Organizational Behavior 1st Edition Neubert Solutions Manual

Organizational Behavior 1st Edition Neubert
Solutions Manual install download
https://testbankfan.com/product/organizational-behavior-1st-
edition-neubert-solutions-manual/
Download more testbank from https://testbankfan.com

We believe these products will be a great fit for you. Click
the link to download now, or visit testbankfan.com
to discover even more!
Organizational Behavior 1st Edition Neubert Test Bank
edition-neubert-test-bank/
Organizational Behavior 1st Edition Nahavandi Test Bank
edition-nahavandi-test-bank/
Organizational Behavior A Critical Thinking Approach
1st Edition Neck Solutions Manual
https://testbankfan.com/product/organizational-behavior-a-
critical-thinking-approach-1st-edition-neck-solutions-manual/
Organizational Behavior 18th Edition Robbins Solutions
Manual
https://testbankfan.com/product/organizational-behavior-18th-
edition-robbins-solutions-manual/

Organizational Behavior 10th Edition Kreitner Solutions
Manual
edition-kreitner-solutions-manual/
Organizational Behavior 4th Edition Hitt Solutions
Manual
edition-hitt-solutions-manual/
Organizational Behavior 12th Edition Schermerhorn
Solutions Manual
edition-schermerhorn-solutions-manual/
Manual
Manual

Neubert & Dyck / Organizational Behavior Instructor’s Manual
Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 8-1
CHAPTER 8
Understanding Relationships
CHAPTER OVERVIEW
This chapter contains several inset features designed to assist the student reader in applying the
concepts to relevant examples. The Opening Case provides a look at an in-depth real world case
from the world of Bernie Madoff, the self-made Wall street financial mogul who made off with
millions of dollars. The case demonstrates organizational behavior concepts in the chapter. My
OB features an organizational behavior scenario that illustrates key chapter concepts in a movie,
novel, visionary or inspirational way. OB in Action refers students to self assessment activities
relevant to concepts in the chapter. The Closing Case profiles examples of organizational
behavior issues and illustrates current events or trends relevant to chapter concepts. The
supplemental material at the end of the chapter begins with Multiple Choice Questions, followed
by Short Questions, both designed to reinforce chapter concepts and perspective. This is
followed by Questions for Reflection and Discussion, which asks critical thinking questions that
may be used for in class discussion, semester related projects, loner exam questions or online for
distance learning.
Chapter eight continues the discussion on organizational behavior and looks specifically at
political behavior from a conventional perspective and a sustainable perspective. From a
conventional perspective, relationships are best explained by people seeking their own self-
interests and the financial interests of their organizations. Political behaviors are perceived to be
inevitable, are important for success in organizations, and, therefore, must be practiced. There
are many instrumental benefits for organizations and individuals in promoting truthfulness,
dependability, reliability, and consistency in relationships. Fairness in relationships focuses on
tangible factors in determining distributive, procedural, and interactional justice and distributive
bargaining serves to secure self-interest and short-term financial interests of the organization.
From a sustainable perspective, relationships can be enhanced to include stakeholders seeking to
improve their mutual (holistic) interests, and those of their organization. As such: political
behaviors are not assumed to be inevitable, are not considered necessary for success in
organizations, and therefore, can be minimized. In addition to the instrumental benefits to the
organization and individuals, there is worth in broadly promoting truthfulness, dependability,
reliability, and consistency in relationships. Fairness in relationships focuses on tangible and
intangible factors in determining distributive, procedural, and interactional justice. Integrative
negotiating serves to improve the mutual holistic interests of the negotiators and other
stakeholders.

The supplemental elements at the end of the chapter provide a number of activities that allows
students to explore their own self assessments in different OB areas. These include an OB
activity that is an application journal which allows students to reflect on their most satisfying and
productive relationships. This is followed by a Self-Assessment exercise that allows students to
explore their adventure quotient. This is followed by a Self Assessment exercise that has students
exploring how they react to people who act or think differently from them. This is followed by
another self-assessment exercise that has students assessing their conflict-handling style. There is
also an Ethics Scenario that provides students with a view of what managers face in real world
settings and places students in the position of a manager or supervisor forced to critique the
decision that the manager has made and thus what they themselves would do if placed in a
similar situation. In this particular case, it focuses on a purchasing representative for a company
who despite not having another bid, tells a supplier during a negotiation to reduce its price
because the company can purchase the product at a lower price. The Discussion Starter has
students looking at the concept of a “trust Bank,” whose balance is the sum of all your relational
deposits (that is, behaviors that build trust) and withdrawals (behaviors that reduce trust). Rick
Douglas is the sales manager for the industrial products division of Norton Manufacturing. , who
must make a decision on an order.
CHAPTER OUTLINE
• Politics
o Organizational Politics
o Organizational Politics: Sustainable Approach
• Trust
o Trusting Relationships
o Trust: Sustainable Perspective
o Trust: Conventional and Sustainable Approaches
o Delegating
o Delegation: Sustainable Perspective
• Fairness
o Fairness: Definition and Characteristics
o Justice: Sustainable Perspective
• Negotiation
o Negotiation: Definition and Characteristics
o Influence Tactics
o Approaches to Negotiation

o Integrative Negotiation: Sustainable Approaches
o Conflict Styles
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
• Define organizational politics and describe the characteristics of organizational politics.
• Describe the sustainable approach to organizational politics.
• Define what is meant by a trusting relationship.
• Describe what is meant by interpersonal trust.
• Define the term “psychological contract.”
• Define social networks.
• Describe trust from a sustainable approach.
• Describe trust from the conventional and the sustainable approaches.
• Define delegating and describe delegation from the sustainable perspective.
• Define fairness and describe the characteristics.
• Compare and contrast distributive justice, procedural justice and interactional justice.
• Describe what is meant by nepotism.
• Describe the sustainable perspective of justice.
• Define negotiation and describe the characteristics.
• Define influence tactics.
• Describe the approaches to negotiation.
• Describe the characteristics of distributive bargaining.
• Define aspiration point.
• Describe what is meant by zone of possible agreement (ZOPA).
• Describe the characteristics of integrative negotiation.
• Describe integrative negotiation from a sustainable approach.
• Define conflict style and name and describe five conflict styles typically identified.
SUPPORTING MATERIALS
Figures
• Figure 8.1: Political and relational Factors
• Figure 8.2: A Model of Trust
• Figure 8.3: Zone of Possible Agreements (ZOPA)
• Figure 8.4: Integrative Negotiation
• Figure 8.5: Conflict Styles

Tables
• Table 8.1: Six Suggestions for Building Trust
• Table 8.2: Influence Tactics
• Table 8.3: The Relationship of an Irrelevant Number and the Price of Goods
Thematic Boxes
• Opening Case: Bernie Madoff Made Off With Billions
• My OB: Politics At Your University
• OB in Action: Keeping a Lid On Layoffs
• My OB: Fair of Foul
• My OB: How Skilled Are You at Understanding Others?
• Closing Case: Transformational Relationships at Tata
Applications
• Questions for Reflection and Discussion
• OB Activities: Application Journal
• Self-Assessment Exercise: How Do You React To People Who Act or Think Differently?
• Self-Assessment Exercise: What is Your Style in Dealing With Conflict?
• Ethics Scenario
• Discussion Starter: Trust Bank Activity
• Discussion Starter: Norton Manufacturing
INTRO TOPIC
You can start the discussion of this chapter by asking students to share the different stories of
organizational politics that took place where they worked. Were the students active participants
in the politics or were they primarily spectators? Do students believe it was critical to their
survival at the organization to be a part of the organizational politics? Why or why not? How
were individuals that were heavily involved in the organizational politics treated? Did the
politics help advance or retard the organization’s progress? What about the organization’s
effectiveness? Do students see organizational politics as a necessary evil and as such something
to be minimized in organizations as much as possible or do they see it as a necessity for the
operation of any organization? Explain.

LECTURE OUTLINE
POLITICS
• Organizational Politics
o Organizational politics refers to the activities that individuals in
organizations pursue to reach their own desired outcomes (which may or may
not be in the interests of the organization).
o Organizational politics may be both universal and inevitable, because most
people look out for their own self-interest and because organizations have
limited resources and opportunities.
o Politics—which includes bargaining, compromise, coalition formation, and
sometimes deception—may be most evident when there is much debate about
which goal to pursue and no clear decision rules to follow because the
situation is complex or ambiguous. Politicized decision makers do things such
as:
✓ Trading “favors” with each other in their own long-term self-interests.
✓ Withholding information that will weaken their own position.
✓ Forming coalitions and sharing information within exclusive “cliques.”
✓ Blaming others for failure.
✓ Breaking promises if it serves their interests.
o When politics increase, organizational members’ strain and anxiety increase, job
satisfaction and organizational commitment decrease, and employees leave the
organization more often.
o Broken promises combined with a political workplace communicate to employees
that they are not cared for or valued by the organization.
o Sometimes members become so obsessed with managing the day-to-day political
battles that they fail to devote the necessary time to tasks that serve the interests
of the organization.
o Leaders aren’t immune; in addition to suffering some of the same stress from
politics as do others, they also receive lower effectiveness ratings if politics occur
on their watch.
o Studies generally show that people are keenly aware of the importance of
organizational politics, but they wish politics weren’t so important.
o When asked whether organizational politics are good or bad, managers often say
that they are bad. Unfortunately, political behavior is very common in
organizations and is perceived as important to success.
o Perhaps it is not surprising that political behavior is as widespread as it is, given
that organizational contexts where power and information are centralized and the
rewards of personal success are high are fertile grounds for politics.

