You are on page 1of 4

ORBR - Analysis for Case 2

Jensen Shoes: Lyndon Brooks Story

Are self-evaluations being hurt?


Yes. This case gives us indications that Lyndon had negative core self-evaluations which are
explained below:
a. Self-esteem: Although not happy with this first assignment he decided to take it up so that it
helped him broaden his background and move up in job roles by showing credibility. But he
could not complete all his assignments in time. He was later told by Chuck that he would be
moved to Strategic Product Marketing and would be reporting to Jane Kravitz as part of
reorganizing. Lyndon took this change as the effect of his under-performance and had a feeling

of being demoted. This looked like it hit his self-esteem as it gave him feeling of failing in his
work and now he had to report to Jane while he himself was in line management before.

b. Self-efficacy: In his first project he did believe in his capabilities to take on the project, but
when he could not complete it, his work was not well appreciated by Chuck and was also moved
to another project. This demotivated him and let him down. He thought he had failed. When he
was again assigned the same market in his 2 nd project he thought he will fail again in this project
and his lack of knowledge of this market will add into the issue. He now did not have confidence
in his capabilities and wanted to remain in his comfort zone of line management.

c. Locus of control: He seems to display external locus of control as he believed the kind of
work and targets given to him by Chuck and Jane were not realistic and lied outside his
knowledge area which is not going his way and now does not know who to trust. He kind of felt
helpless.
This negatively impacted his overall performance in the company. He wasnt confident enough
of taking up and successfully completing the new assignment for the same target region of
African American market. He kept refraining himself from beginning the work and pursued
negotiating with Jane on reducing work or extending deadline. Further, he felt powerless around
Jane and Chuck as he felt the performance feedback and assignments he received did not help
him reaching his goals and could not do much about it apart from looking out options outside the
company.

Are attribution errors present?


a. Fundamental Attribution Error: When Jane bluntly asks Lyndon about completing the
strategic objectives before deadlines, it is then that Lyndon realizes that Jane might have been
under more pressure than he expected.
Her bluntness comes as a revelation to Lyndon which shows that Lyndon underestimated the
kind of pressure Jane was under from her bosses and saw her reluctance to everything he
suggested as an outcome of her personal unwillingness.

If not for this fundamental attribution error, Lyndon would have started working on the project
and then with some part of project completed, would have asked Jane for deadline extension so
then even Jane would have had something to report to her bosses.

b. Self-Serving Bias: Lyndon listed budget cuts, inexperienced staff and rigid management for
the failure in achieving strategic objectives while working for special promotions. On the other
hand, when he somewhat succeeds in environmental project, there is not even the slightest
mention by him of any other co-worker or help from management. He mentions Janes helping
gesture but at the same time doesnt forget to mention of her resources as of no importance. He
acknowledges his work and use of his own resources while working on the project.
If Lyndon would have acknowledged and identified his shortcomings while working on the
special promotions project instead of blaming the external factors, he would have surely felt
more confident about working on his next project which covered the same demographics.

c. Hindsight Bias: Before even starting the project, Lyndon identified budget cuts and
inexperienced staff as the reasons that could steer special promotions project into the troubled
waters. His reluctance to work in African American and Latino markets along with his
inexperience can be cited as the main reasons which translated into pre-existing doubts about the
project which ultimately lead to him failing to meet the strategic objectives.
If Lyndon would have been confident about the success of special promotions project then he
would have worked hard in accordance with the goal of making the project successful and thus
would have made the optimum use of the resources available.

Are perceptual distortions playing a role?


Yes. These are explained as follows:
a. Selective perception: Based on what Lyndon had heard about Jensen Shoes being committed
towards employee development and building diverse work force, he joined the company thinking
hed rise to top rungs and do a job in his area of interest. However, his interests were least taken
care of and was assigned projects and role in which he had no past experience and interest. He
ultimately thought of looking out for options.

b. Self-fulfilling prophecy: When Lyndon raised his concerns in first project, Chuck did not
give any attention to it. Later, when Chuck told him he as he did not complete his S.O.s, he
needed to understand their products and also had issues with handling staff, he felt that he had
been failed. To add to it he felt he was demoted when assigned to new project. This negatively
impacted his self-efficacy. When assigned new project of two S.O.s he kept delaying the start as
he was low on confidence and ultimately ended up not doing the African American market S.O.
c. Halo effect: Jane had had a good track record over the years. This prompted Lyndon to
assume her to be a reasonable and a decent person and thus he believed she would understand his
aspirations and issues unlike Chuck and will thus help him out in improving his current situation.
If Lyndon would have tried to know more about Jane through co-workers and other
acquaintances, he would have steered their discussions accordingly.