Instructor: Kemi Salawu
Due Date: Friday November 21, 2014
1. Identify the counterproductive employee behaviours apparent in the workplace. Explain why employees engaged in these behaviours (i.e. what may have influenced them to behave this way?) (20 marks) The situation described by “The Chili Sauce Case” is a classic example of a counter productive work environment. Many factors contributed to the lack of effort shown by the employees. These counter productive behaviours are demonstrated in two areas: counterproductive behaviours in the kitchen and counterproductive behaviours on the bottling line.
Counterproductive Behaviours in the Kitchen Workplace harassment is a …show more content…
(McShane & Steen, 2008, p.106) The students then used the situation of not being able to keep up with he production line and not being able to leave the organization as an excuse to damage company products. The ethical choice of damaging the boxes was made because they believed it was their only option in that situation. The company’s management was not available for the students to complain to, and therefore contributed to their own counter productiveness.
2. Identify the sources of power had by the permanent staff and the students on the bottling line, as well as the influence tactics used by the permanent staff and the students on the bottling line. (20 marks)
With limited roles held at the food-processing plant, there are specific sources of power exercised by each member, accompanied with their influence tactics.
The kitchen supervisor is most known and viewed as having legitimate power. He exercises management duties and is in charge of overseeing the workers at the production plant. The supervisor has legitimate power because the students are listening and agreeing “to the boss’ requests because there is mutual agreement that employees will follow a specific range of directors” (S. McShane & S. Steen, 2008, p. 274). The kitchen supervisor is seen providing job instructions to the boys