• Organizational Politics: Sustainable Approach
o A sustainable approach to organizational politics is not likely to assume that these
behaviors are inevitable, nor are they certain to be valued.
o Although it may be difficult to eliminate politics completely, a sustainable
approach to OB emphasizes proactive attempts to minimize the perceived need
for political behaviors.
o The necessity for political behavior decreases when trust and fairness flourish and
when leaders are very inclusive, welcome participation, emphasize cooperation,
and develop opportunities for others.
o These qualities let members feel freer to collaborate and help others as well as to
share information and creative suggestions, instead of acting primarily from self-
interest.
o A sustainable approach can also reduce interorganizational politics.
o Safe passage through the perfect storm of organizational politics may be aided by
a sustainable approach, but the relational counterforces of trust, fairness, and
integrative negotiation skills are also critical to healthy and effective
organizational relationships.
DISCUSSION TOPIC
Do students believe that it is realistically possible to have a sustainable approach to
organizational politics? Why or why not?
Have students reflect and then write in detail the psychological contract they believe they have
with their organization. Students should be given the opportunity to at least prepare for this
before class, even if the actual contract is written in class. Do students believe they have
maintained their side of the contract? If not, what has presented them from doing so? If they
have, what has helped them to do so? Has the organization they are working for maintained their
side of the contract? Why or why not? What are some issues that would help to improve their
psychological contract (trust issues, expanding social networks, etc.).
Do students believe organizations or employees should have these psychological contracts in
writing with organizations? What would be the advantages and disadvantages to having such
written contracts?
TRUST
• Trusting Relationships
o A trusting relationship includes mutual willingness to be vulnerable and have
faith in the other person’s intentions and actions.
o Interpersonal trust consists of the “expectations, assumption, or belief about the

likelihood that another’s future actions will be beneficial, favorable, or at least not
detrimental to one’s interests.”
o Within an organization, employees also develop expectations about how the
organization should treat them. This unwritten expectation about the appropriate
exchanges between an employee and the organization is a psychological
contract.
o If this contract is fulfilled, employees trust the organization, but if these
expectations are not fulfilled, employees can feel as though the organization does
not value their efforts or care for them.
o Left unchecked, this violation of trust results in lower levels of performance, job
satisfaction, and organizational commitment.
o Trust is an important factor in establishing and maintaining the social networks
that workers rely on to perform their jobs.
o Social networks are patterns of repeated interactions that influence the flow of
resources, information, and support among organizational members.
Organizational members who demonstrate consistent
✓ competence,
✓ character, and
✓ goodwill
in their interactions are deemed trustworthy and establish strong
networks of interpersonal relationships. Those who do not demonstrate
these characteristics are not trusted.
o In organizations, where completing work often requires relying on others,
competence is an important factor influencing trust.
o Trusting others requires believing the other person has the relevant
knowledge, skills, and abilities to direct, guide, or assist in the completion
of a task or project.
o Lacking trust in another person’s competencies decreases the likelihood
that you will include that person in the network of people you talk to for
advice or help.
o In interactions that include people from different cultures, the skill of
being mindful of and adapting to cultural differences contributes to
trusting relationships.
o Character is critical to trust, because trustworthiness depends on the
consistency and quality we observe in a person’s actions.
o Trust also is related to being authentic or real, having a clear sense of self
and values, acting consistently with those values, and being transparent
about who you are and what you value.
o In organizations, authentic leadership and perceived trust allow members
to become more committed and perform well.

o A person’s intentions influence our perceptions of trust.
o Competence, character, and expressions of goodwill provide unique
contributions to trust, but all are necessary for highest levels of trust.
o Trust is vital in organizations. Without it, organization members can be
immobilized and unwilling to take any risks, distracted by thoughts about
self-protection and excessive worry.
o In an environment of trust, however, members can focus on their work
responsibilities; build a strong commitment to the organization; and
develop the confidence to take risks, be creative, and help others.
o Trust: Sustainable Perspective:
o From a sustainable perspective, trust not only results in tangible benefits to the
person and the organization, but also is an expression of virtuous character.
o The presence of trust promotes the dignity of others by limiting the necessity of
controls and policies, excessive formalization, and centralization of authority and
decision making.
o Building sustainable trust means treating other people with dignity, whether or not
it improves the bottom line.
o The long-term (prudent) perspective of a sustainable approach is evident when
managers are willing to sacrifice short-term gains and avoid laying off employees
during times of lower sales or economic struggles to maintain trust with
employees.
o A sustainable perspective establishes trusting relationships with stakeholders
outside the organization in addition to stockholders, board members, and
employees.
o Outsiders include customers, suppliers, community members, and even
competitors.
o Trust is established and grows when you and your organization stand behind your
products and services, are clear and collaborative in dealing with your suppliers,
consistently demonstrate a concern for and commitment to the community’s well-
being, and honestly and ethically deal with competitors.
o Demonstrating a balanced concern for stakeholders outside the organization
generates goodwill that in the long term contributes to cooperative relationships
that yield mutual benefit and lower transaction costs for monitoring, double-
checking, and legally defending information or actions.
o Long-term investments in trust building might make the organization an attractive
employer or customer, yield collaborative partnerships or strategic alliances, or
result in new customers. But in all cases these investments represent the
organization’s (or its members’) values and are therefore worthwhile regardless of
the end result.

• Trust: Conventional and Sustainable Approaches
o Conventional and sustainable approaches to building trust are very similar.
o Competence-based trust will follow from a commitment to increase and expand
your knowledge, skills, and abilities and an honest admission when a customer
request falls outside your current capabilities.
o In today’s rapidly changing work environments, this requires that organizational
members demonstrate a willingness to continuously improve and learn new skills.
o Character-based trust grows when communication is honest and open, people
demonstrate sensitivity to others’ needs, and courageous decisions are made to do
what is right over what is convenient or self-serving.
o It is a management myth that information is best shared only on a need-to-know
basis: That is, unless you have a specific reason to pass along information to
others, don’t do it. This approach is destructive to trust because it implies that
only certain people can be trusted with information.
o Secretiveness also arouses suspicion that leaders are withholding information to
protect their interests, preserve their power, and promote a hidden agenda.
o Trust is a two-way street; you need to be trustworthy and you need to trust others.
o From a conventional perspective, trust is necessary to distribute work efficiently
to accomplish more.
o A sustainable perspective recognizes the value of sharing the load, but it also may
extend trust when there is little or no clear benefit to the organization.
DISCUSSION TOPIC
Ask students to describe a time when delegating responsibilities were effective and a time when
delegating responsibilities was not effective. What were the factors that contributed to the
process being effective? Could those factors have been applied effectively to the times when the
delegation was not effective? Why or why not? Would the perspectives on sustainable approach
help in the latter case? Why or why not?
• Delegating
o Delegating is the process through which a person, usually an organizational
leader, trusts direct reports, followers, or even peers to accomplish a task or
organizational objective.
o At least five basic steps occur in conventional delegation.
✓ Select a qualified person. Competence is the key qualification here;
because you should not hold a person responsible for something he or
she is not capable of doing. Character also is important to ensure
responsible behavior.
✓ Assign the tasks or goal. The critical skill here relates to

communicating clear expectations about what is to be accomplished.
✓ Provide the necessary resources. Necessary resources may include
access to certain people and information; the right to control specified
budgets, facilities, equipment, and technologies; and authority over
personnel—whatever the person to whom you delegate needs in order
to carry out the assignment.
✓ Affirm person’s acceptance of responsibility. Delegation is incomplete
if it consists of one-way communication. Make sure the person
assuming the responsibility understands and accepts it.
✓ Hold person accountable for results. Delegating does not end with the
transfer of responsibility; it requires follow-up to assess and recognize
progress, and to adapt when improvements are necessary.
o These steps are deceptively simple to describe but far more difficult to implement.
o Some people avoid delegating, while others resist accepting delegated
responsibility.
o Delegation occurs more frequently when those who are delegating view an
employee as competent, when they believe they share similar goals, and when the
delegating supervisor or manager has a heavy workload.
o Delegation occurs less frequently if the task or decision is viewed as very
important or the employee has been on the job for a short time.
o Employees or others may resist receiving delegation if they work in a political
environment where people claim others’ success or blame others for failures.
Resistance also may come from reasonable concerns about a lack of capability,
resources, or even time.
o Organizations should be interested in promoting delegation because when
employees are willing and competent to receive delegation, they perform better.
• Delegation: Sustainable Perspective
o From a sustainable perspective, delegation is worth engaging in even if an
employee is not yet fully competent because it communicates that development is
a priority and prepares the employee for future responsibilities.
o From a sustainable perspective, delegation need not follow lines of authority nor
is it necessarily top-down.
o Delegation can also take place among peers or even stakeholders (such as asking
a customer or supplier to complete a task for the sake of the larger enterprise).
Once you break out of authority-linear thinking, the meaning and practice of
trusting others changes.
o Consider this sustainable adaptation of the steps in delegation:
✓ Partner with another person. This step recognizes and affirms
others and their potential, regardless of their position or power.

✓ Mutually agree on the tasks or goal. A collaborative discussion is
likely to result in the most appropriate fit between tasks or goals
and the partner’s capabilities, and result in high levels of
commitment.
✓ Creatively acquire the necessary resources. Although the person
initiating the partnership may have more resources, the search for
relevant resources should be a joint one to which all parties
contributes.
✓ Mutually affirm each person’s responsibility. Clear
communication is essential to ensure that both parties understand
their commitments.
✓ Share accountability for results. Feedback on progress should be
frequently and broadly communicated, and all partners should
share in the results.
DISCUSSION TOPIC
Have students evaluate and share with the rest of the class their organization’s policies in the
areas of distributive, procedural and interactional justice. Students will need to be very specific
and use examples. What area(s) need improvement? How could the organization go about
improving those areas?
FAIRNESS
• Fairness: Definition and Characteristics
o Fairness is a judgment about whether treatment has been just, equitable, and
impartial.
o Fairness is an obvious counterforce to politics.
o That is, in political work environments, people may not get what they deserve
or may not understand how a decision was made because it is made in secrecy
without broad input from organizational members.
o In contrast, when fair behavior becomes the norm because leaders or members
make it a priority, the frustrations and stress of the political environment are
reduced.
o Fair behavior promotes positive feelings, improves satisfaction and
commitment, promotes other-centered organizational citizenship behavior,
and reduces turnover.
o Our perceptions of fairness also are critical to determining whether to trust
another person.
o In addition, employees’ perceptions of fairness translate into the way they

treat customers and the way customers, in turn, perceive the organization.
o Being fair goes a long way . . . and so does unfair treatment.
o All cries of “It’s not fair” don’t have the same meaning. In organizations,
perceptions of injustice can relate to at least three issues: the distribution of
outcomes, the process by which outcomes are achieved or decided, and
interpersonal behavior.
✓ First, distributive justice compares the individual’s inputs and
outcomes to other members’ inputs and outcomes.
✓ Second, procedural justice looks at the extent to which policies and
rules are participatively developed, transparent, and fairly
administered without bias or favoritism.
✓ Finally, interactional justice is the interpersonal form of justice
concerned with the behavior of leaders in their relationship to
followers or direct reports. Two aspects of interactional justice relate
to the extent to which a leader provides relevant, reasonable, and
timely information, and the extent to which a leader treats followers
with respect, dignity, and sensitivity in their interactions.
o Although all these justice perceptions are important, research suggests that
procedural justice has a stronger positive influence than distributive justice on
organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and positive organizational
citizenship behavior.
o Greater procedural justice within a team is positively related to better team
performance and fewer instances of absenteeism.
o Whereas distributive and procedural justice are perceptions of what the
organization is doing to its members, interactional justice relates to personal
interactions that can buffer or reduce the negative impact of unjust actions by
the organization.
o Overall, demonstrating distributive, procedural, and interpersonal forms of
justice builds trust between people and within the organization.
o Organizational politics often result in special treatment that can violate all
three forms of organizational justice.
o Nepotism is the political behavior of granting relatives special treatment or
favoritism. Typically, this behavior is frowned upon and companies go to
great lengths to avoid perceived injustice related to this type of favoritism. In
other cultures, it is more common and accepted.
• Justice: Sustainable Perspective
o A sustainable perspective values all forms of justice but favors procedural
justice—not because it necessarily yields the most positive outcomes, but because
it is consistent with the sustainable principles of collaboration and transparency.

