The School of Business

...

(d). Yes, If dean got convinced and feel this policy will support the employees of the department as dean is having the legitimate power to take decision. Then I can state directly that graduate assistants cannot be used to grade objective exams.

(e). Yes even if Washington has taken wise decision in sending memo to dean that has given opportunity to talk with dean with coalition influencing tactic. This policy will benefit the team members and can gain the additional support from the team and creates environment with better coordination.

https://new.edu/resources/the-power-to-influence--2

https://www.gsanetwork.org/resources/coalition-building

- (a) If you were Washington, knowing you had no verbal supporters during the meeting, would you have continued to defend your position or agreed to stop using a graduate assistant? (b) What do you think of Washington sending the memo? (c) As a tenured full professor, Washington is secure in her job. Would you answer change if you (as Washington) had not received tenure or promotion to the top rank?

- Usually dean won’t take any standpoint of faculty people at chair. Washington doesn’t have any supporters even to talk with dean. If I was a Washington then I won’t continue to defend to stop using a graduate assistant.

- Without tenure, memo cannot support Washington to go against management and team members. Washington should think and analyze controversies before sending the memo to dean.

- Being a full time professor ill work according to School of the Business policies and coordinate with others and identify the working parameters that helps in achieving the promotion. But as already been sent the memo and lost support from other employees, first ill work on gaining the support from employees and rectify errors from the previous work.

- (a) If you were Washington, and the carl drafted a policy and department members agreed with it, what would you do? Would you appeal the decision to the dean? (b) Again, would you answer to change if you had not received tenure or promotion to the top rank?

(a). School of Business is not having any policies and leave employees to work independently, If I was Washington then I won’t appeal dean ill discuss with the team and explain how it benefits me. If the team agrees with me ill go ahead.

(b). If I haven’t got any rank ill research myself what makes my efforts put down and how I can improve myself and prove within short time following SB policies. Even if I do as what I believe in the next company without following the company policies and disagree with superiors I won’t be ranked, so if I am Washington I will learn from my own mistakes and prove within the organization.

- If you were the dean of the school of Business (SB), knowing that vice president doesn’t want to set a college wise policy, and Washington appealed to you, what would you do? Would you develop a school-wide policy for SB?

If I am a dean I will follow School of Business policies and stick to that. I won’t go for one individual favor ill maintain the consistency between the employees without making any conflict between the employees.

- At what level (college-wide, by schools, or by department within each school) should a graduate assistant policy be set?

Washington is requesting for graduate assistant which will benefit and the same policy is been their across the country. But the policy can be set if the SB is accepting that and at what level it is accepting. The policy which is been requested by Washington cannot be accepted for one individual benefit. That may raise the conflicts between employees. The primary level analysis is that group has to accept the policy and at organizational level conflicts shouldn’t be raised.

- (a) Should Eddie Accorsi have spoken up in defense of Washington during the meeting? (b) If you were Accorsi , would you have taken Washington’s side against the other seven members? (c) Would you answer change if you were or were not friends with Washington, and if you were or were not a tenured full professor?

According to the case presented Eddie Accorsi agreed with the argument done by Washington. If he agreed with Washington he has to share his views in the meeting hall. That’s the common platform where employees can exchange and take decisions. But by agreeing to Washington after coming out doesn’t make sense and no one cares his opinion in any other meeting. Accorsi should explain what points make him to support Washington and how it supports her.

(b). If I was Accorsi first I will analyze myself about what is correct and think about my opinion after getting stick to point then I’ll talk on Washington side and explain the supporting point to talk on behalf of Washington.

(c). Even if I were or were not friends with Washington I won’t change my opinion ill talk to the members according to my analysis and benefits that a team get. But before talking to the members ill check it is in company policy or not then ill talk accordingly.