concerne! that i" he re/ar!s ne/ e$ployees #ase! on potential: he /ill not
ha'e s%""icient "%n!s "or his senior e$ployees.
%>. !at do you t!in, of 7a;estic4s 3alary 0dministration Policy$ Ho# #ould
you c!ange it$ ;here are $any o#'io%s #ene"its to Ma,esticBs progra$. -t is
/ell organi6e!: /ell !oc%$ente!: pro$otes "airness across !i'isions: stri'es "or
internal as /ell as external e?%ity an! has ele$ents that "acilitate $anage$ent
control. -t is /ea& in that the criteria %se! "or ne/ e$ployee e'al%ation are
s%#,ecti'e. Cith a 7pool9 syste$: experience! engineers en! %p co$peting "or
!ollars: $atching their per"or$ance against the potential o" ne/ e$ployees.
%?. ould you recommend &road&anding for engineer ;o&s at 7a;estic$ !y or
#!y not$ ;here /ill #e so$e !isagree$ent o'er this as the case has li$ite!
in"or$ation a#o%t the other plants. St%!ents oppose! to #roa!#an!ing /ill arg%e
that it /o%l! nee! to #e applie! across all plants to $aintain internal e?%ity.
;hose oppose! /o%l! arg%e the $erits o" #roa!#an!ing: incl%!ing its %se"%lness
as a co$pensation syste$ /hen /or&ing /ith sel">!irecte! /or& tea$s "ro$
!i""ering le'els in the organi6ation (a nor$al occ%rrence "or an engineering
gro%p).
%@. Ho# #ould you proceed no# if you #ere 1om =reen$ ;here /ill li&ely #e
li'ely !isc%ssion o" this !ecision. So$e /ill s%ggest that in the short ter$: ;o$
nee!s to $a&e s%re that he has $ore inp%t into the salary !istri#%tion syste$.
;he salary a!$inistrator !oes not ha'e to li'e /ith the i$$e!iate conse?%ences
the salary !istri#%tion !ecision. -n the longer ter$: ;o$ nee!s to /or& /ith
Ma,estic to !e'elop a syste$ that /ill allo/ hi$ to re/ar! high potential
e$ployees (#ase! on a $ore o#,ecti'e criteria) /hile still #eing a#le to re/ar!
those /ho ha'e $a!e career contri#%tions.
C!apter 1%
Pay:for:Performance and 6inancial Incenti"es
Cases and Exercises
Experiential Exercise: Analy6e a 0o$pensation Syste$
(pages 2HK>2H9
;his exercise presents a "ictional a%to !ealership an! pro#le$s that they are
experiencing /ith c%sto$er satis"action an! ?%ality. St%!ents are to analy6e the
c%rrent co$pensation syste$ to see i" it contri#%tes to the pro#le$.
1. In #!at #ays mig!t your group4s compensation plan contri&ute to t!e
customer ser"ices pro&lems$ Sales force: pay is #ase! al$ost entirely on
co$$ission. ;he salesperson has no $oti'ation to assist c%sto$ers /ho they !o
not #elie'e /ill res%lt in a sale. Finance office: #on%ses "or getting c%sto$ers to
%se the co$pany "inancing enco%rage "inance people to coerce people into
$a&ing that choice. Detailing: pay is #ase! entirely on the n%$#er o" cars
!etaile! per !ay. ;here is no $eas%re o" ?%ality: nor re?%ire$ent o" it regar!ing
pay. Mechanics: pay is #ase! al$ost entirely on n%$#er o" cars ser'ice! as /ell
as ser'icing the$ "aster than the stan!ar! esti$ate! repair ti$e. ;here is no
$eas%re$ent o" ?%ality or acc%racy o" repairs. Receptionist/phone service
people: straight ho%rly rate !oes not ha'e any per"or$ance re/ar!s.
%. 0re t!ere re#ards t!at your department pro"ides t!at impede t!e #or, of
ot!er departments$ -n e'ery case: there is no lin& #et/een incenti'es an! ?%ality
o" /or& per"or$e!. ;his res%lts in poor ?%ality /hich a""ects the other
!epart$ents.
'. !at recommendations #ould you ma,e to impro"e t!e compensation
system in a #ay t!at #ould li,ely impro"e customer satisfaction$ ;he
!ealership alrea!y has a c%sto$er satis"action s%r'ey in place. ;hey nee! to lin&
res%lts "ro$ ?%ality $eas%res to the incenti'es that their e$ployees recei'e.
Exa$ples are: Sales force: one $ight !ecrease the co$$ission so$e/hat an!
place the a$o%nt in a pool that is !istri#%te! #ase! on c%sto$er co$$ents a#o%t
speci"ic sales personnel. Finance office: #on%ses "or %sing co$pany "inancing
sho%l! #e no $ore that #on%ses #ase! on c%sto$er satis"action ratings.
Detailing: there $%st #e a $eas%re o" ?%ality an! !etailers sho%l! #e !oc&e! "or
any pro#le$ that res%lts "ro$ their lac& o" attention to !etail. Mechanics: re>
/or&s sho%l! !oc& a $echanics pay an! $echanics /hose /or& res%lts in no
co$plaints sho%l! recei'e a signi"icant #on%s. Receptionist/phone service
people: those /ho ans/er the phone sho%l! #e a#le to gain either per"or$ance
increases in pay: or #on%ses #ase! on c%sto$er satis"action ratings. -n general:
the approach sho%l! #e li&e 7teaching to the test.9 -" yo% /ant test scores to
i$pro'e: yo% teach /hat /ill #e on the test. -" yo% /ant $eas%res o" c%sto$er
satis"action to i$pro'e: yo% re/ar! (or p%nish) people "or those $eas%res.
Case Incident: A/istri&uting t!e Raise PoolB (page 2H9)
@. !at #ill &e t!e moti"ational effects on eac! of t!e t!ree groups under
eac! met!od of distri&ution$ -n $etho! one: an e?%al !istri#%tion: the top
per"or$ers /ill #eco$e less $oti'ate!. ;hey /ill acc%rately percei'e that their
extra e""ort an! per"or$ance ha! no in"l%ence on their co$pensation. ;he
#otto$ per"or$ers $ay "eel they can contin%e to per"or$ poorly: since there is no
incenti'e to !o other/ise. A'erage per"or$ers in Metho! one $ay #e
!isappointe! that they are $a&ing no $ore a raise than poor per"or$ers. ;here
sho%l! #e no i$pro'e$ent in per"or$ance. -n $etho! 2: the #otto$ thir! /ill #e
!isappointe! an! possi#ly angry (e'en tho%gh they $ay #e a/are that they are
poor per"or$ersLthey /ill not appreciate the negati'e recognition associate!
/ith this raise). ;he $i!!le per"or$ers /ill li&ely appreciate that they earne!
$ore than the lo/er per"or$ers. ;hey $ay /on!er /hy there is s%ch a large
!istinction #et/een their raise an! the raise o" a top per"or$er (/hy not a .S
!i""erence). -t is li&ely that top per"or$ers /ill "eel satis"ie! they ha'e #een
re/ar!e! "or their /or&.