o A fair process is one in which organizational members understand beforehand
how decisions are going to made and are invited to ask questions about, or even
participate in, changes that might make it fairer or more consistent.
o A sustainable perspective on distributive justice might look a bit different from a
conventional one; it might argue that the inputs weighed in determining outputs
should be broader and take into account less-tangible factors.
DISCUSSION TOPIC
Have students describe a situation that occurred in their organization that needed negotiation
(even if negotiation was not used). For instances when negotiation was used, what steps or
policies and procedures or influence tactics were followed? Were they ineffective? If they were
not effective, what would have improved their effectiveness?
Further ask students if they have ever been in conflict with someone else? What conflict style did
they actually use to resolve the conflict? Was it the most effective style? What style would have
been more effective? Ask students what their overall conflict style is?
Ask students what influence tactics and conflict styles are most often used in their organization
the majority of the time? Are there more effective options they should be employing?
NEGOTIATION
• Negotiation: Definition and Characteristics
o Negotiation is a social interaction between two (or more) parties who attempt
to persuade or influence each other regarding some end.
o It is central to contracts but is also an everyday occurrence in organizational
relationships.
o The outcome of a negotiation might be an agreement about how to divide a
resource or accomplish a task, an idea for solving a problem, or a new
creation.
o In every case, the choice of influence tactics, the approach to framing the
negotiation, and the parties’ own conflict styles can shape the outcome.
• Influence Tactics
o Influence tactics are specific behaviors exercised to achieve an outcome,
particularly getting personal interests satisfied. They can range from
pressuring someone into an agreement to inviting others to discuss or consult
about a decision.
o Research confirms that the use of influence tactics, especially ingratiation and
rational persuasion, are positively related to performance ratings and success
as measured by promotions and salary level.

o From a conventional perspective, using influence tactics to accomplish goals
is appropriate, but from a sustainable perspective the long-term health of the
relationship and the other parties’ commitment to the agreement is more
relevant.
o Although rational persuasion does work well—after all, most people
appreciate facts and logic—consultation and inspirational appeal are most
likely to gain the commitment of others.
o Coalition, legitimizing, and pressure tactics are the least likely to promote
such commitment; exchange, personal appeal, and sincere ingratiation are
only moderately effective.
• Approaches to Negotiation
o There are two broad approaches to negotiation.
o The first assumes there is a limited amount of money, resources, or
opportunities that must be divided through negotiation because people have
competing interests. That is, everyone wants his or her interests satisfied, and
satisfying one person’s interests often means that someone else is less
satisfied. This approach is distributive bargaining.
✓ An integrative approach assumes that more might be added to the
negotiation and that the parties’ interests are not always competing.
Perhaps if hunger is the issue, we can add brownies or ice cream to the
dessert offering to satisfy everyone.
✓ Practically, most negotiations include both the challenge of dividing
up the resources available and a search for more. Of course, cultural
differences do exist.
✓ There are principles and practices for negotiation that generally work
across cultures to improve negotiation outcomes.
✓ Perhaps the simplest and most effective practice in distributive
negotiation is to make the first offer. An offer is a statement of who
gets what and other relevant details necessary for an agreement.
✓ Research affirms that the first offer sets the tone for the negotiation
and is a strong determinant of the final agreement.
✓ Once an offer has been put on the table, it serves as an anchor against
which all other offers are adjusted; the farther away these offers are
from the original anchor, the more tension or cognitive dissonance that
is created. In other words, psychologically we all seem bound to this
first offer as a reference point, and it can seem uncomfortable to move
far from it.
✓ Obviously, it is critical to make sure you are prepared for and
intentional about your first offer and that you have thought through

two issues—your aspiration point and your reservation point.
✓ Your aspiration point is what you hope for in a given situation; it is
your preferred result. In the case of a job offer, it might be a high
salary and comprehensive benefits, whereas for someone else it might
be a flexible schedule and a particular location.
✓ Your reservation point is the bottom-line offer you would accept. It
might represent the lowest salary you are willing to take, given your
living expenses, or the most responsibilities you can accept, given your
limited time. Many people have made an agreement without
considering their reservation point, due to either lack of preparation or
poor information in the negotiation process.
✓ Together, your aspiration and reservation points make up the range of
possible offers you are willing to accept.
✓ This range and the other party’s range together make up a zone of
possible agreements.
✓ When one person’s range of acceptable agreements does not overlap
with another’s, there is no ZOPA, and each person should go
elsewhere to find an acceptable deal.
✓ Even given a ZOPA, agreement is not guaranteed. The way each party
treats the other can influence the likelihood of reaching a deal.
✓ A concession is a revision of the offer in which one party moves away
from his or her aspiration and gives up or adds something of value.
✓ Most often concessions are reciprocal.
✓ A key to negotiating power is having other options than accepting an
undesirable outcome.
✓ Whether you should accept a deal with another person depends upon
your best alternative to a negotiated agreement.
✓ Having an attractive alternative to the result you are attempting to
negotiate, such as holding a job when you are interviewing for a new
one, reduces your dependence on the other party and your need to
reach an agreement.
✓ Lacking an alternative can force you to accept an agreement that
violates your reservation point and leaves you with an outcome you
cannot afford or believe to be unacceptable.
o Integrative negotiation is an alternative to distributive bargaining that seeks
to achieve a win-win result for both parties.
✓ Instead of allowing one person to gain at the other’s expense, the
integrative approach encourages the parties to gain more information
about each other’s underlying interests and generate more options that
will satisfy the most important goals of both.

✓ The steps in integrative negotiation are:
➢ building a relationship of understanding and respect;
➢ collaborating to generate creative solutions, explore options,
and evaluate them against objective or agreed-upon standards;
and
➢ choosing the alternative that best satisfies the interests of all
parties in the negotiation.
✓ Building a respectful relationship is primarily a matter of
demonstrating a sincere concern for the other party and an
appreciation of his or her situation.
✓ This foundation of trust sets the stage for the next step—asking
questions and listening in order to understand the other person’s
underlying interests. Initial negotiating positions or offers seldom
accurately or completely represent a person’s underlying interest.
✓ Sometimes apparently conflicting interests are not actually in
conflict. But even when they are, brainstorming creative
alternatives can add more value by introducing options.
• Integrative Negotiation: Sustainable Approach
o Integrative negotiation is by nature a sustainable approach. It goes beyond
simply dividing up resources or outcomes and intentionally dignifies the other
party or parties by valuing getting to know and understand them, the value of
which is hard to quantify but is nonetheless meaningful.
o It invites participation and sharing of information, which contribute to a spirit
of collaboration, creative solutions, and commitment to an ongoing work
relationship.
o Finally, it seeks to maximize the holistic benefit to all parties by considering
others’ interests and the overall well-being of the partnership, not simply one
person’s interests or gain.
o A sustainable approach also extends integrative negotiations to parties who
might be unlikely to benefit from a conventional approach.
o Integrative negotiation has great potential to improve outcomes for all parties,
but that’s not to say that there is no role for distributive bargaining.
o The two approaches can sometimes work well together. A negotiation could
begin with distributing certain items but then reach an impasse and need to be
integrative to come to an agreement
• Conflict Styles
o Conflict style is based on how much they value their own interests relative to
the interests of others.

o A high concern for your own interests tends to result in assertive behavior,
whereas a high concern for others’ interests tends to result in cooperative
behavior.
o Five styles are typically identified that represent unique combinations of
assertive and cooperative behavior: avoiding, accommodating, competing,
compromising, and integrating.
✓ The avoiding style, which is a passive response to conflicts, is both
uncooperative and unassertive. It is characterized by withdrawal from
conflict or suppression of the reasons the conflict has occurred. It may
be effective when conflict is too costly to resolve or the issue is trivial.
Drawbacks include missed opportunities to provide input and results
that leave both parties frustrated.
✓ The accommodating style—sometimes referred to as obliging—
focuses on satisfying others’ interests with a high level of
cooperativeness and a low level of assertiveness. It may be useful
when harmony is desired, the goal is building a relationship, or the
issue is more important to the other party. Drawbacks include the
possibility that legitimate interests will be left unresolved and the
feeling of being used or taken advantage of over time.
✓ The competing style—sometimes referred to as dominating—reflects a
high level of assertiveness and a low level of cooperation designed to
satisfy your own needs. This style, concerned with “winning” the
conflict, may be useful against another competitor or when a quick
decision is needed. Drawbacks include the possibility that competitors
will burn bridges or harm relationships.
✓ The compromising style has moderate levels of both cooperativeness
and assertiveness and requires each side to give up and receive
something of importance. This style may be effective if both sides are
equally powerful, a temporary solution is acceptable, or all options for
a win-win solution have been tried without reaching agreement.
Drawbacks include a possible short-circuiting of creativity and
dissatisfaction for both parties.
✓ The integrating style—sometimes referred to as collaborating—
implies a high level of cooperation and a high level of assertiveness. It
seeks to find maximum benefits for all parties, creating a win-win
situation. It may be useful when all interests in the conflict are too
important to compromise and when consensus is needed. One
drawback is that integrators may make a simple decision very complex
by taking too much time to talk through every issue.
o Research indicates that a person’s natural conflict style, which is rooted in

