CASE 28 The Case In Case Analysis Background Information Jerry Brown, 42, was promoted to supervisor of the Case Analysis Unit just three months ago. The Case Analysis Unit was a special investigation group with the city's Department of Social Services. The four employees in this Unit investigated suspected fraud cases and researched various special requests for exemptions and services. The investigations conducted by the case analysis representatives typically began by verifying data obtained from applicants during the intake process. Then, field agents as well as employers or claimants would be contacted as nec- essary for additional information. The information gathered from all these sources would be reviewed, and a recommendation for either "no further action" or "prosecution" would be issued. While the unit's workload fluctuated some- what, the average standard of production was 12 completed cases per week and four backlogged cases cleared. Jerry believed that everyone in his unit was doing an acceptable job except Frank Harrison. Frank, 46, had been with the department for 22 years, the last eight of which were spent in this unit. Frank's usual rate of performance was seven cases a week, with one or two backlogged cases cleared. Jerry remembered a conversation with Sullivan Hart, the previous supervi- sor of this unit, whose retirement had opened up the supervisory opportunity for Jerry. The conversation took place about four months before Sullivan's last scheduled day, when they were having lunch together. Jerry had just been named as Sullivan's replacement, and they were discussing different aspects of the transition and the operations of the Case Analysis Unit. Jerry remembered Sullivan's remarks very clearly: "Frank just doesn't have the motivation to do an adequate job, and to be honest with you, I'm too close to retirement to rock the boat." Sullivan had paused, putting down his fork. "You know," he continued, "I finally got to the point with Frank that I'd be pleased if I got seven or eight completed cases from him each week. Everyone else ended up taking up the slack." After that conversation, Jerry began to watch Frank more closely. Sure enough, Frank seemed to move more slowly, stop more often, put aside more challenging tasks, and ask for help more frequently than his co-workers in the unit. Otherwise, though, Frank was a model employee. He was seldom absent and arrived at work on time every day. The quality of his work was almost as good as the work done by the other employees. He was polite and considerate, even if he did not socialize as freely as the others did. 28.1 Fifty Case Studies for Management & Supervisory Training Jerry looked in Frank's personnel folder. He found no record of any pre- vious counseling or disciplinary procedures, but did find Frank's most recent performance appraisal, which had been conducted by Sullivan Hart about a month before he left. Jerry was disturbed but not surprised by what he saw: Sullivan had rated Frank as an "above average" employee (a 4 on a scale of 5). According to Sullivan, Frank's productivity was in line with the unit's stand- ards. He had written: "Frank does his job well and has a long history of good performance with the city." There was no indication in the appraisal or in the file that there had ever been a notice given to Frank about work standards or a discussion with him about how he could improve his work performance. Under the city's merit review system, the higher the evaluation rating, the bigger the salary increase an employee was entitled to. For example, employees rated as doing an acceptable job would receive an average increase of about 4 percent; those rated above average, 6 percent; and those rated superior, 8 per- cent. Sure enough, Frank's salary had been adjusted by about 5.5 percent as a result of this last review. Jerry was learning about another problem related to Frank's performance. Shortly after assuming the supervisor's job, Jerry began sensing how much an- ger and hostility the other employees in the unit had toward Frank. At first, he would overhear side comments directed at Frank during meetings or discus- sions, but recently he had noticed that Frank's co-workers were making these comments more openly. For example, in a recent staff meeting, an initial joke about how slowly an applicant responded to a fraud claim was compared to Jerry's processing of cases. While he sat there, obviously uncomfortable, the others ridiculed him contemptuously. Before Jerry could regain order, there was a lot of psychological "blood" on the floor. As a result of that episode, Jerry became concerned about the long-term ef- fects this situation would have on the morale and performance of the unit if he let the situation continue. CASE QUESTIONS 1. Describe the problem(s) that Jerry is facing. 2. Should Jerry do anything about the less-than-stand- ard performance of Frank Harrison? If so, what should his performance management strategy be? 3. What should Jerry do about Frank in relation to the other employees in the unit