2WENDY PETERSON CASE ANALYSISmore so the lack of feedback that Peterson is giving to Wu. If one were to take a step back and observe Peterson and Wu’s interactions from a third-party vantage point, it would be apparent that the primary cause of this stagnant working relation is due to Wendy Peterson depriving Wu of timely and useful feedback. This deficiency of feedback has caused unintentional confusion forWu, who is entering this new work environment with different experiences, VABEs, and culture pretenses. In a managerial role, it is imperative that if the working culture is not up to satisfaction,it is Peterson’s responsibility to right it. In this instance, Wu is not living up to Peterson’s output and documentation standards. We see this when she asks Wu, “to summarize your efforts every few days on our online sales tool” (Hill, p.1). This comment is seemingly clear and concise. However, when one looks at her communication history in more depth, we see that Peterson is restraining her speech when Wu is involved. For example, after the dialogue mentioned above, “Peterson hoped her face didn’t register her dismay” (Hill, p.1). If Peterson were willing and able to give timely feedback to Wu, she would have stilled his unusual requests immediately, which would provide Wu with more insight into what is expected of him as a new employee. Further, one needs to recall that Wu has “little hands-on experience [and was only hired because Peterson] was impressed with his access to executives at […] target companies” (Hill, p.5), which means that he needs as much feedback as possible to excel in this new venture.