ORGB 300 - ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR Written Case Assignment Fall 2014 The purpose of this assignment is to give you the opportunity to: (a) better understand theories and concepts we discussed in this course, (b) implement theoretical concepts into practice, and (c) improve your critical thinking and writing skills. Please carefully read the “Reenergizing Employees After a Downsizing” case study (located on the second page), and then prepare a written summary of your assessment about the below four questions. This assignment requires critical thinking in addition to an understanding of the course material. To answer the below questions, please use the relevant concepts and theories discussed in Chapters 2, 3, 5, and 6 which include task performance, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, motivation theories, psychological empowerment, justice, trust, and ethics. You must use and properly cite at least five external sources (e.g., books, journal articles. etc.) not including your textbook and lecture slides, to further explain your answers. Questions: 1. Putting yourself in the shoes of Andrea, which of the four justice dimensions (distributive, procedural, interpersonal, informational) is most important in the morning briefing? Should Andrea be honest and informative in explaining corporate actions in the downsizing, or should she be more guarded? What would be the ethical implications of those two options? Support your analysis with the relevant concepts and theories from Chapter 6. 2. Drawing discussions on justice and ethics, what advice would you give to Andrea in terms of her use of the bigger compensation budget? Would you give everyone a short- term “retention bonus” or a more permanent raise? Or would you leverage those funds to support the changes in the work structure, especially for those staffers with an especially expanded workload? What would be the ethical implications of those two options? Support your analysis with the relevant concepts and theories from Chapters 5 and 6. 3. Which motivation theories and motivational factors would Andrea apply when combining areas for the staffers? Is there a way to give the new versions of their jobs a higher satisfaction potential than the pre- downsizing versions? Support your analysis with the relevant concepts and theories from Chapters 3 and 5. 4. How much voice and input would you recommend Andrea give to the staffers, as the Blaze transitions to its “new normal”? What are the pluses of giving such input and what would be the dangers associated with it? How could those dangers be mitigated? Support your analysis with the relevant concepts and theories from Chapters 2, 3, and 5. 1 Reenergizing Employees After a Downsizing (This case study was developed by J. Colquitt, J. Lepine, and M. Wesson) Andrea Zuckerman is the editor in chief of the Blaze, a small, college-town newspaper owned by a large national conglomerate. After the latest round of downsizing a.

1. ORGB 300 - ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR
Written Case Assignment
Fall 2014
The purpose of this assignment is to give you the opportunity
to: (a) better understand theories and concepts we discussed in
this course, (b) implement theoretical concepts into practice,
and (c) improve your critical thinking and writing skills.
Please carefully read the “Reenergizing Employees After a
Downsizing” case study (located on the second
page), and then prepare a written summary of your assessment
about the below four questions. This assignment requires
critical thinking in addition to an understanding of the course
material. To answer the below questions, please use the relevant
concepts and theories discussed in Chapters 2, 3, 5, and 6 which
include task performance, job satisfaction, organizational
commitment, motivation theories, psychological empowerment,
justice, trust, and ethics.
You must use and properly cite at least five external sources
(e.g., books, journal articles. etc.) not including your textbook
and lecture slides, to further explain your answers.
Questions:
1. Putting yourself in the shoes of Andrea, which of the four
justice dimensions (distributive, procedural, interpersonal,
informational) is most important in the morning briefing?
Should Andrea be honest and informative in explaining
corporate actions in the downsizing, or should she be more
guarded? What would be the ethical implications of those two
options?
Support your analysis with the relevant concepts and theories
from Chapter 6.
2. Drawing discussions on justice and ethics, what advice would
you give to Andrea in terms of her use of the bigger
compensation budget? Would you give everyone a short-
term “retention bonus” or a more permanent

