The Glent Report - Case Study Example

The Glent Case Study Report: The theory of Weber1 provides some important insights into management who stresses the importance of hierarchy and accountability within the organizational structure for employees. Weber's theory is more than a lineal interaction between the management and employees. Weber's theory argues that management is made up of wertrational - value orientated rationality and zweckrational - goal orientated rationality. Therefore there needs to be additional aspects to the workplace rather than a dictatorial approach, there needs to be a support of promoting positive values, goals and motivation. HP understands this through both it training program, benefits and bonus incentives.2 The key notion that Weber developed in order to balance out the inherent inequalities is that of the rationalizing of the organizational structure where those who benefit the company and follow the rules and procedure enjoy incentives; whereas those who break these rules are punished. Hence if the values of the company's structure and the goal's of the employee can be rationalized and de-mystified then a satisfied and motivated workforce can be instituted to achieve the best organizational structure. In order to do this there needs to be a structure which ensures that at the higher the level of management there is a higher the standard of care and duty, which can be seen in the transparent structure of managers for specified organizational roles. However, this cannot be limited to following a set of rules, because rules do not Weber sees it as an important factor that has shaped society and important to understanding the development of societal structure and management. Therefore this brings the marrying of the different key elements of the individual and rationalization that Weber focuses on, but it cannot limit the company to rules without consideration of the individuals. Although rational management of individuals is important, to limit the emotions and interests of the management in respect to the rights and goal of company, as a whole, there has to be consideration of each individual in order to create a system of fairness, transparency and accountability for the employee. Hence, there cannot be a focus on a pure bureaucratic approach as the following examination of employee diversity approaches will illustrate. Therefore the first problem with the Glent case study is that there is not enough one on one employee treatment; rather there is a rule book which is not dealing with the problems. Diversity not only refers to race, gender, religion and culture it also refers to the type of employees that are in the structure. There are those employees that work through initiative, which will be limited by a bureaucratic approach, there are those who enjoy following a strict structure that this bureaucratic approach is essential and finally there are those who will slack without proper supervision, which the bureaucratic approach lacks. Therefore the company has to take upon the different diversity approaches and work it into the company, where the most important factor is an efficient and flexible manager. Diversity in the workplace is becoming increasingly prevalent with persons of different backgrounds, cultures, sexes, social and political choices.3 This creates a more interesting scene, but makes it harder for management because it is easier to oversee a homogenous group than that of a diverse group. It is essential that the manager is seen as both objective and empathetic to all employees without discrimination or bias. This is difficult because it is normal for a manager whose demographics are the same as a certain cleavage in the workplace to emphasize with that group; however personal feeling cannot overtake their position of authority and obligations as a manager.4 Therefore it is essential that a manager does not judge on the basis of difference, rather uses this difference and diversity to create a more cohesive group through communication of personal experiences and ideas. This is a learning process but as Tinsley indicates is that we cannot ignore these differences and pretend everyone is the same; instead it is important to build on and explore cultural, gender and ethnic differences.5 Nkomo argues that it is the "challenge before us is understanding the interactive effects of multiple diversity. This raises the thorny research problem of how to determine the relative saliency of the different identities that an individual may bring to the work team."6 The approach that Tinsley takes is to use and explore these differences to make a more cohesive work team. Not all responses to managing diversity in the work place take this approach, for example McGrath, Berdahl and Arrow separates the work groups into five different clusters of attributes, which are; personal demographics; knowledge and skills; beliefs and ethics; personality and behavior; and organizational demographics.7 The correlation of these clusters will force different members into different groups within the larger workgroup. This makes in and out groups and the way to deal with it in not through exploration of differences amongst group members to increase understanding and empathy; rather it is through intervention and rule making to create an objective standard of treatment to all members and to treat all members the same. These two approaches will have different effects on the work group, because one is based on understanding and exploration, whilst the other is through