-n #oth cases gro%ps /ill express great concern o'er the ar#itrary nat%re o"
!i'i!ing the gro%p into e?%al thir!s.

C. Ho# #ould you distri&ute t!e pool$ !y$ ;here /ill #e so$e !e#ate in the
class response. Most /ill agree that poor per"or$ers are %n/orthy o" a raise.
;hey are not li&ely to agree that one thir! o" the co$pany !eser'es s%ch a rating.
;hey are also li&ely to s%ggest a /i!er range o" co$pensation (a contin%o%s
!istri#%tion o" "%n!s #et/een <>12S: not ,%st .>H>9S). ;he #%l& o" their
arg%$ents /ill rest on the %n"airness o" assigning a percentage to poor
per"or$ance.
Case 0pplication: 2ringing t!e 1eam Concept into Compensation J (r
-ot
(page 2E<)
San!y 0al!/ell: the ne/ H%$an Reso%rces Manager "or Hatha/ay $an%"act%ring:
/ante! to i$pro'e tea$/or& at e'ery le'el o" the organi6ation. As part o" the process
o" i$ple$enting c%lt%ral change: San!y intro!%ce! a ne/ pay "or per"or$ance
syste$. ;he reaction to the change /as i$$e!iate an! 71<< S negati'e9.
%C. /oes t!e pay for performance plan !a"e "alue$ Manage$ent /ants to
pro'i!e incenti'e "or tea$ per"or$ance. ;heir $oti'es are "ine. Properly cra"te!
(an! /ith e$ployee in'ol'e$ent) a pay "or per"or$ance syste$ $ay a!! 'al%e at
Hatha/ay.

%D. !at ad"ice #ould you gi"e Regina and 3andy as t!ey consider t!eir
decision$ Most scholars s%ggest that pay "or per"or$ance /or&s #est (in the
@S): /hen it has #oth an in!i'i!%al an! a tea$ co$ponent. +%rther: Regina an!
San!y nee! to consi!er /ays o" engaging the /or&"orce in the !esignG!ecision
process. ;his in'ol'e$ent /ill li&ely pro'i!e #etter i!eas: i!enti"y potential
pro#le$ areas /ith propose! syste$s #e"ore they are i$ple$ente! an! ai! in
the i$ple$entation process.

