Wednesday, December 11, 2019
Employ Motivation Organizational Effective -Myassignmenthelp.Com
Question: Discuss About The Employ Motivation Organizational Effective? Answer: Introduction With time and dynamics in the international commercial scenario, there have been considerable modifications in the way of doing businesses across the globe. With Globalization and a more inclusive global business set up, the industries have become more integrated and their operational structures have also become complicated and multi-dimensional (Wild, Wild Han, 2014). The businesses, nowadays, not only face competitions from their domestic rivals but also from the similar companies operating in other countries, due to increased ease of import and export of not only goods and services but also resources of production, labor being one of the primary ones. Keeping this into consideration, the organizations have been incorporating different strategies in their operational framework, with the objective of maintaining a stable, productive and efficient employee base, which in turn contributes to long term profitability and sustainability of the companies, by helping them gaining cost effectiveness, advantages in productivity and an edge over their competitors. These operations of the companies fall under the domain of Human Resource Management department of the companies (Cavusgil, Ghauri Akcal, 2012). Of the different roles of the human resource departments of the commercial institutions across the world, one of the primary one is to keep the employees motivated to work efficiently and to encourage to keep them dedicated to the company through all thick and thins. Keeping this into consideration, the report tries to discuss the strategies taken by the companies across the global for maintaining a productive and sustaining employee base. For studying the same, the report takes reference of an article by Kris Carlon, on the recent strategy taken by the tech giant, Samsung in the aspect of human resource management (Jiang et al., 2012). The report analyzes and tries to interpret the same using the Strategic Human Resource Management Framework. Summary of the Article For the purpose of studying the implications of strategies taken in the human resource management framework, in the real world scenario, the article refers to the article, by Kris Carlon, published in Android Authority, on January 27th, 2016. The article specifically highlights the case of Samsung Mobiles in the year 2015 (Carlon, 2018). The international tech giant, had not received expected profitability from their mobile division in 2015, much of which can be attributed to the strict and continually increasing competition which the company have been facing in the recent times with the entry of many international mobile producing companies, some of which are most cost efficient than the company itself. However, in spite of the poor performance of the mobile division, the company decided to pay extremely high bonuses to their employees working in this division, especially, with the highest capping of their bonus framework being 50% of the individual salaries of the respective employees. As the article suggests, the company had done this, mainly to encourage the employees of the mobile division and to keep them working with increased enthusiasm, to overcome the slowdown in the profitability of the concerned sector (Janeczko, 2017). The company, however, have not been equally giving for all the sectors, as not all the sectors received such high bonuses, which primarily includes the battery division of the company (receiving only 3% as their bonus) and the electronics sector (receiving only 10%), both the sectors being moderately profitable in the contemporary periods. These are considerably lower compared to the bonus received by the less productive mobile division of the company (Berman et al., 2012). The only sectors, which got bonuses comparable to that of the mobile sector, were the semiconductor division and the software and psychology sector, both of which have been highly productive and profitable. Implications of Rewarding Strategy taken by Samsung Mobiles From the above summary of the concerned article, it can be asserted that Samsung had resorted to reward the employees of the mobile division in spite of the fact that the division did not perform as efficiently and productively as it was expected to and lagged behind sectors like semiconductors and technology sector of the company (Lee Jung, 2015). However, other sectors like battery division got much lower bonuses. There can be several reasons behind such discrete rewarding strategies taken by the company in 2015, which can be highlighted and explained in the lights of the exiting theoretical frameworks present in the Strategic Human Resource Management scenario in the global framework (Singer, 2012). Keeping this into consideration, the following section of the report tries to explore the theories and concepts, which exist in the domain of human resource management in the global framework. It also tries to link the same with the current issue of consideration, that is the rewarding mechanism of Samsung, thereby analyzing the implications of such a strategy on the employees of the company and the company itself and also identifying the issues of concern within the strategic framework of the company. Rewarding workers: Human Resource Management Perspectives The concerned article highlights several