The mid-year performance reports of the new recruits were due in two weeks. Whitney and Adrian, were the newly appointed co-chairs of the Employee Performance Review Committee (EPRC). Adrian had sent out names and details of eight of the new recruits' along with their survey and peer assessment results to the EPRC's four members (John (senior manager), Kathy (assistant manager), Reno (senior manager) and Selena (assistant manager)) requesting for volunteers to write the reports. John and Selena, responded immediately and volunteered to write the performance reports of two new recruits each. Selena further added that if they needed any help, she would be happy to pitch in for other reports as well. Whitney thanked them in an email which was copied to all other members and asked if there were further volunteers for the remaining four reports. Kathy wrote back thanking Selena and asking her if she would write hers as well. While Reno, on the other hand, explained that the criteria were all messed up, the assessments were incorrect, and this was not the type of shoddy work that he wanted to be associated with. He further added that Adrian and Whitney may not know how to carry out this work as this was a new position that they had taken on this year.

They had one week left to complete the reports and submit it to the VP of Human Resources, who was himself due for a meeting with the CEO to discuss the new recruits' contract renewals.

1)-List the sources of power for all the characters in the scenario and explain what power dependencies are in play that is leading Reno to refuse to listen to the co-chairs?

2)-How can the co-chairs limit the effects of this team's political behavior?

3)-What is the type, level, and source(s) of conflict in the case?

4)-What conflict handling techniques or third party interventions should the co-chairs use to resolve this situation?Explain