AssignmentRead 6.4 The Case of the Poorly Performing Salesperson. See attached document. Write 3-5 page paper that responds to the following questions:Assess Ed’s actions in working with Jane and e
Sylvie, G., Wicks, J. L., Hollifield, C. A., Lacy, S., & Sohn, A. B. (2012). Media management: A casebook approach (4th ed.). Retrieved from https://www.vitalsource.com/
Chapter 6 – Law, Regulation and Ethics
Dealing with Employees and Preventing Legal Problems
The relationship between companies and employees without contracts is not an entirely “at-will” situation. A variety of federal and state laws, including antidiscrimination law, define what employers can and cannot do regarding their employees. Media managers can institute general principles and procedures to minimize legal problems. Generally, all communications and agreements among supervisors, employees, and those outside the organization should be documented. The following section on performance evaluation provides documentation guidelines that can be adapted and applied to other areas. These guidelines come from numerous situations and are the “best practices” that will protect the organization.
Performance Management and Evaluation
Regular, formal communication from supervisors with their employees about performance is simply good business practice. Documenting performance problems using factual information supports a firm’s legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for rewarding, disciplining, or firing an employee. Try to standardize performance criteria and measurement across the organization, if possible, to enable comparisons between employees in various departments and to demonstrate that standards and procedures are applied consistently (Fentin, 2002; How to Align, 2002; How to Remake, 2002; Two Ways, 2002; Zachary, 2000). Standardization helps to create a fair process for all employees and reduces the idiosyncratic influences of individual managers.
Notify employees and educate them about how to prepare for evaluations long before they occur. Develop organizational goals, allowing managers, supervisors, and employees to participate in setting them. Meet with employees to discuss the written goals, performance measurements, and deadlines of evaluations. Explain what rewards may be given for exceptional performance and the penalties for unsatisfactory performance. (How to Align, 2002). People perform better when they have a clear understanding of what is expected.
Managers should provide specific written comments and examples in performance reviews. State performance accurately, clearly, and concisely, because it is in everyone’s best interest to do so (Fentin, 2002; Skoler, Abbott, & Presser, 2002). Managers might decide on a central message for the evaluation and then support that appraisal when completing the evaluation form (How to Remake, 2002; Two Tools, 2002). If an evaluation reveals that an employee lacks necessary job skills, provide and document training in those skills. Document and offer continuous feedback to every employee who performs below expectations. Also consider how employees achieve results; for example, if an account executive surpasses sales goals using unethical, inappropriate, or counterproductive methods, do not reward the behavior (How to Align, 2002).
Follow all written performance evaluations, especially unfavorable ones, with face-to-face conversations with the employee. Two managers should be present. Require the employee to acknowledge in writing that she or he received the written performance evaluation and the meeting was held to discuss it. Allow employees who disagree with an evaluation to make written comments and appeal within an appropriate time period (Fentin, 2002; Skoler et al., 2002; Two Ways, 2002). These steps promote a communication and record of the performance process, which reduces the chances of any misunderstandings.
Treat performance problems consistently across evaluations to avoid discrimination claims. For example, if two employees are often tardy, document and address tardiness the same way in their evaluations. Consistency in evaluation helps protect a firm from wrongful discharge actions (Hinkle, Hensley, Shanor, & Martin, 2002; How to Align, 2002; How to Remake, 2002; Skoler et al., 2002; Two Tools, 2002).
Ideally, a performance evaluation enables a manager to set goals for the employee to accomplish before the next review. These goals could include problems, or below-par performance to eliminate, as well as accomplishments to achieve. Include a written acknowledgment signed by the employee and supervisor to work toward those goals. Allow the employee to sign a different form acknowledging disagreement with the evaluation and/or goals. Give the dissatisfied employee an opportunity to respond (Hinkle et al., 2002; Skoler et al., 2002).
Train all managers on the proper way to conduct evaluations and common errors to avoid. For example, instruct managers to avoid rating employees who resemble them or who they like more highly than other employees. Resist the tendency to rate all employees in the middle of the scale, especially when performance clearly deserves a lower or higher rating. Be careful not to rate an employee against peers rather than objective job standards. Resist the tendency to give recent minor events more importance than major events that occurred months earlier. Instead, continually keep notes in a file of employee performance throughout the evaluation period to refer back to when conducting the evaluation (Hinkle et al., 2002; How to Remake, 2002; Skoler et al., 2002; Two Tools, 2002; Zachary, 2000).
