INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS ISMS ONGOING EXAM ANSWER SHEETS PROVIDED WHATSAPP 91 9924764558
CONTACT:
DR. PRASANTH MBA PH.D. DME MOBILE / WHATSAPP: +91 9924764558 OR +91 9447965521 EMAIL: prasanththampi1975@gmail.com WEBSITE: www.casestudyandprojectreports.com
International business studies
CASE I
A GLOBAL PLAYER?
This is one game that India has permanently lost to its arch-rival Pakistan - manufacturing and exporting sports goods. Historically, when India and Pakistan were one before 1947, Sialkot, now in Pakistan, used to be the world's largest production centre for badminton, hockey, football, volleyball, basketball, and cricket equipment. After the creation of Pakistan, Jalandhar became the second centre after Hindus in the trade migrated to India. Soon Jalandhar overtook Sialkot and till the early 1980s it remained so. However when the face of the trade began to change in the 1980s and import of quality leather and manufacturing equipment became a necessity for quality production, Pakistan wrested the initiative as India clung it its policies of discouraging imports through high duties and restrictions. As it was, the availability of labor and skills was a common factor in both Sialkot and Jalandhar, but with Sialkot having the advantage of easier entry, most of the world's top sports manufactures and procedures developed an association with local industry in Sialkot that continues even today. Ten years later, in the early 1990s, when Manmohan Singh liberalised the norms for importing equipment and raw material required for producing sports goods, it was too late as majority of the global majors had already shifted base to Sialkot.
In 1961 the late Narinder Mayor started the first large scale sports goods manufacturing unit, Mayor & Company, thereby laying the foundation of an organized industry. Even today, more than 70 percent of the industry functions in an unorganized manner. Starting with soccer balls, Mayor expanded to produce inflatable balls like volleyballs, basketballs, and rugby balls. Today his two sons Rajan & Rajesh have built it up into five companies engaged in a wide array of businesses, though sports goods remain the group's core business. While the parent trading company, Mayor & Company, remains the leading revenue-earner to the tune of Rs. 55 crore annually out of a total group turnover of Rs. 85 crore-plus, Mayor's second venture, the Indo-Australian Mayor International Limited, is spinning another Rs. 15 crore. Mayor International is a 100 per cent export-oriented unit (EOU) exclusively manufacturing and exporting golf and tennis balls.
The product portfolio of the company comprises the following:
Inflatable Balls
• Soccer balls and footballs (Professional, Indoor, Match and Training, leisure toy)
• Volley balls, rugby balls (Volley balls and Beach Volley Balls)
• Australian rugby, hand balls (English League, Union and touch) (Australian rules, Australian Rugby League balls with laces)
Boxing Equipment
• Boxing and punching balls (Boxing and Punching Balls, Head Gear, Gloves, Punching Mitts and Kits Punching Bags & Bag Sets)
• Gloves
• Goal keeper's gloves (Football / Soccer)
• Boxing gloves
Cricket Equipment
• Worldwide distributor for Spading Cricket Bats, Balls and Protective equipment.
HOCKEY EQUIPMENT
• Worldwide distributor for Spading Hokey Sticks, Balls & Protective equipment
Based in Delhi, Rajan Mayor, 41 is the CMD of the group, which also comprises an IT division working on B2B and B2C solutions; Voyaguer World Travels in the tourism sector; a houseware exports division specializing in stainless steel kitchenware, ceramics, and textiles; and a high school. Younger brother Rajesh, 34, is the executive director and looks after all the divisions operating in Jalandhar. Technical director Katz Nowaskowski divides his time equally between India and Australia, where he looks after the group’s interests. “While inflatable balls are our prime competence in our core business, we are presently focusing on golf balls, for which we are the sole producers in South Asia. Out of a total Rs. 300 crore of sports goods business generated in domestic market, most of which is supplied by the unorganized players, golf balls constitute a miniscule amount and therefore we came up with a 100 per cent EOU for producing golf balls. Later the same facility was utilized with little moderation for tennis balls too,” says Nowaskowaski.
