University of Technology, Jamaica

School of Business Administration

Organizational Behaviour
Case Analysis
Semester 2, 2022/24

The Case Analysis contributes 10% to your final grade. Students will work in the same groups that
were established for the Group Research and Presentation assignment. The written assignment is due
week 10 of the semester or as instructed by your tutor. Cases should be uploaded in theTurnitin slot
provided for the submission of assignments for your tutor on the Moodle page. There is no verbal
presentation for this assignment. Submissions written by AI will be given 0%.

How to do a case analysis: a) Carefully read the case; on the second reading underline the facts; b)
read the related questions; c) read the case again; d) list responses relevant to the questions in logical
groupings; e) your analysis should make specific reference to the case; f) your analysis should make
reference to the theory (that you get from the text book); g) use practical application of concepts in
answering the questions posed.

Please note:
Demerits will be earned for the Group Research and Presentation and the Case Analysis as follows:

• Late submission of Projects…………………minus 10% per week

• Omission of Group/ Students’ Names/ ID#....minus 10%
• Plagiarism…………………………………...minus 100%
• Non-participation in Group Work………0% of Group Grade
• Limited Participation……………………50% of Group Grade

GENERAL RUBRIC

RUBRIC FOR QUESTION 1

Criteria Marks Marks

(out of 10) Awarded
Content Clarity 4 4
Case Understanding 3 3
Brevity and Conciseness 1 1
Grammar and Mechanics 1 1
Overall quality 1 1
10 10

Rubric for Question 2

Criteria Marks for each Total (out Marks

concept of 20) Awarded
 Identification of Concepts 1 3
Explanation of Concepts 2 6
Application to the case 3 9
Grammar and Mechanics 2
20

Rubric for Question 3

Criteria Total (out of Marks
20) Awarded
Identification of Theory/Approach 4 4
Explanation of theory 5 5
Application of theory 8 8
Grammar, clarity, organization 3 2.5
20 19.5

Rubric for Question 4

Criteria Total (out of Marks
20) Awarded
Understanding of subject matter 4 4
Analysis 7 5
Evaluation 6 5
Grammar, clarity, organization 3 2
20 16

Additional: References, layout (APA) = 5 marks

TOTAL = 75 marks

Organizational Behaviour Cases for Case Analysis Semester 1, 2023/24

Please Note: All the characters and situations described in the cases are fictional (except for some
of the articles) and the references to real organizations and places are done only to make the cases
relevant to students in the programme.
Case 1: Netflix

In the early 2000s, Netflix, a fledgling DVD-by-mail startup, approached Blockbuster, the
behemoth of the home-entertainment industry, with a proposal for acquisition. Blockbuster's
response was nothing short of laughter. At the time, Blockbuster's dominance seemed
unassailable, with 9,000 rental stores worldwide and annual revenues of $6 billion. Netflix,
on the other hand, was a two-year-old company grappling with substantial losses, amounting
to $57 million in a single year.

Fast forward a decade, and the tables had turned dramatically. Blockbuster had dwindled to a
single surviving store in Bend, Oregon, while Netflix had evolved into a $221-billion
entertainment giant with over 167 million subscribers across 190 countries. It had become a
major producer of award-winning films and TV shows, and its stock price reached an all-time
high in 2021. What led to this astonishing transformation, and why did Blockbuster falter
despite its resources and reputation?

Netflix's co-founder, Reed Hastings, explores these questions in his book, "No Rules Rules:
Netflix and the Culture of Reinvention." He emphasizes that Blockbuster's fate was not an
isolated case, as many companies struggle and fail when their industries undergo significant
shifts. According to Hastings, Netflix's success can be attributed to its unique company
culture, which revolves around three core principles: building talent density, increasing
candor, and reducing controls.

1. Build Talent Density: Hastings' journey to crafting Netflix's exceptional culture began
when he made the difficult decision to lay off a third of the company's staff in 2001 after the
dot-com bubble burst. Instead of leaving Netflix with a demoralized workforce, this move
improved morale and productivity significantly. Hastings realized that retaining only the
highest-performing employees was the key to building a high-performing culture.

At the heart of a successful company culture is the idea that a great workplace is one filled
with outstanding colleagues. In many organizations, processes and rules are established to
manage under-performing employees. However, by hiring and retaining top talent, these rules
become unnecessary. When a company is predominantly composed of high performers, the
need for strict controls diminishes, and employees can be given more freedom.

