Going Hi-tech at DrugDiv - Essay Example

Going Hi-tech at DrugDiv Keeping up with the fast pace of our world today entails a lot of adjustment. This is especially true in business where one needs to be a step ahead of the competition. The use of technological advances is known to facilitate things and with precision, at that. However, in the case study at hand, Multico’s DrugDiv division has met up with challenges in the introduction of computers and data bases to their salesforce. In the desire to keep their profitability and continual monitoring of their employees’ performance, management has provided each team member with a laptop computer and a mobile phone to maintain their constant communication via email and phone communication. The employees underwent intensive computer training for at least three days. Management was pleased with their efforts of what seemed like upgrading their division with technological advances. On the other hand, the sales representatives were disgruntled with the additional work of logging into technology and being less efficient due to their adjustment to the new tasks at hand. Glitches were also experienced with regards to the database, thereby losing prospective clients. They find themselves spending so much time learning to make their computers work, taking the time they need to do their real job which was sales. On top of that, they felt they were “ball-chained” to their supervisors who were able to reach them anytime through their computers and mobile phones, demanding reports more often than before. The sales reps were finding out for themselves that the introduction of technology in their jobs was more of a hassle than a help. Management side stuck to their guns refusing to see systems failure. Instead, they attributed the data errors in the database as human failure to encode data correctly. This caused more conflict and division among the management and sales force. Meanwhile, the company was not doing very well in terms of service to customers and therefore, projected profits were low. The case study was concluded with management’s lack of commitment to involve the sales force. Grievances of the sales reps regarding heavy workload and increased control over their activities remained issues that management did not deal with. The prevailing organizational problems seen in the case study was a violation of a “psychological contract”, breakdown in communication in the introduction of technology in the sales work, ineffective transfer of knowledge of the benefits of technological use, and a general decrease in motivation and a high degree of stress. This paper probes into the management’s hasty decision’s effects on relationships with the workforce in terms of power, resistance and motivation. In every employment, employees consciously or unconsciously expect a kind of “psychological contract” apart from the expectations the job usually presents – benefits and compensation for a particular job description. This psychological contract usually includes open and honest communication, managerial support and challenging and interesting work. Employees are becoming increasingly aware of the non-monetary rewards that companies can provide them. It is generally important that the job not only fulfills their economical needs, but their socio-emotional needs as well. “This implies that recruiters need to go beyond a discussion of compensation and benefits and highlight aspects of their organization that job candidates will find intrinsically satisfying.” (Lester, Clair & Kickul, 2001, n.p.) Employers must be cognizant of and responsive to their employees’ perception of their psychological contracts with the company. Things such as meaningful work, recognition, creative freedom and opportunities for personal growth are desired by all employees. Management must maintain open and honest communication with employees, bearing in mind their socio-emotional needs and concerns, and being encouraging enough to boost their self-esteem. Lack of communication is ultimately problematic because it suggests to employees that management may be susceptible to perceived psychological contract breaches across a variety of areas because the basic issue of communication is not met. Employers must be able to invest more time developing and strengthening healthy relationships with their employees in various districts so they are kept abreast of their progress in both personal and professional areas. In line with understanding employees’ needs and concerns, employers should be ready to invest in their professional and personal development. Regular trainings and participation in seminars or enrollment in courses shouldered by the company (whether partial or full) may be perceived as part of the job, but it should be communicated to the employees that although application of their learnings will highly profit the company, ultimately it will redound to their own benefit. This knowledge from trainings is bound to increase their market value. DrugDiv indeed put their staff under intensive training, but might not have communicated to them the personal benefits they can derive from such. Being aware of employees’ gripes and complaints as well as constructive suggestions may be brought up to the proper authorities and dealt with seriously. Regular evaluation of company performance should include the assessment and feedback of employees of their employers and employment. Managers should not be remiss in this duty of bridging communication or else employees may perceive management to be incompetent. “This negative perception could also lead to widespread problems satisfying other psychological contract obligations. This may be particularly troubling because it may often be the responsibility of an employee's manager (acting as the organization's agent) to see that the individual's psychological contract is fulfilled” (Lester, Clair & Kickul, 2001, n.p.). Employees’ values must be aligned to the