Critical Issue Statement The issue in the MagRec case study is Dinah called Partco directly to report the problem she found from several years ago because MagRec did not notify Partco and Dinah believes in the mission and values of MagRec in providing the best heads. 1. What should you do now? After considering what happened, would you change any of your behaviors?
I would probably take a breather and follow the 24 hour rule allowing the emotions to settle. I would then request another meeting with Dinah indicating a sincere desire to work through the issue.
At the meeting, first and foremost I would start by sincerely thanking Dinah for bringing the Partco matter to my attention. I would be sure to communicate how much I respect her strong feelings and beliefs behind her actions. However, I would explain that if she felt unsettled with the actions I planned to take, I wish she would have approached me again or would have taken her concerns to another manager within our company instead of contacting Partco directly. She should know that by going directly to Partco the way she did caused a ripple effect in the customer base and consequently, our company has suffered a great financial hardship. I would explain to her that MagRec could have addressed the matter with Partco in a way that would have made them aware of our mistake, offer compensation and still keep our relationship with Partco in tact without affecting the existing customer base. After making sure I communicate in a diplomatic way that I disagree with her actions and the effect it had on the business, I would then explain that moving forward I would greatly appreciate that we discuss disagreeing opinions before she pursue action like she did with the Partco matter. Also, I would reassure Dinah that she is a valuable asset to the company and that her performance and accomplishments prior to this matter have always been outstanding. I would address the internal friction and her ability to interface effectively within the company being at a state that requires repair and I would ask her for her input on what we as a team can do to change it. I would try to have a consensus between the two of us and also suggest that we have a team meeting within the department to address the internal friction and discuss how we all can move beyond our differences and return to a productive environment.
After considering what happened, I would have challenged Fred on the need to communicate the change in life span of the product to Partco and suggest that we come up with a strategic plan on how it could be communicated in a productive and positive way. 2. Do you think Dinah was right? Why or why not? If you were she and you had to do it all over again, would you do anything differently? If so, what and why?
I think Dinah was right to feel it was unethical in not letting Partco know about the change in life span of the product. However, I disagree with her tactic. I think she should have followed the chain of command indicated in the company’s organization chart.
If I were Dinah, after talking to my manager and getting a response that he/she was not going to do something about the matter of concern, I would have made one more attempt with my direct manager and if it was still unsuccessful, I would have went to the next person in command. I believe this would have allowed MagRec to come up with a strategy to communicate the error to Partco, develop a plan on how the problem could be fixed while keeping the relationship with the Partco intact. 3. Using the cognitive dissonance theory, explain the actions of Pat, Dinah and Fred. According to cognitive dissonance theory, there is a tendency for individuals to seek consistency among their beliefs and opinions. When there is an inconsistency between attitudes or behaviors (dissonance), something must change to eliminate the dissonance. In the case of a discrepancy between attitudes and behavior, it is most likely that the attitude will change to accommodate the behavior. In this case, Pat initially pursued inquiry as to why the company operated in such a manner and was untruthful to Partco. However, when Pat received Fred’s response claiming it was a short term problem and was corrected within a year, Pat was satisfied her resulting in her behaviors being in accord with her beliefs. When Dinah discovered the hidden documents that revealing that MagRec had shipped product with a shorter life span and deliberately attempted to hide the matter from Partco, her belief and attitude was that such actions were wrong. Her feelings led her to the behavior and action of taking the matter to Pat. When Pat came back to her indicating Fred's arguments were good, it caused dissonance for Dinah because her belief was it was wrong and against the mission and values of MagRec. Dinah’s beliefs lead her to the behavior of calling the customer in order to inform them directly of the impropriety. By telling the customer of the wrongdoing, this satisfied Dinah's internal conflict. Fred did not have dissonance because he did not believe that the matter required attention nor did he believe it needed to be communicated to Partco. Fred believed that due to business demands, the need to make numbers and the problem being short-term, the issue did not require further attention. As a result, Fred's behaviors were in accordance with his attitude and beliefs.