bothering problems, which have been faced by the otherwise predominant player in the global tech market, Samsung, of which the primary one has been the problem of reduction in the revenue of the company, especially in several sectors, which primarily includes the mobile sector, as can be seen from the following figure: As is evident from the above diagram, in the last few years, there have been severe dynamics in the revenue generation of the different sectors of Samsung (Manzoor, 2012). However, barring the semi-conductor sector, whose profit has been increasing more or less consistently, the other sectors have seen reduction in their revenue generation, especially between 2013 and 2015, with the telecom sector being one of the prominent ones. One of the main reasons behind the same can be attributed to the increase in the popularity of other competitors and shift in the share of clientele to the other companies. In this context, the decision of the company to provide high bonus to the employees in its mobile section may have considerable implications on the performance of the sector as a whole, though it may seem to be irrational in the first look. The reasons behind implementation of such a strategy on part of Samsung can be explained with the help of Human Resource Management in the following sections (Wilkins, Thakur-Weigold Wagner, 2012). Possible reasons behind rewarding the employees There may be several reasons behind the strategy of rewarding the employees of the concerned company even though the profitability of the sector had been low. The primary reasons behind the same are as follows: Motivation of the employees One of the main requirements for the efficient working of the contemporary commercial companies is evidently the presence of a workforce, which is efficient, productive, innovative and dedicated. To stay constantly productive and efficient sufficient amount of motivation is required for the employees, which has to be provided by the companies themselves, for the vested interest of the companies themselves (Manzoor, 2012). This is because much of the competencies, efficiency, profitability and long-term prospects of the companies depend on the productivity and dedication of the workforce. The management of the workers falling under the domain of human resource department of any company, there are several measures and strategies are taken by the same for ensuring that the employees are motivated to work hard and contribute significantly in good as well as in bad phases of the company. This has to be done particularly by the HR department of the company so that the same sail swiftly through any kind of situations (Presslee, Vance Webb, 2013). One of the strategies which are most commonly incorporated by the human resource management of any company for the purpose of motivating their employees is the strategy of rewarding and recognizing the employees for their efforts. The recognition of the efforts put in by the employees of a company, in general has considerable positive implications in the aspect of motivating them as they feel appreciated and important for the company (Jiang et al., 2012). This in turn increased their incentive to work harder for the company, which reflects in their increased performances, which in turn has high probability of increasing the profitability and sustainability of the company itself. However, recognition of the efforts of employees being verbal and not adding to the materialistic welfare of the employees, it works only up to a certain extent and is not enough for the purpose of constant providing motivation of the employees. For this purpose, rewarding the employees can pose as a more effective strategy. These rewards, which the companies mostly provide to acknowledge the performances of their employees, come in cash or in kind. One of the most common ways of monetarily rewarding the employees is by providing them bonuses, which are in general paid as a percentage of the employees salary (Dobre, 2013). This framework is also followed by Samsung, as can be seen from the concerned article, with the percentages varying according to the level of performances of the different employees. This may have been one of the probable underlying reasons behind the strategy of the concerned company to reward their employees of the mobile division in spite of the decrease in the production of the same in 2015. Cash reward being mostly considered by the employees as the worth of their efforts, this might have helped the company to motivate their mobile division workers to keep on working harder and with more dedication to overcome the slowdown in its revenue generation. Management of performance of the employees One of the primary reasons for rewarding the employees in general, as can be seen to be done by Samsung in this case, apart from motivating them, is also to increase and enhance the performances of the same. As can be seen from the above figure, work stress in Samsung is higher compared to the level of satisfaction in the same workplace. The level of stress is also higher compared to similar companies in the global framework. This, clubbed with the high competition, which the mobile division of the company has been facing in the recent periods, could probably effect the performance of the employees negatively. Keeping this in consideration, one of the primary and effective strategies, which can be taken to enhance the performance of the employees in