Clarifying that the sports good industry in India only includes playing equipment and not apparels or shoes, D K Mittal, chairman of the Sports Goods Export Promotion Council and joint secretary in the Ministry of Commerce, has certified Mayor group as the number one exporter since 1993 till date, barring 1996. However, SGEPC secretary Tarun Dewan points out that being the number one exporter does not mean that Mayor is the number one brand being exported. “Actually we have tie ups Dunlop, Arnold Palmer, and Fila for manufacturing golf balls. For footballs and volleyballs we have association with Adidas, Mitre, Puma, Umbro, and Dunlop. We manufacture soccer World Cup and European Cup replicas for Adidas, which is a huge market. Only 400 balls used for actual play in the World Cup are manufactured in Europe & that too only for sentimental reason, otherwise we are capable of delivering products of the same, if not better quality. Now since we manufacture balls for them, we cannot antimonies them by producing balls of similar quality with our own brand name. Secondly, I agree that competing with such big quaint in the world market in terms of branding is a task that is well beyond our reach at the moment. However, we are trying to brand ourselves in the domestic market and that is one of the prime focus in the coming year,” says Rajan.
Coca-Cola, Unilever, McDonald’s, American Airlines, Disney club, and other such big brands come up with huge orders at tines for golf balls with their logos for promotional schemes. However, there is no mention of the producing country since these companies do not want to show that balls they deliver in the US are being produced in Asia, “Not only is our quality good enough; labour in India is cheap enough to churn out a much less expensive product in the end. Yet, the main threat to our industry comes from countries like Taiwan and China, who have already cornered a chunk of world markets in tennis, badminton, and squash rackets. This is primarily because of two reasons – slow response to our needs in tune with the market requirements from the government and lack of infrastructure. And most importantly, tags ‘Made in China’ or ‘Made in Taiwan’ are more acceptable in the West than ‘Made in India’ or ‘Made in Pakistan’. One of the mottos of the Mayor group has been to make ‘Made in India’ an acceptable label in the West. For that we stress quality, timely delivery, and competent rates. Yet, a lot depends on perception value, which in our case is sadly on the negative side, much owing to our government’s stance over the years. Things might be improving, but the pace is very slow and as our economy drifts towards a free market scenario supinely, it might just prove to be too little too late in the end,” says Rajesh.
Today, Mayor group is sitting pretty as its competitors, Soccer International Sakay Trades, Savi, Wasan, Cosco, Nivia and Spartan are only trying to catch up in the inflatables category. With 1.2 million dozen golf balls, Mayor is way ahead of its competitors. The company is planning to enhance its manufacturing capacity to 1.5 million dozen golf next fiscal. With approval from the world’s two top golf associations – the US PGA and RNA of Scotland, demand for its product is not a problem, the company’s senior marketing officials point out. With the markets in Mayor’s current export destinations – Europe, North America, Australia, and Nw Zealand – all set to expand in the coming years after the present slump, Mayor wants to expand its sports goods business that caters to 60 per cent of its overall exports. Though 40 per cent of exports come from house ware manufactured in Delhi and Mumbai, with export centres in the same countries for its sports goods, just about maintaining this business at its present state, and concerning entirely on sports goods is what the mayors are intent on.
With nearly 2000 skilled workforce; quality certification from ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 14001: 2004; and having spread to more than 40 countries, Mayor and Company is obviously sitting pretty.
Questions
1. What routes of globalization has the Mayor group chosen to go global? What other routes could it have taken?
2. What impediments are coming in the Mayor group’s way becoming a major and active player in international business?
3. Why is ‘Made in India’ not liked in foreign markets? What can be done to erase the perception?
CASE 2
AT THE RECEIVING END !
Spread over 121 countries with 30,000 restaurants, and serving 46 million customers each day with the help of more than 400,000 employees, the reach of McDonald’s is amazing. It all started in 1948 when two brothers, Richard and Maurice ‘Mac’ McDonald, built several hamburger stands, with golden arches in southern California. One day a traveling salesman, Ray Kroc, came to sell milkshake mixers. The popularity of their $O. 15 hamburgers impressed him, so he bought the world franchise rights from them and spread the golden arches around the globe.