his or her personality or shaped by his or her culture, will dominate as the
conflict endures.
o Organizational members can learn other styles and their relationships will
benefit from using the style that is most appropriate to the situation.
o Sometimes, an accommodating style is necessary to build goodwill,
whereas in other situations competing may be necessary to stand up for an
idea that serves not only your own interests, but also those of the
organization.
o Moreover, some situations call for the time and creativity required in the
integrative style, while in other situations avoiding is appropriate given the
insignificance of the issue or the lack of time.
o The prevalence of the different conflict styles may differ by country you
are in or the cultural background of the partners with who you negotiate.
o In summary, relationships are the lifeblood of organizations.
Understanding them and developing the skill to build them are necessary
in accomplishing self-interests and organizational goals.
o From a sustainable perspective, however, relationships are inherently
valuable and worth developing regardless of their “return” in meeting
personal or professional interests.
o Building relationship may be a low priority for organizations, perhaps
because “business isn’t personal” and organizational members aren’t paid
to make friends.
o Still, it seems short-sighted to consider the value of relationships only in
terms of their contribution to organizational outcomes.
o Relationships are fundamental to human beings and essential to our long-
term personal, and perhaps organizational, well-being, happiness, and
ability to flourish.
o Relationships may be of immeasurable worth and merit our understanding
in more depth.
TEACHING NOTES
In the sections below, ideas, exercises, and assignments are provided to assist you in integrating
the concepts in Organizational Behavior 1e for your students, especially the special features of
the text.
Opening Case: Bernie Madoff Made Off With Billions
The Opening Case looks at Bernie Madoff , his rise and fall and the violation of trust between

himself and his investors. Bernie Madoff was a self-made Wall Street financial mogul who rose
from meager beginnings trading penny stocks in his own firm to become a major player on Wall
Street and chairman of the NASDAQ stock exchange. A hero to many because of his personal
success story as well as his above-market returns, he used his trustworthy demeanor to attract
many wealthy private, institutional, and not-for-profit investors. Madoff now resides behind
bars after pleading guilty to robbing his clients of over $65 billion in a Ponzi scheme that lasted
several decades. Ponzi schemes attract investors with the false promise of above-market returns.
Bernie Madoff’s kind of destructive self-interest is uncommon, but most work environments
produce at least some challenges that come from working with or for others.
Teaching Note: Students will more than likely have heard about or read about Bernie Madoff
somewhere else. Why do students believe Madoff was able to get so many people to trust him
with such large investment monies? Do students believe that Madoff was able to also deceive his
family members? Why or why not? If students do believe he was able to deceive his family
members, how do they think he was able to accomplish this? Do students believe that Madoff
engaged in the deception for reasons other than money/greed? What are those reasons? Do
students always believe that organizations need to perpetuate some level of distrust with
employees? Explain.
My OB: Politics at Your University
Universities and colleges pride themselves on being noble institutions of learning above the
common pitfalls of most other organizations, particularly for-profit businesses. Statesman Henry
Kissinger sarcastically noted, "University politics are vicious precisely because the stakes are so
small." Yet, as state budgets tighten, stakes are rising. There is increasing pressure on faculty to
demonstrate the value of the classes they teach and their worth to stakeholders of the university.
Teaching Note: In addition to the questions asked at the end of the My OB exercise, students
should be encouraged to explore additional questions. What are some political maneuvering that
students believe takes place at a university? Do students believe a university would be more
politically potent than other working environments? Why or why not? Do students believe that
the politics that takes place at a university would be different from/similar to that which takes
place elsewhere? Be specific on how you see it being different or similar.
OB in Action: Keeping a Lid on Layoffs
This feature looks at the Container Store. It is consistently rated among the top companies on
Fortune magazine’s Best Places to Work (no. 16 in 2013). No doubt the high ratings are
attributable, in part, to the company’s commitment to a no-layoffs policy as well as generous
benefits when the Kip Tindell, CEO, has this to say about taking a long-term perspective on

layoffs: "While conventional wisdom may tell us downsizing automatically drives a company's
stock price higher and increases productivity, it actually doesn't. Layoffs take a huge, lasting toll
on morale
Teaching Note: In addition to the questions asked at the end of the feature, have students look at
the following questions. What do students believe the sustainable perspective would say about
the philosophies and values held by the management team at the Container Store? Do students
believe that the Container Store will be able to avoid laying off employees? Why or why not?
What are the disadvantages and disadvantages to not laying off employees?
My OB: Fair or Foul?
The case looks specifically at Tom Hanks in the movie Larry Crowne, who experiences a
surprising outcome when he is fired after years of faithful service and frequent recognition as
“employee of the month” at a big box retailer. The news is delivered by a group of inconsiderate
managers who spend more time joking around than providing Larry with helpful information.
He finds out for the first time at his firing—when it is too late—that he was not seen as having
promotion potential. Unfortunately, it is fairly common for managers to fail to provide
information or feedback that can help workers understand why decisions were made and how to
change to improve their outcomes such as a raise, a promotion, or keeping their jobs.
Teaching Note: Do students believe that it is best that organizations not be honest with
employees? Why do students believe that organizations are not honest with employees about how
they see them? What are the disadvantages to organizations and employees if there is complete
honesty in the employee-organization relationship? Which sustainable perspectives can
managers use to increase trust between the management team and the lower level employees?
My OB: How Skilled Are you at Understanding Others?
This feature looks at the book, The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People by Stephen Covey
who popularized the advice, “Seek first to understand, then to be understood.” This is easier said
than done. Social awareness is the ability to focus on others and their words and reactions instead
of on yourself. An included scale looks at how well do you turn your attention outward to others?
Asking you to think of a specific situation in which you were negotiating something of
importance to you.
Teaching Note: In addition to the questions asked at the end of this highlight, students should
address the following questions. Were the students surprised by any of the scale results? What do
they think the various results are indicative of them personally? Are there any negotiations skills
that they need to address personally? How would they go about addressing these? Do the

students believe that their negotiation skills by improved through external means or do they have
to come from within?
Closing Case: Transformational Relationships at Tata
The closing case looks at The Tata Group, India’s largest conglomerate and perhaps its
most pervasive and valuable brand, makes products Indians use from morning to night. The
clock that wakes them, the tea they have with breakfast, the clothes they put on, the car they
drive to work, the phone and computer they use, and even the lights they turn off when they go
to bed all come from companies owned in part by the Tata Group.
From its founding, the Tata Group has seen itself as more that a profit-making enterprise; it also
wants to be a force in modernizing and improving India. The company not only markets products
and services and provides jobs through its for-profit businesses, but it also provides generous
support—over a $150 million annually—for nonprofit organizations committed to community
development, education, emergency aid, and the arts.
The Tata Group invests in the country and the community, sometimes sacrificing short-term
profits to do so. In an initiative that reached beyond the communities in which it operated, Tata
invested in an ant bribery ad campaign. Concerned about a report from Transparency
International that bribery was rampant in India, the Tata Group paid for numerous ads that
challenged Indians to “wake up” and stop accepting bribes.
Teaching Note: In addition to the questions asked at the end of the case, students should explore
the following questions. What are the advantages and disadvantages for Tata in engaging in
engaging in the anti-bribery campaign? Who are the stakeholders most likely and who are the
stakeholders least likely to support this campaign?
As an out of class exercise, have students research five other countries that have rampant
bribery and corruption and how five large corporations from each of the countries have
addressed the bribery issues. Do students it is possible to completely eliminate bribery? Why or
why not?
KEY TERMS
Aspiration point is what you hope for in a given situation; it is your preferred result.
Best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA) is having other options than accepting an
undesirable outcome.
Conflict style is the way people handle conflict.
Delegating is the process through which a person, usually an organizational leader, trusts direct reports,
followers, or even peers to accomplish a task or organizational objective.
Distributive bargaining assumes there is a limited amount of money, resources, or opportunities that
must be divided up through negotiation because people have competing interests.

Distributive justice compares the individual’s inputs and outcomes to other members’ inputs and
outcomes.
Fairness is a judgment about whether treatment has been just, equitable, and impartial.
Influence tactics are specific behaviors exercised to achieve an outcome, particularly getting personal
interests satisfied.
Integrative negotiation is an alternative to distributive bargaining that seeks to achieve a win-win result
for both parties.
Interactional justice is the interpersonal form of justice concerned with the behavior of leaders in their
relationship to followers or direct reports.
Interpersonal trust consists of the expectations, assumption, or belief about the likelihood that another’s
future actions will be beneficial, favorable, or at least not detrimental to one’s interests.
Negotiation is a social interaction between two (or more) parties who attempt to persuade or influence
each other regarding some end.
Organizational politics refers to the activities that individuals in organizations pursue to reach their own
desired outcomes.
Psychological contract is an unwritten expectation about the exchanges that will take place between an
employee and the organization.
Social networks are patterns of repeated interactions that influence the flow of resources, information,
and support among organizational members.
Zone of possible agreements (ZOPA) is a range of possible offers you and the other party are willing to
accept.
QUESTIONS FOR REFLECTION AND DISCUSSION
The questions in this section can be used to generate in class discussion throughout the semester,
as take home or exam essay questions or as a hand in assignment for a quarter semester or mid
semester hand in long paper. The questions go beyond the multiple choice and short answer
questions and serve to get the students to utilize their critical thinking skills.
1. Have you worked in an organization where politics was prevalent? How did it affect
behavior? What do you think caused it?
Teaching Note: Since the very definition of organizational politics is one that emphasizes selfish
and self-serving behavior, it is a concept that perpetuates negative behavior. These behaviors
can include lower productivity, increased stress, a negative culture being promoted, a negative
attitude, decreased job satisfaction and misinformation on the part of the individuals engaged in
the political behavior, as well as other individuals who have chosen not to engage in the political
behavior. In addition to selfish and/or lazy employees, students will point out that a change in
management style or a set of values that promotes a certain political culture can be seen as
causes of political behavior. Lack of resources, increased distrust and shifts in power are some

