Answer the following question after reading over the case study below. Case 10 Two-Tier Wages—Same Job, Different Pay When domestic auto manufacturers were hit hard by recession and foreign competition, they struggled to control costs and maintain profitability. One response was a two-tier wage system paying new workers significantly less than existing ones doing the same job. What is the future for two-tier wage systems? A New Labor Contract At Ford, General Motors, and Chrysler manufacturing plants across the United States, newly hired workers are earning an hourly wage that may be half that of their more experienced coworkers who perform identical tasks, averaging roughly $19 versus $28 per hour. Their benefits—health insurance, paid time off, and retirement funding—are also less than those of experienced workers. These differences are the result of two-tier contracts where labor unions permit corporations to hire new workers with wage and benefit packages below those earned by veteran employees in the same jobs. Here to Stay? “This is not going away,” said Kristin Dziczek, a labor analyst at Ann Arbor’s Center for Automotive Research. “It has allowed the Big Three to reduce labor costs without cutting the pay of workers. Is it good for the health and competitiveness of the companies? Yes. And is that good for job security? Yes.” “If you know you’re going to get to the top wage eventually, the [two-tier] system can work,” says Peter Cappelli, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School. “The big problem is when you think you’ll never get there.” Although lower-tier workers can move up, there’s a lot of uncertainty about how long it takes. The United Auto Workers (UAW) union wants to shorten and clarify the time to jump tiers and close the pay gap between them. Mixed Reactions Labor’s reaction to the two-tier wages has been mixed. Although no one is happy about earning 50% less than the worker across the aisle, “Everybody is appreciative of a job and glad to be working,” said Derrick Chatman, a new hire at Chrysler’s Jefferson North plant. Before joining Chrysler for $14.65 per hour, he was laid off from Home Depot, worked the odd construction job, and collected unemployment. Gary Wurtz, a line worker at GM’s Orion Township, MI, plant, where 40% of his fellow workers receive lower-tier wages, said: “In order to get those guys up, we’ll take a signing bonus or profit-sharing instead.” That said, two-tier plans still have the potential to divide workers across salary lines. Gary Chaison, a professor of industrial relations at Clark University, points out, “[Lower-tier workers] might even feel sufficiently aggrieved to someday negotiate away the benefits of retired higher-tier workers.” A higher-tier autoworker observed, “After we retire, the next generation may ask, ‘Why should we defend your pensions? You didn’t defend our pay when we were young.’” Bridging the Gap For many union members, the rallying cry is “No more tiers!” They want to eliminate the two tiers and move to a higher uniform wage rate for all. The new UAW president Dennis Williams says, “It’s time to bridge the gap.” But Chrysler CEO Sergio Marchione takes a very different position. He would prefer to eliminate the higher wage tier altogether as senior workers retire. A Changing Tide Although at first the two-tier contracts looked to be here to stay, it appears that among the Big Three automakers—Ford, General Motors, and Chrysler—there may be a changing tide. Ford was loudest in support of the two-tier system. And while recognizing that dropping the system will increase labor costs, Ford acknowledges that there have been benefits to eliminating the system. Said Joe Hinrichs, Ford’s president of the Americas, “One of the great things coming out of the new contract has been that we no longer talk about the differences between an ‘entry-level worker’ and a ‘legacy worker.’ All the workers are the same.” So, although Ford is paying more in wages, it also expects to generate performance benefits by eliminating the system. As Hinrichs said, “That’s really good, because one of the things you really need in a manufacturing plant is there to be focus and discipline. Anxiety or distraction is the enemy of process discipline.” Both Chrysler and General Motors have also made tentative agreements with the UAW to narrow pay gaps across the two tiers.
1) Case Analysis Question FURTHER RESEARCH: (You need to lookup data on reports to support your answer to the question below. Please cite where you get your sources from whether online or books.)
Create a report that summarizes the following:
a) the current status of two-tier plans
b) what we know about how they work
c) what direction we can expect from them in the future.
