CASE 6: COUNTRYSIDE ENVIORNMENTAL SERVICES The case “Countryside Environmental Services” focuses on the affect an employee’s unpleasant behavior has on the team and organization on the whole. Gwen not being satisfied with her supervisor John, salary structure, family etc. subjects to incivility the very first day of her meeting with a new entrant, Vincent. Despite of such behaviors the company owner and manager John was not successful in managing her. Though John had sympathy for the family pressures she was facing, but her unpleasant behavior was affecting the efficiency of the entire team and the organization.
Perhaps they believe that the employees are contributing to the revenue losses and are stealing merchandise. These are all self destructive in nature and could impact their ability to remain in business and keep good employees. Making the decision to close two stores without adequate justification drastically reduces it footprint in the market place. It appears that either the store supervisor or manager is not engaged with the employees and consumers; do not have sufficient training on company ethics policies to enforce them; or they do not have a fully robust ethics program in place to address to ongoing issues. PART B Company Q can take some immediate steps which I believe would turn a downward trend in to positive results.
ATLANTIC STORE FURNITURE CASE ANALYSIS Organization Behavior 530 October 8, 2013 Words: 1684 The Atlantic Store Furniture case depicts a hostile work environment composed of woodworking and metalworking employees. The former entity is belittling the other by means of intimidation and harassment. The relationship between the two groups of the company Atlantic Store Furniture (ASF) has plummeted. The employee’s negative and non-constructive behaviors have escalated to a level uncontrollable by management. Previous efforts by management to find a solution to these issues were unsuccessful.
This is a potential reason for the high turnover rate, as low-level employees are more likely to be transient. The results also showed that the majority of the sample was more dissatisfied, than satisfied with company operations. The qualitative data showed more negative responses (1 and 2) versus positive or middle ground responses. Employees feared losing their job and felt they were not being compensated fairly. Also, the majority of the employees surveyed did not enjoy their assigned shift nor did they feel they were given the proper tools to perform their jobs effectively.
In this case, the salesperson‘s mistakes are the non-response action and inactive attitude. Such action and attitude make buyer or customer feel uncomfortable and embarrassed. That may causes the company loss existing customers and future buyers, and the company’s impression will be damaged. Customers or buyers will more likely make business their competitor. 3.
This caused frustration among the members. Moreover, the MCA team lost its quality in company positions and couldn’t make any reasonable offer alternatives to LFA counter-proposals. MCA had no clear plan or objectives and didn’t understand the strengths and weaknesses of their own and LFA’s positions. On the other hand, LFA was well-prepared and more professional during the negotiations. They defined the bargaining outlines.
In the case there is a lot of evidence which indicates that management is not effectively motivating their employees and this is leading to a decline in productivity and profitability. One reason would be management is not giving employees proper incentives to raise their productivity levels and they are using a financial incentive plan with major flaws in its design (Scanlon Plan). Another reason would be the decline in suggestions that are submitted, at the programs height 305 suggestions were submitted. Now it has dropped to 50 a year showing that employees no longer feel like they are contributing successfully to the plant success. This is a major issue because feedback is an essential part of motivating a person and making them feel valued in the company.
Change management was not factored in with workers complaining of radical shake – up in the hours worked, without extra pay for disturbance. However the management sought to make some changes but this was after the strike. They felt the change dehumanizing and insensitive considering the poor relationship with the management. On the other hand, the Company didn’t have a contingency plan making them spend a lot of time and resources in restoring the image after the strike. If they had one, they could have taken les time and resources in the prevention of the strike.
The loss of production and or customers due to failure to deliver the employees or products you sell is also an indirect cost that affects the business in a negative way. One indirect cost many of us do not think of is the effect on the companies morale and that can take a toll on others employees especially the ones who are taking the brunt of the work that the separated employee was performing. Turnover and the indirect cost can even include more frequent accidents and higher injuries due to the inexperience of newcomers. If you take all of the cost, the indirect and direct cost into consideration, you can start to see the full scope and calculate the cost of the
Unfortunately, many people have no desire on developing his or her negotiating skills they simply avoid or postpone solving problems. For example, a conflict between two employees caused production levels to down at Joe bait. The manager of these two employees instead of taking immediate action and using his or her negotiating skills allow the conflict to escalate; whether the manager though the problem would resolve itself his or her lack of action only contributed to the conflict and the continued decrease in production. If the manager had used his or her negotiating skills and solved the conflict with the employees the company would not have only save time and production it would have saved money for the company. One can only image the amount of money wasted from unnecessary and in many cases avoidable lawsuits or injury.