Five Sources of Power
According to French and Raven, there are five sources of power which include referent, coercive, legitimate, expert, and reward power. Reward power results from an individual's ability to offer incentive in exchange for something while coercive power involves punishing individuals. Legitimate power draws from a person's position while referent power stems from an individual's disposition and behavior. Expert power is determined by a person's knowledge in a given area. In this case, it is clear that Joe, the manager has more power than Betty. He possesses legitimate, coercive, and reward power due to his position as the manager who can choose to either administer or withhold punishment and rewards.
Four Sources of Intergroup Conflict
The four sources of intergroup conflict include line-staff, vertical, diversity-based, and horizontal conflict. Vertical occurs when employees who hold jobs at different levels disagree. Horizontal conflict involves different employees working at the same level. Line-staff conflict results from issues associated with authority. When a conflict results from racial, gender, and ethnicity identity issues, it is considered to be diversity-based. In this scenario, there is evidence of line-staff conflict, in which Joe feels that Betty is undermining his legitimate authority. He is unable to control her behavior as she adamantly refuses to train the new trainees, who are clearly incapable of working with the complex electronic records software. At the same time, there is also evidence of vertical conflict, which involves Betty and John, who are individuals at working at different levels. Joe is the manager, while Betty works under Joe in the health information department.
Beatty's Lack of Motivation
Betty's lack of motivation in her job is evident in her refusal to train the new employees. This can be explained by Vroom's expectancy theory which posits that a person's motivation to perform in a particular way is directly determined by his desire for a particular outcome, belief that his performance will generate this desired outcome, and the likelihood of his performance generating this outcome. In this regard, it is clear that Betty wanted to be promoted to the management position, which is currently held by Joe. She knows that teaching the trainees will not result in the promotion. The knowledge that her performance will not be accompanied by the outcome she desires leads her to refuse to assist Joe. Vroom goes on to explain that valence, expectancy, and instrumentality are the key determinants behind a person's performance. Betty's valence is significantly high as she desires to be promoted for her expertise and experience. There is also a lack of instrumentality as Betty was not considered for the promotion. She knows that she will not become the manager even though she improves her performance. Similarly, her expectancy is low because she has only has five years left before she can retire. She is convinced that her performance will not alter this outcome.
Fielder's Contingency Theory
Fielder's contingency theory demonstrates that stress often undermines leaders' intelligence and experiences. Their ability to think in a rational manner may also be undermined. Owing to this, there is no single leadership style effective for all situations. However, leaders should employ styles that are suitable to particular situations. In John's case, he should strive to employ a leadership style that stresses the importance of forging stronger ties with Betty. While John holds a position of power, and tasks in his department are well defined, his relationship with Betty has declined. He needs to focus on rebuilding this relationship to address the discord between him and Betty.
