Fred Maiorino Case

Fred Maiorino Case

Analysis of Critical Issues

This paper will discuss the actions that sales manager, Jim Reed, undertook which failed to suitably motivate the top salesman Fred Maiorino at Schering-Plough. We will inspect the position Reed took in advancing Fred’s sense of psychological contract breach and eventual violation, and Reed’s contributions to the discriminations acted upon to Fred (Epitropaki, 2013). It is imperative to understand the psychological damage that Fred went through, the unobtainable goals that were thrust upon him, given his circumstances, and the aspects that were involved in Reed’s counterproductive leadership style. These combined factors led to the ultimate termination of Fred’s employment
At the commencement of their business relationship, Jim Reed acknowledged to Fred that he understood Fred’s position as a senior salesman with the company, and he would need to rely on his help. Having been born in 1928, Fred Maiorino belonged to a generation called the Silent Generation (Hansen et al., 2012). People born into this generation appreciated formal public recognition, and were characteristically known for being very loyal to employers (Hansen et al., 2012). People born into the Silent Generation were loyal to their families and extended families, and prefer to work in tandem to accomplish a certain goal, rather than work competitively and taking on an ‘every man for himself’ approach (Kanfer & Askerman, 2004). When Jim approached Fred asking for help, Fred’s generational instinct was to help accomplish with the goal that Reed needed assistance. Many workers from the Silent Generation believe that protecting self-concepts are a leading determinant (Kanfer et al., 2004). Acting in a social manner that benefits the overall well-being of the company versus the individual to Fred is a means of obtaining an emotional satisfaction, and therefore he feels he is supporting his own identity (Kanfer et al., 2004). The difference in age between Fred and Reed may have contributed to the differing
Interactional justice is the degree in which the people affected by decision are treated by dignity and respect (Harvey & Haines). Interactional justics focuses on the interpersonal treatment that people receive when procedures are implemented (Harvey & Haines). This concept relates to how Reed handled the decision to change the evaluation process and how the changes were communicated to those who would be monitored by the new system. The manner in which Reed behaved when discussing the new evaluation process and how well Fred had performed under its guidelines demonstrate that Reed’s opinion of Fred was someone who was unworthy of the smallest considerations. All employee evaluations should be conducted respectfully and should be opportunities for employees to ask questions of their bosses that can give them an advantage between now and their next evaluation period. Reed’s feedback of Fred seemed to focus on the negative and gave little to no advice on how he could have performed as well as the younger new hires that Reed had hired. After the unsubstantiated plea for help from Reed, the flawed evaluation system Reed implemented continued to do damage to the idea that Reed could manage and motivate his employees. Caruth and Humphries listed characteristics that effectively evaluate employees, which include formalization, job