Entries in the Category "MGMT250"
HR Simulation Reflection
When my HR Simulation group was trying to make decisions regarding hiring and firing during the sixth quarter, we had to decide if we were going to fire a significant number of Level 1 employees. Firing so many people did not seem to be particularly necessary for accomplishing our objectives. I brought up that firing people would probably cause a decrease in morale. Since we didn't think our company would really benefit from laying off people and because our projected labor needs would require hiring again in the seventh quarter, we decided to make smaller than suggested labor cuts.
Unfortunately our requested layoffs were not correctly entered into the computer. As a result, we were able to experience the correlation between heavy layoffs and morale. This relationship got me thinking: what portion of managerial decisions factor into damage control and what portion factor into progress. Let me explain what I mean:
We know what would happen if we were to layoff a bunch of people: morale would plummet. This is what happened. People would wonder if their jobs were also in danger and would not trust management. However, if we were to not fire those people, despite a need to make cuts, would our morale have stayed the same or increased? If we hired as many people as we fired, instead of firing them, would morale increase as much as it decreased? I have a hard time believing it would. I don’t think people are as enthusiastic about the good as they are unenthusiastic about the negatives. It is kind of like earning someone’s trust. It is very difficult to earn, but it can be lost in a second.
This proves how complex the business environment is, when the best of ideas have only small positive effects but the average or below average have the potential to be catastrophic.
Four Phase Model/Learning Plan
I really liked the Four Phase model presented last week by Amy Sindelar. More than simple action steps, it helped me realize the logic behind the learning plan. At first, I thought the learning plan was just a collection of answers to questions. Now, vis-à-vis the development model presented by Amy, I succinctly see the appropriate steps for an undergraduate to take and I am able to correlate sections of the learning plan to these steps.
The discover section is very much the same as the differently personality assessments and inventories we used. This is an inward process. The explore section was similar to the career interviews and other steps mentioned toward determining careers of interest. This is an outward process. Deciding is similar to creating action plans. Acting is left out of the learning plan, I believe, but it essentially means ‘get to it.’ So, we would be completing action plans in this step.
Other than the similarities, Amy’s presentation was great for the last four slides, which gave suggestions for how to proceed with the steps.
Human Elements in Organizational Communication
Consider the prospect of using an instant message program to end a relationship. This is an overwhelmingly frowned upon scenario. Generally, it is assumed the most honorable method of ending a relationship is to do so face-to-face. One reason for this is the vulnerability created for the party ending the relationship. The recipient of the news would be more likely to respect the giver of the news, creating a more amicable break up, when the giver of the news is in a position of respect for the receiving party.
This situation is similar to one between an employer and employee. If an employer were to terminate employees through text messaging, they would not be viewed positively by employees, current or potential. The impersonal approach would be seen as a ‘cold business tactic’ used by people only interested in profits—and not people. In the future, this lack of personal interaction could backfire on the company, resulting in labor problems, including increased turnover and decreased morale.
If we take anything away from this course, I think it would have to be that since organizations are human, they are vulnerable to human weaknesses. Also, this means problems require human solutions. This is exemplified in the need for face-to-face interactions.
HR/Firing Decisions
In class today, Professor Piderit mentioned the importance of managers coming to a decision regarding a course of action to take with an employee before meeting with the employee. Thus, if a manager is thinking of firing an employee, the manager should decide before meeting with the employee to relay the decision. This seems to me to be a critically important decision for a manager to make. Managers will open themselves to problems if they are not decisive. The manager may appear lack resolve and other employees may doubt his/her decision making capabilities. Further, the decision to fire probably came after significant consideration of factors involved. To make a split second decision based on pleas from an employee will probably result in a new decision not as well thought out as the initial decision. However, if the meeting with the employee revealed information not previously considered (contradicting stories, etc.), a decision to postpone the firing may be in order.
Pay
When the class discussed compensation, I was glad to hear the conversation move toward the limits of performance pay. I think people over value the importance of money as a motivating factor toward employee productivity. If a person is given a raise of $1, from $10 to $11, will this person's productivity increase 10%? I find it hard to believe it would. If the person recently started slacking off 9.1% from a prior productivity level, a 10% increase is possible, since these two percentages cancel each other out and return the worker to normal productivity. Still, was the dollar raise necessary? Probably not. Instead, management probably slipped up. Good management can prevent work place dissatisfaction to some extent and can also increase productivity. Once management improved productivity, a wage increase may be justified as reinforcement for the employee, but it is likely that the raise would not have to be equivalent to the increase in productivity.