McDonald’s depends on its overseas restaurants for revenue. In fact, 60 percent of its revenues are generated outside of the United States. The key to the company’s success is its ability to standardize the formula of quality, service, cleanliness and value, and apply it everywhere.
The company, well known for its golden arches, is not the world’s largest company. Its system wide sales are only about one-fifth of Exxon Mobil or Wal-Mart stores. However, it owns one of the world’s best known brands, and the golden arches are familiar to more people than the Christian cross. This prominence, and its conquest of global markets, makes the company a focal point for inquiry and criticism.
McDonald is a frequent target of criticism by anti-globalization protesters. In France, a pipe-smoking sheep farmer named Jose Bove shot to fame by leading a campaign against the fast food chain. McDonald’s is a symbol of American trade hegemony and economic globalization. Jose Bove organized fellow sheep farmers in France, and the group led by him drove tractors to the construction site of a new McDonald’s restaurants and ransacked it. Bove was jailed for 20 days, and almost overnight an international anti-globalisation star was borne. Bove, who resembles the irrelevant French comic book hero Asterix, traveled to Seattle in 1999, as part of the French delegation to lead the protest against commercialization of food crops promoted by the WTO. Food, according to him, is too vital a part of life to be trusted to the vagaries of the world trade. In Seattle, he led a demonstration in which some ski-masked protestors transhed at McDonald’s/ As Bove explained, his movement was for small farmers against industrial farming, brought about by globalization. For them, McDonald’s was a symbol of globalization, implying the standardization of food through industrial farming. If this was allowed to go on, he said, there would no longer be need for farmers. “For us”, he declared, “McDonald’s is a symbol of what WTO and the big companies want to do with the world”. Ironically, for all of Bove’s fulminations against McDonald’s, the fast food chain counts its French operations among its most profitable in 121 countries. As employer of about 35,000 workers, in 2006, McDonald’s was also one of France’s biggest foreign employers.
Bove’s and his followers are not the only critics of McDonald’s. Leftists, anarchists, nationalists, farmers, labor unions, environmentalists, consumer advocates, protectors of animal rights, religious orders and intellectuals are equally critical of the fast food chain. For these and others, McDonald’s represents an evil America. Within hours after US bombers began to pound Afghanistan in 2001, angry Pakistanis damaged McDonald’s restaurants in Islamabad and an Indonesian mob burned an American flag.
McDonald entered India in the late 1990s. On its entry, the company encountered a unique situation. Majority of the Indians did not eat beef but the company’s preparations contained cow’s meat nor could the company use pork as Muslims were against eating it. This left chicken and mutton. McDonald’s came out with ‘Maharaja Mac’, which is made from mutton and ‘McAloo Tikki Burger’ with chicken potato as the main input. Food items were segregated into vegetarian and non-vegetarian categories.
Though it worked for sometimes, this arrangement did not last long. In 2001, three Indian businessmen settled in Seattle sued McDonald’s for fraudulently concealing the existence of beef in its French fries. The company admitted its guilt of mixing miniscule quantity of beef extract in the oil. The company settled the suit for $10 million and tendered an apology too. Further, the company pledged to label the ingredients of its food items, and to find a substitute for the beef extract used in its oil.
McDonald’s succeeded in spreading American culture in the East Asian countries. In Hong Kong and Taiwan, the company’s clean restrooms and kitchens set a new standard that elevated expectations throughout those countries. In Hong Kong, children’s birthdays had traditionally gone unrecognized, but McDonald’s introduced the practice of birthday parties in its restaurants, and now such parties have become popular among the public. A journalist set forth a ‘Golden Arches Theory of Conflict Prevention’ based on the notion that countries with McDonald’s restaurants do not go to war with each other. A British magazine, The Economist, paints an yearly ‘Big Mac Index’ that uses the price of a Big Mac in different foreign currencies to access exchange rate distortions.
