1

Ethics, Leadership, Motivation, and Decision-Making

Rishitha Golla, Linda Keomanee, Alexandra Piliotis, Emilie Claire Schneider, & Kamilla Sedov

Master of Biotechnology Program, San José State University

Bus 282A: Essentials of Management and Organizational Behavior

Dr. George L. Whaley

September 28, 2021

Ethics

The Case of the Invisible Variables

For the first component of our team assignment — an ethics scenario — we were given a

situation in which the Senior Director of Biostatistics working in a biotechnology company is

facing an ethical dilemma. The company is anticipating revenue shortfall and a new diet pill

product is urgently required to enter the market. The marketing projections look good, but the

biostatistician is warned by a colleague that the formula is far from completion. While the

scientists can assure the product is safe and does not require an FDA approval, it is far from its

full potential in terms of effectiveness. Furthermore, the statistical data from two models shows

different results. One of the models looks better for the marketing purposes but omits some

important variables and calls the integrity of the company into question, while the other model

has more variables but does not look promising for marketing the product. Thus, to make the

final decision on behalf of the biostatistician, we applied the Baird Method for ethical decision

making.

The first step of the Baird Method is called Be Attentive and requires that we look at the

situation from all angles, gather facts and assumptions that might affect our decision, identify the

values in tension and locate the specific ethical issue to be resolved (EthicsGame, 2021). As we

read through the scenario and analyzed the provided information, we noted several problems.

First, the company might face a difficult financial situation due to an expected revenue shortfall;

therefore, the company is seeking a quick solution. Next, the proposed product that might help is

the diet pill known as EasyBurn. It is not perfect and the formula will benefit from some

refinement, but it does not require FDA approval and its safety can be confirmed quickly. From

the marketing perspective, it still seems like a good solution. However, we also learn that the

statistical models used to assess the product are at conflict: one model uses incomplete data but

provides information that would be convenient for the marketing purposes, but the other model

uncovers the incompleteness and low effectiveness of the product in its current state. We are

advised by the lead scientist that using the convenient statistical model not only goes against the

standards of good science but also poses a threat to the reputation of the company in case their

model becomes of interest to experts. Thus, the values in tension are financial obligations of the

company and integrity of data. The ethical question that needs to be resolved can be formulated

as follows: How can a company meet its financial obligations without undermining its research

data and misinforming the public about the effectiveness of their product?

After formulating the ethical issue question, we may move to the second step of the Baird

Method — Be Intelligent — in which we determine the potential stakeholders, explore the values

in tension, and investigate possible courses of action without focusing on any specific one

(EthicsGame, 2021). To understand potential stakeholders, we need to think of individuals or

groups that will be impacted by the decisions that we make. From the given information, the

primary stakeholders are the biostatistician – the person who makes the decision; shareholders of

the company who profit or lose from all the decisions in the company; customers who hope to

lose weight with our product; the marketing department who might need to think of an

alternative marketing strategy. Additionally, there might be secondary stakeholders and even

more primary stakeholders that were not mentioned in this scenario, such as CFO or CEO of the

company who also might be affected by the decision. Next, to explore the values in tension and

start thinking about the courses of action, we use the Responsibility lens and identify the duties

of a person who has to make the decision. As scientists, we must not tamper with the data and

omit important variables, so we cannot agree with the marketing department's strategy to go with

only a stepwise model. Furthermore, to maintain the integrity of the company, we must not

mislead our customers who believe our product’s claims in weight loss assistance. However, as

we are in charge of a resolution that decides the financial fate of the company, we cannot ignore

the potential consequences of not allowing the product on the market while its effectiveness still

needs more work. Our preliminary courses of action might include the following: 1) agreeing

with the marketing team, and allowing the product at the peril of coming under the scrutiny of

the experts; 2) not allowing the product while its effectiveness is not improved and subjecting the

company to financial uncertainty; 3) allowing the product under condition that we disclose all

information regarding its current effectiveness; 4) allowing the product under condition that it is

not marketed as a weight loss aid, meaning that the marketing departments needs to think of

other ways to market it; 5) not allowing the product and look for other alternatives among the

candidates that do not have effectiveness issues if that is an option.

Next, after considering some of the possible courses of action, we need to choose the best

path following the third step of the Baird Method – Be Reasonable (EthicsGame, 2021). From

the Responsibility lens perspective, it might look like our duties as scientists dictate that we take

the rationality approach and attempt to perfect the EasyBurn formula prior to introducing it to the

market. But this approach might affect many primary stakeholders and not be the best one.

