A company’s culture is not so easily discernible. Though LEC has elements of a stable culture by being able to “coordinate and align individual effort for greatest levels of efficiency (Carpenter, M., Taylor B., Erdogan B., 2009)”, it is not a highly bureaucratic one. Neither is it innovative as it does not experiment with new ideas regularly and it most certainly is not an aggressive culture focused on ‘killing’ competition at all costs. Despite the company working collaboratively, neither is LEC particularly group-oriented since rewards are offered based on individual rather than group effort. We can also rule out LEC’s culture being detail-oriented since paying attention to individual customer preferences as the company’s leading competitive edge is not the case.
1.1. Human resource management Vs personal management Although there is no clear distinction between and someone may that, but there is quite difference in terms of the scope of management practice so personnel management often involves in carrying out administrative work the organisation , which is both traditional and routine . Personnel management is not proactive but reactive and only response to demands and business concerns that are presented. Personnel management endeavours the smooth following of the work, and also makes sure staff hiring, training and supervising at work place. On the other hand, human resource management is a holistic and comprehensive approach of managerial task that overlooks both present and future
Building trust Trust is a key element of working together on a global scale. Trust is normally easier developed when meeting face-to-face and spending time together with team members. In traditional teams members can talk about personal matter, interact socially and meet outside of work to establish trust. However, virtual teams members lack face-to-face interactions and members cannot depend on smiles, raised eybrows or voice lev-els to see whether they are being understood (Roebuck, et al., 2004). Virtual team members typically do not have a common past or future as a bases of building trust (Lin, et al., 2008) and because nonverbal cues do not exist asking for or sharing information with team members can be seen as risky due to the inability
Goldratt believes that physical restraints are easier to identify. If the time constraint is overcome by company, another constraint will appear in store. Often appear market restrictions (when there is insufficient demand for any product), this situation sometimes makes managers think that the constraint is out of their control as they are only the provider of other’s products to the direct customer. On many other occasions, the constraint is self-created by the same management through the definition of internal policies. Goldratt, "hardly find a company with a real market restriction, as all are with ruinous policies marketing restrictions” (Oglethorpe and Heron, 2013).
The authors comment that franchising might lead to a higher customer satisfaction level irrespective of the metric and the reason being that franchisor usually has better control of the day to day operations in a franchisee. Any deviance from the normal and accepted service level is dutifully noted and corrective actions are taken. The business psyche sees a franchise owner as a vital part of the organization and rather an extension of the organization. On the other hand, licensing of IPRs usually makes for a not so up to the mark customer experience. The reason is that licensors and licensees lack interaction to improvise and augment the customer experience.
Usually the host-country nationals will have better understanding on the local market conditions, politics, laws and culture, so that they could manage subsidiaries effectively. For example, host-country managers are unlikely to make the mistakes arising from cultural misunderstands that expatriate managers are vulnerable to. Moreover, the recruitment of local employees also deliver a message to the host-country and its consumers that the company is willing to make a commitment to the country and its people. Another advantage is that polycentric approach is less expensive to implement as there are no relocation expenses and premium compensation for working abroad. A polycentric staffing also has its drawbacks.
The term of empowerment is rarely defined clearly (Greasley et al., 2004) and has been used very loosely by practitioners and academics (Mondros and Wilson, 1994 & Russ and Milam, 1995). One possible reason for this lack of clarity is a the tendency for empowerment to be attached to management concepts, for example, Total Quality Management (TQM) (Greasley et al., 2004). Empowerment has been associated with the redistribution of power so that employees have an increasing degree of flexibility and authority to participate in the decision-making process of an organization (Greasley et al., 2004). Employee involvement does not necessary mean any de jure sharing of authority of power. It is employers who decide whether and how to empower employees so as to generate commitment and enhance their contribution to the organization (Willkinson, 1997).
In the bureaucracy, due to the advantages and qualifications hiring and promotion on the basis of competition is not so competitive. Furthermore, once a civil servant was appointed, he or she has a fixed salary, they working in specialized tasks but not in areas other than his or her field belongs. Some people think that this is futile because it enables the
Thus Human resource management deals with recruiting, developing, and keeping the best/ smart people. What exactly does HR do? And do they provide any real value to the organization? The common response to the second question is ‘no’. It is often viewed as simply an administrative Department that tracks vacation days and processes benefits forms, HR appears to get almost no appreciation particularly when you contrast it with a percentage of the other useful heavyweights, such as marketing, finance, and more recently IT.
There are many unfamiliar brand names and alternatives available in the market place. Consumers may prefer to trust major famous brand names. These prestigious brand names and their images attract consumers to purchase the brand and bring about repeat purchasing behavior and reduce price related switching behaviors (Cadogan and Foster, 2000). Furthermore, brand personality provides links to the brand’s emotional and self-expressive benefits for differentiation. This is important for brands, which have only minor physical differences and consumed in a social setting where the brand can create a visible image about the consumer itself.