The following paper analyzes the behavior of Bob Knowlton, his encounter with a difficult organizational issue, how he dealt with it, and what factors influenced his decision. Knowlton can be described as a team-focused leader, which could prove helpful in achieving long-term goals, but, in the end, his insecurities negated all the results of his team-building efforts. With the introduction of Simon Fester, Knowlton’s growing self-doubts resulted in his job resignation and stagnated the progress of the research.
Words of encouragement by Dr. Jerrod took deep roots in Knowlton’s mind when he said that “The sky is the limit for a man who can produce” (Hellriegel and Slocum, 547). However, those words turned into seeds of doubt when Knowlton realized that his new colleague Simon Fester can produce better than him. The problems with communication between Dr. Jerrod, Bob Knowlton, and the research group added fuel to the fire, as Jerrod failed to properly introduce the newcomer as well as describe his plans for Fester. Simon Fester can be described as a very bright, talented, and confident, but abrasive and arrogant person. The conflict of personalities is clear between Fester and Knowlton, and this is what triggers the major problem Knowlton faced.
Knowlton’s insecurity and low self-esteem did not allow him to voice his concerns to his boss, he was left brooding on the issue, with Fester’s outstanding productivity overshadowing his deeds. This problem became more and more complicated as Fester started to challenge the workflow Knowlton created, taking his overconfident attitude a bit too far and even diminishing other workers’ contributions. Bearing in mind Dr. Jerrod’s words, he jumped to the conclusion that Fester will eventually replace him. Due to the atmosphere, Dr. Jarrod created at work, Knowlton did not inquire about this situation and did not even consult about his intentions of resignation.
Instead of taking a direct approach to the problem, Bob Knowlton chose to take a regressive way and tried to live with the issue at first. His inner arguments went from a fearful assessment of Fester’s input to a more accepting and lenient attitude as he hoped that the raising productivity will negate the newcomer’s lack of human touch. However, as Knowlton began to question his own competence, he became wary of the fact that Fester will eventually publicly reveal Knowlton’s mistakes or inadequacy (Hellriegel and Slocum, 549). Instead of dealing with the potential problem, Knowlton chose to escape it by leaving the project, masking it as a personal issue unrelated to work.
According to Rotter’s locus of control principle, Bob Knowlton has an external locus of control and can be described as a person who tends to assume that some factors are beyond their reach (Rotter, 490). Simon Fester, however, has a very strict internal locus of control, which lets him keep a steady grasp on the situation and quickly assume the dominating position in the group. The unveiling situation from Knowlton’s perspective is unstable and he acts as if the outcome is influenced only by other people, fate, or luck and out of Knowlton’s influence (Rotter, 490).
From Fester’s perspective, there is no sign of instability and he acts according to his abilities. Due to the miscommunication between the team, the boss, and the newcomer, the results of a clash between two diametrically opposite loci bring peril to the entire project, with a risk of a complete halt.
Works Cited
Hellriegel, Don and Slocum, John W. Jr. Organizational Behavior. 13th ed., Cengage Learning, 2010.
Rotter, Julian Bernard. “Internal Versus External Control of Reinforcement: A Case History of a Variable.” American Psychologist, vol. 45, no. 4, 1990, pp. 489–493.