Describe the sustainability management practices of a business firm with which you are familiar. Which stage of the corporate environmental responsibility model best fits this firm, and why? Looking again at this same firm, what steps might its managers take to improve its environmental performance? In answering this question, consider the various elements of effective environmental management.

ThyssenKrupp Elevator Canada INTRODUCTION During a lunchroom break, a male employee at ThyssenKrupp decided to take up a dare from a fellow colleague for $100 and the Jackass-like prank was videotaped then posted to YouTube. When it came to the attention of the HR manager and other senior management, the employee was fired for violating company policy. The employee argued in court that the organizational culture allowed such behavior. But would the Ontario Labour Relations Board (OLRB) agree?

BACKGROUND ThyssenKrupp Elevator Canada was subcontracting elevator installation at a construction site in downtown Toronto where a large office building was being built. All the workers on the site, including those from ThyssenKrupp, and the main contractor of the site, PCL Construction, were male and the culture of the workplace was described as a “macho” environment where pranks were played. There were reportedly pictures of women and provocative calendars hanging on walls, as well as signs displaying vulgar humor. There was little concern about these as access to the building was restricted to people involved in the construction project. One of ThyssenKrupp's employees at the site was an elevator mechanic. He and several other employees engaged in what he called “picking” on each other and playing pranks to keep things light at work. They also watched pornographic scenes on a worker's iPod and episodes of the television show Jackass, which features individuals doing stupid activities on dares.

ESCALATION OF PRANK BEHAVIOUR Over a period of a few weeks, the mechanic and other employees performed more and more pranks that copied some of the ones they saw on the Jackass show. Typically these events took place in the basement lunchroom where employees gathered for breaks and meals, to change clothes, and to socialize. Soon, money was being offered on dares to do certain actions. For example, one ThyssenKrupp employee accepted a dare that involved a $60 payment—money collected from fellow employees, including three foremen. The dare involved the employee eating spoiled food found in the common refrigerator of the lunchroom. A couple of weeks after the first dare, the mechanic was observed playing with a stapler in the lunchroom on a break. One of the foremen walked in and jokingly said, “What are you going to do with that? Why don't you staple your nuts to something?” The mechanic jokingly replied that he'd do it “if you get enough money.” Though he claimed it was intended as a joke, word spread within a few hours, and soon $100 was raised among seven other ThyssenKrupp and three PCL employees. Another four people were in the lunchroom later that afternoon watching when the mechanic decided to go ahead with the staple dare. He proceeded to drop his work uniform trousers and staple his scrotum to a wooden plank, which was met by “cheering and high fives,” according to the mechanic. With the mechanic's knowledge, the prank was filmed on video. Included on-camera were all those employees present, wearing full worksite uniforms, PCL logos on hats, and TK shirt patches—all easily identifiable and recorded by a worker who was present that day. The mechanic was advised at a later date that the event was posted on YouTube. Initially, the mechanic did nothing about the YouTube posting but eventually asked for it to be taken off the site. To ensure this was done, the mechanic went back to YouTube searching for the video clip, but couldn't find it. He assumed it had been removed, however, it was not—he just didn't search correctly. In total, the video clip was assessable on YouTube for two weeks, during which time many employees in the construction industry watched it. It was during these two weeks that ThyssenKrupp became aware of the video after the HR department received an email with a link to the video, and several people discussed it with a ThyssenKrupp executive at a construction labor relations conference. Conference participants insisted the employee was from ThyssenKrupp, and they questioned how the company could allow something like that to happen during work hours. At this point, ThyssenKrupp management reviewed the video one more time and decided that the mechanic had violated its workplace harassment policy, which prohibited “practical jokes of a sexual nature which cause awkwardness or embarrassment.” The mechanic was fired for “a flagrant violation” of ThyssenKrupp's harassment policy and risking the company's reputation.

