Response to Review of the Three Students
In the first question, student 1’s article is well articulated. He/she mentions various violations of time and stress management principles in detail. More so, the student supports his/her assertions with well-illustrated examples.
On the second question, I agree with student 1 when he/she says that the problem was Chet’s failure to delegate and come up with a directive mechanism to ensure a follow up and set attainable goals.
On the third question, student 1 notes that Chet’s failure to delegate and work on set goals was inhibiting his progress. Student 1 mentions Chet’s lack of delegation and failure to prioritize demanding tasks, which is correct, though he/she failed to mention that Chet possessed type A personality that made him uneasy, reactive, and sensitive in job handling. On the fourth question, the student illustrates adequately the advice he/she offers to Chet, though he/she does not mention the issue of delegating the work effectively. Thus, I will recommend Chet to adhere to the principle of time and stress management, set achievable goals, and stick to one task at a time, instead of having numerous goals but achieving none at the end of the day.
Finally, I agree with student 1 that time and work balance is vital in life to avoid being stressed up while at work.
On the first question, student 2 is too wordy, and despite developing a good argument, he or she diverts from the question as he/she does not discuss the principles of time and stress management. Instead, he mentions one that deals with set deadlines, which represents a general approach. I suggest that student 2 should have discussed more precepts that were violated in reference to the case study.
On the second question, student 2 relates to his/her past experience, which is not bad, though he should have focused more on the case study. In addition, he/she only suggests what Chet should have done, instead of mentioning the problem. On question 3, I agree with student 2 that Chet faced challenges in setting priorities though the student should have mentioned more traits that prevented Chet, affecting his duties.
On the advice, I disagree with student 2 that Chet was a ‘busy body’; however, I believe Chet was more concerned and caring, and that is why he had to do the morning plant tours. I suggest that student 2 should try to understand the traits of Chet and mention the issue of delegating responsibilities to supervisors since even coming up with a written agenda is likely to add more problems due to lack of action from the overwhelmed manager.
On the life situation, I agree with student 2 on the importance of prioritizing work. The student realized the importance of delegating responsibilities and reorganization.
Student 3 manages to describe in detail the importance of time and stress management principles that Chet violated, and how they could have helped him meet his goals and objectives.
On the second question, student 3 only mentions the importance of decision making, but fails to discuss it in detail. In addition, he or she does not cite other case problems that the organization faces, like poor coordination between supervisors and managers, failure to delegate responsibilities, and poor distribution in leadership hierarchy.
On the third question, student 3 answers correctly by mentioning the problem that Chet faced. Therefore, I agree with his/her comments, as they are well illustrated and precise.
Furthermore, the advice by student 3 is well articulated, and straight to the point. His approach was analyzed well. In addition, I agree with the student’s suggestions.
On real life situation, the student relates to his/her experience, instead of discussing how the case could help at work or what he/she does learn in the end, such as time management and balancing work and family life.