'E. !at mista,es did t!ey ma,e in adopting and communicating t!e ne#
salary plan$ Ho# mig!t 3andy !a"e approac!ed t!is ma;or compensation
c!ange a little differently$ San!y "aile! to in'ol'e signi"icant sta&ehol!ers in the
process. ;heir inp%t /o%l! li&ely ha'e i!enti"ie! potential /ea&nesses in her
syste$. +%rther: #y not in'ol'ing others: the change in pay ca$e largely as a
s%rprise. E$ployees ta&e their pay serio%sly1 s%rprises are not /elco$e. San!y
alrea!y ha! agree$ent on iss%es li&e $ission. She co%l! ha'e %se! that
agree$ent to #egin a !ialog on lin&ing co$pensation $ore !irectly to the
e""ecti'ely acco$plishing the $ission.

'1. 0ssuming t!e ne# pay plan #ere e"entually accepted) !o# #ould you
address t!e fact t!at in t!e ne# performance e"aluation system)
employee4s inputs affect t!eir peers4 pay le"els$ ;ypically: plans ha'e t/o
le'els * a tea$ co$ponent an! an in!i'i!%al co$ponent. -t is i$portant "or the
tea$ to reali6e that the co$pany !oes #est /hen the /hole tea$ s%ccee!s: an!
that tea$ s%ccess also re?%ires in!i'i!%al per"or$ance.
C!apter 1'
2enefits and 3er"ices
Cases and Exercises
Experiential Exercise: 5ene"its Pac&ages (page F<K)
;his exercise as&s st%!ents to "in! o%t a#o%t the #ene"its pac&ages in s$all
#%sinesses that they ha'e /or&e! in: or in /hich a "rien! or "a$ily $e$#er /or&s.
;hey are then gi'en a scenario an! as&e! to !e'elop: in gro%ps: a #ene"its plan
appropriate "or this s$all #%siness.
Case Incident: A2enefits$ !o -eeds 2enefits$B (page F<K)
D. It #ould &e an exaggeration) of course to imply t!at t!e company offers no
&enefits at all. !at sort of &enefits must a company li,e t!is a&solutely
pro"ide in order to successfully recruit and retain !ig!:8uality employees$
!y$ E$ployees re?%ire health #ene"its. -n!i'i!%al health ins%rance is 'ery
costly: an! the ris&s associate! /ith a catastrophic health e'ent are 'ery high.
Most e$ployees /ant so$e /ay to prepare "or their "%t%re. -" a co$pany !oes
not o""er a pension plan: e$ployees $ay expect to recei'e ann%al co$pensation
that is s%""iciently high as to allo/ the$ to !e'elop their o/n in!i'i!%al progra$.

1E. !at are t!e ad"antages and disad"antages of to 6astenol of offering a
pension plan$ /o you t!in, t!ey s!ould implement one$ !y or #!y not$
;he a!'antage to +astenol is that e$ployees ha'e co$e to expect that a
co$pany /ill help the$ prepare "or the "%t%re. A!'antages o" a pension plan are:
1) a#ility to retain e$ployees: 2) a#ility to retain e$ployees an! .) possi#le
re!%ction in salary le'els. ;he !isa!'antages are 1) a!!itional a!$inistrati'e
costs: 2) a!!itional e$ployee expense an! .) on>going costs (har! to !isengage
"ro$ a plan). +astenol $ay choose instea! to o""er a less costly progra$ li&e a
F<1 Q or an E.S.3.P.
11. 3ome critics argue t!at t!e la&or mar,et is too tig!t for 6astenol to
continue to gro# as fast as it !as in t!e past. Critics t!erefore suggest t!e
company !as a dilemma: minimi*ing &enefit4s is a good idea &ecause it
,eeps cost do#nF !o#e"er it may soon &e less of a good idea if it ma,es it
more difficult to !ire good employees. !at do you t!in, t!e company
s!ould do$ !y$ ;he s%ccess o" a co$pany is !epen!ent in the ?%ality an!
per"or$ance o" its e$ployees. +astenol nee!s /ell $oti'ate! e$ployees. -n a
tight la#or $ar&et: it is co$$on "or goo! e$ployees to recei'e o""ers "ro$ other
co$panies. +astenol $ay !isco'er that in $ini$i6ing #ene"its it /ill se increase!
e$ployee t%rno'er.
Case 0pplication: 6amily Halues or 0&use of 2enefits$ (page F<9)
Sarah 0onra! /as pro'i!e! a six>/ee& pai! pregnancy lea'e "ro$ her "ir$. She
also accepte! the co$panyBs o""er "or an a!!itional %npai! six>/ee& lea'e /ith
contin%e! health an! $e!ical #ene"its. She /as o""ere! the opport%nity to ret%rn to
/or& in a "%ll ti$e or part ti$e position. ;he co$pany /as s%""iciently s$all as to not
#e re?%ire! #y la/ to pro'i!e these #ene"its. ;he pro'i!e! the$ #eca%se they
/ante! to #e a "a$ily oriente! #%siness. Sarah repeate!ly tol! her "ir$ she /o%l! #e
ret%rning a"ter her lea'e: then at the en! o" her lea'e: anno%nce! her resignation.
'%. /id 3ara! Conrad a&use t!e &enefits policy of !er employer$ ;he class $ay
not reach agree$ent. ;hose /ho "eel that 0onra! a#%se! the policy /ill note that
the co$pany not only lost the ti$e /hen she /as on lea'e: #%t it $ay ta&e the$
se'eral $onths to recr%it a replace$ent. Ha! Sarah anno%nce! her intention to
lea'e earlier: then they /o%l! ha'e ha! opport%nity to #egin searching "or a ne/
e$ployee. So$e st%!ents $ay go so "ar as to s%ggest that the "ir$ /as
!a$age! #y 0onra!Bs action. 3ther st%!ents $ay note that 0onra! !i! not step
o%tsi!e the #o%n!s o" the policy. So$e $ay "eel that she $ay ha'e "eare! that
ha! she anno%nce! she /as lea'ing the "ir$ $ay ha'e cancelle! her #ene"its.
3thers $ay "eel that 0onra! si$ply change! her $in!1 the experience o" #eing a
stay at ho$e $o$ "or 12 /ee&s rein"orce! the !ecision to ?%it /or&. (D%ring the
!isc%ssion: yo% $ay try to get the class to separate 0onra!Bs actions: /hich
$any st%!ents /ill "in! inappropriate: "ro$ the general iss%e o" pro'i!ing this
#ene"it to an e$ployee).