In: Operations Management
please no handwriting
Learning Outcome:
Understand the issues involved with transfer pricing in multidivisional companies (question 1)
Provide an appreciation of logistics activities and their relationship to supply chain management, other business functions and enterprises. (Question 2)
ECR in the UK
Dutchman Paul Polman, now CEO of Unilever, did a stint as General Manager of Procter & Gamble UK and Eire from 1995 to 1999. While admiring the UK’s advanced retailing systems, he saw opportunities for all four of the ‘pillars of ECR’ – range, new items, promotions and replenishment. The following is extracted from the text of a speech he made to the Institute of Grocery Distribution.
Range
The average store now holds 35 per cent more than five years ago, yet a typical consumer buys just 18 items on a trip. A quarter of these skus[1] sell less than six units a week!
The number of skus offered by manufacturers and stores has become too large and complex. My company is equally guilty in this area. No question, we make too many skus. I can assure you we are working on it. Actually, our overall sku count in laundry is already down 20 per cent compared to this time last year. What’s more, business is up.
Clearly, we have an opportunity to rationalise our ranges. As long as we do this in an ECR way – focusing on what consumers want – we will all win. The consumer will see a clearer range. Retailers and manufacturers will carry less inventory and less complexity.
The result will be cost savings across the whole supply chain and stronger margins.
New items
There were 16,000 new skus last year. Yet 80 per cent lasted less than a year. You don’t need to be an accountant to imagine the costs associated with this kind of activity. And look how this has changed. Since 1975, the number of new sku introductions has increased eightfold. Yet their life expectancy has shrunk from around five years in 1975 to about nine months now. We can hardly call this progress.
Promotions
In promotions it’s the same story. Take laundry detergents. This is a fairly stable market. Yet we’re spending 50 per cent more on promotions than two years ago, with Consumers buying nearly 30 per cent more of their volume on promotions. This not only creates an inefficient supply chain, or in some cases poor in-store availability, but, more importantly, has reduced the value of the category and likely the retailers’ profit. We are all aware of the inefficiencies promotions cause in the system, such as problems in production, inventory and in-store availability. They all create extra costs, which ultimately have to be recouped in price. But there’s a higher cost. As promotions are increasing, they are decreasing customer loyalty to both stores and brands by 16 per cent during the period of the promotion. We commissioned a report by Professor Barwise of the London Business School. He called it ‘Taming the Multi-buy
Dragon’. The report shows us that over 70 per cent of laundry promotional investment goes on multi-buys. The level of investment on multi-buys has increased by 60 per cent over the last three years. There’s been a 50 per cent increase behind brands and a doubling of investment behind own labels. Contrary to what we thought, most of this volume is not going to a broad base of households. It is going to a small minority.
Seventy-one per cent of all multi-buy volume is bought by just 14 per cent of households. Just 2 per cent of multi-buy volume goes to 55 per cent of households.
We really are focusing our spending on influencing and rewarding a very small minority of people indeed.
Replenishment
Based on the escalating activity I’ve just [referred to], costs are unnecessarily high. There are huge cost savings also here, up to 6 per cent, by removing the non-value-added skus and inefficient new brand and promotional activity.
Questions
1 - Cutting down on range, new items and promotions is presumably going to lead to ‘everyday low prices’. Discuss the implications to the trade-off between choice and price. (2 points)
2- Procter & Gamble’s major laundry brand in the US is Tide. This is marketed in some 60 pack presentations, some of which have less than 0.1 per cent share. The proliferation of these pack presentations is considered to have been instrumental in increasing Tide’s market share from 20 to 40 per cent of the US market in recent years. Clearly, this is a major issue within P&G.
