Summary Of Belby Case Analysis

The review written by Sanders about Belby, allows the reader to realize how the legitimate power of a manager can take precedence and result in a negative evaluation of an employee. If Southfield Packaging’s high standards still remain prevalent, personnel and managerial supervision needs to change. The idea of supervising a manager, and making uncalled for comments regarding his physique, decision making, hours of work, and talkativeness are absolutely absurd. I recommend, managers like Sanders, end their ways of being too “over the shoulder” especially in personal reviews, and that the talkativeness of managers is welcomed because communication truly it vital to a company’s success. One recommendation to help Southfield succeed is to change the ways of manger supervision; especially the way Sanders goes about. In the case of Frank Belby, his evaluation was made based off of his personal decisions outside of the office. The idea of stating that a manager has bad decision-making skills because of his physique is not fair. Sander’s continues to attack and criticize Belby by saying, “judging from his physique, he spends a lot more time watching football than playing it”. Comments like this should never be …show more content…
Sanders once stated “Frequent communication means I won’t be surprised by something that has snowballed out of control”. In addition, he mentions that his colleagues know where they stand with him most of the time, regarding their performance. With Belby, the opposite is true. Belby was confident in his chances of promotion. Under a manager who makes use of better more frequent communication this would not be an issue. Lastly, yelling at a manager after he goes into detail regarding his region is a negative, and not a way to boost his morale. A leader who truly values frequent communication would not cut off an employee discussing his own