''. If you #ere +im) 7i,e and /ale) #ould you c!ange your &enefits policy$
So$e $ay s%ggest that the co$pany !rop the #ene"its progra$ altogether:
noting they are not legally re?%ire! to pro'i!e it. ;hey $ay arg%e that the policy
exposes the co$pany to ris& (especially the ris& that their pre$i%$s /ill
increase). 3thers $ay s%ggest that a cla%se #e inserte! saying i" the e$ployee
!oes not ret%rn to /or& they /ill #e #ille! "or all health pre$i%$s.
C!apter 15
9a&or Relations and Collecti"e 2argaining
Cases and Exercises
Experiential Exercise: @nion 3rgaini6ing (page FF2)
;his exercise sets %p a sit%ation in /hich a s%per'isor has reporte! to the HR
!irector that there ha'e #een %nioni6ation e""orts in her !epart$ent. She !escri#es
/hat has happene!: /hat e$ployees ha'e sai!: an! /hat other s%per'isors ha'e
sai! an! !one. ;he ?%estion "or the st%!ents is /hat HR Director Art ;ipton sho%l!
!o next.
;he $ost pressing iss%e to !eal /ith right a/ay is the apparent "act that s%per'isors
are engaging in %n"air la#or practices. Art $%st hol! a $eeting /ith s%per'isors
i$$e!iately to instr%ct the$ in /hat they can an! cannot !o. )ists o" ite$s are on
the #otto$ o" page F29: an! on pages F.F>F.H. A"ter e'eryone has #een instr%cte!
on /hat they can an! cannot !o: the organi6ation can t%rn to the iss%e o" ho/ to
a'oi! #eco$ing %nioni6e!. ;here are t/o lists in the text that help /ith this: 7Ho/ to
)oose an )R5 Election9 on pages F.2 A F.H as /ell as 7(%i!elines "or E$ployers
Cishing to Stay @nion>+ree9 on pages F.H>F.E.
Case Incident: /isciplinary 0ction (page FFF)
1. 0s t!e ar&itrator) do you t!in, t!e employer !ad ;ust cause to discipline t!e
employee$ o: the e$ployer !i! not ha'e ,%st ca%se. ;he tas& o" !irecting an!
or!ering e$ployees to !o tas&s is a $anage$ent tas& an! is not a %nion tas&.
Manage$ent a#rogate! its responsi#ilities in as&ing the %nion to !o a tas& that is
a reser'e! $anage$ent right an! !%ty.
%. If t!e union.s opposition to t!e Quest for Quality program encouraged t!e
employees not to participate) #!y s!ouldn.t t!e union &e !eld responsi&le
for directing t!e employees to attend$ As state! in the pre'io%s ?%estion:
!irecting e$ployees is a $anage$ent !%ty an! right: it is not one that can #e
a#rogate! to the %nion at /ill. Manage$ent sho%l! !irect the e$ployees to
atten!: then !iscipline the$ i" they !o not. ;he %nion is not re?%ire! to #e
s%pporti'e o" all $anage$ent progra$s or !irections.
Case 0pplication: Empo#erment t!roug! 0ssignment 6lexi&ility (page
FFH)
;he Paper 0orporation o" A$erica (P0A) ha! ,%st negotiate! an agree$ent /ith t/o
%nions. @n!er the agree$ent: /or&ers "ro$ one %nion co%l! per"or$ tas&s nor$ally
!one #y $e$#ers o" the other %nion. ;he p%rpose /as to i$pro'e the "lexi#ility o" the
/or&"orce to increase pro!%cti'ity. Cor&ers share! the "inancial re/ar! o"
i$pro'e$ents in pro!%cti'ity. Cor&ers /ere allo/e! to t%rn !o/n /or& they
consi!ere! %nsa"e. ;he "irst /ee&: t/o /or&ers t%rne! !o/n an assign$ent o"
%nloa!ing a tr%c& as they sai! it /as %nsa"e. ;he t/o ha! in "act %nloa!e! the tr%c&
in the past %n!er the ol! contract. Manage$ent acc%se! the$ o" ,%st #eing la6y. ;he
"lexi#ility co$$ittee /as as&e! to ren!er an opinion on the inci!ent #y ans/ering the
"ollo/ing ?%estions:
'5. ere t!e actions of t!e set:up super"isor correct$ !y or #!y not. ;he
set>%p s%per'isor /as certainly correct in as&ing the$ to loa! the tr%c&. ;here is
no e'i!ence "ro$ the case that the s%per'isor that the s%per'isor &ne/ the
/or&ers ha! %nloa!e! that tr%c& #e"ore. ;he criteria "or A+ re?%ire! the
s%per'isor to get agree$ent on "i'e ?%estions. ;he /or&ers !isagree! /ith
?%estion one.