company’s. Differing values create conflict and will impede goal achievement. According to Mishra and Morrissey (1990), the following factors propagate trust: open communication; giving workers a greater share in decision making; sharing of critical information and true sharing of perceptions and feelings. It seems from the foregoing that these were not present in the organization of DrugDiv, that is why a lot of issues come to surface, so trust dissipates. In order to succeed working as a team, organizations must be aware of relational power, or the give and take of power and knowledge. Hence, this would involve knowledge transfer from individuals who possess it to those who do not. For many activities, such as product development (Hansen, 1999) and diffusing best practices across the organization (Dart, Argote, & Epple, 1995), expertise must be transferred and shared among units. Indeed, companies that are more effective at knowledge transfer have been shown to have a greater likelihood of organizational survival and higher levels of productivity (Darr et al., 1995; Dyer & Nobeoka, 2000; Galbraith, 1990). It just proves how knowledge is a critical organizational asset. Despite a growing understanding of the importance of knowledge transfer, the sharing of information within organizations remains a challenge. Burgess (2005) reasons that “one impediment to developing successful knowledge transfer initiatives seems to be the tendency of practitioners and researchers to focus on tools (e.g., technology) and tasks (e.g., routines), with less attention paid to knowledge-transfer among people (Argote & Ingram, 2000; Cabrera & Cabrera, 2002; Davenport & Prusak, 1998; Huysman & de Wit, 2003). DrugDiv management is guilty of this, as the sales force was not consulted before the introduction of technological use in their work, as well as not asked how they were faring with the technology and how it can help them make their jobs easier after it was introduced. Jones (2006) says, “The power of knowledge isn’t about having it, it’s about using it.” This goes not only for managers and others with supervisory positions in organizations but even to their staff. Employees who come upon a great deal of knowledge should use it to their advantage in stepping up the ladder of success and more importantly, use it for the common good. An example is truly studying a particular organizational decision to its fruition. Dedicated employees may objectively research into its pros and cons and share their findings with management. That way, they use their knowledge to influence those in power and when they are considered, they likewise share in the organizational power. Good managers are always open to learning something new, and not haughty enough to claim that they are already “made”. Being human and fallible is one trait that all members of the group share, and what better quality to relate to than that? Group members will even feel important enough to share the burden of thinking up solutions to problems with their leader. The case study portrays management to be resistant in accepting their mistakes in introducing technology that might have been too complicated early on to be used with the sales force and providing erratic data for them to work on. A leader, such as a manager of a service institution, is stereotypically known to possess positive qualities and capabilities. However, in a research reported by French, Simpson and Harvey (2001), a good leader is also equipped with ‘negative capability’. “The underpinning image of leadership is based on knowing and is manifested through activity, work and achievement. There is, however, a quite other dimension of leadership, based on not knowing, on not doing, on being-done-to, and on being no longer in control of one’s own situation.” (French, Simpson & Harvey, 2001). This may be interpreted as being humble enough to admit when one doesn’t really know instead of putting up a façade of being all-knowing. This peculiarly human capacity to live with and tolerate ambiguity, of being content with half knowledge is quite a refreshing concept. “It implies the capacity to engage in a non-defensive way with change, without being overwhelmed by the ever-present pressure merely to react. It also indicates empathy and even a certain flexibility of character, the ability ‘to tolerate a loss of self and a loss of rationality by trusting in the capacity to recreate oneself in another character or another environment’ (Hutter, 1982). Dialogue is defined as “a sustained collective inquiry into the processes, assumptions and certainties that compose everyday experience.” (Isaacs, n.d.). In the organizational setting, dialogues are used to have a “meeting of minds”, extracting what each member believes and coming up with an agreed decision that takes into account those beliefs, Members think together, analyzing causes and effects, and end up understanding a shared meaning. Usually, they reach greater heights in idea-storming that as individuals, they could not have thought of. This is contrasted with the construct of consensus building wherein people “seek some rational means to limit options and focus on the ones that are logically acceptable to most people.” (Isaacs, n.d.). Usually, the final consensus is reached if only to end the discussion, and that is what the group can “live with for now”. There is no guarantee that whatever factor initially leading some members to disagree will just vanish after the consensus has been made. It is likely that some members walk away in resignation but not in total satisfaction. The important thing is that members were consulted. They felt important enough to have been asked of their thoughts and feelings on particular situations that need decision-making. At DrugDiv, the sales force showed resistance to the idea of technology use because they were not even consulted about it in the first place. Their disgruntlement was aggravated with management’s