Questions :
1. What lessons can other MNCs learn from the experience of McDonald’s?
2. Aware of the food habits of Indians, why did McDonald’s err in mixing beef extract in the oil used for fries?
3. How far has McDonald’s succeeded in strategizing and meeting local cultures and needs?
CASE 3
THE ABB PBS JOINT VENTURE IN OPERATION
ABB Prvni Brnenska Strojirna Brno, Ltd. (ABB-PBS), Czechoslovakia was a joint venture in which ABB has a 67 per cent stake and PBS a.s. has a 33 per cent stake. This PBS share was determined nominally by the value of the land, plant and equipment, employees, and goodwill, ABB contributed cash and specified technologies and assumed some of the debt of PBS. The new company started operations on April 15, 1993.
Business for the joint venture in its first two full years was good in most aspects. Orders received in 1994, the first full year of the joint venture's operation, were higher than ever in the history of PBS. Orders received in 1995 were 21/2 times those in 1994. The company was profitable in 1995 and ahead of 1994s results with a rate of return on assets of 2.3 per cent and a rate of return on sales of 4.5 per cent.
The 1995 results showed substantial progress towards meeting the joint venture's strategic goals adopted in 1994 as part of a five-year plan. One of the goals was that exports should account for half of the total orders by 1999. (Exports had accounted for more than a quarter of the PBS business before 1989, but most of this business disappeared when the Soviet Union collapsed), In 1995 exports increased as a share of total orders to 28 per cent up from 16 per cent the year before.
The external service business, organized and functioning as a separate business for the first time in 1995, did not meet expectations. It accounted for five per cent of all orders and revenues in 1995, below the 10 per cent goal set for it. The retrofitting business, which was expected to be a major part of the service business, was disappointing for ABB-PBS, partly because many other small companies began to provide this service in 1994, including some started by former PBS employees who took their knowledge of PBS-built power plants with them. However, ABB-PBS managers hoped that as the company introduced new technologies, these former employees would gradually lose their ability to perform these services, and the retrofit and repair service business would return to ABB-PBS.
ABB-PBS dominated the Czech boiler business with 70 per cent of the Czech market in 1995, but managers expected this share to go down in the future as new domestic and foreign competitors emerged. Furthermore, the west European boiler market was actually declining because environmental laws caused a surge of retrofitting to occur in the mid-1980s, leaving less business in the 1990s. Accordingly ABB-PBS boiler orders were flat in 1995.
Top managers at ABB-PBS regarded business results to date as respectable, but they were not satisfied with the company's performance. Cash flow was not as good as expected. Cost reduction had to go further. "The more we succeed, the more we see our shortcomings", said one official.
Restructuring
The first round of restructuring was largely completed in 1995, the last year of the three-year restructuring plan. Plant logistics, information systems, and other physical capital improvements were in place. The restructing included :
• Renovating and reconstructing workshops and engineering facilities
• Achieving ISO 9001 for all four ABB-PBS divisions (awarded in 1995)
• Transfer of technology from ABB (this was an ongoing project)
• Installation of an information system
• Management training, especially in total quality assurance and English language
• Implementing a project management approach.
A notable achievement of importance of top management in 1995 was a 50 per cent increase in labour productivity, measured as value added per payroll crown. However, in the future ABB-PBS expected its wage rates to go up faster than west European wage rates (Czech wages were increasing about 15 per cent per year) so it would be difficult to maintain the ABB-PBS unit cost advantage over west European unit cost.
The Technology Role for ABB-PBS
The joint venture was expected from the beginning to play an important role in technology development for part of ABB's power generation business worldwide. PBS a.s. had engineering capability in coal-fired steam boilers, and that capability was expected to be especially useful to ABB as more countries became concerned about air quality. (When asked if PBS really did have leading technology here, a boiler engineering manager remarked, "Of course we do. We burn so much dirty coal in this country, we have to have better technology").