'>. ere t!e actions of !e t#o s!ipping department #or,ers correct$ !y or
#!y not$ ;he t/o /or&ers: i" they ha! sa"ely %nloa!e! tr%c&s in the past /ere
not acting in goo! "aith. (;here is no e'i!ence in the case as to /hether
%nloa!ing the tr%c& re?%ires any special s&ills). ;his lea!s to the i$pression that
the /or&ers /ere in "act ,%st !eclining to !o an assign$ent #eca%se they !i!nBt
/ant to !o it.

'?. ere t!e actions of t!e department !ead correct$ !y or #!y not$ ;he
!epart$ent hea! acte! in a 'ery con"rontational $anner. ;he A+ process is
clearly !e"ine! as re?%iring "i'e steps. ;he !epart$ent $anager see$s to #e
p%tting press%re on e$ployees to say yes: e'en i" they ha'e reser'ations. He is
in e""ect a!!ing a sixth step: 7E'ery ti$e yo% say no yo%r per"or$ance /ill #e
re'ie/e!.9

'@. !at #ould !a"e &een a correct #ay for eac! of t!e a&o"e parties to act$
;he s%per'isor $ay ha'e as&e! "or clari"ication "ro$ the e$ployees as to /hat
speci"ically they "elt /as %nsa"e a#o%t the ,o#. -" the s%per'isor &ne/ they ha!
!one the /or& #e"ore: he sho%l! ha'e as&e! a "e/ ?%estions to pro#e /hy they
co%l! !o that /or& then an! not no/. -" he "elt he /as #eing $islea! #y the
e$ployees he co%l! ha'e $entione! that he planne! on !isc%ssing this $atter
"%rther /ith his $anage$ent tea$. ;he shipping /or&ers either nee!e! to
i!enti"y /hat speci"ically they "elt /as %nsa"e or to accept the /or&. -" the /or&
/as %nsa"e: they co%l! ha'e #een traine! in the &no/le!ge: s&ills an! a#ilities to
sa"ely %nloa! the tr%c& so they co%l! !o it in the "%t%re. ;he !epart$ent chair
nee!e! to separate his reaction to the t/o e$ployees "ro$ the policy iss%e o"
ho/ to treat all e$ployees. 5y press%ring /or&ers to say yes or #e re'ie/e!: he
$ay #e press%ring /or&ers to ta&e tas&s /ith /hich hey "eel a little
%nco$"orta#le. ;his co%l! lea! to resent$ent an! lo/er per"or$ance: or /orse:
in!%strial acci!ents.
'C. /o you t!in, t!is incident #ill affect t!e successful use of 06 in t!e mill$
!y or #!y not$ 4es: /or&ers $ay "eel they are #eing coerce! or "orce! into
#eing "lexi#le. ;he literat%re strongly s%ggests that coercion increases resistance
to change. ;he action o" the !epart$ent hea! $ight !ra$atically slo/ the
change process.
'D. !at effects do you t!in, t!e successful use of 06) allo#ing #or,ers to
participate in decision ma,ing) #ill !a"e on empo#erment and
organi*ational culture of PC0 in t!e long term$ -" i$ple$ente! s%ccess"%lly:
the co$pany sho%l! see an i$pro'e$ent in pro!%cti'ity. ;his i$pro'e$ent $ay
sho/ %p in a 'ariety o" /ays. +or exa$ple: the cross training the occ%rs $ay
$a&e it %nnecessary "or the co$pany to hire replace$ent help to co'er
'acations. -t $ay re!%ce o'erti$e #y allo/ing slac& reso%rces to #e re!irecte!
to/ar! o'er/or&e! areas. ;he /or&ers $ay #egin to get a #etter sense o" ho/
the co$pany operates an! ho/ in!i'i!%al ,o#s contri#%te to o'erall goals. ;his
co%l! in t%rn i$pro'e ,o# satis"action an! retention.
5E. !at does t!e case tell use a&out implementing c!ange) particularly
empo#erment) in organi*ations$ 0hange is not easy. -t re?%ires the
cooperation o" the parties in'ol'e!. -t !oes not happen $erely #y iss%ing a policy
state$ent. 3nce a change plan has #een !e'ise! it /ill li&ely still "ace resistance
in so$e sectors. Manage$ent sho%l! anticipate the types o" resistance to
change an! !isc%ss ho/ they /ill #e han!le! #e"ore the change is i$ple$ente!.
C!apter 1>
Employee 3afety and Healt!
0pplication Exercises
Experiential Exercise: -nterpreting Sa"ety Stan!ar!s (page H<<)
;his exercise is the sa$e as the ite$ ,%st a#o'e (N2 in the -n!i'i!%al an! (ro%p
Acti'ities). Again: it is #est to %se the chec&list on pages H<.>H<H.
Case Incident: 1!e -e# 3afety Program (page H<<)
1%. Ho# s!ould a laundry go a&out identifying !a*ardous conditions t!at
s!ould &e rectified$ ;here are a n%$#er o" co$$on $etho!s to acco$plish
this. 3ne is to %se an o%tsi!e cons%ltant /ho speciali6es in this area. Another
$etho! is to ta&e the 3SHA an! EPA g%i!elines "or this in!%stry an! per"or$ an!
internal a%!it o" operations.

