Incident 1:
Is there a problem ad 1.) Dorothy overlooked some of the proper recruiting practices, when reviewing the recruitment and selection process Dorothy did not continue with the procedure, in fact she didn’t go past the second step. Dorothy did not provide a job description or job specifications. 2.) Dorothy mentioned good credit is needed for the job which is a blatant faux pas in the ad. That it something that should have been brought up in a interview. Including good appearance in the ad is also a bias requesting that only individuals with good looks can apply for the job. 3.) Better recruitment sources that could be a recruiting at a college since Dorothy specified that she is looking for a college graduate with a good neat appearance. A professional association could help Dorothy narrow down her candidates for her software engineer position.

Incident 2:
There’s no future here 1.) The career development for this company did a very bad job at career development. Bob was never given any development for him to assume a Terry’s spot. The career planning was also flawed because the company never gave Bob any career goals. Bob was trained but not developed and was not given any career path. I can understand Bob’s frustration. 2.) The company was not a learning organization. The company should have given Bob more training to be ready to undertake Terry’s role once he left. Management development could have been a strategy they could have implemented with Bob as well as other workers.

Incident 3:
You Can’t Fire Me

1.) If I were Norman, Tom would be either reprimanded with a write up or terminated. Norman violated company policy by napping on the job and was away from his workstation. 2.) The HR manager did not handle the situation in the best way possible. Because Tom was related to the regional vice president, the HR