Q1 Mary's attitude before and after meeting Sue, her change in attitude and reasons for the change
Before Mary met Sue, she held the company in high esteem and was actually proud of working for Universal Manufacturers. The company's organizational culture was conducive for her, and staff assisted her whenever she was in need of help. In addition to this, her input to the company was being appreciated and she was given challenging assignments which presented practical experience to her. Her manager, Tom had positive thoughts of her and she passed her annual review. Her salary was increased by 10% from $40,000, whereas most employees had an increase of 5%. However, after Mary met Sue, her attitude towards the company changed.
Sue had joined the company a year later than Mary and yet her starting salary was $45,000, which was $5,000 more than the salary they had started Mary with. It is also $1000 more than Mary would receive after her 10% increase, which is $44,000. This revealed a level of discrimination and unfair treatment of employees since employees ought to be remunerated according to their input to the company. Mary had similar qualifications with Sue when she joined the organization and had put in hard work, which was recognized by everyone in the company. However, the fact that one year after putting in these efforts, she would still have lower pay than Sue, who had recently joined the organization made her have a negative attitude towards the company. Mary's attitude towards the company changed and became negative due to this perception of discrimination and unfairness. The change in attitude will likely influence her ability to perform, and this may have a negative impact on the company.
Q2 What Mary may do at present and later
After Mary changes her attitude towards the company, her performance will be affected. At present, she will not do anything which may put her in the spotlight, but she will be secretly looking for opportunities in other companies. Her qualifications and experience make her an asset to any company. In the long run, she is likely to search for employment in a company which does not discriminate against employees and which pays them according to their input in the company. At present she would put less effort in the company due to a decrease in motivation. She would not resign immediately since she does not have an alternative job which would pay her bills. However, in the long run, she would resign after she successfully obtains employment in a company which values her input and remunerates all employees according to their input.
Q3 Motivation theory which explains case study
There are various motivation theories which explain the case study. However, the expectancy theory of motivation best captures this case study. This theory was advanced by Vroom, and it explains the process which employees undergo when making choices. The theory explains that higher motivation amongst employees is achieved when they believe that increasing effort will achieve higher job yield. According to Schermerhorn et. al. (43-56), employees expect higher rewards due to better performance in organizations. According to his theory, organizations should relate rewards to performance if employees are to be motivated. Initially, Mary had positive thoughts about the company due to the increase in salary after her good performance. However, these thoughts became negative after realizing that Sue received a higher salary in spite of her low input to the organization. Employers should pay employees higher salaries if they perform well and lesser salaries if they are new to the job or have lower input to the organization (Montana & Charnov 35-43). This explains Mary's reaction in the case study.
Montana, Patrick J. & Charnov, Bruce H. Management: 4th edition. New York: Barron's Educational Series, 2008 p 35-43
Schermerhorn Jr. John, Hunt James & Osborn Richard. Organizational Behavior (10th Edition).
Wiley: Danvers, MA, 2007 p43-56