1'. ould it &e ad"isa&le for a firm to set up a procedure for screening out
accident:prone indi"iduals$ ;here are a n%$#er o" iss%es here. 3ne li&ely
?%estion "ro$ st%!ents is /hether acci!ent>prone #eha'ior can change /ith
training or incenti'es. -n $ost cases: training an! incenti'es can resol'e the
pro#le$. So$e st%!ents $ay arg%e that screening>o%t e$ployees /ho are
acci!ent>prone raises ethical iss%es.

15. Ho# #ould you suggest t!at o#ners get all employees to &e!a"e more
safely at #or,$ 0lso) !o# #ould you ad"ise t!em to get t!ose #!o s!ould
&e #earing goggles to do so$ Most "ir$s in this case /o%l! %se a co$#ination
o" training an! incenti'es to in!%ce sa"e #eha'ior. -t is also co$$on to incl%!e
sa"e #eha'ior as part o" an in!i'i!%alBs per"or$ance appraisal. Si$ilar
approaches /o%l! #e applie! to the goggles pro#le$. (St%!ents are li&ely to
s%ggest that /or&ers #e sho/n an inter'ie/ /ith a /or&er /ho /as se'erally
in,%re! tho%gh the "ail%re to %se sa"ety glasses. 3thers /ill arg%e that the tas&
can #e acco$plishe! less graphically).
Case 0pplication: Introducing Ergonomics: !at ent rong$ (page
H<1)
A"ter rea!ing an article a#o%t sa'ings generate! at the @S Post 3""ice thro%gh #etter
/or& !esign: HR Manager Roger Scanlon p%ts "orth a plan "or a $ore ergono$ically
!esigne! /or& setting at Har#or.
51. /id anyt!ing go #rong$ Is so) #!at$ ;he $etho! Roger %se! heightene!
e$ployee a/areness o" pro#le$s in their /or&ing con!itions. -t also $a!e it
c%lt%rally accepta#le to !isc%ss those pro#le$s in the open. ;he pro#le$ $ay
not ha'e change!: #%t a/areness an! !isc%ssion o" the pro#le$ !i!.

5%. !at elements of Roger4s plan could &e impro"ed$ Roger $ay /ish to
i$ple$ent his plan incre$entally: "oc%sing "irst on e$ployees or !epart$ents that
ha'e ha! !i""ic%lties in this area or ha! re!%ce! o%tco$es !%e to a#senteeis$:
etc.

