Assignment
INSTRUCTIONS: Please consider all the information as provided in the case studies and use your powers of analysis to synthesize the information. Often times decision-makers are asked to pronounce judgment or develop a resolution to a situation with scant information.
Select two of the three cases presented below. Respond in a thorough and thoughtful manner considering all aspects of each case. Please limit your responses to no more than five typed pages per question using Times New Roman, 12 pt. font, single space-be concise. Save your response as an MS Word document or pdf format and email to me at the address above by the due date and time.
Good luck and happy holidays!
Case Study #2: From EEO and Affirmative Action to Diversity Management
You are a big-city HR director. For years, you and other city administrators have emphasized Affirmative Action compliance by (1) making it a key organizational objective; (2) taking steps to reduce underutilization of protected classes by targeted programs for recruitment, testing, selection, training, and career development; and (3) establishing separate grievance systems to protect against sexual harassment, racial and ethnic discrimination, and other violations of employee rights.
Now, you hear increasing complaints about the adequacy of these Affirmative Acton compliance policies and programs from managers and employees. Managers ask, "Isn't there a way that we can create a climate of ethnic harmony without resorting to slow and costly administrative proceedings?" Employees in protected categories are unhappy: "Why don't you treat us as employees and human beings, rather than focusing only on gender, race, disability, or ethnicity? Aren't our skills and performance more important than these?" Other employees also dislike Affirmative Action: "I can't get ahead in this organization because I'm a white male. We're discriminated against all the time, but we don't have any legal protection because we're not members of a protected class."
You decide that the best way to deal with these unsatisfactory conditions is by developing diversity management policies and programs. You prepare a formal presentation to the city manager and other department directors explaining how these policies and programs will help the city run better. They listen to your presentation, and then ask questions. How do you answer them?
Questions
1. How does diversity management differ from EEO or Affirmative Action? Isn't this just "old wine in new bottles"?
2. Why does diversity management require changes in our mission, culture, or values? It's just a personnel issue, right? Can't we just say we value diversity, and let it go at that?
3. How will diversity management programs affect these specific areas of human resource management policy and practice: recruitment and retention, job design, education and training, benefits and rewards, and performance measurement and improvement?
4. Won't this put the Affirmative Action office out of business? How will you ever sell it to them?
5. If we're going to do it right, what are the characteristics of a successful diversity management? Of an unsuccessful one?
Case Study #3: Workplace Violence- "In Hindsight, We Could See It Coming"
The Event
In the predawn hours on February 9, 1996, a disgruntled former park and recreation department employee, Clifton McCree, burst into the maintenance trailer where six of his former coworkers were starting their day's work. In five minutes, six people were dead of gunshot wounds: Clifton McCree had killed five of the six coworkers, and then had turned the gun upon himself; one coworker escaped to tell the story of horror and death.
The Background
After eighteen years of employment, Clifton McCree had been discharged from the City of Ft. Lauderdale in October of 1994 after failing a drug test. After this, he had been unable to find steady work, and he had grown increasingly depressed and angry over what he saw as racial discrimination and retaliation by white employees and supervisors.
Mr. McCree had a history of workplace confrontations with coworkers. In the past, other employees had complained about his occasional threats to kill them. His supervisors had counseled him informally about the need to control his temper. Although he frequently went into rages, and coworkers were afraid of him, his supervisors and other employees had avoided formal complaints and tried to handle the problem internally because they did not want him to 4 lose his job. Despite his temper, he continued to receive satisfactory performance evaluations for nine years, and there was no formal record of his problems. Finally, in 1993, after a screaming match with a white coworker, McCree's supervisor counseled him formally.
Personnel Policies and Procedures
Ironically, the problem came to a head just days after the City issued a new policy on workplace violence in 1994. This policy grew out of another tragedy-the murder of two lawyers in a downtown office building earlier that year. The City's policy was designed to raise awareness of what a potentially violent worker might do, and it set up a procedure for handling such incidents.
Immediately after the policy was issued, the supervisor came to the parks and recreation department director, who had just come on the job a few weeks before, and told her about Clifton McCree. Within days, she had interviewed other workers and prepared a chilling memo detailing McCree's threats and racial slurs against his coworkers. The memo indicated that McCree exhibited at least five of the warning signs of potential trouble, including threats, paranoid behavior, and a fascination with workplace violence.
City officials acted quickly, ordering a psychiatric evaluation and a drug test within days. By the end of the month, McCree had been suspended without pay; he flunked the drug test and his firing was in the works. Until the day of the murders, eighteen months to the day after his discharge, he never returned to his workplace.
The Postmortem: Should the City Have Done Anything Differently?
In hindsight, it is difficult to find fault with anyone's actions. Most coworkers and supervisors would initially attempt to counsel a troubled employee informally because they were his friends and they knew he needed the job. With no formal counseling taking place, there would be no written record of previous performance incidents upon which to base a negative performance evaluation. When formal counseling finally occurred in 1993, it was only because coworkers had exerted pressure on management to do something. The City developed a clear and responsible policy on workplace violence in 1994. This policy led to a strong and immediate response by the park and recreation department, and it was the department director's memo that led the City to take action. Appropriately, Clifton McCree was removed from work pending psychiatric evaluation and drug testing. He tested positive and was discharged.
Yet six people died. In addition to the human tragedy, the City will undoubtedly face civil charges from the victims' families, alleging that the City knew that Clifton McCree was violent but did not take adequate precautions to protect coworkers against violence.
Questions
1. In hindsight, what do you think the City could have done differently (if anything)?
2. Under the standard of "foreseeability," do you think the City can be held liable for failure to take more timely action against Clifton McCree?
3. Did the City's prompt and responsible action (to discharge Clifton McCree under its new workplace violence policy) in fact increase the chance of workplace violence?
4. Human Resource Management usually takes place in communities affected by racial or ethnic unrest, alcohol or drug abuse, and disgruntled employees with easy access to weapons. What can HR managers do to lessen the chances of these factors resulting in workplace tragedies such as this one?