Details of this Paper

Case ?Joan Murphy.? respond to the following: o Evaluate Joan?s performance in terms of consistency,




Case ?Joan Murphy.? respond to the following;o Evaluate Joan?s performance in terms of consistency, distinctiveness, and consensus.;o Explain whether or not you attribute Joan?s performance to internal or external causes.;There is no words limit. Thank you;Attachment Preview;Joan Murphy35.doc;Joan Murphy35;Instructions;Joan Murphy is a computer engineering programmer for;the aerospace division of Lockheed Martin Company. Please;read the case and then identify the causes of her behavior by;answering the questions following the case. Then determine;whether you made an internal or external attribution. After;completing the task, decide on the appropriateness of various;forms of corrective action. A list of potential recommendations;has been developed. The list is divided into four categories.;Read each action, and evaluate its appropriateness by;using the scale provided. Next, compute a total score for each;of the four categories.;The Case;Joan Murphy, 42, received her baccalaureate degree in;aerospace engineering from a school in the Northeast. She;graduated with a 3.4 GPA and had a minor in international;relations. During the summer between her junior and senior;years, she took an internship with Texas Instruments in;Japan. Immediately upon graduation, she took a permanent;position with Lockheed Martin and was assigned to its Fort;Worth, Texas, jet fighter division. Joan is currently working;in the aerospace engineering department as a senior;engineer. During the past year, she has missed 12 days of;work. She seems unmotivated and rarely has her assignments;completed on time. Joan is usually given the harder;engineering designs to work on because of her technical;competency.;Past records indicate Joan, on average, completes programs;classified as routine in about 45 hours. Her coworkers;on the other hand, complete routine programs in an;average time of 32 hours. Further, she finishes programs;considered major problems, on average, in about 115 hours.;Her coworkers, however, finish these same major problems;assignments, on average, in about 100 hours. When she has;worked in engineering teams, her peer performance reviews;are generally average to marginal. Her peers have noted she;is not creative in attacking problems and she is difficult to;work with.;The aerospace engineering department recently sent a;questionnaire to all customers to evaluate the usefulness and;accuracy of its designs. The results indicate many departments;are not using its designs because they cannot understand the;reports. It was also determined that many customers found;Joans work unorganized and they could not use her work;unless someone redid it.;Causes of Performance;To what extent was each of the following a cause of Joans;performance? Use the following scale;Very Little Very Much;12345;a. High ability 1 2 3 4 5;b. Low ability 1 2 3 4 5;c. Low effort 1 2 3 4 5;d. Difficult job 1 2 3 4 5;e. Unproductive;coworkers;12345;f. Bad luck 1 2 3 4 5;Internal attribution (total score for causes a, b, and c);External attribution (total score for causes d, e, and f);Appropriateness of Corrective Action;Evaluate the following courses of action by using the scale;below;Very Inappropriate Very Appropriate;12345;Coercive Actions;a. Reprimand Joan for her performance.;12345;b. Threaten to fire Joan if her performance does not improve.;12345;Change Job;c. Transfer Joan to another job.;12345;d. Demote Joan to a less demanding job.;12345;Coaching Actions;e. Work with her to help her do the job better.;12345;f. Offer her encouragement to help her improve.;12345;No Immediate Actions;g. Do nothing.;12345;h. Promise her a pay raise if she improves.;12345;Compute a score for the four categories;Coercive actions = a + b =;Change job = c + d =;Coaching actions = e + f =;No immediate actions = g + h =


Paper#34532 | Written in 18-Jul-2015

Price : $27