Response to authors on the subject (adding to concepts discussed not remarks on their writing)

What should Mark have done if Jack still was not able to resolve the problem? 

If Jack is not the who will be able to solve the problem, so that Mark would have given a chance to others in the team and would have taken their solutions instead of depending on single person for completion of work or solving a problem though he believe in Jack because of his association, skill sets, working capabilities and knowledge but at this point he was not helpful to Mark and was not able was not able to solve problem. Yes he would give chance to Jack even for second time and also would have included other team members to give a solution for the problem so that they would have come up with their solutions and would have helped in times like this when persons like Jack was not able to solve problems or at least he would have asked Jack to guide others and accompany them in solving the issue or he would have asked Jack to select a person basing on his capabilities that Jack will believe that he will be able to solve the problem.

Would it make sense for Mark to assign this problem to someone else now, after Jack could not solve the problem the second time around? 

Yes, I believe that he would, If Jack was not able to solve the problem even after second basing on company reputation it is a very much huge time for wasting on a problem which even not solved after second time. It would have been a good idea if he would have chosen others and asked them to solve the problem. I never believe that if a person cannot solve a problem it is not right that no other will be able to solve. We need to consider everyone’s ability and capability for solving a problem. Though Mark perspective towards Jack may be right but that doesn’t mean no others have the capability in solving issues. Here in case study, Jack PHD also hasn’t helped to solve the problem.