2. raise? Or would you leverage those funds to support the changes
in the work structure, especially for those staffers with an
especially expanded workload? What would be the ethical
implications of those two options?
Support your analysis with the relevant concepts and theories
from Chapters 5 and 6.
3. Which motivation theories and motivational factors would
Andrea apply when combining areas for the staffers? Is there a
way to give the new versions of their jobs a higher satisfaction
potential than the pre- downsizing versions?
Support your analysis with the relevant concepts and theories
from Chapters 3 and 5.
4. How much voice and input would you recommend Andrea
give to the staffers, as the
Blaze
transitions to its
“new normal”? What are the pluses of giving such input and
what would be the dangers associated with it? How
could those dangers be mitigated?
Support your analysis with the relevant concepts and theories
from Chapters 2, 3, and 5.
1
Reenergizing Employees After a Downsizing
(This case study was developed by J. Colquitt, J. Lepine, and
M. Wesson)
Andrea Zuckerman is the editor in chief of the
Blaze,
a small, college-town newspaper owned by a large
national conglomerate. After the latest round of downsizing at
the
Blaze
, Andrea is going to hold briefings today to reenergize the
remaining employees and inform them about the new changes.
In fact, she had been aware of the impending downsizing for

3. some time. However, she had to hold her tongue while the
corporate wheels turned. She did not agree with how the
corporate consultants had determined who would go, which was
largely determined by who had the highest salaries. Moreover,
she did not agree with how the news was being delivered
—
not by her, but by a consultant who would be a complete
stranger to all involved. “They a
re taking
away our wisest,” she noted, “and they
are taking awa
y those folks’
digni
ty for good measure.”
Andrea was aware of the reasons behind the downsizing. She
was, after all, working in a dying industry. Every newspaper,
from the
New York Times
and
Washington Post
down to the smallest rag in the smallest town, had a sliver of
the readership of a decade ago. First it was 24-hour cable news,
then the Internet, then smartphones. Each made newspapers less
central to the current events consumption of the folks in a given
town. Corporate had tried to stay ahead of these trends when
they bought the
Blaze,
an event that had been marked by a smaller round of downsizing
as costs were cut, the paper was scaled back, and Tuesday and
Wednesday deliveries were ended. However, there had been
hope associated with those changes, with everyone assuming
that corporate resources could help the
Blaze
reinvent itself and leverage new technologies to stay relevant.
This time around, the
Blaze

4. is confronting a “new normal.” Its function moving forward will
be to serve
as a local portal to the broader news resources offered by
corporate. When folks in town log on to the
Blaze
using either their web browser or their smartphone or tablet app,
they will see a combination of local stories written by
Blaze
staff and national and world stories authored by staff at other
papers under the corporate umbrella. Eventually the print
version of the paper will be a weekend-only phenomenon, and
even that will almost certainly end at some point. All these
changes mean that the paper will need fewer reporters,
photographers, artists, and section editors, not to mention fewer
assistants. There may also need to be some restructuring and
merging of assignments and duties.
Andrea is worried about what to say to the staff at the morning
briefing. As the survivors of a poorly handled layoff, it will be
on her to restore some semblance of morale. After all, the last
thing the paper needs is its r
emaining staff giving two weeks’ notice. In fact, they a
re going to need to be more committed than ever, because more
is going to be asked of them than when they were hired. She
will have to be somewhat careful with this speech, of course, as
the HR person installed by corporate
—
Jessie Vasquez
—
will no doubt remind her. Jessie is good at his job in many
ways, even if Andrea complains about his general level of risk
aversion.
2
Jessie’
s primary concerns will revolve around Andrea saying
something that could either trigger a wrongful termination suit,
or be used as ammunition if such a suit was brought by a staffer

5. against corporate.
The afternoon briefing is going to be more complicated. That is
where Andrea hopes to begin charting a
course toward the “new normal,” so that everyone understands
what they
will be in for. The rumor mill has already been working
overtime, and many of the scenarios being floated might
actually wind up being worse than the eventual status quo.
Therefore, it is important to begin discussing the future look of
the
Blaze
quickly, to create some information to go along with the
misinformation. Andrea does not want to make decisions about
that future course too quickly, as n
othing will undermine the staff’
s confidence more than a collection of faulty ideas that gets
revised a few months into its existence.
There are a lot of things to consider when contemplating the
new operations of the
Blaze.
The paper has historically grouped its functions into five areas:
state, city, sports, lifestyle, and business. It seems to Andrea
that those five areas will need to get merged into two or three.
The reporters, photographers, artists, and editors in those areas
will still perform the same duties. They will just do those duties
for a broader range of content than they did before. However,
Andrea is undecided about groupings. Some groupings seem
logical to Andrea, but maybe the staff working in those areas
would find other combinations more appealing. Furthermore, it
seems like the degree of “enlargement” will vary a bit. Some
staffers will be taking on just a little bit more,
whereas others will be taking on a lot more. The paper will need
both groups to perform their tasks, and perform them well.
T
here is also the matter of who’
s willing and able to shoulder a lot more rather than a little