Hastings likens a company to an elite sports team, where members who contribute to winning
are rewarded, and those who don't make the cut are let go. Netflix's "Keeper Test"
exemplifies this philosophy. Managers are periodically required to assess their teams and
identify the employees they would fight to retain if they were considering job offers from
competitors. Those who do not pass this test receive generous severance packages. “Our
culture memo says things like adequate performance gets a generous severance package,"
Hastings said.

2. Increase Candor: Innovation thrives in an environment where colleagues can openly

share their ideas and concerns. However, the politeness and etiquette that often pervade office
culture can hinder employees from providing honest feedback, thereby hindering
performance improvement. Hastings advocates for fostering candor, which enables team
members to express their thoughts candidly and constructively.
By "farming for dissent," talented employees help one another make better decisions. The
goal is to create a culture where feedback is given freely and constructively, without fear of
unpopularity. In Hastings' view, the day employees start withholding feedback because they
fear unpopularity is the day they should consider leaving the organization.

Hastings admitted that the culture can be tough, even on him. Hastings' leadership style
was once described as being "unencumbered by emotion," an observation some of his
colleagues have told him point-blank. A Netflix vice president once told him that he is not a
good listener and tends “to be unempathetic”. "Which, I have to say, even at my level of
success, it hurts," Hastings said. "I thought I had done better in that dimension. But I
remember that feedback is like exercise and it's those last few crunches, those last few
pushups that hurt that make you stronger."

3. Reduce Controls: Netflix's culture of freedom and responsibility extends to the reduction
of controls and bureaucracy within the company. When talent density is high and candor is
encouraged, the need for extensive rules and processes diminishes. Netflix did away with
employee handbooks, eliminated travel, expense, and vacation policies, and removed
approval processes.
Processes and policies can stifle innovation, slow down a business, and hinder an
organization's ability to adapt swiftly to changing circumstances. More importantly, they can
make employees risk-averse and fearful of making mistakes. In a creative business like
Netflix, the goal is to lead with context, not control, allowing employees the freedom to
innovate and take calculated risks.
While Netflix's culture of freedom and responsibility is undeniably successful, it is not
without challenges. Hastings acknowledges that the freedom granted to employees can
sometimes be abused, and not everyone thrives in such an environment. For example, Netflix
reimbursed an employee in Taiwan $100,000 for personal travel expenses, a situation that
went unnoticed for three years due to the absence of approval processes.

Reed Hastings' "No Rules Rules" outlines Netflix's journey from a struggling upstart to a
global media powerhouse. The company's success is attributed to its unique culture, which
prioritizes talent density, candor, and reduced controls. Hastings contends that in today's
dynamic industries, businesses must hire the best people, empower them, encourage open
communication, and eliminate unnecessary rules and processes. While this culture may not be
suitable for every organization, it has undoubtedly played a pivotal role in Netflix's rise to
prominence and serves as a compelling example of how culture can drive success in the
modern business landscape.
Source: Vassallo, Steve; The People Paradigm: What Powers Netflix. Published Sep 9, 2021 The People Paradigm: What Powers Netflix
(forbes.com)