What are the logistics pros and cons of sku proliferation? (2points)
In: Operations Management
please no handwriting
Learning Outcome:
Understand the issues involved with transfer pricing in multidivisional companies (question 1)
Provide an appreciation of logistics activities and their relationship to supply chain management, other business functions and enterprises. (Question 2)
CASE STUDY
ECR in the UK
Dutchman Paul Polman, now CEO of Unilever, did a stint as General Manager of Procter & Gamble UK and Eire from 1995 to 1999. While admiring the UK’s advanced retailing systems, he saw opportunities for all four of the ‘pillars of ECR’ – range, new items, promotions and replenishment. The following is extracted from the text of a speech he made to the Institute of Grocery Distribution.
Range
The average store now holds 35 per cent more than five years ago, yet a typical consumer buys just 18 items on a trip. A quarter of these skus[1] sell less than six units a week!
The number of skus offered by manufacturers and stores has become too large and complex. My company is equally guilty in this area. No question, we make too many skus. I can assure you we are working on it. Actually, our overall sku count in laundry is already down 20 per cent compared to this time last year. What’s more, business is up.
Clearly, we have an opportunity to rationalise our ranges. As long as we do this in an ECR way – focusing on what consumers want – we will all win. The consumer will see a clearer range. Retailers and manufacturers will carry less inventory and less complexity.
The result will be cost savings across the whole supply chain and stronger margins.
New items
There were 16,000 new skus last year. Yet 80 per cent lasted less than a year. You don’t need to be an accountant to imagine the costs associated with this kind of activity. And look how this has changed. Since 1975, the number of new sku introductions has increased eightfold. Yet their life expectancy has shrunk from around five years in 1975 to about nine months now. We can hardly call this progress.
Promotions
In promotions it’s the same story. Take laundry detergents. This is a fairly stable market. Yet we’re spending 50 per cent more on promotions than two years ago, with Consumers buying nearly 30 per cent more of their volume on promotions. This not only creates an inefficient supply chain, or in some cases poor in-store availability, but, more importantly, has reduced the value of the category and likely the retailers’ profit. We are all aware of the inefficiencies promotions cause in the system, such as problems in production, inventory and in-store availability. They all create extra costs, which ultimately have to be recouped in price. But there’s a higher cost. As promotions are increasing, they are decreasing customer loyalty to both stores and brands by 16 per cent during the period of the promotion. We commissioned a report by Professor Barwise of the London Business School. He called it ‘Taming the Multi-buy
Dragon’. The report shows us that over 70 per cent of laundry promotional investment goes on multi-buys. The level of investment on multi-buys has increased by 60 per cent over the last three years. There’s been a 50 per cent increase behind brands and a doubling of investment behind own labels. Contrary to what we thought, most of this volume is not going to a broad base of households. It is going to a small minority.
Seventy-one per cent of all multi-buy volume is bought by just 14 per cent of households. Just 2 per cent of multi-buy volume goes to 55 per cent of households.
We really are focusing our spending on influencing and rewarding a very small minority of people indeed.
Replenishment
Based on the escalating activity I’ve just [referred to], costs are unnecessarily high. There are huge cost savings also here, up to 6 per cent, by removing the non-value-added skus and inefficient new brand and promotional activity.
Questions
1 - Cutting down on range, new items and promotions is presumably going to lead to ‘everyday low prices’. Discuss the implications to the trade-off between choice and price. (2 points)
2- Procter & Gamble’s major laundry brand in the US is Tide. This is marketed in some 60 pack presentations, some of which have less than 0.1 per cent share. The proliferation of these pack presentations is considered to have been instrumental in increasing Tide’s market share from 20 to 40 per cent of the US market in recent years. Clearly, this is a major issue within P&G.
What are the logistics pros and cons of sku proliferation? (2points)
please long answer
In: Operations Management
please no handwriting
Learning Outcome:
Understand the issues involved with transfer pricing in multidivisional companies (question 1)
Provide an appreciation of logistics activities and their relationship to supply chain management, other business functions and enterprises. (Question 2)
CASE STUDY
ECR in the UK
Dutchman Paul Polman, now CEO of Unilever, did a stint as General Manager of Procter & Gamble UK and Eire from 1995 to 1999. While admiring the UK’s advanced retailing systems, he saw opportunities for all four of the ‘pillars of ECR’ – range, new items, promotions and replenishment. The following is extracted from the text of a speech he made to the Institute of Grocery Distribution.
