ing as a team is a huge goal that could allow the company to perform as a branch rather than individually. Peter, as you started monitoring the work practices, you notice target sales were not being met and insisted on applying pressure to employees, such as the ones who weren’t up to speed. (Cockburn-Wooten, Simpson & Zorn, 2010). Now in my opinion, structure seemed to be lacking. Instead of targeting the employees who aren’t up to speed, planning and giving commands would have helped the employees who weren’t up to speed. Such as giving them the specifics as to what they should be working on, rather than general stating that they need to work as a team. Peter, you recalled noticing that Barry and Dave failed to meet standards, and initiated a meeting with each of them individually. Barry was showing his concerns in an angrily manner by shouting at you saying, “you combined windows and doors into one workshop, We’re working together as you asked”. (Cockburn-Wooten, Simpson & Zorn, 2010). Although it may have looking like Dave and Barry were slacking, they were doing as you have asked, to work together. Organizations run accordingly to rules and regulations. If these standards were made clearly from the first day on the job some confusion would have been made clear. Instead of addressing how you want to see the company work as a team, you should have addressed planning and how individuals need to function on their own rather than as a team 24/7. Planning allows employees to look into the future and determine what they should be doing. When planning gets brought into the scenario, employees are more likely to want to achieve those goals which allows them to work harder not only for the organization, but for self-satisfaction. When mentioning that everyone working together is a goal, it makes it known in the wrong way that the employees should form some kind of bond and friendship with their co-workers. No future goals were addressed, none of you managers have given commands in a strictly manner. You need to show control, which ensures the comparison between goals and activities to make sure the company is functioning progressively was not initiated (Miller, 2015). No elements of management were given and therefore the reason for employees failed standards are due to these standards not being met by you all. 2) What would be your diagnosis of what went wrong, as it was described in this case study? While taking a human resources approach, through Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs theory, it is focused on the employees needs in the workplace. My diagnosis of what went wrong in this case, is that employee’s affiliation needs did not feel as though they were met. The needs of social interaction may have been felt between some co-workers, but they did not feel a strong social interaction with higher levels such as with Peter and Laurence. Peter, I have noticed that you have been getting a sense of achievement, especially from Laurence. The branch has become one of the top performing branches, but with that being said, about 60% of the original staff has left the company (Cockburn-Wooten, Simpson & Zorn, 2010). With this being said, they did not feel as though they were being treated fairly. Having a strong relationship with coworkers and managers allows employees to stay and work towards a company’s goals. Dave and Barry had left because of the pressure you were putting upon them to do their tasks correctly. I believe a better way to approach employees who are slacking is to help them find ways to improve their work within the >