PURPOSE: Why Are You Doing This Assignment? Real-World Application Workplace conflicts involving performance reviews, leave policies, and potential discrimination claims are among the most challenging situations
PURPOSE: Why Are You Doing This Assignment? Real-World Application Workplace conflicts involving performance reviews, leave policies, and potential discrimination claims are among the most challenging situations HR professionals and managers face. This case study simulates a realistic scenario where legal, ethical, and interpersonal factors intersect—exactly the type of situation you'll encounter in your career.
As an HR consultant analyzing this case, you'll practice the same skills professionals use every day: distinguishing root causes from symptoms, understanding competing stakeholder interests, recognizing when and how managers should intervene, and proposing strategic solutions that address both immediate problems and systemic issues.
Skills You'll Develop Critical analysis: Distinguishing between symptoms and root causes of conflict Stakeholder assessment: Understanding competing interests and power dynamics using the positions vs. interests framework Manager's role evaluation: Determining when and how managers should intervene in conflicts Behavioral analysis: Identifying constructive and destructive conflict behaviors Strategic thinking: Designing resolution approaches that address multiple concerns Legal awareness: Recognizing potential legal risks (FMLA, discrimination, retaliation) Communication planning: Crafting messages for different audiences Application of theory: Using course frameworks from Weeks 1-5 in a realistic scenario How This Connects to Course Learning Outcomes This assignment directly addresses all four course learning outcomes:
Explain and assess the role personality and temperament play in conflict management (analyzing how Tom's management style and Maria's response contribute to the conflict) Analyze negotiation processes and techniques (using interests vs. positions to understand what each party really needs) Apply a situational approach to conflict resolution (determining what role managers and HR should play) Evaluate benefits and drawbacks of various strategies (justifying your recommendations with evidence) Career Relevance Whether you become a manager, HR professional, or team leader, you will encounter performance management conflicts, accommodation requests, and situations where legal and ethical considerations intersect. This assignment prepares you to:
Navigate sensitive employee relations issues with professionalism Balance organizational needs with employee rights Recognize when conflicts require managerial intervention Propose solutions that minimize legal risk while maintaining fairness Apply constructive conflict behaviors in high-stakes situations This Week's Focus: The Manager's Role This case study is perfectly timed for Week 5 because it asks you to evaluate Tom's role as a manager. Using Mitchell & Gamlem Chapter 9, you'll analyze whether Tom handled this conflict appropriately or whether he should have intervened differently. Using Runde & Flanagan Chapter 4, you'll identify which constructive behaviors were missing and which destructive behaviors escalated the situation.
THE CASE: The Performance Review Dispute Organization: NorCal Manufacturing
A 500-employee company that produces industrial equipment in Sacramento, California.
The Players:
Tom Bradley - Production Manager, 15 years with company, known for being "old school" and demanding Maria Santos - Production Supervisor, 8 years with company, consistently strong performer until recently Department: Production Department (25 employees total) The Conflict Timeline: SIX MONTHS AGO:
Maria requested a 3-month leave under FMLA to care for her mother (cancer treatment) Tom approved the leave but was frustrated about coverage challenges Maria returned to work after 3 months THREE MONTHS AGO:
Maria's performance declined slightly (still meeting standards, but not exceeding them as before) Tom made comments to other supervisors: "She's not the same since she came back" Maria requested flexible scheduling (arrive 30 min late, stay 30 min late) to help with mother's ongoing care Tom denied the request: "Everyone else has to be here at 7am, so do you" ONE MONTH AGO:
Annual performance review cycle Tom rated Maria "Meets Expectations" (down from "Exceeds Expectations" previous 3 years) Maria received a 2% raise (company standard for "Meets" is 2-3%, "Exceeds" is 4-5%) Tom's written comments: "Maria's commitment to the team has declined. She seems distracted and less engaged." TWO WEEKS AGO:
Maria filed a formal complaint with HR alleging: Retaliation for taking FMLA leave Discrimination based on family caregiving responsibilities Hostile work environment (Tom's comments about her "not being the same") Unfair performance evaluation CURRENT SITUATION:
Maria has hired an attorney and is threatening legal action Tom is defensive: "I evaluated her fairly based on performance. This has nothing to do with her leave." Other supervisors are watching closely (several have aging parents or family care responsibilities) Production Department morale is suffering (employees are taking sides) VP of HR wants this resolved before it becomes a lawsuit Maria is Requesting: Performance review be changed to "Exceeds Expectations" Retroactive raise adjustment (additional 2-3%) Flexible scheduling accommodation Formal apology from Tom Mandatory training for Tom on FMLA and caregiver discrimination Complicating Factors: Tom's performance reviews of other employees show a pattern of rating people lower after they take extended leave (potential systemic issue) Maria's productivity metrics are actually only 5% lower than her pre-leave average (within normal variation) The company has no formal flexible scheduling policy Tom has never received management training on FMLA, ADA, or unconscious bias Two other employees in the department have recently requested flexible scheduling (Tom denied both) The company's legal counsel is concerned about liability exposure ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONS YOUR ROLE You are an HR consultant hired by NorCal Manufacturing to analyze this conflict and propose a resolution strategy.