Range
The average store now holds 35 per cent more than five years ago, yet a typical consumer buys just 18 items on a trip. A quarter of these skus[1] sell less than six units a week!
The number of skus offered by manufacturers and stores has become too large and complex. My company is equally guilty in this area. No question, we make too many skus. I can assure you we are working on it. Actually, our overall sku count in laundry is already down 20 per cent compared to this time last year. What’s more, business is up.
Clearly, we have an opportunity to rationalise our ranges. As long as we do this in an ECR way – focusing on what consumers want – we will all win. The consumer will see a clearer range. Retailers and manufacturers will carry less inventory and less complexity.
The result will be cost savings across the whole supply chain and stronger margins.
New items
There were 16,000 new skus last year. Yet 80 per cent lasted less than a year. You don’t need to be an accountant to imagine the costs associated with this kind of activity. And look how this has changed. Since 1975, the number of new sku introductions has increased eightfold. Yet their life expectancy has shrunk from around five years in 1975 to about nine months now. We can hardly call this progress.
Promotions
In promotions it’s the same story. Take laundry detergents. This is a fairly stable market. Yet we’re spending 50 per cent more on promotions than two years ago, with Consumers buying nearly 30 per cent more of their volume on promotions. This not only creates an inefficient supply chain, or in some cases poor in-store availability, but, more importantly, has reduced the value of the category and likely the retailers’ profit. We are all aware of the inefficiencies promotions cause in the system, such as problems in production, inventory and in-store availability. They all create extra costs, which ultimately have to be recouped in price. But there’s a higher cost. As promotions are increasing, they are decreasing customer loyalty to both stores and brands by 16 per cent during the period of the promotion. We commissioned a report by Professor Barwise of the London Business School. He called it ‘Taming the Multi-buy
Dragon’. The report shows us that over 70 per cent of laundry promotional investment goes on multi-buys. The level of investment on multi-buys has increased by 60 per cent over the last three years. There’s been a 50 per cent increase behind brands and a doubling of investment behind own labels. Contrary to what we thought, most of this volume is not going to a broad base of households. It is going to a small minority.
Seventy-one per cent of all multi-buy volume is bought by just 14 per cent of households. Just 2 per cent of multi-buy volume goes to 55 per cent of households.
We really are focusing our spending on influencing and rewarding a very small minority of people indeed.
Replenishment
Based on the escalating activity I’ve just [referred to], costs are unnecessarily high. There are huge cost savings also here, up to 6 per cent, by removing the non-value-added skus and inefficient new brand and promotional activity.
Questions
1 - Cutting down on range, new items and promotions is presumably going to lead to ‘everyday low prices’. Discuss the implications to the trade-off between choice and price. (2 points)
2- Procter & Gamble’s major laundry brand in the US is Tide. This is marketed in some 60 pack presentations, some of which have less than 0.1 per cent share. The proliferation of these pack presentations is considered to have been instrumental in increasing Tide’s market share from 20 to 40 per cent of the US market in recent years. Clearly, this is a major issue within P&G.
What are the logistics pros and cons of sku proliferation? (2points)
please long answer
In: Operations Management
Hey, kindly proofread, make corrections and edit where necessary. Thanks
RESEARCH ANALYSIS FOR WAL-MART
GEOFFREY NGIGI
MG 302
April 16, 2018
Walmart was founded by the Walton’s. Co-founder Sam M. Walton opened a franchise Ben Franklin variety store in Newport, Arkansas in 1945. His brother, James L. Walton, opened another store in Versailles, Missouri the following year. Walmart was incorporated in 1969 in Delaware. In 1962, Walmart’s first discount store, Discount City, started operations in Rogers, Arkansas. The first Sam’s Clubs were established in 1984. Walmart’s first supercenter format started operations in 1988. Walmart is a mass merchandiser. It’s the world’s largest retailer. It has over 11,100 stores in 27 countries. With a market cap of over $275 billion, it ranks among the top ten companies in the world. This analysis is to look at Walmart business environment and recommendation on the company
Walmart is looking at different strategies to maintain its presences for a long term. It intends to develop the people in a way that they believe that Walmart is the only store that can satisfy their needs. They are driving productivity loop in a way that they are able to receive the latest information. With the increase in online sales, Walmart is planning to win in the global e-commerce technology area. It is also planning to revive the customer by focusing in different culture, lead in environment conservation and social issues. These particular strategies proved to make Walmart one of the top retailers. Walmart has many competitive advantage, to Walmart, nothing is more important that continuing to deliver a powerful message to their people, both the management and higher organizational levels.