Furthermore, it may cause irreparable damage to the company due to losses. If we consider the

sensibility approach of the Results lens, however, we might find a better solution by keeping the

integrity of the company and the financial obligations. After considering the preliminary courses

of action, we are leaning towards the combination of the third and the fourth suggestions:

allowing the product under condition that its marketing strategy is changed from a weight-loss

aid and metabolic enhancer to a milder supplement that complements the weight loss program

along with the transparency on the research data. This suggestion will require collaboration with

the marketing department and perhaps added stress in the short-term, but has potential to be a

successful solution for the purposes of maintaining company integrity and fulfilment of our

financial duties.

The fourth step of the Baird Method, called Be Responsible, calls for an ethical maturity

and courage, and requires that we communicate our decision effectively (EthicsGame, 2021). We

would need to let the marketing department know of our decision and work with them closely as

they devise a new marketing approach for the “EasyBurn-Lite'' version of the product. We would

also need to inform the lead scientist of our decision and encourage the R&D department to

continue work on the enhanced formula so that we could harness the full potential of the new,

improved version of EasyBurn in the foreseeable future.

The fifth and final step of the Baird Method, called Be Reflective, encourages us to

consider the consequences of our decision and the results that follow from it (EthicsGame,

2021). Ideally, we would need to follow the development of the situation closely and assess

whether this analysis made a difference, and whether we liked the results. We also need to keep

in mind that we might not have the full picture of the situation, and a slight change in details

might call for a different decision. For instance, the proposed decision might work for companies

with a strong team of marketing specialists that can come up with new strategies quickly, but it

might not work for a smaller company with fewer resources. Alternatively, if we knew whether

this company has another candidate product, not necessarily a weight loss aid, that passes all

trials with better data, a better option for satisfying the financial obligations would be to go with

another product entirely. The more details we have from the very first step, the deeper our ethical

analysis can be.

Leadership and Conflict

Summary of Leadership & Styles Scores

One of the overarching themes of this class and the integral component of every

teamwork discussion is leadership and its role in the team dynamics, conflict management,

motivation, and ethical decision making. The essential step of the new team formation was a

slight change in our group composition. EC Schneider and Kamilla Sedov have joined Rishitha

Golla, Linda Keomanee, and Alexandra Piliotis to form a new team. As such, the first logical

step that precedes the completion of the motivation and decision-making elements of this new

team assignment is to collect the results of various leadership assessment tools to gain a better

understanding of individual team members and the synergy that they bring to this project.

First, each team member completed the T-P leadership style questionnaire and profile

sheet to determine the task-orientation and person-orientation scores, and how balanced these

concerns are. Next, we took the Emotional Intelligence questionnaire since understanding

emotions of self and others is recognized as a valuable leadership skill (Jones & George, 2020,

pp. 59-60). We also included Conflict Style Inventory results to see how each person approaches

and resolves conflicts. Finally, we chose to take the Influence Survey that gives an idea of what

kind of influence or power makes us comply with the instructions or requests. We provide the

summary of scores of the four assessment tools in Table 1.

Table 1. Compilation of Team Leadership Styles

Leadership T/P Emotional Conflict Style Our Choice -
style Intelligence Inventory (highest The Influence
Assessment score first) Survey (Highest
Score)
Alex 10/14 – High Self – 25 Problem solving Referent Power
Others – 22 Smoothing
Use – 24 Bargaining
Regulation – 20 Forcing
Avoidance
EC Schneider 7/10 – Medium Self – 22 Smoothing Expert Power
Others – 21 Problem solving and Referent
Use – 27 Bargaining Power Tied
Regulation – 18 Forcing
avoidance
Kamilla 7/11 – Medium Self – 21 Smoothing Expert Power
Others – 24 Bargaining
Use – 22 Problem solving
Regulation – 20 Avoidance
Forcing
Linda 9/10 - Medium Self - 24 Smoothing Expert Power
Others -24 Bargaining
Use - 23 Problem Solving
Regulation -24 Avoidance
Forcing

Rishitha 11/10 – Medium Self – 26 Problem Solving Legitimate

Others – 24 Smoothing Power
Use – 25 Bargaining
Regulation – 23 Avoidance
Forcing

As seen from the table, the members of the new team 3 score similarly in most categories.

