Reference no: EM133283307

Case: The Dueling Managers

Gilda manages a team of insurance salespeople who regularly meet and exceed annual sales expectations. Her team sells flood insurance in an area where it is mandated by the government. All homeowners who purchase any insurance must carry flood insurance as well.

The company sells multiple lines of insurance, and each department manager has goals that are aligned with last year's sales and total market opportunity.

Jerome manages the marine insurance for all watercraft coverage, including personal and commercial lines. His team has underperformed for the last two years, mainly due to storm-related losses that cost the company dearly.

The difference between the two departments could not be greater. First, Gilda's market is set by federal guidelines, including premiums, locations serviced, and market share. Jerome's team works hard to sell, market, advertise, and cold call customers, while also attempting to upsell the products. While Gilda's team consistently does well, there have been no flood losses in the past three years, whereas storm losses, which Jerome's insurance pays out, have been significant. Teams are paid based on total sales, sales with respect to goals, and loss ratios. As a result, Gilda's team's salaries are generally and significantly higher than those of Jerome's team.

Each of the managers hired their own teams, and has been in their positions for more than five years. Gilda is of Asian descent, is in her mid-50s, and has a team of 45 salespeople who are mostly women in their 40s and 50s (37 women, 8 men). Seven of the men are new hires in their mid-20s, with one being 65 (the first salesperson hired in the organization). Most of her team (n = 32) is White, although there are two Asian employees, four Hispanic, and seven Black employees.

Jerome's team is much more diverse than Gilda's. Jerome is Black and has hired a total of 22 salespeople; only four are White, three Asian, three Hispanic, and 11 Black. Ten women and 12 men work for Jerome, and the ages of the employees range from 24 to 70, with over 70 percent being over 40.

One of Jerome's employees filed a complaint, raising the issue of salary parity. A company audit showed that a discrepancy does exist among salaries with respect to race, age, and gender between the two departments. Possible solutions are being considered.

Read the following assumptions and answer the questions following them. Once you have inserted answers, hit the "submit" button at the bottom. This will reveal the correct answers and their reasoning. These answers will help you better understand how assumptions and logical reasoning work and will give you tools to help you do well on your Ontological Humility assignment/assessment.

Question 1

Assumption 1: The lack of diversity between the two departments has led to wage discrimination.
Is this assumption supported by the facts in the passage? Why or why not?

Question 2

Assumption 2: Increasing the diversity in Gilda's department would solve the wage discrimination.
Is this assumption supported by the facts in the passage? Why or why not?

Question 3

Assumption 3: Race, age, and gender do not play a role in the wage problem.
Is this assumption supported by the facts in the passage? Why or why not?

Question 4:

Some thoughts about this scenario and your reactions:

If you felt that assumptions 1 or 2 were accurate, rethink the scenario and the facts given. Were the trigger words which were included what led you to those decisions? Do you think it had to do with the placement of the Salesforce case study? Might it be related to having had a personal situation that mirrored the scenario in some way? Jot down a few thoughts about how this exercise made you rethink your own assumptions or reactions, or whether you felt you read the situation accurately.

Question 5:

If you felt that assumption 3 was not accurate, think about why you felt that way. Did you consider in your decisions whether how the two departments were set up might be the bigger influence on the pay discrepancy?