Jhe Document Final.docx

August 3, 2017 | Author: Syed Sayre | Category: Organizational Culture, Leadership, Leadership & Mentoring, Performance Appraisal, Employment
Share Embed Donate

Short Description

Download Jhe Document Final.docx...


Summary of the Case Dr. Vivian Metger is a Human Resources Consultant who has been tasked to diagnosed RMC, a privately owned, boutique, engineering consulting firm that currently employs 250 people in six offices in the United States (three in the North east and three in the South). The company specialized in design, inspection, and rehabilitation services for all types of bridges and related transportation projects. Martin Riechard, a Russian immigrant, founded the company in 1893. With the reputation he possesses, he was known as the 20 th century’s most famous bridge designers. He built the firm on his reputation for engineering excellence, imagination, and innovative design and over the years the nature and philosophy of the firm’s business had changed little. Dr. Keller who had started with the firm 35 years ago as a staff engineer and subsequently held positions as partner, chief engineer, and president before becoming chief executive officer. Like Dr. Keller, aspiring engineers often joined the firm because it was a place to spend one’s entire career and “becoming a partner” was an achievable goal for talented, committed engineers.

Over the years, RMC had change significantly on its organization culture; this had prompted Dr. Keller to talked with Dr. Metger about the difference in values and management styles among the firm’s leaders which had led to conflict and tension within the firm. There are leaders perceived as autocratic, privileged, and out of touch with contemporary technology and modern management practices. Others were respected for their skill and competence, yet they were

slow to embrace the latest technology or management practices. Still others were perceived as more democratic, egalitarian, and fully embracing technology and modern management practices. These differences among the leaders of the firm fell along generational lines that younger leaders are being technically savvy and embracing a more participative leadership style, but they are chafed at the lack of clear standards of accountability due to their eagerness for meritocracy.

Dr. Keller also had another trend of concern to him that was the perceptions about what the firm valued. The company had always emphasized engineering excellence versus profitability. Managing project profitability had a lower priority than satisfying the client and If these attitudes and practices will served the company well. He wondered if they could change the company culture to respond to the realities of business today without loosing the things that had made the company successful in the past.

With the existing problems with leadership style, organizational culture, other conflicts and tension had become frustrating for Dr. Keller. He felt that as a CEO, loosing some of its best young talent will be at lost if he did nothing and it has been hard to get agreement among other leaders as to what should be done.

Statement of the Problem Having different leadership styles and wide organizational culture, how will Dr. Keller address it, and strengthen its organizational culture to eliminate misbehavior, unprofessionalism and maintain its reputation.

Objectives 1.) To motivate the employee which will procure operation excellence and performance consistency throughout the company. 2.) To implement performance-based culture through fair and unbiased performance appraisal procedure. 3.) To further improve on its operation in consultancy and built a stable reputation which other engineers and clients will look up into.



 Engineering Excellence  Creative Imagination  Innovative Designs Opportunities

 Inconsistent Leadership Styles  Sense of Complacency  Enactment of Consequences Threats

  

  

Caters Wide Clientele’s International Operation Technological Progression

Employee Retention Internal Conflict and Disputes Overrun By Competitors

Alternative Courses of Action 1.) Strict implementation on rules, regulation and suctions for those who are under performing. Pros:

 

Motivates them to work effectively without jeopardizing the output. Consistency in the workplace especially in the company day-to-day

operations. Employees will be conscious with the output that they will present

Cons:   

It takes time for the employees to adjust. Some of the employees will be uncomfortable and anxious with the suctions. They might be some tension and instances were employees would fight over.

2.) Having a fair and just performance appraisal evaluation for normal and senior employees. Pros:   

The company will be highly competitive especially on the employees. This will motivate the new employees to have an equal ground for promotion. It helps the company assess the capability, expertise and knowledge of the employee.

Cons:   

Regular employees and others will not be willing to accept this new culture. It will incur expenses upon implementation. It is time consuming.

3.) Gather all leaders and senior staff to have an open discuss. Pros:  

All the senior staff and leaders will be able to voice out all of their concerns. The company may be able to segment out the necessary action that needs to

be followed. They can immediately agree and decide what should be done to address their problems.

Cons:  

In assemble all the senior staff and leaders it will incur expenses. It is time consuming and a constraint especially to the senior staff and leaders

who are undergoing or partaking projects. There is a chance that it will incur more tension and conflicts after the meeting because of some self-interest and disagreement.

Recommendation We recommend alternative 1 to address the problem because the actions of the employee and their sense of complacency falls due to no prior strict implementation on the company’s rules and regulation resulting to mishahavior, unprofessionalism and inconsistency. Upon admission on the company it is rightly to enforce its governing rules and regulation to maintain the quality of services that they produce. With it, the hesitancy to enact consequences for under performers especially on the less stringent performance standards of the senior employees will be address. Though with this, it has slightly incorporates the performance based culture because with the strict implementation on their

rules and regulation it will likely procure operational excellence and discipline not only the employees but as well the senior employees. Implementation Steps in implementing the said recommendation: 

With prior consultation with Dr. Metger, they will formulate a new suction system that is incorporated with the existing rules and regulation of the

company. Dr. Keller along with the board of directors and leaders will thoroughly discuss first the problems and issues of the organization particularly the existing

organization culture that they currently have. Upon thoroughly discussing it, there will be some revisions to the proposed suctions but still, the said recommendation will still initiate after consultation

and giving of feedback given by all of the senior staff. There will be successive meeting to further evaluate the proposed

recommendation and some revision into it. After their last discussion, there will be one representative that the top

management will assign to monitor the improvements. The representative will report an assessment and evaluation of the recommendation to the top management especially to Dr. Keller whether if the

was an improvement. If it deemed to be successful, it will be implemented throughout the business, if not, it will undergo revision until such time it is successful.

View more...


Copyright ©2017 KUPDF Inc.