Palmer Case

If you were Palmer at the end of the case, how would you respond?

I would respond that due to his performance, I feel that this is the best possible decision. By letting him to go to the other assignment, the audit team has a chance to focus on the audit, and complete what still needs to be completed, without the added stress of wondering if Olds is going to show up. I would also request that the firm consider hiring another individual to replace him, as more manpower is apparently an issue. No one audit should suffer because one person has to be taken out, without being replaced. If this is the case, then the audit is understaffed.

â?¢ 2. What, if anything, could Palmer have done to avoid losing Olds?

If anything, he should have been given tasks that were not as important as the other tasks. He had trouble "switching back" to and from consulting/auditing modes of thinking, which shows that he was one of the main auditors in the audit. A main auditor is never assigned anything but the audit, when he is auditing. If he was one of the main auditors, as the facts indicate, there should have never been a deal made to have him work on two projects. He cannot possibly be the only auditor that is capable of handling the consulting project. If he was, then he should have been used as just that - a consultant for the other project, but should have not been given actual duties within the other project.