Write a 2-3 page report (double-spaced, 12 pt. Times New Roman font, 1-inch margins) that addresses the following sections:
SECTION 1: Problem Statement (1 paragraph) Clearly and concisely articulate the central problem or challenge in this case.
Your problem statement should:
Identify what's at stake for the organization, Tom, and Maria Explain why this conflict requires immediate attention Demonstrate your understanding of the complexity involved Think beyond the surface issue (the performance rating itself) to the deeper organizational and interpersonal dynamics at play.
SECTION 2: Conflict Analysis (1-1.5 pages) Root Cause Analysis Identify the underlying causes of this conflict. Go beyond the surface issues (the performance rating itself) to explore what's really driving this situation.
Consider:
What organizational factors contributed to this conflict? What role does Tom's management approach play? Are there systemic issues beyond this individual case? What assumptions or biases might be at work? Apply AT LEAST 2 course frameworks to deepen your analysis. Choose from:
Expectations and Clarity (Mitchell & Gamlem, Chapter 6): How did unclear expectations contribute to this conflict? Did Tom clearly communicate his performance standards after Maria returned from leave? Interests vs. Positions (Mitchell & Gamlem, Chapter 7): What does each party say they want (positions) vs. what they really need (interests)? What are Maria's underlying interests beyond the specific requests? What are Tom's underlying interests beyond defending his evaluation? Personality and Management Style (Mitchell & Gamlem, Chapter 8): How does Tom's "old school" management approach contribute to the conflict? What conflict style is Tom using (competing, avoiding, etc.)? Manager's Role and Conflict Ownership(Mitchell & Gamlem, Chapter 9): What role should Tom have played in addressing Maria's performance concerns? Should he have intervened differently when Maria requested flexible scheduling? Whose conflict is this—and who should resolve it? Constructive vs. Destructive Behaviors (Runde & Flanagan, Chapter 4): What destructive behaviors escalated this conflict? What constructive behaviors were missing? When you apply a framework, cite it in APA format and explain how it helps you understand the conflict.
A. Stakeholder Assessment
Identify the key stakeholders in this conflict and analyze their perspectives.
For each stakeholder, consider:
What do they say they want? (positions) What are their underlying needs or concerns? (interests) — Use Mitchell & Gamlem Chapter 7 to distinguish between positions and interests What power or influence do they have? How do their interests align or conflict with others? Key stakeholders include: Maria, Tom, HR, other Production Department employees, legal counsel, VP of HR, and potentially others.
B. Legal and Ethical Considerations
Identify potential legal risks and explain why they matter.
Consider:
What laws or regulations are relevant? (FMLA, discrimination, retaliation) What liability does the organization face? What ethical obligations exist toward Maria, Tom, and other employees? You don't need to be a legal expert—focus on identifying that legal issues exist and why they create risk for the organization. Your recommendations should include consulting with legal counsel or HR professionals with expertise in these areas.
How do organizational systems (or lack thereof) contribute to legal exposure? (Reference Mitchell & Gamlem Chapter 11 concepts about organizational conflict management systems)
SECTION 3: Resolution Strategy & Recommendations (1-1.5 pages) Overall Approach Describe your primary conflict resolution approach and explain why it's appropriate for this specific situation.
Consider:
Should this be handled through mediation? Investigation? Policy change? Training? Why is this approach better than alternatives? What course concepts support your choice? Reference course concepts to justify your approach.
B. Specific Recommendations
Provide 3-5 specific, actionable recommendations that address:
How to resolve the immediate conflict between Maria and Tom How to address Maria's requests (which to grant, modify, or deny—and why) What actions Tom should take What systemic changes the organization should implement For each recommendation, explain:
What should be done Why it addresses the root causes How it should be implemented What obstacles might arise and how to address them What role should different parties play in resolving this conflict?
Using Mitchell & Gamlem Chapter 9, identify:
What role should Tom play (if any) in the resolution? What role should HR play (coach, mediator, decision-maker)? Should a third party be involved? Using Runde & Flanagan Chapter 4, what constructive behaviors should each party demonstrate moving forward?
C. Communication Plan
Describe how you would communicate your recommendations to different stakeholders.
Consider:
What messages would you deliver to Maria? To Tom? To the department? To leadership? How would you address concerns and build buy-in? What tone and approach would be most effective? Apply constructive communication behaviors from Runde & Flanagan Chapter 4:
How will you use perspective-taking to understand each stakeholder's viewpoint? How will you express concerns without attacking or blaming? How will you reach out to rebuild trust? SECTION 4: Conclusion (1 paragraph) Summarize your key recommendations and explain the expected outcomes if your strategy is implemented. Emphasize the importance of addressing both the immediate conflict and systemic issues.
