As a young, promoted manager tasked with boosting sales performance, Oliveira's enthusiasm to suggest changes had an adverse impact on existing employees' receptiveness. The problem started with the employers ignorance of market prospects in Vitoria. The store experienced a major decline in consumer markets in downtown Vitoria. As stated by the outgoing manager, the company is not recognizing the changing metropolitan area where governmental institutions and offices were relocated, and transit population had been reduced significantly $($Cates et al$.,2017).$ After understanding the facts of markets declination in downtown Vitoria, Oliveira should have discussed with his supervisor the current market situation to formulate solutions and adjust the companys expectations. The higher$-$up team should have acknowledged the challenges in the market and provided different approaches instead of assigning Oliveira the sole mission of increasing sales performance.Aside from the companys lack of recognition of the market problem, Oliveiras communication with his employees should have been more considerate and thoughtful. Though Oliveira took Fischers advice that the first and most important thing you have to do is to get to know your people $($Cates et al$.,2017),$ his effort may not be perceived as meaningful enough to his employees. He spent a week meeting with each employee personally and inquired about basic information such as their name, experience and role at the store $($Cates et al$.,2017).$ This initial attempt was a good starting point, but it was not an appropriate method for cultivating and building relationships. As described in Building relationship skills at work, a leader can have a hard time bringing a team together to accomplish the goal without solid relationships $($CCL$,2021).$ The employees positive organizational relationships not only play an important role in shaping organizational reputation, but also contribute towards the achievement of organizational aims and boosting employee eectiveness $($Iqbal et al$.,2019).$Oliveiras mistake was rooted in his inability to engage his employees effectively and secure their buy$-$in for the proposed changes, even though he had well$-$reasoned arguments about what changes were needed and how to implement them $($Cates et al$.,2017).$ After meeting with each employee individually for basic information, he moved on and set up the staff meeting to discuss his vision and strategies for the store to improve performance. The biblical verse from Amos $3$:$3$ integrates a better perspective Do two walk together, unless they have agreed to meet?. Oliveira should have involved the experienced senior staff in discussions about the changes, seeking their input to collaboratively create a shared vision. This approach not only establishes a robust strategy for the success of the change process, but also fosters relationships among team members, promoting trust and a cohesive team dynamic. Moreover, when Oliveira communicated his proposed changes, there was no defined timeline set for achieving milestones and no specific person was assigned to be accountable for the outcomes. In Kotters eight steps for Leading Change, he emphasized the significance of forming a coalition comprising dedicated individuals who would serve as champions overseeing specific change initiatives, and the importance of generating short$-$term wins to reward the change agents and reinforce the shared vision $($Kotter$,2012).$ Therefore, to execute the change effectively, Oliveira should have developed a thorough implementation plan, clearly assigning responsibility to specific individuals and outlining milestone activities with associated deadlines.