Reference no: EM131743871

Question: Fairness-When 6 + 1 = 9 Bill had 9 evaluations during 7 consulting assignments. One corporation submitted 1 original evaluation and 2 copies of the same evaluation. Policy requires that each corporation submit 1 evaluation per consulting project. Unfortunately for Bill, the evaluation that was submitted three times was negative in two of the asked 20 evaluative questions. This skewed Bill's overall performance average in those 2 categories to an overall score of "meets expectations." Bill-being a perfectionist- had "exceeds expectations" in all of the categories over the past 10 years. Bill believed that the data were flawed, and he approached Vinnie, his supervisor, to discuss his concerns. Vinnie brushed off Bill's concerns and said everything would average out. Bill later learned that Vinnie was responsible for assuring the accuracy of aggregate data in the organization. Bill thought to himself, "If the performance data are flawed, how can I trust any other data that he presents at corporate meetings?" Bill decided to e-mail his concerns to Vinnie about the use of invalid data in his evaluations. He decided to make the analogy that, if he had 7 algebra exams and in 6 he scored 100 and in 1 he scored 70, the aggregate data would be flawed if the score of 70 was wrongly counted three times. Bill was sure Vinnie would understand this analogy. Not so. Vinnie said to Bill, "We have already had this discussion. I don't want to hear about it again."

1. Discuss what values are at play in this scenario.

2. Should Bill pursue his concerns, or should he accept the performance downgrade that has resulted from the use of flawed data? Discuss your answer.

3. Was Vinnie impervious to reasoning, thinking, "I've made up my mind, don't confuse me with the facts"?