Read the scenario and Table 1.

Use the scenario and the data in Table 1 to fill in the Table 2 Enigma Individual Decision Form.

Make an individual ranking of the employees from 1 (the first to be laid off) to 8 (the last to be laid off). Record your answers in column 1 of Table 3 Rating Form.

Company Situation: Enigma Engineering Company The Enigma Engineering Company is a medium-sized engineering and manufacturing company located in the suburbs of Chicago. Enigma specializes in designing and manufacturing circuit boards and other electronic products. The products it manufactures have low production runs and are utilized as components in products (such as computer-controlled drill presses) made by other companies. This specialization has permitted Enigma to avoid competing with larger companies such as Intel. Enigma is not unionized. Over the past two years, it has been trying to incorporate an objective performance review system that provides feedback to employees. The system is designed to be objective and time-oriented. The loss of a contract bid to a competitor has forced Enigma's management to consider laying off one, two, or three of the poorest performers in the circuit board production unit. The layoff, scheduled for next week, may be only temporary, but the management wants to be sure that it is fair in presenting an objectively based decision to the employees. The people in the unit to be cut back are: 1. Albert Banks: white, age 42, married, 3 children, two years of high school, and 14 years with the company. 2. Bob Brown: black, age 37, widower, 2 children, high school graduate, and 8 years with the company. 3. Christian Newton: black, age 24, single, high school graduate, and two years with the company. 4. Dave Fram: white, age 50, single, finished junior college while working, and 15 years with the company. 5. Carla Peters: Native American, age 36, married, 4 children, high school graduate, and 3 years with the company. 6. Ray Salgado: Hispanic, age 40, married, 1 child, high school graduate, and 4 years with the company. 7. Valerie Green: white, age 39, divorced, 2 children, 2 years of college, and 7 years with the company. 8. Richard Chu: Asian, age 42, married, no children, 1 year of college, and 9 years with the company. In previous performance reviews, the employees have been evaluated on a basis of a number of factors listed in Table 1. The ratings shown have been averaged over the past 2 years of performance evaluation. Table 1. Enigma Performance Review Data; Factors Evaluated by Supervisor 5.3 Employee Average (%) Rejects (%) Cooperative Loyaltyd Potential for Weekly Absences Attituded Promotion Output Albert Banks 39.6 4.9 6.3 Good Good Fair Bob Brown 43.4 7.9 Poor Fair Fair Christine 35.2 0.9 0.4 Excellent Good Good Newton Dave Fram 40.4 13.2 Excellent Excellent Fair Carla Peters 40.2 9.3 Poor Fair Poor Ray Salgado 39.6 3.4 6.1 Good Fair P oor Valerie 4.8 5.0 Good Good Fair Green Richard Chu 45.2 | 7.0 Fair Good a Higher Score=more output Lower score= fewer rejects 'Lower score= fewer absences 'possible rating: poor, fair, good, excellent 4.7 9.6 36.2 3.6 Fair Table 2. Enigma Individual Decision Form Employee Education Seniority Reiects Absencesa Attitude Loyalty Working Output Promotion AVERAGE Potential A Banks B Brown C Newton D Fram C Peters R Salgado V Green R Chu Education No H.S. Diploma = 2 High School Diploma = 4 1 Year College = 6 2+ Years College = 8 Seniority 2 Years=1 3 Years=2 4 Years=3 7 Years=4 8 Years=5 9 Years=6 14 Years=7 15 Years=8 All Other Criteria Poor=2 Fair=4 Good=6 Excellent=8 Rejects or Absences Poor (high scores of rejects or absences)=2 Fair (medium high scores of rejects or absences)=4 Good (medium low scores of rejects or absences)=6 Excellent (low scores of rejects or absences)=8 Table 3. Rating Form Employee Individual Rating Col. 1 Team Rating Col. 2 Class Average Col. 3 Difference (individual - team rating) Difference (team- class rating) 