When done properly, employee evaluations will allow employees to perform better and protect the organization against suits from disgruntled employees. These goals require an evaluation process that is standardized, clear, consistent, and fair and promotes communication between managers and employees.
Progressive Discipline
Managers must be familiar with appropriate procedures for disciplining and, if necessary, firing employees when unsatisfactory evaluations occur. Using progressive discipline (or using an oral warning, written warning, and then dismissal) gives employees a fair chance to correct performance before termination and provides documentation for employers who must fire employees for legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons (Fentin, 2002). Wrongful-termination lawsuits may result from a failure to document progressive discipline. A progressive discipline system should begin with recruitment and continue through orientation, training, performance evaluation, and supervision (Falcone, 1997).
Fentin (2002) and Falcone (1997) provided documentation guidelines for implementing progressive discipline. Begin with private, informal counseling about the unsatisfactory performance or behavior. The manager should document the conversation, including when it occurred and what was discussed, and place a memo in the employee’s personnel file.
A verbal warning typically follows. Two managers (e.g., the employee’s direct supervisor and the head of that department) meet in private with the employee, discuss the performance problems, provide specific steps for correcting them, and give goals and deadlines to complete the corrections. The two supervisors and the employee sign a notice documenting that the employee received the verbal warning. Only other employees who need to know about the warning to conduct their jobs are informed, but directed to keep it private. That protects the employee’s privacy and the company does not risk defamation charges.
If the verbal warning fails, give the employee a written warning based on objective performance criteria that include specific examples about the problem or apparent inability to perform at minimum standards. The document should explain why the performance was unsatisfactory, suggest a way to improve, establish a disciplinary time period for improvement, and outline the consequences of failing to improve. Give the employee the opportunity to respond verbally and in writing.
If the employee does not respond, Fentin (2002) said that several supervisors (e.g., the direct supervisor of the employee, the head of that supervisor’s department, the supervisor of all departments, and/or the head of the firm) should meet before firing an employee to establish whether progressive discipline was followed fairly and correctly. This protects the employee from being fired unfairly by a biased or incompetent manager and protects the firm against a wrongful termination suit.
Managers might ask the following questions in the meeting to ensure that a termination is fair (Baxter, 1983): (a) What is the employee’s overall record? (b) Are there any mitigating factors that might explain or excuse the employee’s misconduct or unsatisfactory performance? (c) Are any statutory problems involved (e.g., regarding race, age, gender, etc.)? (d) Were any job security representations made to the employee? If yes, is the termination consistent with those representations? (e) Are there any public-policy concerns? (f) Has the employee received progressive discipline? (g) Is the termination justified? (h) Does it fit the offense?
Have two managers present to document the entire conversation when terminating an employee. Require the employee to conduct an exit interview with an ombudsman or independent manager not involved in the termination. Exit interviews provide an early warning of potential harassment or discrimination claims and/or management problems that need to be addressed (Fentin, 2002).
Although it is difficult to fire someone without due process, on-the-spot firings are warranted when an employee breaks the law, engages in substance abuse on company property, or engages in illegal conduct, gross insubordination, or negligence. If there is any doubt, a manager can suspend an employee until an investigation of the conduct is completed. This allows time to speak to an attorney versed in labor law. Previous disciplinary actions may also be examined to ensure disciplinary actions are fair (Falcone, 1997).
Understanding and Preventing Discrimination
Title VII of the amended Civil Rights Act of 1964 proscribes employment discrimination (or treating an employee unfairly or unfavorably) based on race, religion, gender, or national origin. Prohibited actions include refusing to hire employees based on race or gender, providing unequal conditions of employment, and providing unequal pay for the same job (Lacy & Simon, 1993).
McGill (2002) reported that in 2000, persons of color made up 11.64% of employees in U.S. newspaper newsrooms. In 2006, the percentage had increased only to 13.87%. The annual report in which this figure was reported stated, “Though newspapers are increasing their hiring and retention of minority journalists, newsroom diversity is falling behind the nation’s rapidly changing demographics. A third of the U.S. population is now minority, according to the latest estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau” (American Society of Newspaper Editors, 2006). What does the inability to attract and retain sufficient numbers of people of color say about an industry that reports on discrimination in other firms?
Persons of color and their coworkers have strongly differing views on employment issues. Seventy-three percent of African American journalists felt that African Americans were not as likely to be considered for career opportunities, yet only 2% of newsroom managers felt that way. Perhaps this is why 78% of African American journalists felt managers had unrealistic perceptions of them, whereas only 24% of managers felt that way (McGill, 2002). These beliefs of journalists of color demonstrate why it is so important to implement fair and consistent performance evaluations.