6. more. Andrea knows from experience that this can be a dicey
issue. Some staffers excel at a narrowly defined set of duties
but struggle once those duties are expanded. Others seem to
lack any limit to what they can take on, at least in the short
term. Aside from her own hunches, Andrea does not know how
to tell one group from the other. Everyone at the
Blaze
filled out a bunch of assessments and inventories when
corporate acquired the paper, and all that information should be
in everyone's personnel files. It may not offer definitive
answers, but it is a good bet that the information would offer at
least some insights.
Asking some staffers to take on a lot more while others are
asked to take on a little more could be a recipe for controversy.
Indeed, Andrea has already been getting complaints about the
relative workloads across areas for years! In this regard,
corporate might actually help for a change. It turns out that they
tend to budget more for compensation-related expenditures in
the wake of a downsizing. They have learned from experience
that survivors sometimes need a bit of a bump to stay
committed, and they ha
ve also learned that “downsizees”
occasionally need to be hired back, this time at the going rate
for the job market. Corporate can justify such expenses because
the downsizing still results in a cost savings, even with extra for
the survivors factored in. She
3
may have to check with Jessie, but Andrea suspects she could
leverage those extra funds in a creative way, to make the new
pay structure match up with the new job structure.
Certainly there are a lot of moving parts to the kinds of
restructuring that Andrea is contemplating. Although her role as
the
editor in chief gives her the best “big picture” sense of how all
those
parts look from 20,000 feet, it is still not clear that she knows

7. everything she
needs to know (even with Jessie’
s help). On the one hand, it might be helpful to involve the
Blaze
’
s staff in the decision making, as the future course of the
paper gets charted. That would give them “buy
-
in” and ensure that all the bases are covered as a new structure
takes shape. On the other hand, keeping reporters,
photographers, artists, and editors on the same page is often like
herding cats. What if she asks for suggestions and the staffers
take off in completely different directions? Once the Pandora
's box of “input” is opened, it i
s not clear that even Andrea could get it shut again.
Although the new day-to-day work of the
Blaze
staff is foremost on Andrea
’
s mind, she cannot help but think of a bigger-picture issue that
hangs over everything. Will the staffers still feel the same way
about not just their jobs, but their vocations? It was hard
enough when the
Blaze
was first acquired by corporate. Many of the
staffers had been attracted to “
Blaze
1.0” because it was a small
-town operation. They could live in a charming place with a low
cost of living, and could do their work the way t
hey wanted to. The more corporate “
Blaze
2.0”
brought with it a certain degree of standardization, with
corporate imposing some common work practices that it had
honed in other, mostly bigger papers. Nevertheless, at the end

8. of the day, everyone was still in the newspaper business.
Even if a new structure works out, and even if the compensation
issues get solved, the move to
“
Blaze
3.0” poses a more existential threat. Is everyone still in the
newspaper business or are they now in the
web portal business? How much of their identity is wrapped up
in the feeling of seeing someone read the paper at a coffee shop
or pick it up off a doorstep? Finally, what does it mean for the
Blaze
to focus only on local news, no longer being able to weigh in on
world and national events, issues, trends, sports, and buzz?
These issues hit home especially deeply for Andrea. Not only
was her father in the newspaper business, but also her
grandfather was
. They used to joke that “ink was in their blood.” One day there
might not even
be any ink.
Some motivational clichés could be sprinkled into the morning
and afternoon briefings, of course. However, Andrea has never
been the rah-rah type, and the pain of losing so many colleagues
would likely cause such speechifying to fall on deaf ears.
Maybe this is how encyclopedia salespeople felt, or typewriter
manufacturers, once upon a time. Maybe there is something
Andrea could do to retain some of the meaning and
“romanticism” in what the
Blaze
does. The paper has always been so focused on the day-by-day,
issue-by-issue pressures of the job. Maybe it has missed some
opportunities to do something larger for the town or the nearby
campus.
4
Instructions
Writing Tips:

