A common refrain among executives is “People are our most important asset.” Relate this statement to any two of the four perspectives of organizational effectiveness presented ion this chapter. Does this statement apply better to some perspectives than to others? Why or why not?

This is an open discussion question because the statement can relate to all four perspectives of organizational effectiveness.

Open systems -- probably the least focus on employees of the four perspectives. People represent the internal subsystems of organizations, so are vital in that respect. Some employees are also “boundary spanners” in that they link the organization to the external environment.

Organizational learning -- this perspective views employees as reasonably important because they hold a large portion of intellectual capital (human capital and possibly some forms of relationship capital). People bring knowledge into the organization and are largely responsible for sharing that knowledge. Knowledge use is also ultimately a human endeavor.

High performance work practices -- arguably the perspective that views people (employees) as the most critical resource. HPWPs embrace the human capital model; they consider employees as competitive advantage. HPWP are practices to leverage or unleash the competitive advantage potential of employees.

Stakeholder -- Employees are one type of stakeholder, so the statement applies to this perspective. It recognizes that employees have a vested interest in the organization and its actions.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

“All decisions are ethical decisions.” Comment on this statement, particularly by referring to the concepts of moral intensity and moral sensitivity.

This sweeping statement is false. In other words, not all decisions are having equal right/wrong or good/bad dimensions. We are saying there is a threshold which defines ethical concern, and it is a function of moral intensity and moral sensitivity. For a decision to have an ethical dimension, i t has to have some moral intensity associated with it. Moral intensity is a characteristic of the situation. It refers to the degree to which an issue demands the application of ethical principles. “Who should be laid off?” would have high moral intensity. On the other hand, a decision to take an umbrella to work because it might rain has no moral intensity. This is because morally intense issues involve others in the society who may think the decision is good or evil, or the issue quickly affects people. Moral sensitivity refers to a characteristic of the decision maker, not the situation. Faced with the same issue, two decision makers may be more or less moral sensitive, depending on emp...
Read more

After hearing a seminar on organizational learning, a mining company executive argues that this perspective ignores the fact that mining companies could not rely on knowledge alone to stay in business. They also need physical capital (such as digging and ore processing equipment) and land (where the minerals are located). In fact, these two may be more important than what employees carry around in their heads. Evaluate the mining executive’s comments.

This question relates to the importance of organizational learning perspective in achieving organizational effectiveness. Meanwhile, the question emphasizes the critical understanding that organizational effectiveness is a function of an overall holistic system view of the effective and efficient interplay of all three elements of software (the knowledge and processes), hardware (the structures and the people) and the harmonious relationship between the organization and its environment. Focusing on any one component at the expense of the rest would definitely result in incomplete picture of an effective organization. Some executives still view land and capital as a company’s most valuable assets . They give lip service to the idea that “People are our most value assets” but still don’t understand that land and capital have little value without people . For instance, this mining company would not have found land with ore deposits unless it had the knowledge to find those minera...
Read more

Two college graduates recently joined the same major newspaper as journalists. Both work long hours and have tight deadlines for completing their stories. They are under constant pressure to scout out new leads and be the first to report new controversies. One journalist is increasingly fatigued and despondent and has taken several days of sick leave. The other is getting the work done and seems to enjoy the challenges. Use your knowledge of stress to explain why these two journalists are reacting differently to their jobs.

This incident describes two journalists with similar stressors experiencing different levels of stress and stress consequences. This illustrates the distinction between stressors and stress. It may also highlight the importance of individual differences in stress. One possible reason why these two journalists are experiencing different stress levels is that they might perceive the situation differently. The low stress journalist might have higher self-esteem and confidence that he/she can complete the work. A second explanation might be that the journalists have different threshold levels of resistance to a stressor . Both are recent graduates and we don’t know if they are a similar age. However, the high stress journalist might have less resistance because he/she has recently experienced other stressors , such as death of a family member. Finally, the different stress levels might be explained by the different strategies used to manage the stress. The ...
Read more