Feedback
Today, in class, we spoke about feedback: how to give it, how to receive it, when to give it, when to withhold it, etc. When talking about the appropriateness of timing feedback, I was reminded of an all-to-familiar and frequent occurrence often portrayed in media: when a husband is attempting to assemble some new piece of equipment/furniture/bicycle (sans directions) and his wife is standing on the said trying to throw in her two cents. The last thing the husband, with frustration intensifying, wants to hear is his wife nagging about his performance. Most of us have probably been in a similar situation before and I'm sure we weren't pleased with the advice we were receiving either. This can be adapted to a work setting: someone is in the middle of something, very busily attempting to accomplish his or her job as a deadline approaches. In the middle of the chaos, a boss comes to complain about technique, as if could possibly help with limited time remaining. I have to wonder how much blame I should put on each person, for the workers agitation, in a time like this. Is it the manager's fault for disturbing the worker or is it the worker's fault for blaming the manager who is just doing his/her job? Sure, the boss is approaching the situation in the wrong way, at the wrong time, but does that justify the employee's feelings? This reveals a little about the psychology of a work place.
Jonah Creighton Case
This is something that struck me in the Jonah Creighton case that we didn't cover in class. I think the case study presents an issue of the responsibility of employees. However, I'm not talking about the responsibility to ethical standards, rather to the company and to themselves. Jonah Creighton desperately wanted to do something about the discrimination issue, but there is a problem with this. Jonah's job had very little, if anything to do with the situation, yet he approached it from the position of being a relevant party. Jonah never even attempting to contact the relevant employees, the President and the senior vice president of international operations, instead he kept to people in his department, who were isolated from the problem. In trying to be the source of the solution, Jonah wasn't doing what was in the best interest of the company. His pushing of the discrimination issue, created tension between him and his boss, which affected their working relationship, Jonah's performance, and subsequently his performance evaluation. If Jonah really had a problem with the discrimination case, he should either have quit in protest or asked to be transferred to a position where this issue would have been relevant so he could actually work on it and not just complain about it. Here, he isn't being responsible to himself as a person or an employee. Unexpectedly, I think the Jonah Creighton case reveals something about the responsibility of employees in approaching problems from an angle that works best for the company.
Harrah's Casino Case
During class, while talking about the Harrah's Casino case study, many people were talking about gain sharing rewards based on reaching a certain level of quality customer growth. Members of a team, the valet team, the cashiers, the dealers, are grouped together and are rewarded based upon survey results. Without going into detail about the program, which we covered extensively in class, I wonder if this is the best way to measure performance by employees, which is to be rewarded. Possible problems include getting no reward for falling just short of the goal and even having a more difficult upcoming year when a percentage gain is more difficult after the improved performance of the current year. Next year, you may just miss it again, with performance that is just short of what is necessary.
I think there should be a different way of measuring performance and assigning rewards. In my plan, the total reward base would be allocated in a tiered, pro rata fashion. The tiers should be based upon different levels at the casino. There should be the performance of the casino, performance of the team, and performance of the individual employee, upon given metrics. The total available rewards should be divided upon these three tiers. If the company expects a four percent growth, the rewards should be dealt proportionally to meeting that goal. If there was only a 2% growth, only 50% of the casino tier rewards should be paid. Each team can be assigned a certain metric of success and a potential portion of the team tier rewards and the teams members are compensated based upon the performance of the team. Finally, maybe by a manager, individual performance is measured and compensated.
I think this method more accurately reflects an individual's accomplishments toward the team and casino. It factors in the performance of others into what is a reflection on an employee. In real life, customers deal with more than one employee, so this makes sense. It seems like management often likes to take short cuts in providing benefits: "It is something a little extra for the employees, how could they reasonably complain about rewards?" Maybe management should be a little considerate of fair practices for awarding employees; they would probably get a better response.
Value of Dreams
Earlier this year, I gave a presentation on "Visionary Leadership" at the Fall Leadership Conference. For it, I created a managerial decision making process for businesses. It followed: determine organization's mission statement, determine a vision statement for organization or departments within the organization, create goals, formulate action plan, implement the plan, evaluate progress and make adjustments to goals and the action plan. This model, for organizations, can be adapted to people as well. I suppose, at first we either have to drop the mission plan portion of the model, since people are not an organization of lesser parts, brought together for a common purpose. Maybe the mission plan is the meaning of life, but we don't know what that is, so we can drop this portion. An organization's vision is the equivalent of an individual's dream, which is basically where a person sees himself or herself in the future. Goals, we can assume the SMART goal structure presented in class, is placing metrics on our dreams. Once we know where we want to be (dreams) and the metrics which must be met to consider our dream realized (goals), we can create the plans to accomplish our goals. Of course, the plan is then implemented and people will always be reviewing their progress.