sameness and suppression at the management level. The first approach is better for combating the isolation of members into in and out groups, but is very hard to implement because it focuses on communication and teambuilding, aspects that usually interfere with business costs and demands.8 The second approach of suppressing difference and treating people the same will perpetrate the stereotypes and prejudices between the different individuals and groups and strengthen the possibility of in and out groups. This approach is easier to implement through a workplace agenda and set of rules, in addition if these rules are broken it is easier to justify punishment if a rule is broken rather than a lack of communication and refusal to participate in learning and exploring the diversity within the group.9 This recommendation paper on the best approach to dealing with in and out groups proposes that the Tinsley approach is the favorable approach; however there needs to be some uniformity through structures and rules on the appropriate manner to treat work colleagues.10 Another important area is transparency and accountability for both employees, the company and within the society, because it is important to the overall reputation of the company. In recent years this has been a major drive in the corporate world, which is especially important for essential sectors such as pharmaceuticals and IT because there are social responsibility considerations. The following comparison of HP and Sony will illustrate the importance of corporate responsibility globally and locally and suggest that for the concerns of reputation, which is lacking due to the actions of staff not promoting the company, that the company work in social projects and ensuring that the company is now fully transparent and accountable. One of the top companies approaching accountability and social responsibility is HP, which would be a good role model for Glent to follow. The most important individual in any workplace is the manager and if the manager is present but ineffectual, i.e. cannot promote efficiency and motivation through responsibility and accountability, then the staff has no confidence then it reduces staff morale. This is because in effect if there is no management, which promotes bullying and discrimination in the workplace, as well as job dissatisfaction and the low staff retention. To re-iterate HP holds that accountability and transparency within the management structure is very important, therefore this increases the morale, motivation and staff retention within the company. HP understands that the lack of transparency and accountability also opens the company to liability, especially in the highly regulated sector of listed companies, because corners will be cut by employees due to the lack of control and accountability.11 HP was listed as No. 8 of top accountable companies in the world's top 100 companies, illustrating their commitment to accountability and transparency to the environment, society, shareholders and consumers: HP today announced that it was ranked No. 8 overall in the Accountability Rating, the first global index that evaluates how well the world's 100 largest companies account for their impacts on society and the environment. HP was the only U.S. company ranked in the top ten.12 HP understands that main problem with non-compliance of duties of a line-manager, high-level management, director or vice president is that it results in lack of organization and without the effective control by an accountable and efficient manager then the legal liabilities of the company are increased.13 This is because without a sufficiently responsible and liable individual corners will be cut. In other words this individual's behavior is putting the department of the company to a detriment, especially of privacy and data protection is breached. This would put HP a company as a whole, in a difficult position if laws are breached because the company owes a duty of care to its clients and consumers to privacy. HP being a large technology companies includes defense and government contracts, where breaches of privacy rules can have drastic consequences.14 HP understands is there is a lack of accountability and transparency in the management structure then a single employee's actions can open up the company, relevant managers and himself to civil and criminal actions; therefore an appropriate management structure needs to be adopted to ensuring accountability and efficiency into the organization.15 Therefore accountable and efficient actions from an efficient management structure needs to be present from the basic everyday actions to the special occasions, because how can a manager discipline an employee without accountable and transparent behavior This is promoted in various policies of HP but an excellent illustration is HP's approach to its approach to privacy and confidential data: In addition we argue that accountability is a fundamental aspect in dealing with privacy management and needs to be explicitly managed to mitigate risks and increase trust in the system. Despite the efforts being made by organisations in dealing with privacy, it is very unlikely that "tamper proof" solutions will ever be provided, considering that solutions are the result of a compromise between business needs, costs and requirements. In this respect, we believe in the importance of active tracing of disclosures of confidential data and auditing by trusted third parties to collect tamper-resistance evidence about enterprise activities when