For instance, we observe that the concern for people is slightly dominating in the task-people

orientation, and the prevailing shared leadership style is Medium. Furthermore, all team

members score relatively high on all four categories of the emotional intelligence questionnaire.

The ruling conflict resolution styles in our team are Smoothing and Problem Solving which in

our opinion are among the most productive ones of the five styles. Lastly, regarding The

Influence Survey scores, our team members showed slight variation, with Expert Power leading

among the five powers. We believe that these characteristics of our team members contributed to

effective collaboration on this project.

Leadership Scenario: Styles

The characters in the scenario provided all have specific leadership/follower styles and

conflict/resolution styles that play a big role in how they interact and make decisions in the

workplace. The styles for each person in the scenario is summarized in Table 2.

Table 2. Employee Styles Based on Provided Scenario

Employee Conflict/Resolution Style Leader/Follower Style
Wendy Problem Solving S1
Dave Forcing D3
Betty Bargaining D2

Erin Problem Solving D3

George Smoothing D1
Wendy’s Boss Avoidance S4

Wendy Walters is the department head and has four employees directly reporting to her

giving her a leadership position. She demonstrates having an S2 style of leadership through her

high directive behavior, and her supportive behavior for her follower’s career development. Her

job requires her to be very precise and be very task oriented, making her Theory X style

approach very effective. Wendy works with her subordinates by telling them what to do and

being a micromanager. However, she also takes on a Theory Y style approach by delegating work

and supporting her employees. As a leader, Wendy strives to be effective in dealing with

conflicts, and does so through a problem solving style. She recognizes what the problem is and

explores all options to determine the best course of action.

Dave is one of the employees that have been around a while, and he is perceived to be

competent and committed to the company. This places him as a D3 follower. While Dave is a

competent worker, there are still inconsistencies in commitment when it comes to conflict

resolution. Dave has a forcing conflict/resolution style. He is quick and decisive in solving

problems and he wants issues to be resolved his way, and is not keen on compromising with

others.

Betty is the other employee that has been around as long as Dave, but she is viewed to be

less competent than him. She struggles with feeling overwhelmed by some tasks of her job.

These traits place her as a D2 style follower. When conflicts arise, Betty practices a bargaining

style for conflict resolution. She prefers to be cooperative and not force her opinions onto others.

 10

Instead, Betty suggests voting or to “split the difference” to find common ground amongst the

other employees.

Erin is very competent at her job, however, she needs to work on soft skills for team

interactions. This level of competence places her as a D3 style follower. Erin’s conflict/resolution

style is problem solving. She is very problem focused and will decide the best way to go about

solving the issue based on the situation. Erin does not worry about office politics and will make

her decisions based on what is best for the goals of the company. Her dedication to achieving the

company’s goals demonstrates her strong commitment to the company.

George is a newer employee and he is very eager to learn about his new tasks. This

makes him a D1 follower as he has low competence to the tasks, but high commitment to learn

more about the company. Being new, George prefers not to cause too much drama when it comes

to solving conflicts. He prefers to have a soothing conflict/resolution style, in which he can focus

more on the feelings and relationships of his coworkers.

Wendy’s boss is the VP of Operations, and he has an S4 leadership style. He prefers

delegating and staying out of his follower’s way. In comparison to Wendy, he is much more

hands off and less task oriented. Much like his leadership style, Wendy’s boss also has a hands

off conflict/resolution style, which is avoidance. He avoids conflict and does not make decisions

unless he has to.

Leadership Scenario: Hersey-Blanchard’s Situational Model

Hersey-Blachard’s Situational Model looks at the competence and commitment level of

the follower and then pairs them with what leadership style would be best suited for them.

 11

Leadership is very situational and there are different ways to best approach employees and

different problems. Figure 1 displays the full Hersey-Blachard Situational Model as it relates to

the workers in the situation. Wendy, who is struggling with determining which leadership models

she should use to determine her effectiveness as a leader, should use the Hersey-Blachard

Situational Model. She can analyze how her employees work and respond to different situations

and then determine what is the most effective way to handle the issues that arise.