Walmart's center of attention is on developing leadership skills and talent through training programs and business series such as the Walton Institute. Walmart plans to recruit exceptional new talent where it is needed. Walmart has huge diversity in product which allows customers to find variety of products. It has convenient prices in all there location which is affordable to low income earners. Its strong market presence makes it visible to many customers. There strong financial performance in the stock exchange makes it visible and trusted by customers. Due to its cost, pricing advantages over rival and good supply chain it has managed to increase its sales.
The major weakness that Walmart has is brand image which makes it to have a weak reputation. Walmart has also low global presences and is behind their rivals in e-commerce. The major opportunity that the company has is a great global expansion in new geographic areas, increasing online sales, and many business strategic alliances like acquiring rival firms. Major threats that affects Walmart is intense competition, laws and regulations like trade policy which are not good for business, cultural barriers, current economy, slow market growth, and transport of distinctive competency
This analysis shows that Walmart must prioritize using its strengths to exploit opportunities in the global retail market. The company’s weaknesses and threats should be secondary priorities. Walmart can improve its HR management standards and product quality standards to improve firm performance. Also, the company must continue expanding its business to exploit economic opportunities in developing markets. Walmart’s strengths based on its global organizational size, global supply chain, and high efficiency of the supply chain can support aggressive global expansion in foreign markets.
Reference
"Walmart 2012 Annual Report." Online posting. Walmart Corporate. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 2012. Web. 12 Feb. 2013. http://stock.walmart.com/annual-reports
Statista (2016) Available at: http://www.statista.com/statistics/240481/food-market-share-of-the-leading-food-retailers-of-north-america/
Lu, C. (2014) “Incredibly successful supply chain management: how does walmart do it?” Tradegecko, Available at: https://www.tradegecko.com/blog/incredibly-successful-supply-chain-management-walmar
The World’s Most Valuable Brands (2015) Forbes, Available at: http://www.forbes.com/companies/wal-mart-stores/
.
In: Operations Management
what type of plagiarism is the below questions
In the case below, the original source material is given along with a sample of student work. Determine the type of plagiarism by clicking the appropriate radio button.
Original Source Material | Student Version |
But what are reasonable outcomes of the influence of global processes on education? While the question of how global processes influence all aspects of education (and who controls these forces) is multidimensional and not completely testable, there appear to be some theories of globalization as it relates to education that can be empirically examined. References: | The authors are not alone in asking “what are reasonable outcomes of the influence of global processes on education?” (p. 138). In fact, this same question provides the basis for the discussion that follows. |
Which of the following is true for the Student Version above?
Word-for-Word plagiarism
Paraphrasing plagiarism
This is not plagiarism
In the case below, the original source material is given along with a sample of student work. Determine the type of plagiarism by clicking the appropriate radio button.
Original Source Material | Student Version |
But what are reasonable outcomes of the influence of global processes on education? While the question of how global processes influence all aspects of education (and who controls these forces) is multidimensional and not completely testable, there appear to be some theories of globalization as it relates to education that can be empirically examined. References: | The question of “how global processes influence all aspects of education (and who controls these forces) is multidimensional and not completely testable but there appear to be some theories of globalization as it relates to education that can be empirically examined” (Rutkowski and Rutkowski, 2009, p. 138). |
Which of the following is true for the Student Version above?