the otherwise stressful environment, is by providing them financial rewards for their efforts. Employee Retention Another probable reason behind the bonus paid by Samsung to the employees of its mobile division in spite of their comparatively poor performance is to retain them in the company itself and give them incentives to work harder staying in the company (Edirisooriyaa, 2014). This is highly relevant in the contemporary global business scenarios as with increased number of supply side players in the market, the demand for labors, especially skilled labors has also been consistently increasing. This increases the number of job opportunities in the hands of the employees and can increase the risk of resignations and layoffs of considerable number of employees if they are not paid appropriately and if they are not given enough incentive to stay back in the company (Das Baruah, 2013). As can be seen from the above figure, in spite of the poor performance of the mobile division, the company did not experience a major decrease in their employee strength. This may be because of the fact that the company tries to retain the employees by providing them incentives and encouragements in the forms of financial incentives and bonuses, even when the company does not generate high revenue. The action of the company can be thus justified from the perspective of employee retention (Terera Ngirande, 2014). Conclusion One of the problems, which can arise from the incentive structure of the company, is the problem of the feeling of discrimination among the workers of the different divisions of the company. The battery division got only 3% bonus in spite of being moderately productive whiles the mobile employees got much higher bonus. This may create the notion that the company values the mobile division much more than the battery division. Keeping this into consideration the company needs to redesign their bonus structure in such a way that the employees in all the divisions feel motivated and feel that their efforts are appreciated. This, if designed and implemented efficiently on part of the company, can help in building up a loyal, dedicated, motivated and productive workforce, which in turn can considerably contribute in the long term profitability and sustainability of the company, giving them an edge over their competitors. References Berman, E. M., Bowman, J. S., West, J. P., Van Wart, M. R. (2012). Human resource management in public service: Paradoxes, processes, and problems. Sage. Carlon, K. (2018).Samsung rewards Mobile division employees despite poor performance in 2015.Android Authority. Retrieved 31 January 2018, from https://www.androidauthority.com/samsung-rewards-mobile-division-employees-669904/ Cavusgil, S. T., Ghauri, P. N., Akcal, A. A. (2012).Doing business in emerging markets. Sage. Dailymail.co.uk. (2018).96 percent of Facebook workers are extremely happy with their job.Mail Online. Retrieved 2 February 2018, from https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3474085/96-percent-Facebook-workers-extremely-happy-job.html Das, B. L., Baruah, M. (2013). Employee retention: A review of literature.Journal of Business and Management,14(2), 8-16. Dediu, H. (2018).Samsungs profit center.Asymco. Retrieved 2 February 2018, from https://www.asymco.com/2015/07/30/samsungs-profit-center/ Dobre, O. I. (2013). Employee motivation and organizational performance.Tabel of Contents. Edirisooriyaa, W. A. (2014, February). Impact of Rewards on Employee Performance: With Special Reference to ElectriCo. InProceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Management and Economics(Vol. 26, p. 27). Janeczko, S. (2017). Samsung Technical and Fundamental Analysis. Jiang, K., Lepak, D. P., Han, K., Hong, Y., Kim, A., Winkler, A. L. (2012). Clarifying the construct of human resource systems: Relating human resource management to employee performance.Human resource management review,22(2), 73-85. Jiang, K., Lepak, D. P., Hu, J., Baer, J. C. (2012). How does human resource management influence organizational outcomes? A meta-analytic investigation of mediating mechanisms.Academy of management Journal,55(6), 1264-1294. Lee, K., Jung, M. (2015). Overseas factories, domestic employment, and technological hollowing out: a case study of Samsungs mobile phone business.Review of World Economics,151(3), 461-475. Manzoor, Q. A. (2012). Impact of employees motivation on organizational effectiveness.Business management and strategy,3(1), 1. Presslee, A., Vance, T. W., Webb, R. A. (2013). The effects of reward type on employee goal setting, goal commitment, and performance.The Accounting Review,88(5), 1805-1831. Richter, F. (2018).Infographic: Samsung's Profit Growth Is Coming Back to Earth.Statista Infographics. Retrieved 2 February 2018, from https://www.statista.com/chart/1248/samsungs-profit-growth/ Singer, N. (2012). Youve won a badge (and now we know all about you).New York Times,4. Statista.com. (2018).Topic: Samsung Electronics.www.statista.com. Retrieved 31 January 2018, from https://www.statista.com/topics/985/samsung-electronics/ Terera, S. R., Ngirande, H. (2014). The impact of rewards on job satisfaction and employee retention.Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences,5(1), 481. Wild, J. J., Wild, K. L., Han, J. C. (2014).International business. Pearson Education Limited. Wilkins, R., Thakur-Weigold, B., Wagner, S. M. (2012). Managing demand uncertainty.Industrial Engineer,44(8).