Ryan Clifford P.

Bibal ECEP 5523

BSECE V TTh 4:00 - 5:00

Working Overtime
Case Analysis

Background
A young man named Ryan Redgrave lands a job as quality control personnel. During his
work, he observed some problems in the production of plastic parts in his department. He then
directly approached Mark, a vendor representative of the company concerned, and offered a
solution to the inconsistency problem. After spending a number of weeks working overtime, he
came up with a working solution which later on was implemented. In exchange for his hard
work, Mark offered Ryan some luxurious compensation which he readily accepted.

Problem Statement
The opening statement of the case already presents the main problem of this case. XYZ
hired Ryan Redgrave who, on papers, is very much qualified for the job position. However, what
the company did not see was that Ryan was ignorant of the proper industry methods. His lack of
experience proved to be his major downfall and already led him to committing violations of
company policies. He did things that are rather beyond his job description. It is evidenced by his
actions showing bias treatment for Mark and the IMP. This is clearly an unnecessary and unjust
action for an employee of his level.
XYZ might have not been greatly affected by Ryans actions as of the moment. However,
the company cannot be sure of as to how these improper transactions might potentially have a
great impact business-wise as well as with the mentally of its employees.

Problem Analysis
Having a young and brilliant employee may give both good and bad effects for the
company. After his hiring, Ryan Redgrave immediately identified a problem with the current
operations of the company. As excellent as he is, he readily offered a solution to the concerned
party but in a rather improper manner. He is ignorant not only with the company policies but also
with specific legalities regarding procurement proceedings. Clearly, his actions are slowly
leading to accepting acts to bribery.
Ryan Redgrave might be an intelligent employee but his lack of experience in the
industry proved to be a major flaw in his character. He performed transactions which turned out
to benefit him more without proper acknowledgement from the company. He is indeed
unconsciously starting to build a sense of corruptness and dishonesty within him. It is common
problem within any part of the society. A person thinks that what he is doing correct but in fact is
against what is ethical and just. In Ryans case, what he is doing is can be regarded as accepting
a bribe from Mark to do favors for IMP.

Assumptions
From the case presented, the actions of Ryan Redgrave can be attributed to the following
assumptions:

No briefing of the company policies to new employees
The case of Ryan Redgrave could have not taken place if only proper and sufficient
briefing was made with the employees. Certainly, every employee is expected to be a
professional and ethical with his actions. However, the company should not forget to take
into consideration that there will always be people nave about industry methods which might
result to undesirable instances.
Ignorance on existing regulations on bidding and procurement of services
One major probability that Ryan Redgrave did his unethical actions is that he is
unaware that there laws and implementing rules and regulations that every professional
must learn to practice in the workplace. He might not have thought that what he did was
wrong and therefore continued to do it until somebody intervened with them. Still, even if
he is a very promising employee, he will never be excused in committing such wrong
acts. There are right steps in performing business transactions which are needed to be
followed in creating orderly dealings.
No social interaction between Ryan Redgrave and his co-employees
It is indeed necessary to build social connections within every workplace
especially among the workers themselves. This lets a person have someone whom he can
refer to in making decisions related to work. This might come from the seniors or more
experienced employees than the person concerned.


Alternative Course of Action
Addressing this problem might not be as difficult as it may sound. There are two offered
alternatives for this case which are given hereunder.
1. Performing a detailed lecture of the company policies to be delivered to employees
whether in group or per department
To address employees lack of knowledge about company rules and regulations is
always a good way of reminding the employees of what they are legally bounded as
people working under the company. A well-informed worker might be able to self-
regulate and refrain himself from doing things that will not support the growth of the
company.
2. Conducting team-building activities
These activities primarily aim to strengthen team work within the employees.
Furthermore, these can be designed to help in determining the strengths and weakness of
each individual. Knowing the capabilities and incapacities if a co-worker can lead to a
more productive working relationship letting them develop ways of coping up with ones
weaknesses.
3. Termination of employee proved to violate the rules and regulations
An employee who he is determined to be deliberately going against the rules of
the company should be punished accordingly even if might mean immediate termination
from the job. This could abruptly be done to prevent any growth of potential issues for
the company and its employees that may develop overtime.


Recommendation
From the abovementioned possible courses of actions, it is recommended that the first
alternative be selected for this case. This is due to the reasons that the perceived problem can
already be addressed by injecting to the employees the rules and regulations that they are
expected to abide. Aside from this, the company should let the workers know what consequences
they might face once they are proven to be committing illegal and unjust actions against the
company.
However, it is also suggested that the second alternative be taken along with the first.
There are no explicit incompatibilities with these two and might as well conduct the two
alternatives one after a short period of time. Of course, the first one should be performed prior to
the next alternative.
The only possible setbacks with these two alternatives is extended work and more
allotted time to be performed by the concerned workers both for conducting and officiating tasks.
The third alternative is only recommended in conditions leading to major problems for
the company as well as its workers.
The case of Ryan Redgrave might not be posing great predicaments for XYZ but requires
immediate response from the management. Letting this activities continue might develop into
something harmful to the companys name as a business entity.

Implementation Plan
In pursuing the first alternative, several steps are needed to be performed for its success.
A committee that should be responsible for detailing company policies to the employees should
be formed. The next step is to create a schedule for meeting a certain number of workers for each
session. It must be ensured that no job will be compromised in conducting this activity. Written
and verbal tests should then be conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of these company policy
information distribution tasks.
Since the number of workers is not stated, it could be assumed that the time frame for this
activity should be within a period of 4 -7 weeks. By the end of 10 weeks, the results of the tests
should have already been evaluated. At this time, an employee evaluation should then be
conducted by the committee to determine whether the performed activity succeeded in achieving
its objective of reducing any malpractice in the workplace due to ignorance of the company
policies.