CULTURE AT FAULT Upon being fired from his job, the mechanic filed a grievance with the OLRB. He argued that dismissal was too harsh given the culture of the workplace which was accepting of that type of behavior. He also said no one told him not to do it, no one expressed displeasure, and no one mentioned they were offended. He argued that other employees had done stunts but questioned why he was the only one disciplined for his actions. He also claimed to have never seen the workplace harassment policy, even though it was part of the orientation package. THE DECISION In July 2011, the OLRB found the mechanic's misconduct on the employer's premises, plus his permission to record it, “patently unacceptable in almost any workplace.” The fact that his employer was easily identified in the video clip contributed to the decision. The fact that the mechanic claimed not to have known about the corporate harassment policy was irrelevant—he should have known better. The OLRB also dismissed as irrelevant that no one protested or objected to the prank during the lunch break, which the mechanic argued was “not during work hours.” The court stated that ThyssenKrupp has an interest in preventing such horseplay and stunts in the workplace. They are in a safety-sensitive industry and such employee misconduct places the firm's reputation in jeopardy. The seriousness of the mechanic's misconduct also superseded any other factors, such as his claim of being a good employee with a clean record and the argument around the culture. There was no evidence that the company was aware of other pranks, and his role as the principal offender wasn't diminished by the culture, said the board. In dismissing the mechanic's grievance, the board stated, “If (ThyssenKrupp) employees want to emulate the principles of Jackass by self-abuse, they may be free to do so when they are not on the (employer's) premises and cannot be identified as being associated with (ThyssenKrupp).

(4) Did the Ontario Labour Relation Board (OLRB) accept the defense that organizational culture contributed to the employee behavior? Explain their reasoning. Considering the company’s work environment, what factors need to be considered while updating the company’s health & safety policy?

ThyssenKrupp Elevator Canada

INTRODUCTION During a lunchroom break, a male employee at ThyssenKrupp decided to take up a dare from a fellow colleague for $100 and the Jackass-like prank was videotaped then posted to YouTube. When it came to the attention of the HR manager and other senior management, the employee was fired for violating company policy. The employee argued in court that the organizational culture allowed such behaviour. But would the Ontario Labour Relations Board (OLRB) agree?

BACKGROUND ThyssenKrupp Elevator Canada was subcontracting elevator installation at a construction site in downtown Toronto where a large office building was being built. All the workers on the site, including those from ThyssenKrupp, and the main contractor of the site, PCL Construction, were male and the culture of the workplace was described as a “macho” environment where pranks were played. There were reportedly pictures of women and provocative calendars hanging on walls, as well as signs displaying vulgar humour. There was little concern about these as access to the building was restricted to people involved in the construction project. One of ThyssenKrupp's employees at the site was an elevator mechanic. He and several other employees engaged in what he called “picking” on each other and playing pranks to keep things light at work. They also watched pornographic scenes on a worker's iPod and episodes of the television show Jackass, which features individuals doing stupid activities on dares.