of the causes of political behavior. Students may also provide examples of political behavior that
they have personally observed and that they can speak to.
2. Trust can be earned. Which of the main factors influencing trust—competence,
character, and goodwill—do you think is most important to earning and maintaining trust?
Teaching Note: All three (competence, character and goodwill) are said to be necessary for
trust. Some students may decide that character is most important, since that is the basis from
which goodwill comes and is more important than competence which many may believe is more
focused on ability. Some students may believe that goodwill is most important since it speaks to
more long-term and stable characteristics and that is needed for trust. Still other students may
point out that all three are equally important and that all three are critical for earning and
maintaining trust.
3. Describe the three types of fairness discussed in the chapter. What are some examples
you have experienced of violations of each type?
Teaching Note: First, distributive justice compares the individual’s inputs and outcomes to
other members’ inputs and outcomes. Second, procedural justice looks at the extent to which
policies and rules are participatively developed, transparent, and fairly administered without
bias or favoritism. Finally, interactional justice is the interpersonal form of justice concerned
with the behavior of leaders in their relationship to followers or direct reports. Students will
provide their own examples of each and should be instructed to provide work-related as well as
non-work related examples.
4. What are the main components of successful integrative negotiation? How do these
differ from a distributive bargaining approach?
Teaching Note: Integrative negotiation is an alternative to distributive bargaining that seeks to
achieve a win-win result for both parties. Instead of allowing one person to gain at the other’s
expense, the integrative approach encourages the parties to gain more information about each
other’s underlying interests and generate more options that will satisfy the most important goals
of both. The steps in integrative negotiation are: (1) building a relationship of understanding
and respect; (2) collaborating to generate creative solutions, explore options, and evaluate them
against objective or agreed-upon standards; and (3) choosing the alternative that best satisfies
the interests of all parties in the negotiation.
The above approach differs from distributive bargaining which assumes there is a limited

amount of money, resources, or opportunities that must be divided through negotiation because
people have competing interests. That is, everyone wants his or her interests satisfied, and
satisfying one person’s interests often means that someone else is less satisfied.
5. The chapter mentioned that culture can affect conflict styles. What might be other
factors that influence conflict styles?
Teaching Note: Since conflict relates to opposing views – values, personalities, power and
resources are all factors that can affect conflict styles. Students may point out that each of these
can affect conflict styles to different degrees and in different ways.
OB ACTIVITIES
Application Journal
This is a personal journal entry that can be used for class discussion or compiled as input into a
self-reflection paper.
Consider the most satisfying and productive relationships you have experienced in the
workplace. What made these relationships satisfying and productive? Were some relationships
satisfying but not productive or productive but not satisfying? List specific behaviors that were
important to shaping these relationships and indicate a relationship that might benefit from your
engaging in more of each behavior.
Teaching Note: Students could also look at the other side of the question above, that is, look at
relationships that were not satisfying? Thus, what could have been done differently to make
these relationships satisfying?
Further, ask students if employees need satisfying relationships in the workplace to remain
there? Would just a productive relationship (and not satisfying) be enough? Why or why not?
Self-Assessment Exercise: How Do You React to People Who Act or Think Differently?
Using a scale of 1 - Strongly Disagree (SD), 2 - Disagree (D), 3 - Neutral (N), 4 - Agree (A), and
5 - Strongly Agree (AG), indicate your level of agreement with each statement on the 5-point
scale.

Typically, I . . . SD D N A SA
1. Accept people as they are. 1 2 3 4 5
2. Treat people as inferiors. 1 2 3 4 5
3. Believe there are many sides to most issues. 1 2 3 4 5
4. Believe that others have good intentions. 1 2 3 4 5
5. Am quick to judge others. 1 2 3 4 5
Key: This is a short version of a tolerance scale from the International Personality Item Pool
(http://ipip.ori.org/). To calculate your total score, add the following:
____ (response to statement 1)
+ ____ (response to statement 2, subtracted from 6)
+ ____ (response to statement 3)
+ ____ (response to statement 4)
+ ____ (response to statement 5, subtracted from 6)
= _____ Total score
The greater the score (out of 25 possible), the higher your self-rating on tolerance for others.
Tolerance for diversity has the potential to improve satisfaction with teamwork and contribute to
a sense of belonging and closeness in a team or work group.
Teaching Note: Have students complete the above scale and send the results to you before class
so you can inform them of the class average when you complete this exercise in class. Students
could alternatively complete the more comprehensive version of this scale and also submit they
results before class. Were students surprised at the results? Did the results indicate a lack of
tolerance for diversity? Do students believe that someone’s tolerance level can be changed?
What actions could students engage in that would increase their tolerance level?
Self –Assessment Exercise: What is Your Style in Dealing with Conflict?
Please indicate the extent to which each sentence typically describes your behavior in conflict
situations, with a 1 indicating “rarely” or “never,” and a 5 indicating “almost always.”
Rarely Always
1. I argue my case with others to show the merits of my position. 1 2 3 4 5
2. I negotiate with others so that a compromise can be reached. 1 2 3 4 5
3. I try to satisfy the expectations of others. 1 2 3 4 5
4. I try to investigate an issue with others to find a solution
acceptable to both of us. 1 2 3 4 5
5. I am firm in pursuing my side of the issue. 1 2 3 4 5

6. I attempt to avoid being “put on the spot” and try to keep my conflict
with others to myself. 1 2 3 4 5
7. I hold on to my solution to a problem. 1 2 3 4 5
8. I use “give and take” so that a compromise can be made. 1 2 3 4 5
9. I exchange accurate information with others to solve a
problem together. 1 2 3 4 5
10. I avoid open discussion of my differences with others. 1 2 3 4 5
11. I accommodate the wishes of others. 1 2 3 4 5
12. I try to bring all our concerns out in the open so that the issues can be
resolved in the best possible way. 1 2 3 4 5
13. I propose a middle ground for breaking deadlocks. 1 2 3 4 5
14. I go along with the suggestions of others. 1 2 3 4 5
15. I try to keep my disagreements with others to myself to avoid
hard feelings. 1 2 3 4 5
Key: To determine your score for each conflict style, sum the response values from the questions
associated with each category. The highest score is your dominant style.
Questions representing category Category Score
Avoiding (6, 10, 15) ______
Accommodating (3, 11, 14) ______
Competing (1, 5, 7) ______
Compromising (2, 8, 13) ______
Collaborating (4, 9, 12) ______
Source: Adapted from Rahim’s original measure: Rahim, M. A. (1983). A measure of styles of handling
interpersonal conflict. Academy of Management Journal, 26(2), 368–376.
Teaching Note: Have students complete the above scale and send the results to you before class
so you can inform them of the class average when you complete this exercise in class. Were
students surprised by any of the results? Do students believe that it is possible to have more than
one conflict style? Explain. Do students believe that one conflict style is better than others? If
so, which one and why? Do students believe a person’s conflict style can be changed or does
change depending on the circumstances? Explain. If needed, how would go about changing their
conflict style?
Ethics Scenario
Despite not having a lower bid, a purchasing representative for a company tells a supplier during
a negotiation to reduce its price because the company can purchase the product at a lower cost

from someone else.
Why might this scenario occur in organizations?
Use the following scale to indicate whether this behavior is ethically acceptable:
NEVER SOMETIMES
ALWAYS
ACCEPTABLE ACCEPTABLE
ACCEPTABLE
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Explain the ideas you considered in arriving at your answer.
Teaching Note: Many students may note that just saying he can purchase the product from
someone else is just that a statement between a customer and supplier and is not binding.
Students might further note that making the statement does not imply that he necessarily has a
lower quote or potential contract with another supplier, just that he could purchase it if he
wanted to. Some students might not believe anything unethical was done and that this was just a
customer engaging in negotiation strategies. Some students will note that the statement is not in
agreement with the sustainable perspective and would thus be seen as counterproductive to the
supplier and customer who are now negotiating with honesty between them.
Discussion Starter: Trust Bank Activity
You can think of each relationship in your work environment as having a “Trust Bank,” whose
balance is the sum of all your relational deposits (that is, behaviors that build trust) and
withdrawals (behaviors that reduce trust). Create a list of your recent deposits and withdrawals.
Be specific about the behavior, but don’t name names.
After everyone has written down his or her own ideas, have all group members’ list examples of
their deposits and withdrawals. Listen to the ideas of others and add them to your list. This is
the critical step in the process. After all, to be a trust builder you have to be interested in what
others believe builds trust.
Questions for Discussion: Which deposits and withdrawals were mentioned most often? Which
deposits and withdrawals were surprising? What is one deposit you intend to make in the future
and one withdrawal you will try to avoid?
Teaching Note: Ask students how they believe keeping track of their deposits and withdrawals

could be helpful to them in their work environment. Ask them further, why they believe it is
important to build trusting relationships in organizations? Do they believe that an employee
could remain in an organization without building trust? Why or why not? In addition, why can
employees that continue to make withdrawals still advance in an organization?
Discussion Starter: Norton Manufacturing
Rick Douglas is the sales manager for the industrial products division of Norton Manufacturing.
He has held this position for nearly two years. Most orders from clients are for the standard
version of the division’s products, but customized versions are becoming increasingly important
as a source of profits. A few months ago one of Rick’s sales representatives obtained an order
from a new client for some customized products. Now the client wants to speed up delivery of
the order by three weeks. It is a very lucrative order, and the client will pay extra for early
delivery. Rick’s sales representative has asked him to expedite the order. Rick knows that two
things are necessary to get faster delivery to the customer.
First, Rick must influence Carl Miller, the product design manager, to finish developing the
specifications and testing the samples. Carl needs to run some more tests on the products, but he
could be ready for production next week. Rick has a friendly working relationship with Carl,
and they occasionally play golf together. When he first came to Norton, Rick spent several
months working in product design as part of the company’s management training program. He
understands the technical specifications of the products and works closely with Carl in
determining how to satisfy the specialized needs of industrial clients.
The other thing Rick must do to expedite the order is to influence Ken Williams, the plant
manager, to change his production schedule. Ken has been trying to complete work on a large
production run for one of the company’s regular products. Interrupting this work to shift
production to Rick’s order would cause delays and make more work for Ken than if he just
finished the current run first. The production equipment must be adjusted for Rick’s customized
products, and then readjusted afterward for the regular products. In addition, special materials
must be obtained quickly to make the customized items. Ken is loyal to the company, but he has
complained that the industrial salespeople seem to favor the customized products with lots of
“bells and whistles” over the basic products that have kept the company going through the years.
Ken is still a little distrustful of people in sales due to some conflicts he had with the person who
formerly held Rick’s position.
Rick is confident that the profits from his special order would more than compensate the
company for any delays or costs of changing production schedules. Moreover, if this client is
pleased with the product quality and customer service on their initial order, the client could

