NAME: Lerato Mnguni

STUDENT NUMBER: 218005462

DUE DATE: 07/06/2021
QUESTION 2
2.1 1 Do manager as leaders have a moral obligation to help cushion the effect
of downsizing on employees?
Yes, managers have a moral duty to help workers cope with downsizing. To reduce
the detrimental effects of downsizing, employers often provide unpaid sabbaticals or
"sweeteners" that promote early retirement and voluntary severance. If the company
can afford to wait, attrition will be able to take care of much of the remaining
reduction, leaving only a few real layoffs. However, there are occasions when the
need to lay off certain employees is unavoidable. Employers have a range of levers
at their disposal in these situations to mitigate the negative effects on those who do
leave, such as providing outplacement counselling. This form of source may highlight
quick re-hiring with appropriate tools and strategies for self-promotion or a
progression of job assessment, schooling, and training, depending on the needs of
the employees. Effective management necessitates leaders attending to the needs
of both those who are asked to leave and those who remain.

Managers must encourage workers to shape the post-layoff climate, explain the new
opportunities and career pathways available to survivors, and identify and reward all
survivors who participate in desired post-layoff behaviours after the layoff.
Downsizing and strategic strategy must be communicated to workers so that they
understand how the workforce reduction contributes to the company's long-term
performance. Furthermore, it is the duty of the leadership to ensure that layoffs are
carried out in accordance with the company's principles and core beliefs.

2.2 Suggestion to minimise the negative impact of downsizing on employees:

 Increase communication to reduce ambiguity. Provide as much detail as

possible, as well as a reasonable warning. Some businesses provide "pre-
layoff" seminars to help workers understand why, where, and how they will be
laid off. Employee confidence is vital during downsizing attempts, so regular,
transparent, and truthful communication is essential.
 Complete the downsizing process all at once. Avoid making a series of
disturbing announcements if at all possible; they will quickly fuel a downward
spiral and have a harsh, increasing outcome.
  Go after justice in the course. Events are thought to be realistic if they are
carried out systematically, deprived of regard for self-regard, on the basis of
truthful facts, with openings for correction, and with the comforts of all parties
concerned reflected, all while adhering to decent and principled ethics. Not
only is it the right thing to do, but there is also a strong business argument for
process fairness.
 Treat the workers with respect. Allow workers to say their final goodbyes.
Refrain from suspecting or undervaluing workers who have been laid off due
to business need.
 Career opportunities that are just temporary. Instead of severing all relations
with the company, companies can implement a job-sharing program in which
two workers share one role and share responsibilities 50/50. Employees may
also be retained as independent contractors to help them transition smoothly
as the company maintains some continuity of work. These can be done on a
temporary basis before the unemployed employee is able to find another job.
 Employee counselling and assistance on-site. On the day of layoff
announcements, on-site clinical counselling will help impacted workers
process their immediate reactions and emotions while also preparing them for
longer-term outplacement assistance.

2.3 Possible ways managers can create a more ethical culture in an

organisation:

Equal competency in policy legislation and relationship-building, as well as equal

commitment to rules and ideals, are required to establish a moral company culture.
Codes, planning, and specific requirements are important, but so are storytelling,
mentoring, and presiding over an organization's rituals and ceremonies.

Make yourself recognizable and act as a role model. In terms of acceptable

workplace behavior, top management acts as a role model for employees. It sends a
positive message to all employees when senior management is perceived (by
subordinates) pursuing the ethical high road.
Make it clear what your ethical standards are. By developing and spreading an
organizational code of ethics, legal issues can be reduced. It should incorporate both
the company's basic beliefs and the ethical standards that employees must adhere
to. Keep in mind, however, that a code of ethics is useless unless senior
management exemplifies ethical behavior.

Educate people about ethics. Arrange for seminars, workshops, and other types of
ethical training. Use these meetings to reinforce the company's code of ethics, define
what behaviors are and aren't acceptable, and address any ethical difficulties that
may occur.

Reward and penalize moral and legal behavior. Managerial performance reviews will
include a point-by-point evaluation of how their actions compare to the company's
code of ethics. Aside from the goals themselves, assessments must contain the
techniques employed to attain them. People who conduct ethically should be
rewarded publicly. In addition, unethical behavior should be discouraged.

Mechanisms of protection must be put in place. Employees should be able to resolve

ethical challenges and report unethical conduct without fear of retaliation if the
company has proper procedures in place. There is a chance that ethical counselors,
ombudsmen, or ethical officials will be needed.