5'. !at do you t!in, accounts for t!e increase in reported illness and in;ury$
E$ployees $ay not ha'e relate! their aches an! pains to /or&place relate!
iss%es. As a res%lt o" their training: they no/ "elt co$"orta#le #la$ing their
e$ployer.
55. =i"en your ans#er to Question ') do you t!in, Har&or s!ould go a!ead
#it! t!e reno"ation$ ;here are se'eral iss%es here: act%al /or&ing con!itions
an! pro#le$s: an! e$ployee perceptions. 3n the pri$ary iss%e o" /or&ing
con!itions: the case see$s to in!icate the con!itions nee! i$pro'e$ent. At this
stage: canceling those i$pro'e$ents $ight increase e$ployee !issatis"action.
Har#or nee!s to consi!er /hat its co$$%nication an! i$ple$entation strategy
/ill #e so as to not con'ey to e$ployees that they ha'e #een negligent a#o%t
/or&ing con!itions %ntil no/.
C!apter 1?
7anaging Human Resources in an
$nternational %usiness
Cases and Exercises
Experiential Exercise: 0o$pensation -ncenti'es "or Expatriate E$ployees
(page H.F)
;his exercise "orces st%!ents to thin& realistically a#o%t the co$pensation pro#le$s
/ith expatriate e$ployees. ;he ran&ings /ill 'ary: #%t st%!ents sho%l! #e prepare!
to !e"en! their ran&ings /ith reason an! logic. Si$ilarly: /hile the !escri#e! 7e""ects
on co$pensation9 $ay 'ary: they sho%l! #e reasona#le an! logical. Chen
!isc%ssing the pro#le$s that the higher le'el o" co$pensation $ight create: !o not
"orget: 1) ,ealo%sy o" other e$ployees: 2) pro#le$s o" a!,%st$ent /hen repatriation
occ%rs: an! .) /hether e'en this le'el /ill #e a!e?%ate to entice e$ployees to ta&e
the "oreign assign$ents.
Compensation incenti"es for expatriate employees
(co$plete! ta#le)
<our
Ran,
Issues /escription Effect on Compensation K
Lor:
(exa$ple) Health
care
Physicians an! hospital !o
not $eet /estern
stan!ar!s.
Ma&e contingency $oney
a'aila#le to "ly expatriate to
closest co%ntry /ith Cestern
style health care)
JF
. +a$ily li"e ;here are no English
lang%age schools "or
chil!renLchil!ren o"
expatriates /ill nee! to
atten! pri'ate #oar!ing
schools.
E$ployees /ill nee! higher
salaries to pay school t%ition.
J1<
2 -n"lation ;arget co%ntry c%rrency is
%nsta#le. 0%rrency $ay
in"late #y as $%ch as 2<S
per $onth.
Pay$ent $ight nee! to #e pai!
in M@S rather than local c%rrency
("%nctions as a #on%sTas
in"lation increases: MM #eco$e
$ore 'al%a#le).
I
2 -n"rastr%ct
%re
;he expatriate /ill not #e
a#le to ha'e his or her o/n
phone or ;R.
0reates a percei'e! har!ship1
$ay re?%ire a!!itional
co$pensation to attract an
appropriate e$ployee.
J1<
1 Political
ris&
Assigne! co%ntry "aces the
ris& o" political %phea'al.
0learly a har!ship con!ition1
e$ployee /ill expect higher pay.
Arrange$ents sho%l! #e $a!e
"or o"">shore #an&ing: access to
cash an! %n%s%al repatriation
expenses.
JF<
/irections
Di'i!e the class into s$all tea$s. As& each tea$ to per"or$ the "ollo/ing tas&s:
1. Ran, order t!e issues from one to fi"e (num&er one &eing t!e most important).
;here /ill #e so$e 'ariation here: tho%gh political ris& sho%l! ran& the highest.
%. Consider t!at eac! employee !as a &ase salary e8ual to t!eir I3
compensation. <ou may add from EK to >EK for eac! item on t!e list.
ote that in the a#o'e exa$ple: in"lation can #e han!le! /itho%t increasing the salary.
Ans/er the "ollo/ing !isc%ssion ?%estions as a larger gro%p:
1. Ho# muc! did you need to increase compensation o"erall to satisfy t!e
expected needs of your expatriate #or,ers$ -n the a#o'e exa$ple: EFS.
%. !at pro&lems mig!t t!is le"el of compensation create$ Might $a&e yo%r "ir$
less co$petiti'e. Might create !i""ic%lties /ith national e$ployees in the host co%ntry
/ho are $a&ing ,%st the #ase salary. Might create !i""ic%lties /hen yo% try to
repatriate an e$ployee #ac& to @S /ages.
Case Incident: A2oss) I 1!in, e Ha"e a Pro&lemB (page H.H)
1%. 2ased on t!e c!apter and case incident) compile a list of 1E international
HR mista,es 7r. 6is!er !as made so far. A$ong his $ista&es: +isher has not
properly i!enti"ie! can!i!ates1 c%lt%ral sensiti'ity: interpersonal s&ills an! "lexi#ility
ha'e not #een incl%!e! as re?%ire! ,o# s&ills1 there is no syste$ in place to
assess can!i!ates "or proper s&ills1 the co$pany !oes not ha'e realistic cost
pro,ects "or cross>#or!er operations1 the co$pany has not !eter$ine! /hether it
/o%l! #e cost e""ect to ha'e an expatriate $anager1 there are no assign$ent
letters !oc%$enting the scope o" the ,o#1 there is no international co$pensation
syste$ in place1 the co$pany has not ta&en into acco%nt !i""erences in "oreign
expenses1 the co$pany has not ta&en into acco%nt "oreign taxes1 there is no
"or$al relocation assistance progra$ in place1 the co$pany has not consi!ere!
the i$portance o" "a$ily s%pport1 there is no c%lt%ral orientation progra$ in place
"or expatriate $angers or their "a$ily $e$#ers1 a$ong others.
1'. Ho# #ould you !a"e gone a&out !iring a European sales manager$ !y$
- /o%l! ha'e in'estigate! the $ar&et to !eter$ine the appropriate le'el o"
co$pensation an! #ene"its. Expropriate co$pensation pac&ages sho%l!
consi!er tax e?%ali6ation cla%ses or other $eas%res "or !ealing /ith !i""ering
costs o" li'ing. ;he co$pany sho%l! also ha'e retaine! cons%l on E%ropean
la#or la/sG practices. ;he location o" the o""ice sho%l! #e care"%lly selecte! "or
"a'ora#le la#or an! tax la/s. )i&e +isher: - /o%l! ha'e /ante! a large pool o"
potential applicants: #%t gi'en +isherBs inexperience: he $ay ha'e #ene"ite! "ro$
the %se o" an o%tsi!e agency (search "ir$). +inally: +isherBs stereotypes o"
E%ropean $anagers $ay ha'e clo%!e! his ,%!ge$ent /ith his existing pool o"
applicants.

