Team Assignment: Address The Following Scenario Including Al

Team Assignment Address The Following Scenario Including All The Chec

Team Assignment: Address the following scenario including all the checklist items, and designate a person to submit the final team presentation response to the Unit 6 Dropbox. Once complete, each team member will be responsible for submitting his/her own peer evaluation form to the Unit 6 Peer Evaluation Assignment 2 Dropbox demonstrating how they contributed to the assigned team goals and objectives.

Scenario (fictional): Artificial Intelligence Medical (i.e., AIM) Inc. is a very profitable new company that although in business just two years, has already doubled in size in terms of the workforce and quadrupled their profits. The CEO/founder has stepped aside recently in favor of a new CEO in the wake of employees’ frustration and social media messages about the benefits inequity and lack of motivation for teams at the company.

The new CEO wants to change the way executive salaries are determined and find ways to motivate the project teams. The project teams typically are assigned to an artificial intelligence product such as a robot to perform routine surgeries or diagnostic software used by different medical units of a hospital for patient diagnosis.

Your employee team is tasked by the new CEO with determining a general proposed solution to the inequity in pay at the company and to address the lack of motivation for the 125 technicians and medical staff that work in project teams of 25 employees each. Each technician or staff member receives a salary of $35,000 per year while the CEO and V.P.s receive $500,000 per year (the CEO also holds 10% of the company stock) and the managers receive $50,000 per year.

There is a CEO, 2 VPs (Manufacturing and Finance), a Marketing Manager, a Sales/Customer Service Manager, and a Technical Support Manager along with the 125 Technology-savvy employees that work at the company. Access the Learning Activities and readings to assist the team in addressing the checklist items.

Paper For Above instruction

The scenario presented by Artificial Intelligence Medical (AIM) Inc. mirrors several critical issues faced by rapidly growing tech companies, particularly within specialized sectors like healthcare technology. The core problems stemming from this scenario include significant pay inequity, employee motivation challenges, and organizational transparency. Addressing these issues requires a comprehensive understanding of compensation frameworks, motivational theories, and organizational justice principles to develop effective strategies aligned with both employee wellbeing and organizational performance.

Identifying and Describing the Problems

The first problem evident in AIM Inc. is the stark pay disparity between the executive leadership and the operational staff. The salary difference between the technicians ($35,000) and the top executives (CEO and VPs earning $500,000) is stark, with the latter earning approximately 14 times more than the technicians. This significant gap can foster feelings of resentment and perceptions of unfairness, undermining morale and team cohesion (Colquitt, Greenberg, & Zapata-Phelan, 2014). Furthermore, the lack of transparency regarding compensation structures can exacerbate employees’ frustrations, leading to social media messages and public dissatisfaction that threaten the company's reputation and internal culture.

Secondly, the motivation of the employees working in project teams is compromised due to perceived inequities and limited reward structures tied to performance or outcomes. According to motivation theories such as Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs (Maslow, 1943) and Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory (Herzberg, 1959), recognition and meaningful incentives are critical in motivating employees. When employees perceive their compensation as inadequate or unrelated to their contributions, their motivation diminishes, leading to decreased productivity and innovation (Deci & Ryan, 2000).

Another problem is organizational justice, which refers to the perceived fairness of decision-making processes within an organization (Folger & Konovsky, 1989). Employees experiencing perceived injustice regarding pay or rewards may develop feelings of injustice and mistrust toward management, which can impair teamwork and operational effectiveness.

Research and Scholarly Perspective

Organizational justice theory emphasizes the importance of fairness in workplace procedures and distributions (Greenberg, 1990). When employees observe inequitable pay structures, they may reduce their effort or seek employment elsewhere, impacting organizational performance. Compensation research suggests that a well-structured, transparent pay system aligned with performance and contribution can enhance motivation and retention (Kuvaas, 2006). Moreover, motivation theories advocate for intrinsic and extrinsic rewards, including recognition, career development opportunities, and performance-based incentives (Ryan & Deci, 2000).

Proposed Solutions to Address the Problems

To rectify the pay inequity and motivate staff, AIM Inc. should consider implementing a transparent and performance-based compensation system. One approach is introducing a tiered and equitable bonus structure linked to project outcomes, innovation, or efficiency improvements. This system can include profit-sharing plans or stock options that redistribute wealth more equitably among employees, aligning their interests with organizational success (Kuo, 2009).

Furthermore, fostering organizational justice through transparent decision-making processes, regular communication, and employee inclusion in reward determinations can improve perceptions of fairness (Moorman, 1991). Implementing employee recognition programs, career development pathways, and participation in goal-setting can also enhance intrinsic motivation (Deci & Ryan, 2000).

Additionally, leadership training to manage diversity in rewards and ensure consistent application of pay policies can promote fairness perceptions. These strategies combined can improve morale, motivation, and organizational commitment, ultimately driving productivity and innovation at AIM Inc.

Conclusion

Addressing the pay disparity and motivational challenges at AIM Inc. requires a strategic blend of transparent, performance-based compensation systems, fostering organizational justice, and enhancing intrinsic motivation through recognition and involvement. Implementing these solutions can foster a more equitable, motivated workforce aligned with the company's growth objectives and organizational values.

References

• Colquitt, J. A., Greenberg, J., & Zapata-Phelan, C. P. (2014). Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(2), 375–412.
• Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268.
• Folger, R., & Konovsky, M. A. (1989). Effects of procedural and distributive justice on reactions to pay raise decisions. Academy of Management Journal, 32(1), 115–130.
• Greenberg, J. (1990). Organizational justice: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Journal of Management, 16(2), 399–432.
• Herzberg, F. (1959). The motivation to work. Wiley.
• Kuo, N. (2009). Pay-for-performance and motivation: A review of the evidence. Research in Organizational Behavior, 29, 109–137.
• Kuvaas, B. (2006). Work performance, affective commitment, and work motivation: The roles of pay administration and pay level. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(3), 365–385.
• Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396.
• Moorman, R. H. (1991). Relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviors: Do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship? Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(6), 845–855.
• Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.