insistence to use it to supervise their sales performance, even if the sales reps did not see it as a valid and reliable tool to measure their efficiency. The consistent back and forth of complaints and justifications just piled up to “de-motivate” the employees, causing much stress in the workplace. Sales representatives need to contend with the demands of their jobs. They cannot escape paperwork, performance evaluations and a series of meetings. Living a life full of stress in a prolonged period may cause harm to one’s health. It can also dampen his motivation on what used to be something that impassioned him. This is called ‘burnout’. Burnout obviously affects a person’s productivity and quality of life. Losing the flame for something that used to excite and fulfill him may cause depleted physical energy, emotional exhaustion, lowered immunity to illness, less investment in interpersonal relationships, increasingly pessimistic outlook, increased absenteeism and inefficiency at work. (Scott, 2007). Burnout may also be the cause of the fast turnover of staff at DrugDiv. Management must be able to come up with ways to reduce it like giving people more allowance to work on their own and not being too demanding. Being given enough trust to decide on one’s own in situations that call for one’s expertise like sales may be enough to make one feel fulfilled. Management and employees must have less frequent but more thorough, well-planned meetings that meet its goals. The people in charge of facilitating meetings must draw up a written agenda and estimated time spent for each item. During the meeting each item must be thoroughly discussed and it should be made clear to everyone in the meeting. Opening communication lines for both professional concerns and personal adjustments to changes implemented by management must be encouraged. Follow up trainings on the software for the data base and other necessary technological training must be done regularly. This way, management ensures that the sales people are adequately skilled with the computer programs and sales people gain more confidence an develop more motivation towards work. The ultimate lesson here is that people working in an organization must work as a team. Although there is a hierarchy of power and decision making, loops must be closed when it comes to communication, since a breakdown may foretell impending organizational conflicts and problems. Living in the technological age has its own advantages like having access to information and communication at the tip of one’s finger. It is necessary in order to survive the speed of progress we are experiencing to reach globalization. However, it must not be forgotten that there are also disadvantages in embracing everything new that comes along. We must be critical and meticulous in allowing something un-tested to invade and perhaps even take over our lives. In the case of DrugDiv, management should have thoroughly considered the introduction of computer use with their already efficient system of sales, and more importantly, how the people concerned who will directly be affected in their work will adjust to it. This is not to say that the use of technology must be banned out in the sales department of the organization. It is just suggested that human factors take precedence over it, and it should be treated as a tool towards the fulfilment of goals rather than a hindrance. Ideally, going hi-tech should be more of a boon than a bane to all. References Argote, L., & Ingram, P. (2000). Knowledge transfer: A basis for competitive advantage in firms. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82, 150-169. Burgess, D. (2005) What Motivates Employees to Transfer Knowledge outside Their Work Unit? The Journal of Business Communication. Volume: 42. Issue: 4 Cabrera, A., & Cabrera, E. F. (2002). Knowledge-sharing dilemmas. Organization Studies, 23, 687-710. Dart, E., Argote, L., & Epple, D. (1995). The acquisition, transfer and depreciation of knowledge in service organizations: Productivity in franchises. Management Science, 41, 1750-1762. Davenport, T., & Prusak, L. (1998). Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Dyer, J. H., & Nobeoka, K. (2000). Creating and managing a high-performance knowledge- sharing network: The Toyota Case. Strategic Management Journal, 21, 345-367. French, R., Simpson, P. & Harvey, C. (2001), ‘Negative capability’: the key to creative leadership. Presented at the International Society for the Psychoanalytic Study of Organizations 2001 Symposium. Retrieved on May 11, 2008 from www.sba.oakland.edu/ispso/html/2001Symposium/french.htm Galbraith, C. S. (1990). Transferring core manufacturing technologies in high technology firms. California Management Review, 32, 56-70. Hansen, M. T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44 (1), 82-111. Hutter, A.D. (1982) Poetry in psychoanalysis: Hopkins, Rosetti, Winnicott. International Review of Psycho-Analysis 9, 303-16. Huysman, M., & de Wit, D. (2003). A critical evaluation of knowledge management practices. In M. S. Ackerman, V. Pipek, & V. Wulf (Eds.). Sharing expertise: Beyond knowledge management (pp. 27-55). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Isaacs, W.,(n.d.) Taking flight: Dialogue, collective thinking and organizational learning. Organizational Dynamics Jones, D.S. (2006) Expanding our Influence. Professional Safety. September 2006 Lester, S. Clair, E, Kickul, J. (2001) Psychological Contracts in the 21st Century: What Employees Value Most and How Well Organizations Are Responding to These Expectations. Human Resource Planning. Volume: 24. Issue: 1. Mishra, J., & Morrissey, M. A. (1990). Trust in employee/employer relationships: A survey of West Michigan managers. Public Personnel Management, 19.4, winter 1990, 443-463. Scott, E. (2007) Stress and burnout: burnout symptoms and causes. Retrieved on May 11, 2008 from http://stress.about.com/od/burnout/a/stressnburnout.htm\ Read More