In my opinion, the dream is the most important step of process. This is the motivation, the excitement, the passion. For the individual, this is the starting point and this makes it the most important step. There is no purpose behind a person's actions without a dream for where the person wants to be. This can be as simple as the action of eating. If a person's dream is to be the President of the United States, goals will be acquiring all the skills necessary to be elected. Since being President requires the age of 35 years, one goal might be staying alive until the age of 35 years. A necessary action to stay alive is eating. If a person doesn't have a dream, even if the dream is simply to live, there is no reason to stay alive. Also, a person can do whatever he or she feels like doing at all times if they have no dream for where he or she wishes to end up. However, if a person has a vision, the person also knows what he or she should not do. My marketing professor says that the first rule of management is to do as little as possible while will accomplishing the organization's goals. This is the same with individuals. When the person knows his or her dream, he knows what the necessary steps are to accomplish the dream and can avoid doing extra work. For example, the person may know joining ten college student organizations is not necessary to getting a certain job and can thus avoid over extending himself or herself by joining all the organizations.
Apologizing
In class number 11, we discussed managing teams. One of the topics was repairing breaches of trust. I'm not sure the class was able to make any immediate personality changes on anyone, but I definitely have been noticing certain practices since. One of my HR Simulation teammates missed class that day. This was the same day the first inputs for the simulation were due. As a result, the team wasn't able to include this team member's graphs. Needless to say, he was sorry he let us down. Strikingly, later on, he sent the team an email saying he'd "gladly take on some more work next week to make up for it." I definitely recall this being one of the appropriate measures to restore trust from group members.
Executive Compensation
This is a little more on what we spent very little time on in class today: executive compensation.
Continue reading "Executive Compensation"
MBTI: Better than the LSI
No, no, I'm not talking about the LSI again. I just thought I'd throw it into the title. Unlike my situation with LSI, I actually do like the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator.
Continue reading "MBTI: Better than the LSI"
I think I'm having a 'tiff with the LSI
This is a second blog entry discussing the LSI. The first dealt with a flaw in the way the test is constructed: ordinal statistics given quantitative properties. This entry is in regards to a flaw in the way the results of the test are determined. I would recommend reading my entry Learning Styles Inventory before reading this entry as this entry deals with concepts introduced in that previous entry.
Continue reading "I think I'm having a 'tiff with the LSI"
Learning Style Inventory
I have a problem with the Learning Style Inventory.
Continue reading "Learning Style Inventory"
My First MGMT 250 Entry: Decisions, Decisions
Hey now, everyone. This is my second attempt at the first entry of my MGMT 250 blog...I was wise enough to accidentally delete the old one. Well, you know how this works: what I lose in patience, you lose in details. Definitely a lose-lose situations. Consider it 30 seconds of your life you just got back. What makes an appropriate first entry in my blog. What is a worthwhile first topic for an assignment whose guidelines state simply that the entries must relate to the class. With an assignment so open-ended, how can I decide the best place to start? Decisions, decisions.
This reminds me of a situation I was in for another of this class's assignments, the "My Values" exercise. From a list of 40 or so "values," we were supposed to select our top 15, reduce it to our top 10 and then rank our top five values. This assignment was probably expected to take no more than 20 minutes, yet it took me nearly 90. Something about limiting myself to the values listed on a sheet of paper just didn't sit well with me, especially when my top value was not listed. I have never sat around, trying to sort my values to determine which means the most to me. I'd like to think that I hold all values equally strong and in doing so would always strive to live to the requirements of the values. If this was the case, the only way to rank the values is by measuring the requirements to fulfill a life supporting the particular value. The other way to look at it is through my perspective of which values are most necessary for achieving a certain quality of life. At any rate, the result was my difficultly in determining my values. Given my indifference of choosing one value over another, I realize now I critical flaw in my management of the situation. I spent four and a half times as long as any one else on the assignment as a result of my indecisiveness. That's four and a half times more for something I cared less about. I realize now that there is some importance to making a choice for the sake of making one. The time I wasted carefully evaluating each value was not worth the result I got for making sure I made the absolute right choice. Time is a precious commodity. If I am not carefully monitoring my use of time, I'm wasting the one thing I can not get back. Indecisive management is a huge obstacle in the efficiency of businesses. It doesn't matter if I determine the best way to capitalize on a certain market if a competitor already stole a significant portion of the market share while you were thinking.