Figure 1. Full Hersey-Blachard Situational Model for Employee Styles

 12

LOW ← DIRECTIVE BEHAVIOR → HIGH

LOW ← SUPPORTIVE → S3: Participating S2: Selling

Wendy Walters
BEHAVIOR
HIGH

S4: Delegating S1: Telling

Wendy’s boss

D4 D3 D2 D1
Dave
Erin Betty George
HIGH ← COMPETENCE → LOW

HIGH ← COMMITMENT → LOW

Wendy is an S2 leader as she likes telling people what to do and is very task orientated,

but is also very supportive of her employees and trusts them to accomplish their tasks. She is

working on determining how to be the best leader for the company. Her employees, as well as

HR, find her decision-making skills and task-oriented behavior make her a very capable leader

and would do well in a higher management position, such as VP of Operations.

Dave, having a D3 follower style, would work best with an S3 leadership style. This

leadership style would help solidify Dave’s “up and down” commitment during times of conflict.

An S3 leader would help in getting Dave to be more open accepting input from others instead of

wanting everything done his way. An S1 leadership style, where the leader is trying to tell the

 13

follower what to do, would be a poor match for Dave. This is because the micromanaging style

would create more conflict by insulting Dave’s high competence in his tasks.

Betty, having a D2 follower style, would work best with an S2 leadership style. Wendy

having a S2 leadership style is a great match for Betty. Betty is a cooperative worker but is

worried about “getting in her own way”. Wendy would encourage Betty to speak up during

conflicts. Also, Wendy can help Betty’s competence level through explaining task directions.

Erin has a D3 follower style which works best with an S3 leadership style. Erin’s

situation is similar to Dave’s as they share the same follower style. However, Erin is different in

which she lacks soft skills in working with teams. An S3 leader would be able to help give Erin

more confidence in this area. Erin is very competent at her job so having a leader that is less

focused on tasks and more focused on relationships would help raise Erin’s competence.

George, having a D1 follower style, would work best with a leader that has an S1 style.

George is great at focusing relationships when conflicts arise, but needs help when it comes to

tasks. An S1 leader would help provide clear instructions and be a micromanager for George.

This would help raise his competence level in his new tasks.

Wendy’s boss is an S4 leader and would work well with a D4 follower. In this

relationship, Wendy is a D4 follower. She is very competent and committed to her job. Wendy’s

boss’ hands off approach allows Wendy to grow more as an individual as she takes on

responsibility for all her decisions. Wendy is well set to be a leader in the company.

 14

Motivation

Motivation to Change Team Members

The formation of Team 3 can be attributed to the following Need Theories:

1. Herzberg’s Motivator-Hygiene Theory

2. Expectancy Theory

Herzberg’s Motivator-Hygiene Theory

According to the Herzberg’s Motivator-Hygiene Theory, outcomes can be distinguished and

categorized by the following:

1. Outcomes that lead to higher levels of motivation and job satisfaction

2. Outcomes that can prevent people from being dissatisfied

Outcomes that lead to a higher level of motivation and job satisfaction are categorized as

Motivator Needs. Motivator needs are defined as outcomes that are related to the actual work and

the outcomes of that work (Jones & George, 2020, pp. 296). These needs are related to the

intrinsic motivation factors, self-esteem and growth, which are the results of increased job

development, interest, autonomy, and responsibility. An example of motivator needs would be

the promotion of a hardworking and likeable individual to a supervisor position. In response to

the promotion, the individual will need to transition from being task oriented to results oriented,

and their responsibility will increase because of acquiring direct reports. In summary, motivator

needs must be met to increase job motivation and job satisfaction.

The new formation of Team 3 consists of Rishitha, Alex, Linda, EC, and Kamilla. The

motivation to change new team members stems from each member’s desire for personal and

 15

team growth. Per Professor Whaley, a key expectation of this assignment is to be able to adapt

and act accordingly during team changes, which is expected during team formation in the biotech

industry. Therefore, each member was motivated to change members to meet that expectation

and demonstrate to their peers and course instructor that they are adaptable to change.

Additionally, time availability played a component in determining team formation. For example,

in the original Team 4, some members were professionals in the biotech industry, working

atypical hours. As a result, the only time availability was after 8:30 PM, which was considered

late for some members. Therefore, the need for members with more flexible hours and the

availability to meet earlier helped structure the formation of team 3.

Outcomes that prevent people from being dissatisfied are categorized as Hygiene Needs.

