Case Issues Issue 1: The process for making a hiring and selection decision Mary Foster's selection process, which spanned over a week, enlisted a team of seven individuals from various departments to interview and assess two candidates, Jenny Bruce and David Boyle. The process was extensive, draining, and costly as the team's involvement required recompense fortheir time and efforts. Due to the complexity of the task, Foster could not make the decision independently and had to seek consultation within the organization, further prolonging the process. Additionally, Foster was under pressure to make a decision quickly, which could lead to a rushed decision that is not well thought out or considered. This could lead to a decision that is not the best forthe organization. Foster didn't consulted selection criteria with the team, which led to some confusion and lack of unanimity among the group. The selection decision was intricate, requiring Fosterto critically examine each candidate's strengths and weaknesses to determine the best t forthe position. This dense, tedious, and partially ambiguous selection process highlighted the challenges of decision-making in a diverse and multifaceted organizational setting.| Issue 2: Selection Criteria The selection process forthe senior event manager role at Riverview Hotel was impaired by unclear and undefined criteria, making it problematic for the team to assess candidates effectively and impartially. This ambiguity resulted in confusion among selectors, who found it challenging to rate candidates and reach agreement. The team lacked a uniform structured interview guide and rating system, leading to potential bias due to differing personal evaluation standards. The absence of a detailed criteria prevented direct, objective side-by-side comparison, risking the hiring ofa less suitable applicant which could be an expensive error forthe company. Hindered by a lack of opportunity to contribute to the selection criteria, the team's decision-making capacity was compromised, as the nal criteria did not fully align with the specific position needs. This shortfall led to team member Foster feeling uneasy and left her with more questions than answers regarding the ultimate hiring decision. The varied team composition could provide diverse perspectives fora balanced candidate evaluation, but the process was undermined by the lack of transparent, objective standards. Issue 3: Leadership Style Foster's leadership style in this case study was problematic for several reasons. First, she failed to provide clear direction to the selection team, leaving them with more questions than answers. This resulted in a lack of clarity in the decision-making process and a feeling of confusion \\a/mA/oAng/s/t/the team members. Second, Foster attempted to control the decision-making process by providing a set of criteria for the selection team to use in determining the best candidate. This created an environment of rigidity and inflexibility, making it difficult for the team to consider alternative solutions. Finally, Foster seemed to have difficulty accepting feedback from her team and adapting to their opinions. This resulted in a lack of collaboration and an inability to reach a consensus. The problems with Foster's leadership style had a signicant impact on the decision-making process. The lack of clarity and direction made it difficult for the team to reach a consensus, resulting in a prolonged debate. The rigid selection criteria limited the team's ability to consider different solutions, and the lack of collaboration prevented them from finding a solution that was acceptable to all parties. Ultimately, the team ended up making a decision that was not satisfactory to everyone and that could have been avoided with better leadership. lssue4: Selection Teaml The selection team was presented with a difficult decision to make. The team was responsible for providing input on the selection criteria, interviewing the candidates, evaluating the candidates, participating in the team debrief, and providing input on the selection decision. The team had two candidates to choose from and had to make a decision based on the selection criteria they had chosen. The selection team faced several problems in decision-making. Firstly, the team had not been given enough timeto properly evaluate the candidates. The team was only given 30 minutes to interview each candidate, which is not enough timeto get afull understanding oftheir qualications and abilities. Additionally, the team was not given a structured interview guide with a common rating system, which is a best practice for selection teams. This lack of structure made it difficult for the team to evaluate the candidates and make a decision. Furthermore, the team had to make a difficult decision between two seemingly qualied candidates. Jenny Bruce had been in her position for three years and had consistently received good performance evaluations. David Boyle had been in his position for two years and had also received good performance evaluations. The team had to decide between two equally qualied candidates