GBS3001 – Decision Making in Human Resources, Case Study, TP, Singapore

The Tripartite Committee on Workplace Fairness on Friday proposed a framework for workplace fairness legislation that prohibits workplace discrimination based on five characteristics: nationality; age; sex, marital status, pregnancy status and caregiving responsibilities; race, religion and language; and disability and mental health conditions. Making an adverse employment decision because of any of these traits can be seen as discriminatory.

The five traits are the most commonly reported forms of workplace discrimination, and together account for more than 95 per cent of discrimination complaints received by the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (Tafep) and the Ministry of Manpower from 2018 to 2022, said the committee in its report.

In the lectures and seminars, we went through various theories on how biases and irrationality affect decision-making. Students have been considering how this might apply to the workplace where decisions are made that might affect the work of oneself and others. The above summary write-up highlights the importance of decision-making on employment and treatment of the workforce.

For this individual assignment, you are to take TWO of the five characteristics: Nationality, Age, Sex, Race, and Disability, and discuss how they might occur in local enterprises. For each case:

a) Find a recent news article (within one year) on a local company that has been highlighted for discriminatory practices;

b) analyse how in the case described by the news a discriminatory decision may be/ has been made against another individual or a group of individuals;

c) identify the decision-makers and victims in the process and the context behind the decisions that were made that led to the discrimination scenario;

d) evaluate the biases/ heuristics that may have affected the decisions we observe to have been made;

e) recommend what the key decision-maker/s should have done differently to avoid discrimination in their decision-making process;

f) recommend, in addition, what the organization could do differently to help individuals in their workforce make fair and rational decisions in the situation you described.

The minimum word requirement for each example is 500 words. Students may follow the guidelines below in writing up the analysis:

(a) Short summary regarding the context of the discriminating decision.
(approx. 50 words)

(b) An analysis of the specific driver and influence of the decision, and the possible bias and heuristics that may have led to the decision and discriminating behaviour reported.
(approx. 250 words)

(c) Based on the analysis in (b), provide a recommendation on how the individual can make a different decision, or avoid the bad decision; and/or how the organization can control for such decisions and negative outcomes in similar situations.
(approx. 200 words)
Students are advised to base their evaluation on the theories and principles

taught in class and found in readings and provide reference for their analysis and writing. This is NOT an opinion piece. The analysis of decision-making heuristics that they conduct for this assignment will greatly aid them in understanding and observing of decision-making in real-world contexts. This will also be helpful in your other assignment (i.e., group project), where solutions and interventions will need to be proposed.