ESCALATION OF PRANK BEHAVIOUR Over a period of a few weeks, the mechanic and other employees performed more and more pranks that copied some of the ones they saw on the Jackass show. Typically these events took place in the basement lunchroom where employees gathered for breaks and meals, to change clothes, and to socialize. Soon, money was being offered on dares to do certain actions. For example, one ThyssenKrupp employee accepted a dare that involved a $60 payment—money collected from fellow employees, including three foremen. The dare involved the employee eating spoiled food found in the common refrigerator of the lunchroom. A couple of weeks after the first dare, the mechanic was observed playing with a stapler in the lunchroom on a break. One of the foremen walked in and jokingly said, “What are you going to do with that? Why don't you staple your nuts to something?” The mechanic jokingly replied that he'd do it “if you get enough money.” Though he claimed it was intended as a joke, word spread within a few hours, and soon $100 was raised among seven other ThyssenKrupp and three PCL employees. Another four people were in the lunchroom later that afternoon watching when the mechanic decided to go ahead with the staple dare. He proceeded to drop his work uniform trousers and staple his scrotum to a wooden plank, which was met by “cheering and high fives,” according to the mechanic. With the mechanic's knowledge, the prank was filmed on video. Included on-camera were all those employees present, wearing full worksite uniforms, PCL logos on hats, and TK shirt patches—all easily identifiable and recorded by a worker who was present that day. The mechanic was advised at a later date that the event was posted on YouTube. Initially, the mechanic did nothing about the YouTube posting, but eventually asked for it to be taken off the site. To ensure this was done, the mechanic went back to YouTube searching for the video clip, but couldn't find it. He assumed it had been removed, however it was not—he just didn't search correctly. In total, the video clip was assessable on YouTube for two weeks, during which time many employees in the construction industry watched it. It was during these two weeks that ThyssenKrupp became aware of the video after the HR department received an email with a link to the video, and several people discussed it with a ThyssenKrupp executive at a construction labour relations conference. Conference participants insisted the employee was from ThyssenKrupp, and they questioned how the company could allow something like that to happen during work hours. At this point, ThyssenKrupp management reviewed the video one more time and decided that the mechanic had violated its workplace harassment policy, which prohibited “practical jokes of a sexual nature which cause awkwardness or embarrassment.” The mechanic was fired for “a flagrant violation” of ThyssenKrupp's harassment policy and risking the company's reputation.

CULTURE AT FAULT Upon being fired from his job, the mechanic filed a grievance with the OLRB. He argued that dismissal was too harsh given the culture of the workplace which was accepting of that type of behaviour. He also said no one told him not to do it, no one expressed displeasure, and no one mentioned they were offended. He argued that other employees had done stunts but questioned why he was the only one disciplined for his actions. He also claimed to have never seen the workplace harassment policy, even though it was part of the orientation package.

THE DECISION In July 2011, the OLRB found the mechanic's misconduct on the employer's premises, plus his permission to record it, “patently unacceptable in almost any workplace.” The fact that his employer was easily identified in the video clip contributed to the decision. The fact that the mechanic claimed not to have known about the corporate harassment policy was irrelevant—he should have known better. The OLRB also dismissed as irrelevant that no one protested or objected to the prank during the lunch break, which the mechanic argued was “not during work hours.” The court stated that ThyssenKrupp has an interest in preventing such horseplay and stunts in the workplace. They are in a safety-sensitive industry and such employee misconduct places the firm's reputation in jeopardy. The seriousness of the mechanic's misconduct also superseded any other factors, such as his claim of being a good employee with a clean record and the argument around the culture. There was no evidence that the company was aware of other pranks, and his role as the principle offender wasn't diminished by the culture, said the board. In dismissing the mechanics grievance, the board stated, “If (ThyssenKrupp) employees want to emulate the principles of Jackass by self-abuse, they may be free to do so when they are not on the (employer's) premises and cannot be identified as being associated with (ThyssenKrupp).”

1. Considering that the mechanic claimed that the ThyssenKrupp culture contributed to such behaviour, in your opinion, does ThyssenKrupp need to change its corporate culture? If not, why not?

1. Describe and discuss at least three ways in which nonverbal communication signals may differ culturally in an intercultural team meeting.

1. Discuss ways in which cultural differences among team members “get in the way” of effective teamwork. As a team leader, how would you deal with this problem?

College students nationwide crave and rave about the sandwiches served up at their campus Jimmy John's Gourmet Sandwiches, but what they likely don't know is that the restaurant's founder was merely a fresh-faced high school graduate when he opened the chain's first location.

Using a loan of $25,000 from his father, Jimmy John Liautaud planned to open a Chicago-style hot dog stand in Charleston, Ill. But when he realized the equipment involved exceeded his budget, the 19-year-old turned his attention to dell-style sandwiches, opening the first Jimmy John's outlet in 1983 on the campus of Eastern Illinois University in Charleston.