Hygiene needs are defined as outcomes related to the context of the actual work (Jones &

George, 2020, pp. 296). These needs are related to the extrinsic motivation factors of social

affiliation, safety, and basic needs, which are the results of comfortable working conditions. An

example of hygiene needs would be a well-liked individual of a team who through their job, is

able to pay for rent on time each month, provide a meal every night for their family, and provide

insured annual checkups for each family member. In summary, if hygiene needs are met, workers

are satisfied and if hygiene needs are not met, workers are not satisfied. It is important to note,

however, that meeting hygiene needs does not impact the levels of motivation or achieving high

levels of job satisfaction.

Team 4 consisted of members Rishitha Golla, Linda Keomanee, and Alexandra Piliotis,

and Team 3 consisted of members Emilie Claire Schneider and Kamilla Sedov. In the case of

both original teams, the basic needs of food, water, and shelter did not impact job satisfaction as

 16

it was not applicable. However, for both original teams, all safety needs were met as there were

no threats or issues that transpired due to the lack of team security, stability, and safety. Every

member felt safe with one another, and all interactions were very open and engaging.

Additionally, all members communicated well with one another, frequently engaging in

conversations outside of BUS 282 to converse about weekend related events or feelings and

concerns of other courses. Upon encountering issues, there was consistent and constant

communication with one another to quickly help address and resolve issues. Therefore, per

Herzberg, as all hygiene requirements of basic, safety and social needs were met for each

original member of Team 3 and 4, all members can be considered satisfied.

The Expectancy Theory

The Expectancy Theory states that high motivation can be achieved by high levels of

effort, high levels of effort can lead to high performance, and high performance can lead to the

attainment of desired outcomes (Jones & George, 2020, pp. 296). The three factors of the

Expectancy Theory are Expectancy, Instrumentality and Valence.

Expectancy can be defined as a person’s perception of how much their effort will result in

a certain level of performance (Jones & George, 2020, pp. 296). More specifically, the level of

expectancy increases if they believe that more effort results in an increased level of performance.

An example of expectancy is training, which allows individuals to have the expertise needed for

high performance and to allow them to gain experience to perform at a high level. In the case of

Team 3, each member was motivated to form a group with one another to complete the

assignment appropriately, and each member did so by choosing members with high team

experience. For example, Alex is a recent graduate who during her senior year at the University

 17

of California, Davis, spent her senior year working on numerous team projects. Additionally, EC

offered a unique team experience through her prior experience as a member in a swim team. The

decision to choose members with high prior team experience assured each team member they

would work well as a cohesive unit.

Instrumentality can be defined as a person’s perception that their performance will result

in an outcome (Jones & George, 2020, pp. 296). More specifically, workers are motivated to

work at a high level if they believe their performance leads to specific outcomes. Therefore,

instrumentality is high when motivation is high. An example of instrumentality is a bonus, in

which a worker is motivated to complete organizational goals in order to obtain the yearly bonus.

In the case of Team 3, members were motivated to choose members in a quick manner to meet

the assignment deadlines and start the team project well before the expected due date.

Valence can be defined as a person’s perception that their performance will result in a

specific outcome, and how desirable that outcome is to the individual (Jones & George, 2020,

pp. 296). More specifically, valence accounts that there are differences in workers expectations

of outcomes, therefore, managers must figure out which valence outcomes are needed to ensure

high performance. An example of valence is workers in the finance industry, who during the

pandemic, wanted to seek more flexible hours and availability to work-from-home. In the case of

Team 3, choosing members with flexible hours and prior team experience was advantageous so

they could have shorter and more productive team meetings, which allowed team members to

fully optimize their time to complete the team project.

 18

Job Redesign for a Life Sciences Research Assistant at The Palo Alto Veterans Institute of
Research
Job redesign is an important application of motivation due to its ability to reinvigorate a

position. The job redesign model has 4 key parts, each with varying levels of motivational

increase. They are: Job Enrichment, Job Enlargement, Job Rotating, and Job Simplifying. Job

enrichment provides new depth and scope to the position, giving the employee a wider range of

responsibilities and opportunities for growth. By increasing a worker’s responsibility the worker

will have an increased interest and involvement in their job and the quality of the services or

goods they provide. One technique of job redesign in the DOT method. This method takes

information from the code provided by the Dictionary of Occupational Titles and enhances it by

changing the “score.” The first three digits of the code describe the industry and job type. The

next three focus on worker functions; specifically, data, people, and things. The last three

describe the specific job title. For job enrichment we will focus on the middle three digits.

