SOS in DHS—A Problem of Motivation: A Case Study About 18 months ago, Jess Johnson was appointed to direct a newly autho

[answerhappygod]

SOS in DHS—A Problem of Motivation: A CaseStudy
About 18 months ago, Jess Johnson was appointed to direct anewly authorized and funded unit in the state’s Department of HumanServices (DHS). Shortly thereafter, she interviewed and hired sixnew employees to staff the unit. The name of the unit is ServiceOutreach for Seniors (SOS). Its purpose is to coordinate servicesfor the vulnerable elderly. This is Jess’s first supervisoryposition. Susan Jones and Bob Martin were two of the new employeesJess hired. Initially, both were very productive, enthusiastic, andindustrious. Bob had taken the initiative to work closely withseveral prominent private service providers to ensure theircooperation and involvement in the new program. Susan had done aterrific job of producing publications and other materialsdescribing the goals of the unit and explaining SOS services to theelderly. But since this initial spurt of activity and enthusiasm,both Susan and Bob have become less-than-ideal employees in Jess’sestimation. Within 6 months of his hiring, Bob developed what Jessconsiders to be poor work habits (e.g., very long lunches andcoffee breaks, tardiness, absenteeism). Bob demonstrates littleinterest in or enthusiasm for his work. Although he generallyaccomplishes those tasks that are directly assigned to him (atleast in a minimal manner), he rarely volunteers ideas or takes theinitiative. From Jess’s perspective, employees who take initiativeand demonstrate creativity are critical to helping the unitestablish itself politically and creating a service where none hadexisted before. Susan, on the other hand, has become quite“creative” in the sense that she has ceased to check with Jess (oranyone) on important policy matters before speaking to externalgroups and individuals. On several occasions, she has promisedthings to representatives of organizations and to elected officialsthat the SOS program simply could not deliver. On other occasions,she has misrepresented her role as a staff member, instead leavingthe impression that she was directing the unit. This hasembarrassed Jess and her supervisors more than once. DespiteSusan’s apparent desire to be “in the limelight” in the politicaland community arena, she has developed an open disdain for theregular workload in her area. She routinely misses deadlines andfails to complete important paperwork. Jess has met with Bob andSusan separately to discuss her dissatisfaction with theirperformance. Being a matter-of-fact person, Jess simply told themthat their work was not up to par and that she expected them toimprove. For a week or so, things seemed to get better. But thesame problems quickly resurfaced. The other four employees Jesshired are doing well. They have what she considers good workhabits: They usually are on time and are willing to work hard tohelp the new unit succeed. They seem to be eager to do well. Shecan count on them to complete assigned tasks and meet deadlines.Each of them, in his or her own way, also has demonstrated awillingness to go “above and beyond” and to make positivesuggestions for improving the operations and services of the unit.But the problems with Susan and Bob are beginning to drag down themorale of the other employees and certainly are causing Jess’sattitude toward work to suffer. Jess has not talked to either ofthem about these problems for several weeks because she has notbeen able to figure out what to do or say. But at different timesthis morning, both Susan and Bob came to Jess’s office asking herto recommend them for promotion to a position that opened uprecently in the Child Welfare Unit similar to SOS. Jess does notknow how to handle these requests. More troubling, she does notknow how to address the long-term problems of motivating all of heremployees to do well.
What conclusions can you draw or what observations canyou make about motivation theory and research?