15. !at #ould you do no# if you #ere 7r. 6is!er$ +isher nee!s to see& legal
cons%l in regar! to his la#or sit%ation. He is li&ely in the /rong. -n /hich case: he
/ill nee! to reinstate the e$ployees an! apologi6e. He /ill in all li&elihoo! nee!
to start o'er an! "in! an appropriate sales $anager /ith &no/le!ge o" the local
c%lt%re an! #%siness practices.
Case 0pplication: 1a,ing a 6ast 2oat to -o#!ere (page H.H)
;/o years a"ter sen!ing an! a$#itio%s an! highly regar!e! exec%ti'e to Hong Qong
to o'ersee a $a,or expansion into Asia: the @S "ir$: 5an!ag: -nc.: close! its 0hinese
o""ice. -n the process the lai! o"" their "or$er 7star9 e$ployee (eral! 5orenstein.
5>. !at uncontrolla&le factors contri&uted to t!e crisis in 2orensteins4s
career$ ;he econo$ic !o/nt%rn in Asia p%t enor$o%s press%re on prices an!
'irt%ally eli$inate! any opport%nity "or pro"it. +%rther: since all co$petitors /here
in the sa$e position: it intensi"ie! co$petition. Also: the $an /ho hire!
5orenstein an! to so$e extent cha$pione! this expansion retire!: lea'ing
5orenstein /ith /itho%t an a!'ocate in the ho$e o""ice.

5?. ("er #!at factors did !e !a"e control$ He selecte! ne/ $ore expensi'e
o""ices #e"ore the co$pany ha! s%ccess"%lly expan!e!. +%rther: he pai! salaries
"or "o%r engineers /hen only one /as nee!e! in anticipation o" an econo$ic
%pt%rn. 5orenstein also chose to stop atten!ing ho$e o""ice $eetings saying the
1K ho%rs o" tra'el /erenBt /orth a "e/ ho%rs o" ho$e o""ice $eetings.

5@. !et!er you t!in, t!ey #ould c!anged t!e e"entual outcome or not) !o#
mig!t 2orenstein !a"e !andled t!e controlla&le factors differently$ -t is
li&ely that only a "e/ exec%ti'es in the ho$e o""ice ha! the le'el o" international
"iel! experience possesses #y 5orenstein. Citho%t an a!'ocate in the ho$e
o""ice: 5orenstein nee!e! to spen! ti$e e!%cating his ho$e o""ice colleag%es on
the speci"ics o" the Asian opport%nity. +%rther: he sho%l! ha'e so%ght greater
a!'ice an! consent #e"ore hiring signi"icant sta"" #ase! on his "orecast. 5y
$a&ing that !ecision in isolation "ro$ the ho$e o""ice: he #eca$e an easy target
"or #la$e once the pro,ect "aile!.
5C. !at) if anyt!ing) could 2andag !a"e done differently to minimi*e t!e
impact of t!e economic do#nturn on 2orenstein and !is family$ 5an!ag
sho%l! ha'e reali6e! the cross #or!er operations in'ol'e higher le'els o" ris&.
;hey co%l! ha'e g%arantee! 5orenstein a position in the ho$e o""ice: or
o%tplace$ent in the e'ent they close! the 'ent%re. (;here /ere also #%siness
an! "inancial strategies they co%l! ha'e chosen that /o%l! ha'e $ini$i6e! the
e""ect o" the Asian c%rrency crisis). 5an!ag sho%l! ha'e #een a#le to anticipate
that the c%rrency crisis in So%theast Asia /o%l! carry o'er to Hong Qong an!
$a!e arrange$ents to scale #ac& their operations "or a year. ;his /o%l! ha'e
allo/e! 5an!ag to esta#lish a long ter$ presence in Asia: one o" the largest an!
"astest gro/ing $ar&ets in the /orl!.