To practice our job redesign skills we have enriched EC Schneider’s Research Assistant

job description by using this method. To begin, we read the current job description and selected a

few keywords and phrases (highlighted in green) that we felt prevented the job from being

engaging and motivating. The complete job description is included below (Pavir, 2021):

Life Sciences Research Assistant

Palo Alto Veterans Institute for Research (PAVIR) is looking for a Research Assistant to join the
Nicolls Laboratory and support investigations that study pathophysiology causes and develop
treatments for Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension. It is rewarding to know that your hard work as a
Research Assistant makes a difference in the lives of others.

ABOUT THIS ROLE

 19

The Research Assistant will participate in animal husbandry under the supervision of Principal
Investigator - Mark Nicolls, M.D., and Research Director.

The successful candidate will be a highly motivated individual with experience in molecular
biology and animal studies.

JOB RESPONSIBILITIES OF A RESEARCH ASSISTANT

● Maintain rat and mouse colonies including breeding, weaning, and PCR genotyping.
● Perform animal husbandry related duties as required.
● Perform other wet lab duties as required.

A Research Assistant position has a code of 199.267-034 according to the Dictionary of

Occupational Titles. (DOT, n.d.) Each of the middle three digits corresponds to a specific

function as outlined in the table below:

Table 3. DOT Job Redesign Values and Corresponding Functions

Data People Things
0 Synthesizing 0 Mentoring 0 Setting-up
1 Coordinating 1 Negotiating 1 Precision
2 Analyzing 2 Instructing 2 Ops- control
3 Compiling 3 Supervising 3 Driving-ops
4 Computing 4 Diverting 4 Manipulating
5 Copying 5 Persuading 5 Tending
6 Comparing 6 Speak-signal 6 Feeding-off
7 Serving 7 Handling
8 Help-instruct

The digits in our DOT code, 267, correspond to analyzing, speak-signal, and handling in

each of their respective categories. To enrich this job, we want to lower the values by changing

the functions of the job. To enrich the Data component, we would change the function to

 20

synthesizing, or a value of ‘0’. Not only does a research assistant analyze the data they've

gathered, they can also synthesize it; using it to make further decisions about the experiment and

next-steps in the research. Next, for the people category, we are enriching speak-signal (6) to

supervising (3). For the specific job description we are enriching, the position could require

supervising and managing new research employees as the lab expands. Finally, to enrich the

things category, we are changing handling (7) to precision (1). This job entails large amounts of

fine details in both the animal handling and the experimental processes. Precision should

absolutely be required in the job description. These enrichments leave us with a final job code of

031 for the worker function, changing the whole code to: 199.031-034.

Now, how does this apply to our real job description we have provided? As you can tell,

this job description is quite short and appears to lack any description of the actual day-to-day

tasks required for this position. After using the DOT redesign approach, we have agreed to re-

write the job description as follows, focusing on the keywords and phrases that had been

previously highlighted in green and replacing them with supplemental descriptions, highlighted

in orange.

Life Sciences Research Assistant - Enriched

Palo Alto Veterans Institute for Research (PAVIR) is looking for a Research Assistant to join the

Nicolls Laboratory and support, maintain, and supervise investigations that study

pathophysiology causes and develop treatments for Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension. It is

rewarding to know that your hard work as a Research Assistant makes a difference in the lives of

others.

 21

ABOUT THIS ROLE

The Research Assistant will participate in animal husbandry under the supervision of Principal
Investigator - Mark Nicolls, M.D., and Research Director.

The successful candidate will be a highly motivated individual with experience in molecular
biology and animal studies.

JOB RESPONSIBILITIES OF A RESEARCH ASSISTANT

● Maintain rat and mouse colonies including breeding, weaning, and PCR genotyping with
extreme attention to detail.
○ Manage own weekly schedule of required husbandry tasks to fit the needs of the
research
● Perform animal husbandry related duties.
● Perform other wet lab duties to the standards of the lab
○ Analyze, discuss, and present data collected to head scientists

To begin we enriched the phrase that said “support investigations.” With the new DOT

score and corresponding functions, we felt that “support, maintain, and supervise investigations,”

provided more opportunity for variety in the job, potentially leading to a more motivated

employee and enriches the People component of the DOT score. Next we altered, “Maintain rat

and mouse colonies…” to say, “ Maintain rat and mouse colonies... with extreme attention to

detail,” and added, “Manage own weekly schedule of required husbandry tasks to fit the needs of

the research.” By including the need for precision there is a new sense of importance to the job

and enriches the things category of the DOT score. By opening up the option for the employee to

manage parts of their own schedule, the employee will have more autonomy and thus feel more

motivated. Finally, we changed, “Perform other wet lab duties as required,” to, “Perform other

wet lab duties to the standards of the lab,” and added, “Analyze, discuss, and present data

collected to head scientists.” Again, stressing the importance of the employee’s work enriches the

job and motivates the employee to perform the functions to the best of their ability. The addition

 22

of “Analyze, discuss, and present data collected to head scientists,” heavily enriches the Data

category of the DOT score, providing more opportunities for the employee to be included in lab-

wide research discussion and experimental design sessions.

