Read the case study and answer the questions as required. Please do not forget this note

Important Note: -

1. Support your submission with course material concepts, principles, and theories from the textbook and at least two scholarly, peer-reviewed journal articles.
2. References required in the assignment. Use APA style for writing references.

Case: LEVI'S Please read the case "LEVI'S" from Chapter 1 "What is organizational Behaviour" Page: - 23 given in your textbook - Organizational behaviour: Improving performance and commitment in the workplace (7th ed). by Colquitt, J. A., LePine, J. A., \& Wesson, M. J. (2021) and Answer the following Questions: Assignment Question(s): 1. Initiatives like Improving Worker Well-Being could increase Levi's costs in a number of different respects. Shouldn't that harm the profitability of the company? (02 Marks) (Min words 150-200) 2. What are the potential strengths of a bottom-up approach to supplier improvement for a large company like Levi's? Would be the advantages to a more top-down approach? ( 02 Marks) (Min words 150-200) 3. How exactly should Harvard's School of Public Health go about studying the effects of the Improving Worker Wellbeing initiative? What would an ideal study look like? (02 Marks) (Min words 200) Clearly the end goal behind the Improving Worker Well-Being initiative is laudable. The stickier question is how to achieve that goal in 72 different factories. A natural temptation would be to focus on interventions with universal appeal and to roll out those same interventions in all 72 places. That sounds both efficient and consistent, doesn't it? Levi's is taking the opposite approach. It offers funding and guidance but lets the specifics vary by supplier and by region. For example, the company connected one of its suppliers-Apparel International-with a nonprofit to help it identify need areas. The resulting feedback led to better water fountains, better overhead fans, microwaves and griddles in the cafeteria, and a new soccer field. The feedback also led Apparel International to improve its managers-who had a reputation for being disrespectful and authoritarian. Explains Oscar Gonzalez French, the president of the supplier, "We had lots of people complaining their supervisors didn't have the right leadership style-they were too strong, too blunt, they didn't treat them well."* An additional nonprofit was then brought in to design a 10-week training and team-building program tailored to Apparel International's needs. Supervisors are trained to learn employees' idiosyncratic circumstances, listen to their opinions, and foster open two-way communication. As Gonzalez French summarizes, "We're teaching them to be better leaders."* How important is having better leaders to Apparel International's employees? Well, it showed up as a need area more frequently than higher wages, despite the fact that Mexicos minimum wage for apparel workers is only $5 a day. Indeed, Gonzalez French believes bad managers is a key reason why the annual turnover rate in his plant tends to be in the 3040 percent range. In reflecting on the bottom-up structure of the Improving Worker Well-Being initiative, Kim Almedia notes, "We needed to step back and listen to vendors."* Offers Bergh, "If this is going to be sustainable over time, we have to prove to the factory owners that this is good for their bus ness ...** Still, the question remains how to measure whether the initiative is helping, especially if it takes on different shapes and sizes across suppliers and regions. After all, Levi's is offering funding, even if the suppliers themselves are sharing the responsibility. How exactly will the company measure the success of the initiative? Much like it did with the design and execution of the Apparel International program, it found help. The company has asked the Harvard School o. Public Health to design a rigorous scientific study to assess the impact of the Worker Well-Being initiative