The work activity in this situation is on the project critical-path schedule. The job supervisor is concerned about keeping up with the schedule. He observes that the team seems to have lost some of its productivity. After worrying about this for a couple of days, the job supervisor overhears Doug Butler, one of the most senior members of the crew, say to the other members of the crew, 'Hey, you guys, what's the rush? You're not getting paid by the piece, you know. Why don't you slow down so we all can get a few more hours?' What leadership action should the supervisor use?

The work activity in this situation is on the project critical-path schedule. The job supervisor is concerned about keeping up with the schedule. He observes that the team seems to have lost some of its productivity. After worrying about this for a couple of days, the job supervisor overhears Doug Butler, one of the most senior members of the crew, say to the other members of the crew, 'Hey, you guys, what's the rush? You're not getting paid by the piece, you know. Why don't you slow down so we all can get a few more hours?' What leadership action should the supervisor use?

• A. Directive
• B. Supportive
• C. None required
• D. Coercive

Answer: (B)

When morale is slipping and a senior crew member is voicing a counterproductive attitude, the leader should step in with supportive leadership. The idea is to address the people side of the work—reassure the crew, listen to their concerns, and find constructive ways to keep progress moving on the critical-path tasks without crushing motivation. A supportive response would acknowledge the schedule pressure while addressing why productivity is slipping. It means talking with the team to understand barriers, offering help or resources, and aligning incentives with the expected pace. This approach helps restore trust, keeps people engaged, and often yields sustainable gains in output—crucial when the project’s critical activities determine the finish date. Directive leadership, which imposes orders to speed up, risks increasing resistance and may overlook underlying causes of slowdown. Coercive leadership relies on punishment or threats, which would further harm morale and cooperation. Doing nothing would ignore the signal that morale and motivation are a problem, likely leading to continued delays.

When morale is slipping and a senior crew member is voicing a counterproductive attitude, the leader should step in with supportive leadership. The idea is to address the people side of the work—reassure the crew, listen to their concerns, and find constructive ways to keep progress moving on the critical-path tasks without crushing motivation.

A supportive response would acknowledge the schedule pressure while addressing why productivity is slipping. It means talking with the team to understand barriers, offering help or resources, and aligning incentives with the expected pace. This approach helps restore trust, keeps people engaged, and often yields sustainable gains in output—crucial when the project’s critical activities determine the finish date.

Directive leadership, which imposes orders to speed up, risks increasing resistance and may overlook underlying causes of slowdown. Coercive leadership relies on punishment or threats, which would further harm morale and cooperation. Doing nothing would ignore the signal that morale and motivation are a problem, likely leading to continued delays.