Decision Making and Problem Solving

New Member Decisions

The final component of this project focuses on decision making and problem solving

through various means; that of a group discussion for a project and a decision for a

biopharmaceutical company. As previously mentioned, our group made a significant change

prior to the start of this project, by exchanging two members with another group. After some

discussion, we felt that our decision making process best fit that of the Nominal Group

Technique. The nominal group technique (NGT) is a group process involving problem

identification, solution generation, and decision making. We used nominal group technique

because we wanted to make the decision quickly by taking everyone’s opinions into account. The

stages of the Nominal Group technique that we went through are:

1. Introduction and explanation: Our first project had come to an end and we wrapped the

things very well. We reviewed what went well and which areas had to be improved. We

realised that the dominating and learning styles of all the team members were similar. We

wanted to work with people of different dominating styles and explore how effective the

team would be with people of different styles. So we decided on swapping a few of our

team members with another team.

 23

2. Silent generation of ideas: The team has developed a sense of comfort and figured out

how to work together. Each person worked more efficiently because we have learned how

to share our ideas and listen to feedback while working towards a common goal. It took

us time to decide whether to stay or leave the team. Each of us have made our decisions

separately but haven't discussed with other team members.

3. Sharing ideas: We sat with the team members to discuss the decisions made. We

recorded our decisions on a chart. Each member had an opportunity to tell their decisions

if they would like to stay or leave the team. Since all of us have been contributing equally

and working together we didn't want to remove any of the team members. We instead had

two of our team members who agreed to leave the team voluntarily because they wanted

to explore new ideas and bond together with the other teams.

4. Group discussion and output: Team 4 discussed and made the decision early on who

would leave the team but haven't decided which team to join. While members of Team 3

had not yet discussed who would leave. Therefore, as the assignment deadline became

closer and upon notification of an opening in Team 4, members of Team 3 took the

opportunity to become the new members of Team 4. Members of Team 4 have joined

Team 3.

Using Nominal Group Technique for decision making, we were able to successfully form a new

team with diverse styles and more work experience. With the newly formed team we went back

to the storming phase instead of the forming phase of the team development process since the

new team members were interactive and mingled well with each other. The newly formed team

worked together in making goals and dividing tasks to complete the second team assignment.

 24

Choosing a Strategic Partner for Zip Biotech

Another important decision making model is the weighted average decision making

model, or matrix. This method is used to quantify and directly compare several choices. By using

a ranking system, decisions can be made without the impacts of emotions or guesswork, enabling

rational decisions. Each category is given a weight and each choice is given a score in each

category. These scores are then calculated and compared; the one with the largest score is the

best strategic choice. (Airfocus, n.d.)

For the purposes of this assignment, we were tasked with weighing which of 10

companies would be the best strategic choice for Zip Biotech to partner with. 10 companies and

their respective information for various categories are outlined in Table 4., which is shown

below.

Table 4. Provided Potential Partners for Zip Biotech Strategic Alliance Formation
Company Global US Revenue No. of Gross Diabetes Products Competing Complementary
Name Rank Rank USD $M HCPs Profit Name/Description Products? Products?
Paid Margin

Johnson & 1 5 71,310 97,000 69% LifeScan Ultra: blood No No

Johnson sugar meter
Animas: Insulin Pump

Novartis 2 6 56,670 64,500 69% Starlix: Oral Drug No No

Roche 3 2 52,310 NR 66% Accu-Chek: Blood No No

sugar meter

Pfizer 4 1 51,580 142,000 81% Exubera: Inhaled insulin Yes, No

(discontinued) Ertugliflozin
Ertugliflozin: (Phase 3)
Fast-acting oral

Sanofi 5 9 52, 300 NR 59% Lantus: Long-lasting No Yes, Lantus,

injectable insulin Aprida
Apidra: fast acting
injectable insulin

Merck 6 3 44,000 81,300 62% Januvia: Oral Drug Yes, Januvia, No

Ertugliflozin: (phase 3) Ertuglioflozin
Fast Acting Oral

GlaxoSmith 7 7 43,900 85,100 68% Avandia: oral drug No No

Kline

 25

AstraZenaca 10 11 25,700 111,200 77% Oral: Onglyza, Symlin Yes, Exenatide No

Komboglyze Farxiga
Injectable Exenatide:
Inject, long-lasting

Eli Lilly and 11 8 23,100 79,000 79% Humalog: Fast-acting Yes, Humalog Yes, Humulin
Co injectable

