Assessing the description of attitudes is a very complicated subject because in one hand you can have an attitude about work and be very displeased with your current job, and at the same time have an attitude about your family with a projective satisfaction to home life. The reason surrounding their attitude may be more complicated then interpreted, but also be closely related. In the (Judge, 2013,2011,2009,2007,2005)case of Walter Henderson he may be a good worker but that’s not to say that he is a good employee. In this case I will attempt to explore Walter Henderson’s main attitude towards work and what may arise once his dissatisfaction is realized beyond his breaking point, and what his supervisor can do about Walters attitude in order to bring stability. It was not necessary for Walter to take his work home and finish just so he can take it easy at work at the same time enabling another employee by doing their work for them and instead training and guiding a co-worker to work as efficiently and as effective as himself. In this case the supervisor expressed to Walter that he has already been reprimanded before for a similar offense. So by this stage of the case Walter starts to express a cognitive component of his attitude where he states “I did my work and more; what do you expect me to do?” basically a description of a belief in a way things are.”(Robbins & Judge .70). Walter believes that what he does with his time only concerns him and that it shouldn’t bother anyone else since all his work is done. Walter then starts to negotiate his ability to do more work then his job in tells in exchange for some lenience toward the already strict rules in place. In which case he is already starting to perceive his notion towards the affective component part of his attitude, where he begins to input his psychological empowerment where “employees beliefs in the degree to they influence their work environment, their competence, the meaningfulness of their job, and their perceived autonomy.”(Robbins& Judge .74). To which the supervisor expresses that although Walter is a hard worker its not to say that he is a good employee, followed by saying that a good employee follows the rules as to not create precedence, eliminating the possibility of any other employee empowering themselves with the same grounds. At this point Walter is relentless presenting his case with the utmost disrespect knowing that he is breaking company policies and rules, in trade he is disregarding his organizational commitment , where an employee identifies with a particular organization and its goals and wishes to remain a member (Robbins& Judge .74). During the same conversation Walter states his discourse by making the situation a personal matter where he states” I don’t want to be paid overtime. All I want to do is be treated like an honest person. Each time the company was behind schedule, I worked like mad to catch up. Now, I have a personal problem, and all I ask is to be able to use the drafting table. Is this too much to ask?.” By this time he is already in the behavioral component of attitudes in which his intention to hehave in certain way toward someone or something. (Robbins& Judge .70) If Walter Henderson becomes dissatisfied in his work, He will begin to neglect his work. The neglect response passively allows conditions to worsen and includes chronic absenteeism or lateness, reduced effort and increased error rate. (Robbins & Judge.82) Walter already feels in titled to leniency because of his ability to effectively finish his work as well as others work, already expressing his determination by making himself available when the company was behind schedule and ultimately pulling through. Walter is liable to passively allow conditions to worsen by doing as much work as his co workers and letting himself behind in turn not being able to help or train others with reduced effort, with these self brought on condition he may even create mistakes and make certain errors. Until finally taking on the exit response, either voluntarily or involuntarily, the exit response directs behavior toward leaving the organization, including looking for a new position as well as resigning. In order to alleviate the situation Walters boss could give Walter special responsibilities that may occupy Walters’s time effectively in an area he doesn’t excel in very well but could prove effective for him and the company. Its obvious that Walter does not feel challenged in his job so he exploits his abilities to work on other un related activities, by his boss challenging him with a more detailed responsibility and not just more work this approach may prove beneficial to the organization. Walter would be leading his team and organization to greatness by presenting what other opportunities may arise when other employees excel in their current roles. Changing Walters perceived organizational support is the degree to which employees believe the organization values their contribution and cares about their well-being.(Robbins & Judge .76) Walter Henderson is not a terrible worker in fact from what I gather he is a very resourceful employee. The reason I interpret this is because he helps when needed and foresees any problems that may arise and openly takes it upon him-self to make his work group more efficient as well as work as a team to get the task done that has been asked of him. Unfortunately he does lack a little more forward thinking and may find it hard to distinguish a balance between work and home life.

Works Cited
Judge, S. P. (2013,2011,2009,2007,2005). Organizational Behavior (5th Edition ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Case adapted by Alain RONDEAU (1990) from Marabout Service no 129, translated by Evelyn PITRE (1997) and updated by E3P3 (2012).