FORMATTING & CITATION REQUIREMENTS Format:
Length: 2-3 pages (double-spaced) Font: 12-point Times New Roman Margins: 1-inch on all sides Header: Include your name, course number, and date at the top Sections: Use clear section headings APA Citations Required:
Cite course textbooks when referencing concepts: (Mitchell & Gamlem, 2015) or (Runde & Flanagan, 2010) Include page numbers for direct quotes or specific concepts: (Mitchell & Gamlem, 2015, p. 78) Include an APA-formatted reference list on a separate page (does not count toward page length) Reference List Format:
Mitchell, C., & Gamlem, K. (2015). The essential workplace conflict handbook: A quick and handy resource for any manager, team leader, HR professional, or anyone who wants to resolve disputes and increase productivity. Career Press.
Runde, C. E., & Flanagan, T. A. (2010). Developing your conflict competence: A hands-on guide for leaders, managers, facilitators, and teams. Jossey-Bass.
TIPS FOR SUCCESS ✅ Read the case carefully - Take notes on key facts, timeline, and stakeholder perspectives. Notice the pattern in Tom's behavior.
✅ Use the Week 5 reading guides - They will help you identify relevant frameworks from Mitchell & Gamlem Chapter 9 and Runde & Flanagan Chapter 4.
✅ Be specific - Avoid generic recommendations like "improve communication." Instead: "Tom should meet with Maria for a one-on-one conversation using active listening techniques (Runde & Flanagan, Chapter 4) to understand her perspective and rebuild trust."
✅ Apply course concepts explicitly - Don't just mention frameworks; show how they illuminate the conflict. Use this format: "Using [Framework] from [Chapter], I can see that..."
✅ Consider multiple perspectives - Analyze the situation from Maria's, Tom's, HR's, and the organization's viewpoints. Use the positions vs. interests framework.
✅ Balance empathy with objectivity - Acknowledge the human impact (Maria's caregiving responsibilities, Tom's frustration) while providing practical solutions.
✅ Address legal risks - This case involves FMLA and potential discrimination—don't ignore these factors. Explain why they create organizational risk.
✅ Think systemically - Recommend changes to prevent future similar conflicts. What organizational systems are missing? (Reference Mitchell & Gamlem Chapter 11 concepts)
✅ Focus on the manager's role - This is Week 5's core concept. Evaluate Tom's role using Mitchell & Gamlem Chapter 9. Should he have coached Maria? Facilitated a conversation? What did he do wrong?
✅ Identify constructive and destructive behaviors - Use Runde & Flanagan Chapter 4 to analyze what behaviors escalated the conflict and what behaviors could resolve it.
✅ Proofread - Errors undermine your credibility. Read your analysis aloud to catch mistakes.
✅ Start early - Don't wait until Sunday night! This case requires thoughtful analysis.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS Q: Do I need to take a side—Maria's or Tom's?
A: No. Your role is as a neutral HR consultant analyzing the situation objectively and proposing solutions that address legitimate interests while protecting the organization.
Q: How many course frameworks do I need to apply?
A: At minimum, 2 frameworks in your root cause analysis. However, strong analyses will integrate concepts throughout (positions vs. interests in stakeholder assessment, manager's role in recommendations, constructive behaviors in communication plan).
Q: Can I use outside sources beyond the textbooks?
A: You may, but it's not required. If you do, cite them properly in APA format. Focus on applying course concepts first.
Q: What if I go over 3 pages?
A: Stay within 2-3 pages. Being concise is a professional skill. The reference list does not count toward page length.
Q: What if I don't know much about FMLA or employment law?
A: You don't need to be a legal expert. Focus on identifying that legal issues exist and why they create risk. Your recommendations should include consulting with legal counsel or HR professionals with expertise in these areas.
Q: Should I recommend firing Tom or Maria?
A: You can recommend disciplinary action if you believe it's warranted, but explain why and consider whether coaching, training, or other interventions might be more appropriate. Think about what's best for the organization long-term.
Q: How do I know if I'm applying course concepts correctly?
A: Explicitly name the concept, cite the source with page numbers, and explain how it applies to your scenario. Example: "Using Mitchell & Gamlem's interest-based negotiation approach (Chapter 7, p. 120), I would..."
Q: What's the most important thing to focus on for this case study?
A: The manager's role (Mitchell & Gamlem Chapter 9). Evaluate what Tom did wrong, what he should have done differently, and what role HR should play now. This is the core Week 5 concept.
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS Where to Submit: Canvas Assignment Portal: "Week 5 - Case Study Analysis"
When to Submit: Due: Sunday, April 26 by 11:59 PM
Late Policy: 10% deduction per day late (up to 3 days); after 3 days, assignment receives zero
Before You Submit - Checklist: ☐ All four sections included (Problem Statement, Analysis, Strategy, Conclusion)
☐ 2-3 pages, double-spaced, 12-point Times New Roman font
☐ Applied at least 2 course frameworks with citations and page numbers
☐ Explicitly referenced Mitchell & Gamlem Chapter 9 (manager's role)
☐ Explicitly referenced Runde & Flanagan Chapter 4 (constructive behaviors)
☐ Included 3-5 specific, actionable recommendations
☐ Proper APA in-text citations throughout
☐ APA-formatted reference list on separate page
☐ Proofread for grammar, spelling, and clarity
☐ Saved as PDF or Word document
☐ File named: LastName_FirstName_CaseStudy.pdf