Novo 19 13 15,400 NR 77% Levemir: Long-lasting Yes, FIASp Yes, Levemir

Nordisk injectable

To begin the decision making process we first constructed a blank Weighted Average

Matrix and assigned a weight to each of the 9 categories. Following the weighting, we scored

each company 1-10 points based on their status in each category. After a lengthy discussion, we

agreed that the financial categories should have higher ranks due to their direct relation to the

success of the company. US Revenue and Gross Profit Margin are weighted the highest, with

35% and 20% respectively. These two categories were scored based on the numerical data we

were provided. Next up are the products themselves, and the Number of Healthcare Providers

being paid. We felt that by comparing companies’ current marketable products we could

significantly differentiate between them, allowing Zip Biotech the opportunity to partner with a

successful company. Some companies have one or two products on the shelves while others only

have products in phase 3 of drug development. Lastly we ranked the remaining categories:

Global Rank, US Rank, Competing Products, and Complementary Products the same at 5% each.

We felt that while these categories do affect a company's strategic partnership value, they are not

as critical as the financial or product categories. The rankings are shown in red on the attached

matrix.

Following the ranking, we assigned points to each company based on their information in

each category. For the numerical categories, the highest points went to the company with the

highest value and continued down to the lowest. For example, in the Global Rank category

 26

Johnson & Johnson are ranked #1, so they scored 10 points, Novartis is #2 so they scored 9, and

so on. For categories that had several companies with the same data, each of these companies

received the same points. These points were then multiplied by the weight of their category. Each

company's total points were added up. Johnson & Johnson scored the highest with a total of 895

points (highlighted in yellow on the matrix), making it the best choice for Zip Biotech as they

plan to form a Strategic Alliance.

Table 5. Weighted Average Decision Matrix

 27

Final Conclusion

This project provided us the opportunity to analyze and integrate class topics in our new

group setting. We were able to practice our knowledge of ethics, leadership, motivation, and

decision-making through several exercises; further demonstrating our team’s strength and

understanding of the course material. To practice ethics, each team member participated in an

online “ethics game” where we ran through two hot-topics with their respective ethical dilemmas

and responded to the provided ethics scenario, using the Baird Method. We were motivated to

complete both parts ‘A’ and ‘B’ in a timely manner in order to qualify for potential extra credit.

To practice leadership and conflict management, we first discussed each group member's

respective styles, allowing us to predict how our group dynamic may play out, then we analyzed

leader/follower styles of employees in a provided scenario. For motivation, we discussed what

motivated our group specifically to change members and enriched a job through the DOT

method. Finally, we discussed our decision-making tools used to change team members and used

a weighted average matrix to select a strategic partner for ZipBiotech.

 28

References

Greenstein, S., Myers, K., & Mehta, S. (2021). Digital Manufacturing at Amgen. Harvard

Business School Case 621-008. https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?

num=59616

199.267-034 - research Assistant II (PROFESS. & kin.) ALTERNATE titles: Researcher - DOT

Dictionary of OCCUPATIONAL Titles job description. (n.d.). Retrieved September 27,

2021, from https://occupationalinfo.org/19/199267034.html

Pavir Careers. (2021). Pavir. Retrieved September 27, 2021, from https://pavir.org/careers/pavir-

careers/

 29

Weighted decision matrix: A tool for pro-level prioritization. (n.d.). airfocus. Retrieved

September 27, 2021, from https://airfocus.com/blog/weighted-decision-matrix-

prioritization/

The Baird Method™ . (2021). EthicsGame. https://www.ethicsgame.com/Exec/CorpGame/

BairdDecisionModel.aspx

Jones, G.R. & George, J. M. (2021). Essentials of contemporary management. (9th ed.,

pp. 59-60, 296). McGraw-Hill Education.