become one of the division’s most important clients in future years. The new business would
provide justification to purchase some new equipment that Ken wants for the production
department. Ken requested the new equipment last year, but the funds were not approved by top
management.
Source: Yukl, G. (1998). Leadership in organizations. (4th
ed.) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Questions for Discussion: Describe the characteristics of the relationships in the case. Which
influence tactics might be most useful in Rick’s negotiating with Carl and which ones in
negotiating with Ken?
Teaching Note: Students will like this case and some students may have experience of this
nature – either as an employee or supervisor – when there needs to be trust in a relationship for
all parties to feel secure in what will take place. Ask students further what are some actions that
Rick should take (beyond the influence tactics) and actions that he should not take in order to
gain the trust of Carl and Ken. Do students believe that Rick talking to both men at the same
time, copying them on all correspondence and having a very transparent relationship where carl
is aware of what is taking place with Ken and vice versa would be most helpful? Why or why
not? These latter two questions could be used as a debate with the class being divided into two
and each half debating one side of the argument.

Exploring the Variety of Random
Documents with Different Content

villages cluster, like beads upon a string, continuously along the
lesser roads. A little way back from these cross-roads of Hargham
comes Hargham village, and then the village of Wilby, in whose
church, recently restored, has been discovered, under one of the old
floor-boards, a lady’s hawking gauntlet some three centuries old.
Framed and exhibited on the wall, it forms a trivial yet intimate link
with the past.
But to reach the church and village one must pass Wilby Old Hall,
a romantic building of red brick, with corbie-stepped gables, that
peer darkly across the meadows. One cannot resist a closer glance,
and the old place well repays that attention. It is now, and long has
been, a farmhouse, but was built as a mansion somewhere about
the beginning of the seventeenth century. It was when Elizabeth
reigned, or in the first years of James I., that the hall first rose
within the girdle of its moat: that moat only in part now remaining,
but still plentifully stocked with fish. A family of Lovells probably built
it; but the place soon passed from them into the hands of the
Wiltons, of whom Robert Wilton, a Royalist colonel, had it at the
time of the Civil War. Scratched with a diamond on a pane of one of
the old casement windows of an upstairs bedroom is the name
“Elizabeth,” with the date 1649. The surname is included, but is
illegible. Perhaps it was this Elizabeth who inscribed the Latin lines
on another window—lines that seemed to hint at some heavy
sorrow. “Alas!” they said, when translated, “Alas! how can I tune my
lute to a broken heart!” We may seek in vain for the personal sorrow
that prompted this record; or was it the outpouring of a loyal soul?
for the year 1649, when the unknown Elizabeth inscribed her name
on the other casement, was the date of the execution of Charles I.

WILBY OLD HALL.
Those lines, we say, seemed to hint, and they are thus spoken of
because quite recently, when the house was the scene of a sale at
auction and pervaded by strangers, some unknown person prized
the inscribed pane out of its leaden setting and made off with it.
Invoking a murrain on all such, we come into the ancient market-
town of Attleborough.

XLI
Attleborough, quiet enough on all other days of the week, wakes up
and does a considerable business on market-day, although even that
weekly fixture does not command the trade of sixty years ago,
before the railway brought the better marketing of Norwich within
reach. But the trade of the town is still large enough to support
several large inns, a Corn Hall, and a long street of shops. It would
be unprofitable to argue the origin of the “Attle” in the place-name,
for it has already been discussed by Norfolk antiquaries without any
light being thrown on it, excepting the fact that the name is shared
with Attlebridge on the river Wensum, fifteen miles away. Some
topographers, mindful of the fact that the youthful Etheling, or
Saxon noble, afterwards Edmund, King of East Anglia, spent a year
at this place in A.D. 856 in pious preparation for his kingly and saintly
career, have thought the place to be named after him, Etheling-
borough; while others are of opinion it enshrines the name of some
otherwise unrecorded chieftain whose stronghold was the burh or
mound that gives the “borough” termination. However that may be,
Attleborough is a place of greater age than might be thought from a
casual glance. Nothing in it, except the great church, is of any high
antiquity, for the College of the Holy Cross, founded by Sir Robert
Mortimer late in the fourteenth century, has disappeared, and the
church itself, a part of that religious establishment, although still
very large, has been reduced from its original size. All this
destruction took place in the time of Henry VIII., when such things
were repeated at every monastery and religious college in the land.
At that time the Mortimers, the ancient lords of the manor, had given
place to the Radcliffes, then newly created Earls of Sussex, and

Robert, the first Earl, who ruled at that period, lent a willing hand.
One might almost suppose him to have been animated by a personal
hatred of his forbears, for it is still recorded in the parish register
how he busied himself in the work of demolition and tore up many
“fair marble gravestones of his ancestors, with monuments of brass
upon them, and carried them, with other fair good pavement, and
laid them for floors in his hall, kitchen, and larder-house.” He died in
1542, and was buried in the City church of St. Lawrence Pountney,
London. In later years the bodies of himself and his son, with those
of their wives, were removed to the church of Boreham, in Essex.
With the grandson, the line of Radcliffes, Earls of Sussex, ended;
and in that church their three marble effigies lie side by side, on one
elaborate altar-tomb, fulfilling the threat, or prophecy, that in the
third generation of that spoiler of the Church his race should become
extinct.
These records of old time explain how it comes that Attleborough
church tower is so oddly situated at the east end of the building. It
was once at the centre of the cruciform church, but the choir being
destroyed in that time of trouble, it is now, of course, immediately
over what is now the chancel.

ATTLEBOROUGH.
Standing beside the high road, the church is, of course, a very
prominent object. It has a singularly beautiful north porch,
containing an ancient wooden poor’s-box. Under a slab in the nave
rests that Captain John Gibbs of Charles II.’s time, who earned a
kind of fame by his foolhardy feat of driving his chaise and four
horses over the deepest part of the Devil’s Ditch, on Newmarket
Heath, for a wager of £500. The chancel is Norman architecture, the
nave and aisles Decorated and Perpendicular. The pulpit is part of
the spoil of one of the City of London churches, demolished in
modern times, and the magnificent rood-screen is now at the west
end, painted white, decorated with the arms of thirty dioceses, and
black-lettered with moral maxims from the Proverbs, the work of the
Rev. John Forbie, vicar in the first half of the seventeenth century,
commentator in the parish registers upon national and local events,
and censor, in the safe seclusion of those pages, of his parishioners’
characters. His favourable opinion of James I. is seen in the entry
made when that monarch died: “It might be truly said of him, as in

the Gospell, ‘Never man spake as this man speaketh.’” John Forbie
evidently did not dislike Scots pawkiness.
His post-mortem, testimonial in 1625 to the landlady of the “Cock”
inn—a hostelry still standing by the roadside at the entrance to the
town—is hearty. “August 11th,” he says, “there was buried Mary, the
wife of Gilbert Greene, hostess of the ‘Cock,’ who knew how to gaine
more by her trade than any other, and a woman free and kind for
any one in sickness ... and for answering (i.e., standing godmother)
to any one’s child, and readie to give to any one’s marriage.” Surely,
one thinks, it was ill sojourning at the house of one so accomplished
in gaining more by her trade than any other. Did she accomplish it
by overcharging her guests or diluting their drinks?
He records the death of one John Dowe, “an unprofitable
tradesman of great estate.” This, he says severely, and moved to
verse by indignation, should have been his epitaph:—
Here lyeth the Dowe who ne’er in life did good,
Nor would have done, tho’ longer he had stood.
A wife he had, bothe beautiful and Wise,
But he ne’er would such goodness exercise.
Death was his friend, to bring him to his grave,
For he in Life Commendam none could have.
The situation of Attleborough, isolated on the lonely flats,
surrounded by commons, must have been singularly aloof from the
world in days of old. Up to the very doors of the townsfolk came the
dangers of those far-off times, as we may perceive in the road that
now leads to the railway station, but is marked on old maps as
“Thieves’ Lane.” Where those thieves lurked, there now stand the
respectable red-brick villas of modern times, with a “Peace
Monument” of 1856 at the cross-roads, celebrating the close of the
Crimean War, and at one and the same time recording the victories
of that strife and acting as lamp-post, general gazetteer, and
compendious milestone

XLII
To Wymondham is our next stage, a flat six miles.
In midst of this level tract of country, where villages, and houses
even, are few and far between, the wayfarer’s eye lights upon a
stone pillar on the grassy selvedge of the road, a dilapidated object
that looks like a milestone. But as it occurs only three-quarters of a
mile after passing the sixteenth stone from Thetford, it is clearly
something else, and inspection is rewarded by the discovery of this
inscription:—
“This Pillar | was erected by | the order of the sessions of the |
Peace of Norfolk | as a gratefull | remembrance of | the Charity of |
Sir Edwin Rich Knt | who freely gave | ye
sume of Two hundred |
povnds towards ye
| repaire of ye
highway betweene Wymondham |
and Attleborough | A.D. 1675.”
Who, then, was this Sir Edwin Rich, whose charity was so
necessary to the upkeep of these six miles of road between
Attleborough and Wymondham? He was a distinguished lawyer, a
native of Thetford, born in 1594. His monument in the church of
Mulbarton, three miles from Wymondham, rich in moral reflections,
surmounted by a large hour-glass, and further adorned with
eulogistic verse written by himself on himself, quaintly tells us the
circumstances of his birth and breeding:—
Our Lyef is like an Hower Glasse, and our Riches are like Sand in it,
which runs with us but the time of our Continuance here, and then must
be turned up by another.

