Dealing with Employees
In the above scenario, it is clear that Smith is a disgruntled employee. It applies based on the fact that after observing her, she does not work actively and appears as though she has problems. Smith’s performance over the testing process shows she appeared on top of the list but was not chosen. Despite her determination to impress the team that she was fit for the detective position, she was judged based on her previous records. This action comes out to be the factors that make her feel dissatisfied working as she feels she is not treated right. In addition to that, being looked down upon by her poor performance review seems to be what is used in limiting her from getting the detective position in the department.
The fact that she is not active in the department makes her a disgruntled employee. Also, her performance can tell that she is not happy with how the organization treats her. Based on her case, it is clear that she works in a district where there is low activity going on, which affects her overall performance. But considering that this is what the vetting team looks at in concluding that she is lazy is an issue that needs to be addressed. Renyut et al. (2017) explain that the problem can be fixed by communicating with her and making her clear the misconception she might be having over the company. It is essential to work on keeping a positive work environment with her and offer her an opportunity to progress her career. Follow-ups will then be made, which is a way of preparing her to learn more and improve on her areas of weaknesses before she can pass the test again in the future.
Renyut, B. C., Modding, H. B., & Bima, J. (2017). The effect of organizational commitment, competence on Job satisfaction, and employees performance in Maluku Governor’s Office.