Word-for-Word plagiarism
Paraphrasing plagiarism
This is not plagiarism
In the case below, the original source material is given along with a sample of student work. Determine the type of plagiarism by clicking the appropriate radio button.
Original Source Material | Student Version |
A teacher is one who guides or leads. To guide does not necessarily mean to instruct directly. We often think of teaching as direct instruction (presenting information, asking questions, giving feedback, demonstrating some procedure,evaluating student progress, and so on). But a teacher can guide without instructing directly. A good example is the Montessori system of education. In a Montessori school, most of what a child learns is through interacting with a variety of curriculum materials in a particular context. A Montessori teacher does much less direct instruction than do teachers in traditional schools. References: | Teachers should be guides or leaders. In the role of a guide, a teacher does less presenting of information, demonstrating and providing feedback. For example, in a Montessori school, most student learning occurs through interaction with a variety of class materials, rather than interaction with a teacher. |
Which of the following is true for the Student Version above?
Word-for-Word plagiarism
Paraphrasing plagiarism
This is not plagiarism
In the case below, the original source material is given along with a sample of student work. Determine the type of plagiarism by clicking the appropriate radio button.
Original Source Material | Student Version |
Suppose you study a group of successful companies and you find that they emphasize customer focus, or quality improvement, or empowerment; how do you know that you haven't merely discovered the management practice equivalent of having buildings? How do you know that you've discovered something that distinguishes the successful companies from other companies? You don't know. You can't know--not unless you have a control set, a comparison group. References: | It's clear that, in the end, they wanted to ensure that they had “discovered something that distinguishes the successful companies from other companies” rather than identifying attributes that all the successful companies studied share (e.g., an emphasis on customer focus, or quality improvement, or empowerment) (p. 14). |
Which of the following is true for the Student Version above?
Word-for-Word plagiarism
Paraphrasing plagiarism
This is not plagiarism
In the case below, the original source material is given along with a sample of student work. Determine the type of plagiarism by clicking the appropriate radio button.
Original Source Material | Student Version |
There is a desperate need for theorists and researchers to generate and refine a new breed of learning-focused instructional design theories that help educators and trainers to meet those needs, (i.e., that focus on learning and that foster development of initiative, teamwork, thinking skills, and diversity). The health of instructional-design theory also depends on its ability to involve stakeholders in the design process. References: | Reigeluth (1999) maintains that we "need theorists and researchers to generate and refine ... learning-focused instructional design theories...." Such theories will "help educators and trainers to meet those needs (i.e., that focus on learning and that foster development of initiative, teamwork, thinking skills, and diversity)" (p. 27).
|
Which of the following is true for the Student Version above?
Word-for-Word plagiarism
Paraphrasing plagiarism
This is not plagiarism
In: Operations Management
How Bad Performance Management Killed Microsoft’s Edge
By DARCY JACOBSEN
What went wrong? Microsoft has been crippled by a management system known as “stack ranking.” Like the hated bell curve of your high school memory, this program forced each business area to rank a certain percentage of employees as top, good, average, or poor performers. That means that even if your department was full of stars, a certain quota would be getting bad reviews—no matter how hard they worked. Pretty demoralizing.
Here is a quote from the preview of the article that’s now available online:
“Every current and former Microsoft employee I interviewed—every one—cited stack ranking as the most destructive process inside of Microsoft, something that drove out untold numbers of employees,” Eichenwald writes. “If you were on a team of 10 people, you walked in the first day knowing that, no matter how good everyone was, 2 people were going to get a great review, 7 were going to get mediocre reviews, and 1 was going to get a terrible review,” says a former software developer. “It leads to employees focusing on competing with each other rather than competing with other companies.”