To speak to God, as if men heard you talk,
To live with men, as if God saw you walk.
When thou art young, to live well thou must strive;
When thou art old, to dye well then contryve;
Thetford gave me breath, and Norwich Breeding,
Trinity College in Cambridge Learning.
Lincoln’s Inne did teach me Law and Equity.
Reports I have made in the Courts of Chancery,
And though I cannot skill in Rhymes, yet know it,
In my Life I was my own Death’s Poet;
For he who leaves his work to other’s Trust
May be deceived when he lies in the Dust.
And, now I have travell’d thro’ all these ways,
Here I conclude the Story of my Days;
And here my Rhymes I end, then ask no more,
Here lies Sir Edwin Rich, who lov’d the poor.
He died in 1675, at the advanced age of eighty-one, and not only
left those £200 towards the repair of the road, but made the curious
bequest to the poor of Thetford of the annual sum of £20, to be
distributed for five hundred years, on every 24th of December, in
bread or clothing. Why he should have limited his charity to a mere
five centuries does not appear, nor does it seem to be clearly
understood what is then to become of the property of Rose Hill
Farm, Beccles, whence the income is derived. Perhaps he thought
the end of the world will have come by that time.
It will be observed that Sir Edwin was a prudent as well as a pious
man. Desiring some recognition of his excellent traits and
achievements, he judged it best to write the epitaph himself: and a
very curious mixture of humility and pride it is. There were sufficient
reasons for his leaving a bequest for the maintenance of this road,
which was in his time an open track, going unfenced the whole
twenty-nine miles between Thetford and Norwich, and plunged in
the fourteen miles between Larlingford and Wymondham into
successive bogs and water-logged flats. If we consult a large map of
Norfolk and scan this district well, it will be seen that on descending
from the uplands of Thetford Heath to the Thet at Larlingford the

road traverses a considerable district, veined like the leaf of a tree
with the aimless wanderings of many streams, and dotted here and
there with such meres, or marshy lakes, as those of Scoulton and
Hingham. It is even now an oozy plain, but was then a veritable
piece of fenland, where the bitterns boomed among the reeds, the
corncrakes creaked, the great horned owls hooted, and the gulls
screamed in unstudied orchestration. The last bittern—“bog-
bumpers” the country-folks called them—long years ago was
gathered into the natural history collections of rare birds, and the
bass-viol bellowings of his voice are no longer heard after sundown.
The great horned owls, too, are no more; but lesser owls still tu-
whoo in the woods, and the screaming gulls of Scoulton yet startle
the stranger as they rise, voiceful, in their many thousands from the
mere.
In 1675, when Ogilby’s “Britannia,” that first, and most
magnificent, survey of the roads, was published, this spot was
pictured on his sketch-plan of this road as “Attleburgh Meer,” and
was apparently something between a bog and a lake. It stretched
across the road, and to a considerable distance on either side. This
was in the very year of Sir Edwin Rich’s death, when his bequest
became available, and we may suppose that this hindrance to
travellers was abolished very shortly afterwards and the monument
to his liberality erected here, on the very spot where that slough had
once been.
From its old name of the “Portway,” it is obvious this road must
have been in existence in very ancient times, but it is equally
obvious it was early discarded for other routes, for Ogilby is the
earliest map-maker to mark it, and Will Kemp, who seventy-five
years earlier danced his nine days’ dance from London to Norwich,
went the less direct road to Norwich from Thetford by way of
Rockland, Hingham, and Barford Bridge, which he would not have
done had the way through Attleborough and Wymondham been
passable.

Kemp, who was a low comedian, and, according to his own
showing, spent his life in “mad Igges and merry iestes,” wagered he
would dance down all the way, and did so perform the distance in
nine days jigging, with intervals for rest and entertainment in
between: not a very difficult performance, even for that time, and
even though it was winter when he did it. He tells us fully in his
“Nine Days’ Wonder” how, accompanied by his tabourer, or
drummer, he skipped and joked the miles away, and gives the route
he took, over Bow Bridge to Romford, Ingatestone, Widford,
Braintree, Sudbury, Long Melford, and Clare, to Bury St. Edmunds. It
was on a Saturday, at the close of his sixth day’s dancing, that he
entered Bury, and there, “by reason of the great snow that then fell,”
he stayed until the following Friday morning, February 29th. The
distance between Bury and Thetford is really twelve miles, and so
Kemp does not take full credit for this day’s performance when he
tells us that “Dauncing that tenne mile in three houres,” and leaving
Bury shortly after seven in the morning, he was at Thetford soon
after ten o’clock: “So light was my heeles that I counted the tenne
mile no better than a leape.”
Master Kemp jigged to some profitable purpose, for as many
people came to see him as are attracted by the modern pedestrians
who wear out so much shoe-leather on the classic miles of the
Brighton Road; nor were the county magnates above patronising this
Merry Andrew. Thus he reports, “At my entrance into Thetford the
people came in great numbers to see mee, for there were many
there, being Size time. The noble gentleman, Sir Edwin Rich,[1]
gaue
mee entertainment in such beautiful and liberal sort, during my
continuance there, Satterday & Sunday, that I want fitte words to
express the least part of his worthy vsage of my unworthines; and to
conclude liberally as hee had begun and continued, at my departure
on Munday his worship gaue mee fiue pound.”
On that Monday Kemp danced to Rockland and Hingham. At
Rockland his host at the inn was a boon companion, but stood a
little upon his dignity, for he would not appear until he had shifted
from his working day’s suit; when, valiantly arrayed, he entered, hat

in hand, with “Dear Master Kemp, you are even as welcome as—as—
as—” and so stammering until he found a comparison—“as the
Queen’s best greyhound.”
1. Father of the Sir Edwin, the benefactor.
“After this dogged, yet well-meant salutation,” says Kemp, weakly
punning, “the Carrowses were called in, and they drank long and
deep.” So merry did this convivial interlude make him that, although
he was an extravagantly fat man, he insisted upon dancing off with
Kemp; but two fields sufficed him, and then, breathless, bade his
visitor “go—go, in God’s name.” So they parted. From Thetford to
Rockland, Kemp had found “a foul way,” and onwards to Hingham it
was not only foul, but deep, and no one knew the road. There were
twenties and forties, nay, sometimes a hundred people, in groups,
come to see him pass, but of the way to Norwich they could tell him
nothing. “One cried, ‘The fayrest way was thorow their Village,’
another, ‘This is the nearest and fayrest way, when you have passed
but a myle and a half.’ Another sorte crie, ‘Turn on the left hand,’
some, ‘On the right hand’”; but with it all he did at last reach
Hingham, and on the next day through Barford Bridge reached
Norwich.
It was a roundabout way, and Kemp would have found more
publicity had he gone through the towns of Attleborough and
Wymondham. But the people of Thetford had probably warned him
of the bad way through those places.
Sir Edwin Rich’s £200 probably did not suffice for anything beyond
filling up that ambiguous stretch of watery mud called Attleborough
Mere, and thus we find, twenty-one years later, an early Turnpike
Act, the Act of 1696, 7th and 8th of William and Mary, passed for the
repair of the highways between Wymondham and Attleborough. This
road is thus claimed by Norfolk antiquaries as the first turnpike road
to be constructed in the kingdom, but that is a slight error, for the
Act was passed merely for repair, and was antedated by thirty-three
years, in the first of Turnpike Acts, that of 1663, which provided for
the repair and turnpiking of the road from London to Stilton—the

“Old North” and the “Great North” roads of modern parlance. If,
however, we somewhat limit that claim, and declare this to be the
first turnpike road in Norfolk, we shall probably be correct

XLIII
Wymondham town, to which we now come, stands at the junction of
many roads, and was long a centre, both of religious and trade
activity. Strangers, uninstructed in Norfolk usage, pronounce the
name as spelled, and thereby earn the contempt of those to the
manner born, who smile superior; but when the East Anglian travels
into Leicestershire and, arriving at that Wymondham, calls it, after
his own use and wont, “Windham,” he in turn is made to feel outside
the pale, for Leicestershire folk take full value out of every letter in
the name of their Wymondham. The Windham family, of Felbrigg,
near Cromer, who settled at that place in 1461, came from
Wymondham and were possibly descendants of the Saxon Wymund
after whom the town was named.
Wymondham is said to stand higher than the surrounding country,
but such a statement, unilluminated by comparison, might be
misleading. You do not climb exhaustedly up into it, nor in leaving
drop sheer down into a corresponding vale: the difference, in fact,
between the levels through which we have come and the heights we
now reach is merely one of inches, and so slight that only a robust
faith can believe in it.
Wymondham was the child of that great Benedictine Priory
founded here in 1107, by William d’Albini, chief butler to Henry I.,
whose son became first Earl of Arundel, and was the hero of that
very tall story which tells how the Queen Dowager of France fell in
love with him when he was in Paris and offered him marriage. He
refused that very flattering offer, because as a matter of fact he was
engaged already to another distinguished lady; no less an one,

indeed, than the widow of Henry I. “Earth hath no rage like love to
hatred turned,” says the poet, and the rage of the rejected Queen
was really a right royal, consuming, and devastating rage, quite
worthy of the second line in that poetic couplet, which says, “Nor
hell a fury like a woman scorned.” She planned a visit to a lion’s den,
conveniently handy to the palace, and, when there, pretended to be
frightened of that fierce beast. D’Albini said it was nothing, only
women would be afraid; whereupon she pushed him into the den
and came away, happy in the thought that if she could not have him,
at least the other woman should not. But she mistook, for D’Albini,
wrapping up his hand in his cloak, put his hand in the lion’s mouth
and—pulled its tongue out! He left it at the palace as a present for
the Queen, and then returned to England, became known as William
of the Strong Hand, married the Dowager Queen of England, and
lived happy ever after. That breed of lion must early have become
extinct, for the exploit has never since been repeated.
Wymondham Priory, or Abbey, was, of course, brought to an end
in the Eighth Harry’s time, and is now a mass of ruins. The existing
noble church was even in early days parochial and built on to the
west end of the monastic church, whose only important surviving
fragment is the great eastern tower, whose two octagonal upper
stages, with shattered windows, look so weird and unaccountable
beside the even greater western tower. The “two towers to one
church” have indeed a gloomy and heavy nightmare-like effect in
certain lights, and it was not without a grim sense of impressiveness
that the revengeful Government of 1549, at the close of the
peasants’ rebellion, hanged one of its leaders, William Kett, higher
than Haman, from the summit of the western tower.

