Should Phil and Linda ignore the old- timer’s protests and write the job descriptions as they see fit? Why? Why not? How would you go by resolving the differences? A job description is a list of a job’s duties, responsibilities, reporting relationships, working conditions, and supervisory responsibilities- one product of a job analysis (Dessler 2013). I do not think that the old timer’s description should be ignored. I do think that the best way to get a valid description of a job is to get it from the person that is doing the job. The person that is doing the job knows exactly what the job entails.
The case clearly stated that the employees knew their jobs well and did not have to be bothered about what they were doing. So with that being said, this means that the workers know exactly what is required to accomplish their jobs. I also feel that if someone else writes job descriptions according to their own understanding of the jobs, this could cause employees to become unhappy and this can lead to deviant workplace behavior. Employees are the people who know the problems that they are facing so in designing job descriptions their involvement is mandatory. It was said by the consultant that the old timers was exaggerating, even if they are exaggerating the fact still remains that they were able to perform their jobs therefore the information that they was given should not be omitted.
The company can go about resolving the problem having the president to look at what the descriptions that were written by the employees and if he disagree that they should not be doing the job then he will be able to take the job away from them and have someone else to do the job. In fact I feel that if the president should write the description or have the consultant to do so and if it is something that the employee was doing but is no longer required to then that job should be taking away from them.
They should only be required to do. The consultant could use other resources to determine who should have what job and write the descriptions according to that so that everyone know what is required of them and no one is doing more than what they should be. 2.How would you have conducted they job analysis? What should Phil do now? In this case a job analysis is the procedure for determining the duties and skill requirements of a job and the kind of person who should be hired ( Dessler 2013).
I would have taken incite from the old timers and I would have reviewed what they had. I would have used other data to determine the role of all employees I will do questionnaires and interviews to come up with the descriptions. I would have given them a list of what was expected of them and if they were doing things that were not in my description I would take the job away from them immediately and give it to the person that I had assigned that description to. From now Phil should take into account what the old-timers are saying that their job entails and either agree to the description or rewrite them and distribute the work. He should have done other things such as interviews and observations and different techniques to help with the process.