This sort of cannibalistic performance management practice—with its rigid, stratified winner’s circle—completely disengaged many workers at the company, and led to a culture that did not encourage cooperation or teamwork. Innovation and excellence fell victim to the need to compete with co-workers for not only recognition but survival. Said one former employee: “It was always much less about how I could become a better engineer and much more about my need to improve my visibility among other managers.”
Microsoft, once the uncontested king of the tech industry, has faltered while companies like Facebook, Apple and Google have excelled. Where Microsoft had a head start on technologies like smart phones, social networking and e-reader tablets, in every case the company’s culture, which penalized risk-taking, caused them to fail.
Good talent management is not divisive; it is inclusive. It takes into account the viewpoints of peers; it doesn’t pit you against peers. It is flexible and immediate and responsive to the needs of management and the needs of workers. It works in tandem with the culture you want to encourage; it does not set up a new, toxic culture. The surest way to kill your company is to ignore these principles.
Read the case and answer the following questions. All questions carry equal marks.
Q1. Identify the performance measurement approach adopted in the Microsoft company and analyze its negative impact on employee morale, creativity and work-outcomes.
Q2. Identify and explain the key stages of performance management cycle in which Microsoft company made errors in designing an effective performance management system. Give examples.
Q3. In your opinion, is the performance management system at Microsoft ethical? Can it create legal issues for the company?
Q4. Plan and propose a new performance management system for Microsoft company capable of motivating the employees, taking into consideration all the stages of PMS development.
How Bad Performance Management Killed Microsoft’s Edge
By DARCY JACOBSEN
What went wrong? Microsoft has been crippled by a management system known as “stack ranking.” Like the hated bell curve of your high school memory, this program forced each business area to rank a certain percentage of employees as top, good, average, or poor performers. That means that even if your department was full of stars, a certain quota would be getting bad reviews—no matter how hard they worked. Pretty demoralizing.
Here is a quote from the preview of the article that’s now available online:
“Every current and former Microsoft employee I interviewed—every one—cited stack ranking as the most destructive process inside of Microsoft, something that drove out untold numbers of employees,” Eichenwald writes. “If you were on a team of 10 people, you walked in the first day knowing that, no matter how good everyone was, 2 people were going to get a great review, 7 were going to get mediocre reviews, and 1 was going to get a terrible review,” says a former software developer. “It leads to employees focusing on competing with each other rather than competing with other companies.”
This sort of cannibalistic performance management practice—with its rigid, stratified winner’s circle—completely disengaged many workers at the company, and led to a culture that did not encourage cooperation or teamwork. Innovation and excellence fell victim to the need to compete with co-workers for not only recognition but survival. Said one former employee: “It was always much less about how I could become a better engineer and much more about my need to improve my visibility among other managers.”
Microsoft, once the uncontested king of the tech industry, has faltered while companies like Facebook, Apple and Google have excelled. Where Microsoft had a head start on technologies like smart phones, social networking and e-reader tablets, in every case the company’s culture, which penalized risk-taking, caused them to fail.
Good talent management is not divisive; it is inclusive. It takes into account the viewpoints of peers; it doesn’t pit you against peers. It is flexible and immediate and responsive to the needs of management and the needs of workers. It works in tandem with the culture you want to encourage; it does not set up a new, toxic culture. The surest way to kill your company is to ignore these principles.
Read the case and answer the following questions. All questions carry equal marks.
Q1. Identify the performance measurement approach adopted in the Microsoft company and analyze its negative impact on employee morale, creativity and work-outcomes.
Q2. Identify and explain the key stages of performance management cycle in which Microsoft company made errors in designing an effective performance management system. Give examples.
Q3. In your opinion, is the performance management system at Microsoft ethical? Can it create legal issues for the company?
Q4. Plan and propose a new performance management system for Microsoft company capable of motivating the employees, taking into consideration all the stages of PMS development.