QUESTION 3

3.1 Possible ways of reducing the incident of social loafing amongst group
members:

 Assigning Individual Responsibility

When members of a group believe they are being judged on an individual level, they
are more effective as a group. As a result, as identifiability grows, social loafing
decreases.

 Reducing the amount of time spent for Free Riding

Limiting free riding is additional significant move that groups may take to lessening
social loafing. "Free riding" occurs when individuals of a group put forth less effort so
that others can repay for them. As group members are not able to free ride because
they are more responsible, social loafing reduces.
  Assign Clearly Defined Tasks

Assign different and dissimilar contributions to each team member. Groups and
community members are significantly more likely to slip into the region of social
loafing if they don't have defined goals. Setting explicit goals motivates group
members to be more engaged and reduces social loafing (Harkins & Szymanski,
1989). The goals must be achievable; they should not be too simple or too hard.

 Boosting Team Trustworthiness

Involvement in the group is another aspect that can have a significant impact on the
presence of social loafing. When members of a group feel engaged and invested in
it, they are more likely to be effective (Stark, Shaw, & Duffy, 2007). As a result,
increasing group participation will encourage team loyalty while also reducing social
loafing.

3.2. I believe that a group member's duty to report shirkers to leadership is

contingent on a number of factors. If the shirker is endangering the group's well-
being and performance, it is imperative that he or she be dealt with. Members will go
about it in a variety of ways. I believe that one successful approach for resolving the
problem is to address the issues with your party, as well as the member who is not
performing their duties, and what can be done to resolve them. If the shirking
continues, it might be time for members to exercise their ethical duty to report
shirkers.

As a result, yes, members should be able to report a shirker in their group to the
instructor. Peer reviews may be used to do this. Instead of telling the shirker that
they are educating their teacher, the instructor should stress the importance of the
peer review and that a portion of the student's grade will be determined by the grade
provided to the shirker. The percentage from peer review could make or break a
good grade for each person, so avoiding shirking should be enough motivation.
Notifying the shirker that the other members of the group are spying on him or her
could backfire. The shirker could feel tattled on and be discouraged from
participating in any more group activities. Peer feedback will ensure that everyone is
treated fairly and that no one gets a free pass.
3.3 No, I don't believe social loafing is often a form of shirking. “The propensity for
persons to spend little effort when employed together than when working individually
is known as social loafing (Robbins and Judge ,2014). This does not necessarily
imply that you are not fulfilling your obligations. I believe there are a few occasions
where shirking is ethical or even justified, but they are usually things that are out of
the shirker's or other group members' control. Personal problems or being
hospitalized are examples of situations when a group member may struggle to live
up to their responsibilities, but this is understandable.

3.4 I believe that different countries have different group dynamics and, as a result,
different issues to contend with. Social loafing is more of a concern in Western
countries, and I believe we should be stricter about it rather than tolerant. In a group
setting, everyone should be treated fairly and everyone should give it their all. If we
tolerate shirking, we are implying that it is permissible in certain ways. Individualistic
representatives from the West, much like students from South Africa, must be kept
responsible for their jobs. Tolerating it does not help to remove or minimize the
problem; rather, it helps it to expand. When people are handled differently or given
more slack simply because they are from a position where the problem is more
prominent, I believe it can separate groups and make it difficult to cooperate.

3.5 The queen bee syndrome is a woman who has achieved personal and
professional success but refuses to share her knowledge and ideas with other
women in order to assist them achieve their goals. It also means , women in
positions of power who treat female subordinates not as good as than male
subordinates solely on the basis of their gender.

The queen bee's efforts to stifle the promotion of female co-workers in the workplace
scarcely qualify as a labour violation. Gender-specific bullying occurs when a female
senior executive, for example, refuses to answer her female subordinates' calls,
distances herself from them, refuses to develop a working relationship with them,
and refuses to provide her female protégées with any assistance in the workplace.

The Queen Bee Syndrome is a term used in South Africa to describe a woman in a
position of power who views or treats her female subordinates differently than her
male counterparts. The boss who is particularly harsh with her employees, but only
when they are female. The one who dismisses eligible women in favour of men in
lucrative positions. She's the office version of the lady who says, "I don't have
girlfriends because women are too stressful." For example, mostly women who often
view themselves as “Feminists”.

REFERENCE LIST

Harkins, S.G., & Szymanski, K. (1989). Social loafing and group evaluation. Journal
of personality and Social Psychology,56(6),934-941

Stark, E.M., Shaw, J.D., &Duffy, M.K. (2007). Preference for group work, winning
orientation, and social loafing behaviour in groups.

Robbins, S, & Judge T. (2014). Organisational behaviour: Global and Southern

African perspectives. Cape town: Person Education South Africa