WYMONDHAM CHURCH.
The nave of the great church, incomparably the finest example of
Norman architecture in Norfolk, after the nave of Norwich Cathedral,
has a Perpendicular clerestory, is flanked by Perpendicular aisles,
and roofed with a noble open-timbered roof of East Anglian
character, decorated with the usual serried ranks of angels with
outstretched wings.
But it is not of architecture, even though ranking with the noblest,
that we must talk here, but rather of that strenuous flesh and blood
which, although long resolved into dust, gives to Wymondham the
interest of living, breathing—aye, and hating and fighting—men, who
fought and failed and died the death for their fellow-men in this fair
land of East Anglia, more than three hundred and fifty years ago.

That rebellion for which William Kett suffered here, and his brother
Robert from the battlements of Norwich Castle, was the very natural
revolt of the Norfolk peasantry from the rapacity and selfishness of
the landowning class, who sought to enclose the wide-spreading
commons where the peasants’ cattle and geese freely pastured.
There were other rural grievances, but of a minor kind. No one of
them was new when the trouble broke out, but they had at length,
after the smouldering discontent of years past, come to such a pass
that but very slight excuse was needed to set Norfolk in a blaze.
Already, nine years earlier, a certain John Walker, of Griston, had
said, “It would be a good thing if there were only as many
gentlemen in Norfolk as there were white bulls,” and this remarkable
expression of opinion was rendered the more impressive by the
favour it found among the country folk, who passed it from mouth to
mouth with every sign of approval. Some rhymester, too, had been
at work, and produced this prophetic verse:—
The country gnoffes, Hob, Dick, and Hick,
With clubs and clouted shoon,
Shall fill the vale of Dussin’s Dale
With slaughtered bodies soon.
Dussin’s Dale was, and is, outside Norwich, and the picture of a
rural revenge was thus presented to the rustics, who had long
suffered from manorial encroachments.
The initial incidents of the outbreak happened upon this very road
from Wymondham into Norwich, when the new fences erected by a
local landowner upon Attleborough Common were demolished on
June 20th, 1549. A fortnight later new hedges at Morley and
Hethersett were destroyed. The destruction of those at Hethersett
brought about the rising. It seems that the land-grabber of that
place was one Serjeant Flowerdew, between whom and the Ketts of
Wymondham there was a violent enmity. The Ketts were substantial
folks, engaged in tanning. It cannot be said that they were
blameless, for they, too, had enclosed; but had set the crowd on to
destroy Flowerdew’s landmarks without considering their own case.

The Serjeant naturally retorted by instigating the rustics in turn to
level and tear into fragments the hedges and palings of the Ketts,
who in the meanwhile seemed to have found salvation, for they not
only permitted this work of vengeance on their own illegal
enclosures, but heartily joined in it themselves. When this work was
completed, and having thus proved their sincerity, the two brothers
headed the mob back to Hethersett and destroyed what remained of
Flowerdew’s enclosures; marching on to Cringleford and meeting the
High Sheriff, who had heard of these riotous proceedings, and now
admonished the people to return home. So far, however, from doing
so, they put the Sheriff to flight, and, boldly setting forth upon an
armed movement for reform, laid waste an enclosure beside the
approach to Norwich, and, in defiance of the Mayor, marched round
the city, climbed to the high ground of Hellesdon, and, reaching
Mousehold Heath, pitched their camp there

XLIV
Some years earlier a short-lived but significant movement had been
set afoot by one self-styled “John Amend-all,” whose name is
sufficient earnest of there being wrongs grievously calling for justice
to be done. It had then been said that three or four stout fellows,
riding overnight through the towns of Norfolk, with bell-ringing and
exhortations to rise, would by morning have collected 10,000 men,
and it was now perceived that this had been no idle talk; for 16,000
peasants joined the camp on Mousehold Heath, whence the Ketts
and the leading spirits despatched a very moderate and fair-minded
petition to the King for redress of their grievances.
Norwich, as the place of residence of many landowners and, as a
manufacturing centre, quite out of sympathy with the country
people, was meanwhile practically invested by the rebels, who from
the commanding heights of Mousehold intercepted everything going
in or coming out. There for more than a fortnight they lay, the
summer weather in alliance with them, and with raiding parties
looting cattle and provisions from all quarters for the feeding of this
rustic host, which by this time had increased to 20,000.
Never did rebellion begin in more orderly fashion, for the Ketts,
with their chaplain, Conyers, held open-air court on the Heath, and
conducted things decently and in order. Food they were obliged to
seize, but no violence and no robbery were permitted, and had the
Government returned an answer showing any disposition to relieve
the peasants from the landlords’ exactions and aggressions, all
would have been well. But vague promises, coupled with an offer of
pardon for all concerned if they would first disperse and return to

their homes, was all the satisfaction they received; and Robert Kett
very rightly retorted to the herald who brought this message that
“Kings were wont to pardon wicked persons, not innocent and just
men.”
Norwich then prepared itself for attack. The Bishop’s Bridge over
the Wensum, and the gate that then straddled across it, were put in
a condition for defence against the expected descent from
Mousehold, and pieces of cannon were mounted on the quays. The
next morning the assault was delivered, and Kett’s men, although
many were slain by arrow-flights from the defenders, swarmed
across the river and seizing the guns, which had refused to shoot,
were soon masters of the city. The Mayor, Mr. Alderman Codd, and
the principal citizens were made prisoners and marched up to “Kett’s
Castle” on Mousehold, where they doubtless expected a violent
death, Robert Kett sending down a message that any one coming to
Mousehold should have a Codd’s head for a penny. But that was only
his humour, with nothing tragical at the back of it, for the worst that
befell those prisoners was the being made ridiculous in a mock-court
held on the Heath.
Norwich, in despair, welcomed the tardy arrival of some 2,500
men, chiefly Italian mercenaries, under the command of the Marquis
of Northampton, but they made little impression, and one of the
aliens, being captured, was stripped of his armour and hanged. On
August 1st there was renewed fighting in the streets, and Lord
Sheffield was killed, at a spot still marked by an inscribed stone. This
first force sent against the rebels was by this time defeated with
heavy loss, and Norwich remained in the hands of the victorious
peasants until August 23rd, when a second expedition, cautiously
feeling its way through disaffected East Anglia, appeared at the
entrance of the city by St. Stephen’s Gate.
It was not yet too late for the rebels to lay down their poor arms
of bows and arrows, scythes, pikes, and bill-hooks, but, fired with
the successful bloodshed that had given them possession of the city,
they rejected all offers made by the Earl of Warwick, commanding

the strong force that now sought entrance. Three days’ fighting, in
the city and on the slopes of Mousehold, followed, with varying
fortunes, and had it not been for the reinforcements of 1,100
German mercenaries, the rebellion might again have proved
successful. As it was, however, their arrival turned the scale. It was
at this juncture that, driven from the city, the peasants,
remembering the old prophetic verse, moved to the hollow of
Dussin’s Dale on Mousehold, where they were to “fill the vale with
slaughtered bodies.” Here, they thought, if there was any truth in
prophecy, they would achieve the final victory. It never occurred to
them that there were two ways of reading that verse, and thus it
was here they made their last stand and were cut down in hundreds,
grimly fulfilling its words, if not its spirit. Three thousand five
hundred of these poor countrymen were slain in this final struggle,
and perhaps an equal number had fallen in the almost two months’
fighting and skirmishing of this fatal rising. Thus it ended, but
vengeance had yet to take toll of their number. The chiefs of the
movement had held their court on Mousehold, under an oak they
called the Oak of Reformation, and it was from its branches that nine
of them were now hanged. Robert Kett was hanged higher still,
three months later, when, after having been sent to London and
flung into the Tower, he was brought back and suspended from a
gallows on the roof of Norwich Castle. Forty-five minor leaders were
hanged, drawn, and quartered in Norwich Market place, and some
250 of the others were plainly hanged, without these fiendish extras.
The others, a disheartened mob of 12,000, having learned an
unforgettable lesson, were bidden go home, for even the
bloodthirsty rage of the victors might well be aghast at the prospect
of meting out a like penalty to such a number; and moreover,
counsels of prudence and expediency had something to say. “What
shall we do, then?” asked the victorious Earl of Warwick, himself a
Norfolk landowner, anxious how his lands should be kept tilled if they
thus made away with the tillers of them, “What shall we do, then?
Hold the plough ourselves, play the carters, and labour the ground
with our own hands?” Good Heavens forefend such disaster!

Thus ended the great agrarian uprising of the mid-sixteenth
century, and no man can with certainty say that it had any result. It
sprang out of the void, and into nothingness it returned. But none
the less it behoves us to honour those simple souls who laid down
their lives for their immemorial rights in their common and free
pasturages, who saw with a manly indignation the preserving of fish
in the rivers, and that stopping up of public ways which even in the
fierce publicity of our own times requires all the vigilance of a public
society to keep in check. Wymondham or Norwich should in public
memorial honour the men who by their action said that these things
should not be, if they could help, and in laying down their lives for
the cause were as truly martyrs as any of those who died for
conscience’ sake in religion

XLV
There are modern epitaphs to Ketts in Wymondham churchyard,
whose fir-grown space admirably sets off and embellishes the gaunt
towers. It is in the narrow lane leading to the church that the most
picturesque inn of the town is to be found, in the sign of the “Green
Dragon,” a characteristic old English title and a very fine specimen of
old English woodwork.
Most of the ancient inns of Wymondham have either disappeared,
or have been rebuilt or otherwise modernised, but it was once, in
common with most other mediæval towns clustered around great
priories, a town of much good cheer and inordinate drinking. Piety
and early purl went hand in hand in those days, and often staggered
off to bed together in a very muzzy condition, or fell into the gutter,
wholly incapable. Those were the days when the ascetic early use of
the religious was forgotten, and before the Puritan rule of life had
come into existence; and men were not less devout because they
were drunken.

Organizational Behavior 1st Edition Neubert Solutions Manual

More Related Content

Similar to Organizational Behavior 1st Edition Neubert Solutions Manual

More from dipreraynaj8

Recently uploaded

Organizational Behavior 1st Edition Neubert Solutions Manual