dealing with confidential data.16 In comparison to a company like Sony, this has failed greatly in this area which has reduced consumer confidence in the company. Sony will purport that its actions of setting up shop will aid the country through sustainable development, such as Indonesia, by the following means; technology introduction; education to use the technology; and job creation would have a trickle down effect to boost the economy of the country, which in turn would pass on a better standard of living to the average person and create better working conditions for the workers17. Sony has been tracking the works of environmental groups to neutralize their effects.18 Therefore in 2000 Sony was not really adhering to its corporate governance image and protecting the environment, but finding ways to avoid environmental and developmental concerns. This is supported by their actions towards the female workforce in Indonesia and Japan where their needs and health concerns were ignored. When the work conditions were reduced the women went on strike and Sony fired the workforce. This is completely against the corporate civil governance image that Sony like to portray, but illustrates that the rights and laws of workers are negotiable in certain countries when it comes to large TNCs (Transnational Corporations). Although the IMF seemed to be supporting the workers, it was a mere threatening letter, how about real sanctions like large fines; otherwise such companies will purport civil governance on one hand but their actions portray their economic interests are far more important: IMF, which claims a membership of 23 million worldwide, threatened in a letter to the Sony corporation chairman in Japan a public campaign "to taint the image" of Sony for its "serious human and labor rights violations" in Indonesia.19 In a recent accountability report in 2005 Sony only made 41 out 100, therefore indicating its failure to keep up its promises in Global Corporate Governance20. Instead its activities have been to hide its real impacts on society and the environment. As the Financial Times reported in response to a similar report dealing with 40 companies surveyed by GlobeAScan there has been a extreme failure of TNCs to keep up to their social responsibility problems, rather than promoting sustainability the actions of companies However the reality of the situation has arguably turned out to be quite different. This can be illustrated by the effects on the indigenous peoples, in reference to the activities of Sony this is best illustrated by the Indonesian workers, who have had their women subjugated to poorer pay and working conditions than their male counterparts. This is because in the type of work, i.e. factory, manufacturing work, this is closer to the traditional role of women. Therefore the traditional globalization arguments that corporations, such as Sony, are arguing are giving them a foothold in the country but the exploitation of workers rather than their sustainable development is occurring. This has negative effects on it customers, which causes a bad reputation and de-motivation in the workers throughout the company. Therefore it is important that the Glent Company learn from the mistakes of Sony and the successes of Hp to ensure that they have high accountability and corporate responsibility. In addition to ensuring that employees are treated as individuals and not through a strict bureaucratic structure; otherwise the company's reputation will be harmed. This has already been experienced by Glent, which has caused problems in consumer confidence in the company. Therefore Glent needs to revise its management structure; as well as rebuild its reputation through accountability, transparency and incorporating corporate social responsibility into its organizational structure. Bibliography: 2005 Accountability Rating can be found at: http://www.accountabilityrating.com/results.asp Beres et al, 2003, Accountability and Enforceability of Enterprise Privacy Policies, HP HP Benefits which can be found at Jobs at HP: http://h10055.www1.hp.com/jobsathp/content/Informations/benefits.aspLang=ENen HP Press Release, HP Recognized as Top U.S. Company for Reporting Social and Environmental Impact, June 24th 2005 can be found at: http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/press/2004/040624b.html Jakarta Post, 2000, Indonesia: International Union Steps into Sony Dispute, Jakarta Post July 25th 2000 Knight, 2000, US: Sony Corporation Tracks Environmental Organizations, Corp Watch News can be found at: http://www.corpwatch.org/article.phpid=563 Kraakman, 1999, Vicarious and Corporate Civil Liability Harvard Law School can be found at: http://encyclo.findlaw.com/3400book.pdf McGrath, Berdahl & Arrow, 1995, in Jackson & Ruderman, 1995, Workteam and Diversity: Paradigms and Perspectives, APA Nahavandi, A. (2003). The art and science of leadership, Prentice-Hall Nkomo, 1995, Identity and the Complexity of Diversity in Jackson & Ruderman, 1995, Workteam and Diversity: Paradigms and Perspectives, APA Sony Global www.sony.net Sony Global, Sony Group Environmental Vision, Corporate Social Responsibility can be found at: www.sony.net/SonyInfo/Environment/environment/management/vision/index.html Stewart & Associates, Leadership Models and Theories, can be found at: www.stewart-associates.co.uk Tinsley, 1994, Special Issue on Racial Identity and Vocational Behavior, Journal of Vocational Behavior 44 Weber, 1976 edn., The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, London, Unwin Read More