Questions
1. Summarize the case in 150 words. (10 marks)
2. Discuss three organizational behaviour concepts covered in this module that apply to
the case. (20 marks)
3. How would you explain Reed Hastings’ leadership style in terms of one of the
theories/approaches covered in this module? (20 marks)
4. Explain the concept of reducing controls within Netflix’s culture. Do you think this
concept of reducing controls would be effective in a Jamaican company? Discuss.
What are the potential benefits and drawbacks of this approach? (20 marks)
CASE 2: Google
Google is one of the best-known and most admired companies around the world, so much so
that “googling” is the term many use to refer to searching for information on the Web. What
started out as a student project by two Stanford University graduates—Larry Page and Sergey
Brin—in 1996, Google became the most frequently used Web search engine on the Internet
with 1 billion searches per day in 2009, as well as other innovative applications such as
Gmail, Google Earth, Google Maps, and Picasa. Google grew from 10 employees working in
a garage in Palo Alto to 10,000 employees operating around the world by 2009.
What is the formula behind this success? Google strives to operate based on solid principles
that may be traced back to its founders. In a world crowded with search engines, they were
probably the first company that put users first. Their mission statement summarizes their
commitment to end-user needs: “To organize the world’s information and to make it
universally accessible and useful.”
While other companies were focused on marketing their sites and increasing advertising
revenues, Google stripped the search page of all distractions and presented users with a blank
page consisting only of a company logo and a search box. Google resisted pop-up advertising
because the company felt that it was annoying to end-users. They insisted that all their
advertisements would be clearly marked as “sponsored links.” This emphasis on improving
user experience and always putting it before making more money in the short term seems to
have been critical to their success.
Keeping their employees happy is also a value they take to heart. Google created a unique
work environment that attracts, motivates, and retains the best players in the field. Google
was ranked as the number 1 “Best Place to Work For” by Fortune magazine in 2007 and
number 4 in 2010. This is not surprising if one looks closer at how Google treats employees.
On their Mountain View, California, campus called the “Googleplex,” employees are treated
to free gourmet food options including sushi bars and espresso stations. In fact, many
employees complain that once they start working for Google, they tend to gain 10 to 15
pounds! Employees have access to gyms, shower facilities, video games, on-site childcare,
and doctors. Google provides 4 months of paternal leave with 75% of full pay and offers
$500 for take-out meals for families with a newborn. These perks create a place where
employees feel that they are treated well and their needs are taken care of. Moreover, they
contribute to the feeling that they are working at a unique and cool place that is different from
everywhere else they may have worked.
In addition, Google encourages employee risk-taking and innovation. How is this done?
When a vice president in charge of the company’s advertising system made a mistake costing
the company millions of dollars and apologized for the mistake, she was commended by
Larry Page, who congratulated her for making the mistake and noting that he would rather
run a company where they are moving quickly and doing too much, as opposed to being too
cautious and doing too little. This attitude toward acting fast and accepting the cost of
resulting mistakes as a natural consequence of working on the cutting edge may explain why
the company is performing far ahead of competitors such as Microsoft and Yahoo!
One of the current challenges for Google is to expand to new fields outside of their Web
search engine business. To promote new ideas, Google encourages all engineers to spend
20% of their time working on their own ideas. Google’s culture is reflected in their decision
making as well. Decisions at Google are made in teams. Even the company management is in
the hands of a triad: Larry Page and Sergey Brin hired Eric Schmidt to act as the CEO of the
company, and they are reportedly leading the company by consensus. In other words, this is
not a company where decisions are made by the senior person in charge and then
implemented top down. It is common for several small teams to attack each problem and for
employees to try to influence each other using rational persuasion and data. Gut feeling has
little impact on how decisions are made. In some meetings, people reportedly are not allowed
to say “I think…” but instead must say “the data suggest….” To facilitate teamwork,
employees work in open office environments where private offices are assigned only to a
select few. Even Kai-Fu Lee, the famous employee whose defection from Microsoft was the
target of a lawsuit, did not get his own office and shared a cubicle with two other employees.
How do they maintain these unique values? In a company emphasizing hiring the smartest
people, it is very likely that they will attract big egos that may be difficult to work with.
Google realizes that its strength comes from its “small company” values that emphasize risk
taking, agility, and cooperation. Therefore, they take their hiring process very seriously.
Hiring is extremely competitive and getting to work at Google is not unlike applying to a
college. Candidates may be asked to write essays about how they will perform their future
jobs. Recently, they targeted potential new employees using billboards featuring brain teasers
directing potential candidates to a Website where they were subjected to more brain teasers.
Each candidate may be interviewed by as many as eight people on several occasions.
Through this scrutiny, they are trying to select “Googley” employees who will share the
company’s values, perform at high levels, and be liked by others within the company. Will
this culture survive in the long run? It may be too early to tell, given that the company was
only founded in 1998. The founders emphasized that their initial public offering (IPO) would
not change their culture and they would not introduce more rules or change the way things
are done in Google to please Wall Street. But can a public corporation really act like a start-
up? Can a global giant facing scrutiny on issues including privacy, copyright, and censorship
maintain its culture rooted in its days in a Palo Alto garage? Larry Page is quoted as saying,
“We have a mantra: don’t be evil, which is to do the best things we know how for our users,
for our customers, for everyone. So I think if we were known for that, it would be a
wonderful thing.”
Source: 7.1 Decision-Making Culture: The Case of Google – Fundamentals of Leadership (wsu.edu)

