CASE STUDY QUESTION Rita Dubrovsky, the relatively new general manager of the ma

Question

CASE STUDY QUESTION Rita Dubrovsky, the relatively new general manager of the machine tooling group at Parker Manufacturing, was visiting one of the plants. She scheduled a meeting with Mike Singh, a plant manager who reported to her.
1. RITA: Mike, I’ve scheduled this meeting with you because I’ve been reviewing performance data, and I wanted to give you some feedback. I know we haven’t talked face-to-face before, but I think it’s time we review how you’re doing. I’m afraid that some of the things I have to say are not very favorable. 2. MIKE: Well, since you’re the new boss, I guess I’ll have to listen. I’ve had meetings like this before with new people who come in my plant and think they know what’s going on. 3. RITA: Look, Mike, I want this to be a two-way interchange. I’m not here to read a verdict to you, and I’m not here to tell you how to do your job. There are just some areas for improvement I want to review. 4. MIKE: OK, sure, I’ve heard that before. But you called the meeting. Go ahead and lower the boom.
Question
1. Categorize statements 1, 2 and 3 by naming the rule of supportive communication that is either illustrated or violated.    

Explanation / Answer

1.In statement 2 Rule of supportive communication Mike broke is that supportive communication requires a non judgmental attitude. Mike was judgmental of Rita by claiming that Rita was picking on him. The person one is speaking to should know that he or she can express their feelings without fear of retaliation. Mike shouldn't have said that many people came before also thinking that they know what is going on .

2. In statement 4 Another principle of supportive communication that Mike broke is that supportive communication requires listening and not a one way of delivering the message. As other principles of supportive communication have their focus on message delivery, it is essential to have effective listening. This should go in hand with responding to the other person's statements. Mike seemed not to be listening to the issues that Rita was pointing out through the way he was responding.

3. In statement 2 Mike violated a rule speaking with optimism by using positive phrasing. The violation of this rule took place when Mike made a statement that Rita is new in the organization and; therefore, he did not have any experience. The individuals one is speaking to should comprehend that regardless of the situations that may be , she still can make it. Mike should have encouraged Rita that regardless of the fact that he was new in the organization, he could still review his work what he is doing .

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse C
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.