McGill (2002) said such perceptual discrepancies indicate that separate cultures have evolved in newsrooms. In one culture, White managers and journalists think opportunities for advancement are equal. In another culture, managers and journalists of color perceive that different standards are being applied to different types of people. Such perceptions are reinforced when people within the White-male-management culture talk mostly to others in that same culture, neglecting interaction with people in other cultures. People from different cultures must be able to communicate their differing perceptions with each other in a supportive environment.
The primary reasons journalists of color give for leaving the profession have been consistent over time: lack of professional challenge and lack of advancement opportunities. Although pay, quality of the work environment, interpersonal relationships, and other factors are important, advancement and challenges must be equally available to journalists of color to retain them. Promotions bring the new duties and challenges that journalists of color desire, yet feel they must work harder and longer than White employees to get. Unfortunately, most journalists of color leave the newspaper profession feeling disillusioned and disappointed—a far cry from the high ideals they held at the beginning of their careers (McGill, 2002).
McGill (2002) said managers must find ways to promote more journalists of color into professionally challenging positions. Such promotions signal an organizational culture change to other employees of color who perceive the same advancement opportunities for themselves. Managers must communicate more effectively with people of color and be open to their different perceptions.
Many of the same types of issues also apply to female employees (see the “Leadership Traits and Skills” section in chapter 2). For example, women make less money than men for the same jobs and receive fewer management opportunities. Managers must acknowledge these discrepancies and create a positive climate conducive to open communications, fair and equitable promotions, productive work environment and job satisfaction for employees of all colors and genders. Not only is this the right thing to do, it will also encourage women and employees of color to remain in media industries and prevent incidents of discrimination.
Diversifying a media organization involves more than just law. It also involves business and ethics. A company that produces cultural goods such as journalism and entertainment needs to understand the diversity of its audience. This occurs best when the workforce and management includes members of the various cultural groups in that audience. A 1992 study concluded that media managers were more likely to support diversity because of business reasons rather than because it is socially responsible to do so (Smith, 1992). Simply put, diversity also is good business. However, the issue also involves ethics in that representing the range of groups in a society has been identified as the right thing to do by the media professional groups. With the increasing diversification of the U.S. population, this issue will remain important during the rest of the 21st century.
Ethics
Thirty-five years ago when one of the authors studied in business school, the curriculum required business law but not business ethics. Business schools seemed to consider ethics and law equivalent. If it was legal, it was ethical. However, this idea seemed to dissipate during the 1990s and early 2000s as business scandals such as that at Enron grabbed headlines. Managers who cared nothing about right and wrong pushed the boundaries of legality. Even after they were convicted on criminal charges, many of the managers argued that they did nothing wrong.
Today, ethics and law are interrelated. Laws and regulations define what a manager must do, and ethics defines what he or she should do. Laws prevent a manager from stealing trade secrets from a competitor, but laws may not prevent him or her from lying to gain an advantage. Courts settle disputes over just what a law means, but no formal authority settles disputes about ethics. Some journalists believe that reporting should be fair, balanced, and complete, but others believe that journalists should express their opinions in what they write. Regardless of what they believe, managers of news organizations need to understand that the individual citizens who use media pass judgment on what they feel is ethical journalism. This judgment by the court of public opinion does not require that news organizations do everything their readers, viewers, and listeners want. Not only is it impossible to suit all potential media users in a market, sometimes doing as the audience wants can violate professional ethics. For instance, some readers expect newspapers to run the names of people arrested for crimes. However, many newspapers have a rule that the names of arrested people run after the people are officially charged by the prosecutor.
Just as there are disagreements as to what are appropriate ethical standards, managers, journalists, and ethicists also disagree on the best way to establish ethics. Most news organizations and professional journalism associations have codes of ethics. Other media organizations, such as those in the information and entertainment business, are less likely to have codes. Such codes, however, do not guarantee ethical behavior. In most cases, enforcement is voluntary (Goodwin, 1987, pp. 16–19). In other cases, the codes are so general and vague as to be impossible to follow (Goodwin, 1987, pp. 15–16). Merrill (1974, p. 164) argued that journalists must decide whether to be ethical. By extension, a code will not cause a journalist, or a manager, to behave according to standards if the individual has not already decided to be ethical. The argument about the relationship between codes and behavior explains the two approaches taken to media ethics. Those who doubt the effectiveness of codes argue that ethics must be established through a rational process that applies general principles to each ethical situation. This “moral-reasoning” process makes ethical decision making more flexible than just adhering to a list of rules.