Liautaud worked open to dose, usually by himself, in what was then a single-unit restaurant serving four sandwiches and 25-cent sodas. He has since grown the Champaign, Ill.-based brand into the second fastest-growing sandwich chain in the United States based on percentage growth in systemwide sales, according to Nation's Restaurant News' Top 200 census. In 2011 systemwide sales reached $1.01 billion, a 30-percent increase from the prior year.

The company currently has 26 corporate units and 1,415 franchised locations, and it continues to expand, opening approximately one new store every day.

Liautaud, who refers to himself as "a 30-year overnight success," didn't have a business plan when he started, and he claims he still doesn't. He attributes the brand's success to keeping it simple and staying informed.

"I didn't have a business philosophy or plan," he said. "What I did do was balance the checkbook every day and keep a bank balance. I was very keen on understanding what drove that balance up and down."

He grew that understanding by listening to Jamie Coulter, then a Pizza Hut franchisee who would go on to lead Lone Star Steakhouse. In 1987, after opening his second and third Jimmy John's units on the campus of Western Illinois University, Liautaud began attending monthly operations-review meetings that Coulter was holding for Pizza Hut franchisees.

"I told him to take notes and not ask any questions," said Coulter, chief executive and chairman of Coulter Enterprises Inc. "After the fourth meeting he did ask me some questions and showed me a financial statement. I was impressed with his numbers. He left with a lot of confidence, and he has just grown into a giant."

As he continued to expand the brand, Liautaud sold the first Jimmy John's franchise in 1994 and made a point to put his time and energy into developing a strong system of franchisees, which he maintains to this day with an intense hands-on approach.

"From my experience, Jimmy's attention to detail is without comparison," said Peter Fox, a Jimmy John's franchisee and part owner of the company, which he bought into when Liautaud sold a 33-percent stake to private equity firm Weston Presidio in 2007.

Fox, who was formerly a Wendy's franchisee and partner at Bear Steams, explained that corporate officials audit each franchised unit every 28 days. That audit includes the findings of a full day spent in the store rating and evaluating every detail. It is a process that Fox cited as drastically different and more involved than the one at Wendy's, and one that Liautaud himself continues to take part in because of mistakes made early in his career.

"I didn't lead by example and set people up to fail," he said. "I thought the definition of a good employee was someone that you didn't have to tell what to do and they just did it. Now I realize a good employee does exactly what you tell them to do."

Meticulous standards outlining how restaurants appear and are managed have helped Liautaud move closer to his goal of having every outlet, regardless of location, provide the same experience, environment and product.

"I really want them to be the same all the time, and I really want to be good at what I do," he said.

For this reason he sticks to a core menu and follows his guiding principles no matter what his competition is doing. While the product line has grown beyond the four original sandwiches--the cold-cut deli sandwich and sub remain the chain's bread and butter--Liautaud has resisted the temptation to add items such as hot sandwiches to better compete with brands like Potbelly Sandwich Shop and Subway.
"He's never deviated from trying to keep it simple," Fox said.

In line with its slogan, "Subs so fast you'll freak," Jimmy John's has also differentiated itself from competitors in the sandwich segment by investing time, training and money in its POS system to make sure that delivery is as quick and efficient as possible.

Liautaud claims to not know how he stands out from his competitors, who he says "are all great." He said he does not spend a lot of time thinking about what others in the business are doing. However, the difference is evident to those around him.

"I talk to Jimmy several times a week," Coulter said. "He just seems to have acquired more knowledge about the restaurant business than most of his competitors, and he executes his concept."

In addition to finance, Liautaud said he learned from Coulter that surrounding himself with good people was as important as anything else. That lesson has prompted Liautaud to eschew large development deals and big money and instead to focus on growing intelligently.

"I have no interest in being the biggest; I want to be the best," he said. "I'm going to focus on the people, focus on the team and focus on the franchisees being successful."

The company, which expanded outside of college campuses in the late 1990s, currently has more than 2,000 units in development. Despite that apparent success, however, Liautaud said he remains focused on keeping his business simple and developing strong business relationships.

