There are couple of responses posted below . Please read both of them and give your opinion on them separately.
Read Response-1 and Response-2 below and give your opinion on BOTH responses separately. your answer should be supported with research unless the question is opinion oriented.. Responses to discussions below should not be “I agree” or “I like the way you stated that.” These responses should again be insightful, offering an opinion or facts based on your research and experiences. The opinion to both responses should be a minimum of 200 words each . See APA criteria for citing resources.
The below responses are of individuals who did case study “McRoy Aerospace” on page 332 and answer questions 4 and 5 on page 333.
“text book attached “
There are two possible things Mark could have done in my opinion. Mark has complete trust on Jack’s skill sets and abilities. He also believes that if this project can be done by anyone it was Jack. However, despite of trying, Jack had been facing difficulties finding the solution on this extremely complex project. In this situation, Mark should have actively looked into the progress of Jack’s efforts. If Jack was struggling with something or he was facing any impediments, Mark should have asked Jack if he needs any help with anything or from any other co-workers. Mark should have tried to understand the difficulties Jack brought up and tried to find a way to channel them. Meanwhile Mark could have considered another co-worker of Jack, maybe the second best from his team to analyze the project. Sometimes it is not feasible for one person to think through all possibilities with wide angle. In this case, working as a team with other co-worker helps to find an effective solution quicker.
If Jack could not solve the problem second time around, it would be too late for Mark to give this chance to someone else from his team in order to find the solution. Mark believed that Jack is the only one who could solve this problem. So, in a way Mark believed that Jack is the best person to solve this problem and no one else could be as efficient and as effective as Jack. So, considering Jack’s co-worker to take another look into the project could be again the waste of time and money. Moreover, the new person would have his/her own learning curve just to understand the requirement of the project, to determine the complexity of the project. It would have taken longer for the new person than Jack’s second tryout just to make initial analysis of the project. So, in my opinion, It would not make sense to assign this project to someone else for the third tryout.
What should Mark have done if Jack still was not able to resolve the problem?
Mark had a recency bias towards Jack which is why he believed that he was the only one from the whole company who is capable of finding one door opening/closing mechanism for the plane. Mark should have assembled a resource pool of varied talents and expertise from different departments across the company. This would have helped in ensuring that multiple perspectives are being applied to the problem. Working with people from different skillsets and knowledge fosters an environment of creative collaboration that helps bring new ideas to the table. The team should have broken down the problem into smaller tasks and issues and addressed each of those by weighing all the possible options.
Would it make sense for Mark to assign this problem to someone else now, after Jack could not solve the problem the second time around?
It makes sense to involve multiple resources that Mark has at his disposal instead of assigning it to another person. Giving the sole responsibility to someone else might result in a solution, but that solution may not be the only one that solves the problem as well as is in alignment with company’s new goals. Therefore it makes sense to get external help and utilize different skillsets from all the levels so that there can be plenty of thinking hats.