Questions
1. Summarize the case in 150 words (10 marks)
2. Discuss three organizational behaviour concepts covered in this module that apply to
the case. (20 marks)
3. Apply one motivational theory covered in this module to Google employees. (20
marks)
4. How does Google promote innovation among its employees? Do you think Google’s
method of promoting innovation could work in a Jamaican company? Discuss. What
benefits and challenges might arise from this approach? (20 marks)
Case 3: Balancing Act

Brittany Johnson, an accomplished high achiever, embarked on her promising career after
graduating as the valedictorian of her class. Her dreams started taking shape when she
secured her first position at a prestigious marketing firm known for its potential for career
growth. The organization wasn't just a workplace; it represented a place where Brittany
believed her career could truly thrive. Alongside her thriving career, Brittany found joy in her
life through her husband, Rameck. Rameck, an architect, was two years ahead of her in
college, and they had been inseparable since their university days. Their love grew stronger
with time, and they shared a common vision for their future, one that included building
successful careers, acquiring a nice home and starting a family.

A year after their wedding, Brittany received life-changing news: she was pregnant with
twins. This brought excitement but also presented its unique set of challenges. Brittany's
pregnancy wasn't easy, requiring numerous medical appointments and bed rest. During this
challenging period, her organization turned out to be an unexpected source of tremendous
support.

Brittany's boss and colleagues went above and beyond to accommodate her needs during her
pregnancy. They allowed her to work remotely and adjusted her workload to ensure her well-
being. Brittany felt truly grateful to be part of an organization that valued its employees and
their families.

As the due date approached, Brittany and Rameck found themselves making crucial decisions
about their future. They realized that balancing their careers with parenthood would
necessitate some adjustments. Rameck, always committed to his job, decided that after the
twins were born, he did not want to work out of town anymore. His organization, recognizing
his value, agreed to accommodate this change, allowing him to work primarily from their
local office.

With the arrival of the twins, Brittany encountered the pressures of motherhood, attempting
to balance the twins' needs with her career ambitions. Brittany remained dedicated to her
profession, staying updated with developments in the dynamic marketing field. However, the
twins demanded constant attention, and finding the right equilibrium between her role as a
mother and her desire for career excellence became a challenge. Brittany’s organization
continued to provide support, offering flexible hours and even on-site childcare facilities but
Brittany is finding herself falling behind on deadlines.

Meanwhile, Rameck thrived in his career as an architect, recently earning a promotion to

supervisor for the largest team in the firm. His promotion validated his dedication and the
organization's trust in him, giving him a strong sense of accomplishment. Though Rameck's
job had always been demanding, the added responsibilities of fatherhood intensified his
commitment to his career. However, changes in dynamics at his workplace brought new
challenges.

Two new employees joined Rameck's firm, both younger than him but highly educated. One
is pursuing an MBA, while the other held a master's degree in architecture. They introduced
new perspectives and innovative ideas, increasing the pressure on Rameck to maintain his
position as the supervisor. In response, Rameck began working extra hours, feeling the need
to prove himself in light of these highly qualified newcomers.
Over time, Brittany observed concerning changes in Rameck's behaviour. One night he
returned home later than usual, appearing tired and dishevelled, with the faint aroma of
alcohol. This was the first time Brittany had seen him like this since before their marriage.
Subsequently, more worrying transformations became apparent.

Rameck reverted to smoking, a habit he had given up long ago. His commitment to regular
exercise dwindled, leading to weight gain. He ceased participating in activities he once
enjoyed, such as playing football and dominoes with friends. Most concerning of all, he
withdrew from Brittany and the babies, frequently displaying irritability. “No wonder, I am
not meeting my deadlines anymore. Rameck is not helping anymore,” Brittany whispered
quietly to herself.

Rameck's work performance started to suffer as well. He appeared less focused during
meetings, and colleagues noticed his frequent preoccupation. Missed deadlines and decreased
team efficiency became noticeable trends. His interactions with the younger colleagues,
whom he perceived as threats, grew increasingly strained. Defensive and reluctant to
collaborate, Rameck found himself isolated.

As Brittany continued balancing her career and motherhood, she grew increasingly anxious
about Rameck's well-being as well as her job security. She recognized the toll his job was
taking on him and feared the consequences for their family. What if they both should lose
their jobs at the same time? Despite her own aspirations, Brittany prioritized her husband's
health and happiness.