9. Writing skills are often a facto
r in employers’ decisions to hire and promote individuals.
Furthermore, it is
difficult to lead and motivate others without the ability to
effectively communicate your message(s). Therefore, you are
strongly encouraged to take this opportunity to strengthen your
writing skills. Here are a few helpful tips regarding good
writing practices:
Make a clear, linear presentation of ideas using paragraphs to
organize ideas and denote transitions.
Watch out for common errors such as: lack of an apostrophe in
possessive nouns, using slang terms or
inappropriate jargon, excessive use of abbreviations, lack of
parallel noun/pronouns (singular/plural),
and beginning a sentence with “this” or “that” without offering
a clear indication to what the term is
referring.
Be careful not to confuse words that sound similar when
spoken, such as affect/effect and
their/there/they’re
.
Proofread thoroughly. Employing the spell check function alone
often results in missed errors (for
example, using “manger” rather than “manager”)
.
Your written analysis must address the research questions and
implement theoretical concepts into practice.
In your assessment, you are expected to include citations to
relevant theories and concepts. You should have a minimum of
FIVE external references not including the textbook and lecture

10. presentations.
o
References may be books, articles from technical journals (such
as the
Journal of Applied Psychology
or
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
), professional periodicals (such as
Fast Company
or
Business Week
), or business journals (such as
Harvard Business Review
or
Organizational Dynamics
).
o
It is not acceptable to use opinion websites (e.g., blogs,
Wikipedia, ask.com, and the like) as references.
o
If you quote or use materials from the textbook or lecture
presentations, you do need to cite them 5
in your paper. However, these sources do not count towards
your required five external sources.
You should use the APA format for in-text citations. You can
find more information about the APA
format at the following websites:
o
http://www.library.drexel.edu/tutorials/citations
o
https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/section/2/10/
The paper should be typed, doubled-spaced, with a 12-
point/Times New Roman font, and a 1-inch

11. margin around the edges.
The paper should have a cover page that includes the title of the
paper, your name, your section number,
and your ID#.
Your paper should be minimum FOUR pages in length not
including the cover and reference pages.
Peer-Review & Submission Processes:
Step 1: Peer-Review (Question 1)
Your response to
the first question
will be peer reviewed during
Week 8
of the term. You must bring a hardcopy of
your rough draft for Question 1
to class
on FEB 27TH
. Based on the grading rubric, one of your fellow classmates
will review your draft during regular class time.
If you do not participate in the peer- review process, you will
lose approximately 17 percent (25 out of 150 points) from your
final assignment grade.
Step 2: Submission of the Final Draft
You must turn in an electronic version of your final paper on
BBLearn. The deadline for electronic version is due by 11:59pm
on the day of your class during
Week 9
of the term.
There is a link on BBLearn for electronic submissions of the
papers. You need to click on this link to submit the electronic
version of your paper. BBLearn includes a plagiarism detection
service that allows instructors to determine how much of your
paper is plagiarized. Please note this service will detect

12. ANYTHING you copy
–
that includes information from websites and articles as well as
the work of other students at Drexel (both students who are
currently taking the class and those who have taken the class in
prior terms) and at other universities. If you are caught
plagiarizing, YOU WILL BE PENALIZED. You will
automatically receive a zero for the paper, and you may fail the
class entirely. Also, the infraction will be reported to the Office
of Student Conduct and Community Standards and could result
in expulsion from the University.
6
Late Paper Policy:
If you do not submit your paper on the day it is due AND/OR if
you do not submit your paper to BBLEARN on the day it is due,
your paper grade will be reduced 20 percent (30 points out of
150 points) for each day it is late.
Exceptions to this rule will only be made in the event of an
EXTREME illness or personal emergency. If a situation such as
this occurs and you cannot turn in your paper on time, you
MUST contact your instructor IMMEDIATELY. Documentation
of your illness or emergency will be required.