Key Questions:1. Communication between Jerrold and Knowlton was neither open nor honest. 2. Knowlton was insincere in expressing his concerns and insecurities to Jerrold.3. Jerrold's inability to communicate his vision and goals to Knowlton contributed to the tension. 4. Jerrold did not have an accurate assessment of Knowlton's task force due to Knowlton's divergence from the truth.5. Knowlton should have spoken up about Jerrold's condescending interaction with the group at the first sign of unease among his subordinates. 6. Fester's inability to gauge his tone and authoritarian attitude often undermined the abilities of his colleagues, and his strong sense of individualism perpetuated a hostile work environment. Diagnosis: Additionally, there is an allusion to the cultural differences presented in the case study as Fester critiques America's "emphasis on team ideas" (p. 459). As I mentioned above in the key questions, Knowlton's lack of leadership in managing the interaction between Fester and other subordinates contributed to the breakdown of the team concept promoted by Knowlton. Additionally, the text explains behavioral problems that can arise in the workplace when an employee's self-esteem is diminished (the book describes these as procrastination, stress, conflict, and poor working conditions). work). This led to a hiatus in the group's contributions to the "photon correlator" search. When it comes to Jerrold's responsibility as a leader, he could have more clearly expressed his vision for the organization and his expectations of his employees. Hellriegel and Slocum (2011) express the importance of leaders in managing attitudes of “hope, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment,” as these are important for job performance. Thus, Jerrold failed to communicate to Knowlton his vision for his team and Fester's role for the sole purpose of supporting Knowlton's overall success. This doesn't stop Knowlton from communicating openly with his superior, but it could have lowered Knowlton's self-esteem.