Case:

On a Saturday night in the fall of 2015, a woman was attending a charity event at a golf and country club in Toronto along with her baby and partner. During the dinner her two-and-a-half-month old baby became hungry so she went into a secluded hallway in a discreet corner outside of the dining area where she sat in a chair to feed him. While seated in the chair feeding her baby, a male service manager approached her with a large tablecloth to shield her from view because of complaints from people who did not want to see her breastfeeding while they were eating. She was told that she was visible to patrons in a members-only dining area. Although she was seated in a chair in the corner of the hallway, she was told that she was still visible to patrons.

The woman was then escorted to the basement to continue feeding her baby and told that she would be "more comfortable there," a move that she felt was an attempt to accommodate people who are intolerant of something natural. "I thought, why are people disgusted or upset by the sight of a child eating while they are eating? It didn't make any sense to me," said the mother. I took Jacob (her baby) off the breast and covered up and he led me downstairs to the basement," she said. "The way it was handled, I was slightly embarrassed because he made me feel like it was a shameful thing by sort of covering me up and saying people didn't want to see it." She did not say anything to the manager at the time because she was so surprised. "I kind of went along with it," she said. "And then I felt like, wait a minute, what just happened here? And why didn't I kind of stand up for myself at the time?" She left shortly after and the charity's organizers said they would speak with the golf club.

The woman's partner took a photo of her breastfeeding and posted it and a description of the incident on Facebook. People from all around the world sent messages of support and outrage over the incident. The post also prompted a backlash from parents and patrons of the club. By Sunday afternoon, the page was full of comments from people condemning the club's actions. The club's Facebook page also received dozens of one-star reviews.

"After getting a flood of support, I suddenly realized that a lot of women don't really know the law, don't really know that it's not OK for people to ask you to move and make you feel like you're doing something wrong breastfeeding," she said. "Personally, I feel why should I have to cover up when I'm breastfeeding? The baby's head covers the breast anyway, this is a perfectly natural thing to do. It's necessary to sustain life, so why are we made to feel shameful of it?"

The Ontario Human Rights Commission says that women have the right to breastfeed in a public area and not to be disturbed or asked to move to a more discreet location. The commission also states that such services including those offered by restaurants, cafes, stores, and at parks must be provided to breastfeeding women without discrimination.

The following Monday, the president of the club's board of governors and the chief operating officer sent an apology to the woman and posted it publicly. The letter stated, "Our staff member should have acted differently and not have asked you to move to another location at the club to continue feeding your baby. We deeply regret that this caused you to feel embarrassed." The letter also stated, "We recognize that you and other mothers who come to the [club] as members or guests are entitled to breast feed their children without covering up and should not be asked to move from a location that is comfortable and convenient for them," and "We unreservedly apologize for the discomfort this caused you."

The apology also indicated that the club plans to make sure its staff are aware of the province's human rights code as it applies to women breastfeeding and will provide sensitivity training to its staff to make them aware "of the needs and rights of breastfeeding mothers."

The women accepted the apology and said, "Well I'm very pleased. First of all because the apology was public and second of all it was going to come with sensitivity training for the staff." She said the club took the corrective measures she wanted, but she has a message for those who discriminate against breastfeeding mothers. "I say that this is a beautiful act. It's an act that sustains life. It's very important as a way of bonding between mother and child, and it's a human right."

Q1. If you conducted a needs analysis, what could you have learned from a person analysis?

a) Club's mission statement b) Technology audit and cost benefit analysis c) individual, team, or staff personas d) Theoretical model for sensitivity training e) None of the above

Q2. What information would they have obtained if they had conducted a needs analysis?

a) A needs analysis would have determined the exact requirements, as per the province's human rights codes, the club needed to implement. b) A needs analysis may or may not have validated the decision to provide sensitivity training to staff, but it would have almost certainly helped in determining whether or not staff were conversant with the province's human rights code. c) A needs analysis would have provided the necessary data to design and develop a training framework focused on organizational goals independent of the human rights code. d) A needs analysis would have validated the decision to provide sensitivity training to staff, and it would have helped determine that the staff were not conversant with the province's human rights code. e) None of the above.

Q3. If you conducted a needs analysis, what could you have learned from an organizational analysis?

a) The club's strategic plan. b) What the patrons of the club required. c) The need for sensitivity training. d) How knowledgeable staff are. e) None of the above.

Please only experts. Thank you very much.