"It's kind of old school, and it's not sexy," Liautaud said. "I wish I had a big, macro, super Harvard-Stanford-Yale plan to tell you about, but I just don't have one."

This case is about Jimmy John Liautaud, the founder and CEO of Jimmy John’s Gourmet Sandwiches and the evolution of his business. He began in 1983 with a single store. During the 1980s, the number of company owned stores grew, and in 1994, he began franchising. He shares how he built a strong brand so the in-store experience is consistent.

Answer the following questions: When he started his business, did Jimmy have a business plan? What was his focus to ensure success in the beginning? How has Jimmy built such a strong brand such that the customer experience is consistent regardless of location? What types of control are evident in the company’s franchise system?

Integer Programming Problem (Chapter 6)

A manufacturer can sell product 1 at a price of $30 per unit and product 2 at a price of $40 per unit. Three units of raw material and 1.5 labor hours are needed to manufacturer one unit of product 1. Six units of raw material and 2 labor hours are need to manufacture one unit of product 2. The unit variable cost for product 1 is $20, and for product 2 is $20. A total of 15,000 units of raw material and 8,000 labor hours are available. If any product 1 is produced, a setup cost of $15,000 is incurred; if any product 2 is produced, a setup cost of $35,000 is incurred. Determine how to maximize the manufacturer’s profit.

a. What is the effective capacity for product 1 and product 2, respectively?

b. In the optimal solution, which product(s) will be manufactured? What is the optimal production quantity? What is the optimal profit?

Please use excel to solve the problem and show formulas.

1. Choose three cultural assumptions that you believe to be typical of your home country. Show how these assumptions may contrast with the cultural perspectives and beliefs of other countries or world regions of your choice.

Please examine and make an assessment on Ford's debt analysis over the last 5 years compared to the auto industry? [200 word or more][Will give thumbs up]

Explain in detail how operating in equilibrium prevented a company from successfully implementing business transformation there by causing its demise. and also explain the below listed 3 types of state equilibrium in detail separately in terms organization change and development.

the state equilibrium sometimes results in

• Difficulty in change management
• Inhibition to take risk
• Lack of innovation
• Lack of business Diversification thoughts and analysis

Trader Joe's company operates in the US supermarket industry. How difficult is it to make money in the supermarket industry? Why? How have its prospects changed in the last 10 years?

Working in teams has become necessary in many organizations and school projects. In this class, you have also been allocated to project teams. Together with your teammates, you have accomplished two team projects. Reflect upon your experiences of the learning journey, drawing connections between Organizational Behavior theories and your team processes, and discuss accordingly. In particular:

a) What did your team do well? Identify your team’s top two key success factors and explain what interventions or unintended actions contributed to those positive experiences. (Discuss and Elaborate more with Individual Differences, Groups & Teams - 5 Stages of Team Development, Diversity & Inclusion, Leadership, Organisational Behavior, Management and other related topics.) (Word limit of 300 words)

b) What went wrong at certain points? What were the reasons behind the process losses in your team? Discuss up to two issues and explain how your team turned around these situations. (Discuss and Elaborate more with Individual Differences, Groups & Teams - 5 Stages of Team Development, Diversity & Inclusion, Leadership, Organisational Behavior, Management and other related topics.) (Word limit of 300 words)

*PLEASE TYPE YOUR ANSWER (NO SCREENSHOTS OR IMAGES) IN FULL SENTENCE/PARAGRAPH/REPORT FORMAT, NO POINT FORM. THANK YOU IN ADVANCE

CLASS : INTERNATIONAL AIR TRANSPORTATION

WRITE A 2 PAGE PAPER ON "" HOW AIRLINE TERRORISM EFFECTS AIRLINE COMPANY ""   WITH WORK CITED. APA OR MLA. PLEASEE....

THANK YOU!!

What Changes Ford Motors COmpany implemented in the last 10 years?                                      

• External or Forces? Discuss

Or

Internal Forces? Discuss?                                                                 

Planned?

Or

Reactive?

What are the "real-world" implications for this case?