Case Study No.

UNIVERSITY OF THE EAST

Caloocan
College of Business Administration
Department of Management and Entrepreneurship
Group: Group 1: Subject and Section: Date of
John Lester Pueyo BME2202 BSMA 2F Submission: 02-15-2021
Jermaine De Guzman Alyssa Paringit
Justine Ermoneta Diana Sambrano
Aralice Darlene Marcelo Princess Tabios
Sophia Jenn Mailig Nicole Anne Yee

I. Case Title: Outstanding Faculty Award

II. Time Context: Before awarding at the end of academic year
III. Executive Summary: (at least 5 sentences)
The members of the Outstanding Faculty Award committee for the College of Business
held a meeting for the selection of who will receive the award. During the first meeting
they were able to gather 6 nominees. At the second meeting they assumed they
shared a common definition of "outstanding" and rank the nominees without criteria. In
the third meeting, they discussed and agreed a five criterion which will be scaled 5
points each to rate each candidate. The following day, the rating were discussed and
averaged and resulted to three top scorers. The members of the committee began
debating over the criterion and they began changing the weights of the criteria which
depending on the changes, the top scorer from the three top scorers changed as well
but the same lower scores remained unchanged. After 2 hours, the associate dean
expressed his desire for a certain nominee, Dr. H to get the award for the reason that
he is going to retire the following year that it will be a great honor for Dr. H to receive
the award before his retirement. Dr. H only has one among the five criteria as his
strength. Despite of it, no one disagreed on this conclusion and it has been concluded
that Dr. H will be receiving the award.

IV Introduction: (at least 5 sentences)

There are a lot of situations in our life where we need to rely on good judgement. Our
final decision always comes down to a matter of judgement, especially in an
organization. According to Ceplenski, 2013, having the idea of fairness determines the
amount of extra effort one is to make in order to reach their objectives. A research
demonstrates the employees perception of fairness and equitable treatment as the
core driver of retention, engagement and performance. Having an unfair treatment can
result to conflicts in an organization such as distrust and hostility. Thus it is very
important to make a decision with good and fair judgement. Before one can establish a
good judgement it is prominent to assess and evaluate the situation. This case
displays issues in an organization involving decision making and the ability of the
members in making fair judgement. This study is done in order to analyze, examine
and highlight what went wrong in the situation and what are the alternative courses of
 action in order to remedy it.

V. Statement of the Problem:

The conflict in deciding whom to give the outstanding faculty award.

VI. Areas of Consideration: (3 or more for each category)

Strengths
1 ability to make judgment
2 It motivates faculty members to do their job well.
3 It enriches the performance of faculty member.
4 Faculty and student participation
5
6
Weaknesses
1 Poor selection of committee members
2 Lack of discernment on candidates.
3 Fail to address the ranking criteria.
4 Its Subjectivity
5 Poor leadership
6
Opportunities
1 To make a standard that is rightfully executed
2 Form a new set of committee
3 Faculty member loyalty
4 Faculty performance appreciation.
5 It improves faculty satisfaction.
6
Threats
1 Unsettled ranking criteria.
2 Vague representation of “Outstanding” faculty member.
3 Unfair selection process
4 Non-compliance to rules or standard
5 Lack of professional recognition
6
VII. Alternative Courses of Action: (3 solutions or more; and 3 or more advantages and
disadvantages)
Solution 1
Confidentiality of identities.

Advantages of Solution 1
1 It can avoid conflict of interest between the nominees and judges
2 The treatment among all the nominees are fair
3 Sabotage is less likely to happen
4
5
Disadvantages of Solution 1
1 Hard to know well who deserves the award better
2 Might lead to awarding to wrong winner due to confusion
3
4
5
Solution 2
Establish an agenda for the meeting to execute the process of the nomination properly

Advantages of Solution 2
1 The delegations and tasks are properly disseminated
2 There will be an outline that can be observed or followed
3 It enhances organizational skills
4 Plan ahead in preparation for the incoming meeting
5 Will be more focused on things that need to be done
Disadvantages of Solution 2
1 Disregarding a great suggestion if it’s out of the agenda
2 It minimizes the opportunity to initiate ideas on the spot
3 Impede of flexibility on personal schedule
4
5
Solution 3
Seek help to students who have software related knowledge
 Advantages of Solution 3
1 Less likely to have error in counting votes
2 Electoral voting helps to speed up and streamline several procedures in the cycle
3 Quick results
4
5
Disadvantages of Solution 3
1 It might be costly
2 Might corrupt the data
3 Complexity
4 Different electronic fraud
5

VIII Recommendations and Conclusion: (at least 5 sentences)

.
The case study presents various issues that could have been addressed to produce
a better outcome. First, the leadership role assignment to any member was the issue
that significantly affected the decision’s outcome. The members did not have the
same consensus about the interpretation of ‘outstanding.’ Moreover, the group did
not settle or have systematic criteria to choose a winner, bringing about a sense of
biasness among the committee selection. Good leadership in place would have
resulted to a positive outcome. Secondly, the committee had no team norms detailed.
Team norms usually influence the collective expectations and informal duties settled
by the committee to regulate effectively behavior. Apparently, from the case study,
there was a bunch of confusion on the correct route to advance in selecting a best
candidate for the award. Lastly, team cohesion was an apparent issue. Members had
their own motives and interests that were not shared by other members of the
committee.
Hence, decision-making is crucial in any team and organizations in our contemporary
society. Basing on the case study, several recommendations can be adopted to
prevent groups from bad decisions. First, all group members should engage in
brainstorming over the pertinent issue with creative thinking to solve the issue.
Secondly, effective communication should be a priority to improve teamwork. Lack of
proper communication usually leads to confusion and debates as each member has
their conflicting ideas, leading to loss of time and resources. Lastly, groups should
encourage constructive conflict that harbor positive ideas and recommendations, as
well as respecting each other members ideas or availing better proposals.

IX. Plan of Action: (3 or more)

1 The use of pseudonym names for the nominees
2 Make an outline of dates where agendas are being specified
3 Ask for recommendations from IT professors to know who are their best students
4
5

IX References:
.
1 https://mattscradle.com/case-analysis-guidelines-plm-format/
2 https://careertrend.com/about-6514088-effective-communication-important-
management-.html
3 https://hrdailyadvisor.blr.com/2013/06/29/employee-rewards-the-importance-of-
perceived-fairness/
4
5