In: Operations Management
Y1 Y2 X3 X4 X5 X6 X7
478 184 40 74 11 31 20
494 213 32 72 11 43 18
643 347 57 70 18 16 16
341 565 31 71 11 25 19
773 327 67 72 9 29 24
603 260 25 68 8 32 15
484 325 34 68 12 24 14
546 102 33 62 13 28 11
424 38 36 69 7 25 12
548 226 31 66 9 58 15
506 137 35 60 13 21 9
819 369 30 81 4 77 36
541 109 44 66 9 37 12
491 809 32 67 11 37 16
514 29 30 65 12 35 11
371 245 16 64 10 42 14
457 118 29 64 12 21 10
437 148 36 62 7 81 27
570 387 30 59 15 31 16
432 98 23 56 15 50 15
619 608 33 46 22 24 8
357 218 35 54 14 27 13
623 254 38 54 20 22 11
547 697 44 45 26 18 8
792 827 28 57 12 23 11
799 693 35 57 9 60 18
439 448 31 61 19 14 12
867 942 39 52 17 31 10
912 1017 27 44 21 24 9
462 216 36 43 18 23 8
859 673 38 48 19 22 10
805 989 46 57 14 25 12
652 630 29 47 19 25 9
776 404 32 50 19 21 9
919 692 39 48 16 32 11
732 1517 44 49 13 31 14
657 879 33 72 13 13 22
1419 631 43 59 14 21 13
989 1375 22 49 9 46 13
821 1139 30 54 13 27 12
1740 3545 86 62 22 18 15
815 706 30 47 17 39 11
760 451 32 45 34 15 10
936 433 43 48 26 23 12
863 601 20 69 23 7 12
783 1024 55 42 23 23 11
715 457 44 49 18 30 12
1504 1441 37 57 15 35 13
1324 1022 82 72 22 15 16
940 1244 66 67 26 18 16
Y1 = Total reported crimes per million inhabitants Y2 = Crimes of violence reported per 100,000 inhabitants X3 = Annual budget for the police dollars per capita X4 =% of people 25 years old or older who finished high school X5 =% of young people between 16 and 19 years old who do not attend high school nor have graduated from it. X6 =% of young people between the ages of 18 and 24 who attend university X7 =% of people with 25 years or more who achieved a 4-year university career
The attached Excel document presents the crime statistics in a city. Other important information about education is also presented.
The purpose of this exercise is to create two models of multiple linear regression where we try to predict
(1) Y1 using as predictors X3, X5, X6
(2)) Y2 using as predictors X3, X4, X7
In each case you need:
A. The model (all beta coefficients) and the interpretation of each coefficient.
B. How significant are each of the coefficients
C. The coefficient of determination of the model (R squared)
D. The interpretation of R squared
E. In case (a) predict: What will be the rate of total crimes reported per million inhabitants if $ 50 per year are assigned per capita to the police, there is a 10% of young people between 16 and 19 who do not attend the high school (they have not completed it) and there is 50% of young people between 18 and 24 years old who attend university.
F. In case (b) predict: How many crimes of violence will be reported if 20 dollars per capita per year are allocated to the police, 60% of people over 25 years old have finished high school and there are 5% of people 25 years or older who achieved a 4-year university career.
G. After doing all this analysis, draw practical conclusions about the findings made in this city.
H. If you are a counselor for the authorities in that city, please write a paragraph of recommendations to follow to try to reduce crime
In: Statistics and Probability
The manufacturer of a new racecar engine claims that the proportion p1 p 1 of engine failures due to overheating for this new engine be less than the proportion p2 p 2 of engine failures due to overheating of the old engines. To test this statement, NASCAR took a random sample of 155 of the new racecar engines and 115 of the old engines. They found that 7 of the new racecar engines and 18 of the old engines failed due to overheating during the test. Does NASCAR have enough evidence to reject the manufacturer's claim about the new racecar engine? Use a significance level of α=0.05 α = 0.05 for the test.
In: Statistics and Probability
firms use acquisition strategies to:
Think of College of business , Imagine they are to acquire another business. Answer the following:
1.What business should they acquire(could be an existing one or fictitious)?
2.Which of the above bullet-point strategies would explain/justify the acquisition?
In: Economics