With the twins growing, Rameck's challenges escalating and the demand for an urgent
meeting from her manager, Brittany found herself standing at a crossroads. Her career
dreams, while important, clashed with her role as a supportive wife and mother. Parenthood
had brought unforeseen complexities, forcing her to re-evaluate her priorities and confront
the demanding choices awaiting them.

Questions
1. Summarize the case in 150 words. (10 marks)
2. Discuss three organizational behaviour concepts covered in this module that apply to
the case. (20 marks)
3. Use one contemporary motivation theory to describe Brittany’s motivation. (20
marks)
4. Examine the potential consequences of Rameck’s decision to work extra hours and his
perception of competition from younger colleagues. What are some effective ways to
manage the stress that Rameck is experiencing while maintaining a healthy work-life
balance? (20 marks)
Case 4: Mitchell’s Hardware

Akeelah Mitchell, a recent graduate with a degree in business management, was facing a
significant challenge as she took the reins of her family's century-old hardware store,
Mitchell's Hardware. Located in a small, tight-knit community in rural Texas, the store had
been a local institution for generations. It provided everything from nuts and bolts to
gardening supplies and kitchenware.

Akeelah's great-grandfather, Henry Mitchell, had founded the store, and it had always been
known for its warm, customer-friendly environment. Henry had instilled in his employees a
sense of community and a commitment to treating customers like family. Over the years, this
approach had made Mitchell's Hardware a beloved institution in the area.

However, times were changing rapidly. Big-box retailers and online shopping had
encroached on the small-town charm that had sustained Mitchell's Hardware for generations.
Akeelah felt the pressure to modernize the store and adapt to the changing retail landscape.
With a firm belief in the importance of innovation, Akeelah decided to implement a series of
changes that she believed were necessary to ensure the store's survival. She introduced new
technology systems for inventory management, point-of-sale operations, and even an online
store. Akeelah believed that these changes would streamline operations, reduce costs, and
attract a younger, tech-savvy customer base.

Akeelah also made adjustments to the employee structure. She implemented a new
performance-based pay system that was designed to reward employees for meeting sales
targets and providing exceptional customer service. To further cut costs, she eliminate the
middle managers’ positions and reduced the store's reliance on part-time employees, instead
focusing on hiring a smaller team of full-time staff members who were expected to multitask
across different departments.

As she implemented these changes, Akeelah was met with mixed reactions from the
employees. While some embraced the opportunity to learn new skills and adapt to the
changing retail landscape, others were resistant to the alterations. They felt that the changes
were eroding the family-oriented, community-centered values that had been the store's
hallmark for generations.

Customer feedback also began to change. While some customers appreciated the convenience
of online shopping and the efficiency of the new systems, others missed the personalized
service and sense of belonging that the store had traditionally provided. Some long-time
customers expressed their concerns that Mitchell's Hardware was losing its soul. They
missed seeing some of the familiar faces around when they visited the store.
Feeling torn between her commitment to modernization and her desire to honor the store's
legacy, Akeelah decided to seek outside help. She hired a retail consultant to evaluate the
situation and provide recommendations for the way forward.

The consultant conducted interviews with employees, customers, and Akeelah herself. After
thorough research and analysis, the consultant proposed a comprehensive plan that included a
balanced approach. The plan emphasized the importance of maintaining the store's core
values while strategically integrating modernization efforts to meet the changing needs of the
community.
Now, Akeelah faces a difficult decision. Should she follow the consultant's advice and
attempt to strike a balance between tradition and innovation, or should she continue with her
initial modernization efforts, risking further employee and customer dissatisfaction? The fate
of Mitchell's Hardware hangs in the balance as Akeelah grapples with the complex challenge
of preserving the past while preparing for the future.

Questions
1. Summarize the case in 150 words. (10 marks)
2. Discuss three organizational behaviour concepts covered in this module that apply to
the case. (20 marks)
3. Use a leadership theory covered in this module to evaluate the leadership
style/approach of Akeelah. (20 marks)
4. Analyze the culture at Mitchell’s Hardware. How has this deeply ingrained culture at
Mitchell's Hardware might have become a liability? What practical actions would
you take to obtain the desired culture if this was a Jamaican company? (20 marks)

Case 5: Red Bull

Racing pit stops are known for being lightning-quick moments full of impressive work done
by crew members. Capable of performing maintenance at unhuman-like speeds, pit stop crew
members are highly talented.