1. A. Banks 2. B. Brown 3. C. Newton 4. D. Fram 5. C. Peters 6. R. Salgado 7. V. Green 8. R. Chu Total Scores (maximum score is 80, minimum score is O) Company Situation: Enigma Engineering Company The Enigma Engineering Company is a medium-sized engineering and manufacturing company located in the suburbs of Chicago. Enigma specializes in designing and manufacturing circuit boards and other electronic products. The products it manufactures have low production runs and are utilized as components in products (such as computer-controlled drill presses) made by other companies. This specialization has permitted Enigma to avoid competing with larger companies such as Intel. Enigma is not unionized. Over the past two years, it has been trying to incorporate an objective performance review system that provides feedback to employees. The system is designed to be objective and time-oriented. The loss of a contract bid to a competitor has forced Enigma's management to consider laying off one, two, or three of the poorest performers in the circuit board production unit. The layoff, scheduled for next week, may be only temporary, but the management wants to be sure that it is fair in presenting an objectively based decision to the employees. The people in the unit to be cut back are: 1. Albert Banks: white, age 42, married, 3 children, two years of high school, and 14 years with the company. 2. Bob Brown: black, age 37, widower, 2 children, high school graduate, and 8 years with the company. 3. Christian Newton: black, age 24, single, high school graduate, and two years with the company. 4. Dave Fram: white, age 50, single, finished junior college while working, and 15 years with the company. 5. Carla Peters: Native American, age 36, married, 4 children, high school graduate, and 3 years with the company. 6. Ray Salgado: Hispanic, age 40, married, 1 child, high school graduate, and 4 years with the company. 7. Valerie Green: white, age 39, divorced, 2 children, 2 years of college, and 7 years with the company. 8. Richard Chu: Asian, age 42, married, no children, 1 year of college, and 9 years with the company. In previous performance reviews, the employees have been evaluated on a basis of a number of factors listed in Table 1. The ratings shown have been averaged over the past 2 years of performance evaluation. Table 1. Enigma Performance Review Data; Factors Evaluated by Supervisor 5.3 Employee Average (%) Rejects (%) Cooperative Loyaltyd Potential for Weekly Absences Attituded Promotion Output Albert Banks 39.6 4.9 6.3 Good Good Fair Bob Brown 43.4 7.9 Poor Fair Fair Christine 35.2 0.9 0.4 Excellent Good Good Newton Dave Fram 40.4 13.2 Excellent Excellent Fair Carla Peters 40.2 9.3 Poor Fair Poor Ray Salgado 39.6 3.4 6.1 Good Fair P oor Valerie 4.8 5.0 Good Good Fair Green Richard Chu 45.2 | 7.0 Fair Good a Higher Score=more output Lower score= fewer rejects 'Lower score= fewer absences 'possible rating: poor, fair, good, excellent 4.7 9.6 36.2 3.6 Fair Table 2. Enigma Individual Decision Form Employee Education Seniority Reiects Absencesa Attitude Loyalty Working Output Promotion AVERAGE Potential A Banks B Brown C Newton D Fram C Peters R Salgado V Green R Chu Education No H.S. Diploma = 2 High School Diploma = 4 1 Year College = 6 2+ Years College = 8 Seniority 2 Years=1 3 Years=2 4 Years=3 7 Years=4 8 Years=5 9 Years=6 14 Years=7 15 Years=8 All Other Criteria Poor=2 Fair=4 Good=6 Excellent=8 Rejects or Absences Poor (high scores of rejects or absences)=2 Fair (medium high scores of rejects or absences)=4 Good (medium low scores of rejects or absences)=6 Excellent (low scores of rejects or absences)=8 Table 3. Rating Form Employee Individual Rating Col. 1 Team Rating Col. 2 Class Average Col. 3 Difference (individual - team rating) Difference (team- class rating) 1. A. Banks 2. B. Brown 3. C. Newton 4. D. Fram 5. C. Peters 6. R. Salgado 7. V. Green 8. R. Chu Total Scores (maximum score is 80, minimum score is O)