Decades and decades of racing have allowed pit stop crews to hone and perfect their skills,
leading to faster pit stops than ever before. The Formula One Red Bull Racing team is
determined to set the bar for pit stop time standards higher than ever. They’ve accomplished
this with not one, but two recent world record-breaking pit stops.

Towards the end of July 2019, Red Bull Racing had one of the best Formula One races of the
season. Dominating the German Grand Prix in Hockenheim, Red Bull took the number one
spot in the race, as well as set a new world record for the fastest (and most impressive) pit
stop.

According to Jalopnik, driver Max Verstappen pulled in for a pit stop on lap 46 of 64 for a
four-tire change. The pit stop crew made it happen in the blink of an eye, or 1.88 seconds to
be exact. That’s faster than ever before. What makes this even more astonishing is that this is
Red Bull’s second time breaking the record, all within the same month.

Earlier in the month of July, the Red Bull team set a pit stop record of 1.91 seconds at
the British Grand Prix. This record bested the previous world record by only .01 seconds,
which according to Western Journal, was held by the same Red Bull Formula One team.

The Red Bull team won the DHL Fastest Pit Stop Award, given by Formula One at the end of
the season. According to Formula 1, the “DHL Fastest Pit Stop Award” was first established
in 2015, recognizing the “critically important contributions” to the success of drivers on the
track.

Pit stops are absolutely essential to not just a driver’s success, but their driving strategy as
well. In racing, even hundredths of seconds matter, and an extra second in the pit stop could
be the difference between winning and losing.

According to Car and Driver, the average pit stop lasts about 2.4 seconds and it can be
difficult to see the intense work that goes into every single pit stop. For example, the Red
Bull team makes use of a total of 16 people in their pit stop crew: two people in the front and
back with jack, four to take off old tires that weigh 10.5 kg, four with new tires, four who
bolt-on the new tires, and two to stabilize the car. A pit stop works through a mixture of
talented crew and superfast tools.

The pit crew have often been praised for their professionalism, and while they’ll happily
receive any plaudits coming their way, ‘professionalism’ is perhaps not the correct word.
None of the people clustered around the box, waiting for Max or Checo to stop is
professional pit crew: like every other form of motorsport, they’re all doing it as a side-line to
whatever their full-time job in the garage is.

While many of the crew are mechanics, they might just as easily be garage support,
composites fabricators, gearbox techs and so on. Trials are held over the winter, from which a
prime crew will be chosen. It’s often the same faces (though not necessarily in the same
places) year after year, but it’s not a job for life. There are many criteria that go into the
selection process, with each position requiring something a little different. Handedness plays
a part in the selection, as does balancing the crew side-to-side. Some jobs require strength,
others are about that quick twitch reflex. The wheel guns require crew members who are calm
and analytical: not so much for the regulation stop but for the one that isn’t.
A variety of factors go into the speed of a pit stop crew, but according to Hot Cars, crews are
working faster than ever with refueling no longer allowed in Formula One racing.

They use pneumatic wheel guns that are powered by nitrogen or air and spin faster than your
average guns at 10,000 RPMs. When tires are put back on the car, the crew only has one nut
to tighten before the car is ready to go. The bolts and tires are threaded in the opposite
direction of rotation, so there’s no risk of the wheels coming off during the race. As Formula
1 points out, pit stops might be “the most visual evidence of why Formula 1 racing is a team
sport.”

The Red Bull company has always been committed to “having wings,” and the work put in
by its racing pit crew is only further proof of Red Bull’s ability to do unbelievable things.

Sources:
• https://www.motorbiscuit.com; Houghtlen, M.; Don’t Blink or You Might Miss the Fastest Pit Stop of All Time. Published
on August 15, 2019. Don't Blink or You Might Miss the Fastest Pit Stop of All Time (motorbiscuit.com)
• https://www.redbullracing.com; People of the Pit Stop: A Pit Crew’s View; Published on 07.02.2022 People of the Pit Stop: A Pit
Crew’s View (redbullracing.com)

Questions:
1. Summarize the case in 150 words. (10 marks)
2. Discuss three organizational behaviour concepts covered in this module that are
applicable to the case. (20 marks)
 3. Use as many variables as possible from the team effectiveness model (in the
prescribed text) to describe the Red Bulls pit stop crew. (15 marks)
4. Analyze the parallels between the pit stop crew's teamwork and teamwork in other
organizational settings. How might leadership styles impact team performance in such
a high-stakes environment? (25 marks)

January 2024