However, the envisioned technology leadership role for ABB-PBS had not been realised by mid-1996. Richard Kuba, the ABB-PBS managing director, realised the slowness with which the technology role was being fulfilled, and he offered his interpretation of events :
"ABB did not promise to make the joint venture its steam technology leader. The main point we wanted to achieve in the joint venture agreement was for ABB-PBS to be recognised as a full-fledged company, not just a factory. We were slowed down on our technology plans because we had a problem keeping our good, young engineers. The annual employee turnover rate for companies in the Czech Republic is 15 or 20 per cent, and the unemployment rate is zero. Our engineers have many other good entrepreneurial opportunities. Now we've begun to stabilise our engineering workforce. The restructuring helped. We have better equipment and a clean and safer work environment. We also had another problem which is a good problem to have. The domestic power plant business turned out to be better than we expected, so just meeting the needs of our regular customers forced some postponement of new technology initiatives."
ABB-PBS had benefited technologically from its relationship with ABB. One example was the development of a new steam turbine line. This project was a cooperative effort among ABB-PBS and two other ABB companies, one in Sweden and one in Germany. Nevertheless, technology transfer was not the most important early benefit of ABB relationship. Rather, one of the most important gains was the opportunity to benchmark the joint venture's performance against other established western ABB companies on variables such as productivity, inventory, and receivables.
Questions
1. Where does the joint venture meet the needs of both the partners? Where does it fall short?
2. Why had ABB-PBS failed to realized its technology leadership?
3. What lessons one can draw from this incident for better management of technology transfers?
CASE 4
PERU
Peru is located on the west coast South America. It is the third largest nation of the continent (after Brazil and Argentina), and covers almost 500,000 square miles (about 14 per cent of the size of the United States). The land has enormous contrasts, with a desert (drier than the Sahara), the towering snow-capped Andes mountains, sparking grass-covered plateaus, and thick rain forests. Peru has approximately 27 million people, of which about 20 per cent live in Lima, the capital. More Indians (one half of the population) live in Peru than in any other country in the western hemisphere. The ancestors of Peru’s Indians were the famous Incas, who built a great empire. The rest of the population is mixed and a small percentage is white. The economy depends heavily on agriculture, fishing, mining, and services. GDP is approximately $115 billion and per capita income in recent years has been around $4, 300. In recent years the economy has gained some relative and multinationals are now beginning to consider investing in the country.
One of these potential investors is a large New York based that is considering a $25 million loan to the owner of a Peruvian fishing fleet. The owner wants to refurbish the fleet and add one more ship.
During the 1970s, the Peruvian government nationalized a number of industries and factories and began running them for the profit of the state. In most cases, these state-run ventures became disasters. In the late 1970s, the fishing fleet owner was given back his ships and allowed to operate his business as before. Since then, he has managed to remain profitable, but the biggest problem is that his ships are getting old and he needs and influx of capital to make repairs and add new technology. As he explained it to the New York banker: “Fishing is no longer just an art. There is a great deal of technology involved. And to keep costs low and be competitive on the world market, you have to have the latest equipment for both locating as well as catching and then loading and unloading the fish.”
Having reviewed the fleet owner’s operation, the large multinational bank believers that the loan is justified. The financial institution is concerned, however, that the Peruvian government might step in during the next couple of years and again take over the business. If this were to happen it might take and additional decade for the loan to be repaid. If the government were to allow the fleet owner to operate the fleet the way he has over the last decade, the loan could be repaid within seven years.
Right now, the bank is deciding on the specific terms of the agreement. Once these have been worked out, either a loan officer will fly down to Lima and close the deal or the owner will be asked to come to New York for the signing. Whichever approach is used, the bank realizes that final adjustments in the agreement will have to be made on the spot. Therefore, if the bank sends a representative to Lima, the individual will have to have the authority to commit the bank to specific terms. These final matters should be worked out within the next ten days.
Questions
1. What are some current issues facing Peru? What is the climate for doing business in Peru today?
2. What type of political risks does this fishing company need to evaluate? Identify and describe them.
3. What types of integrative and protective and defensive techniques can the bank use?
4. Would the bank be better off negotiating the loan in New York or in Lima? Why?
CASE 1
BULLYING BOSSES
It got to where I was twitching, literally, on the way into work,’’ states Carrie Clark, a 52-year-old retired teacher and administrator. After enduring 10 months of repeated insults and mistreatment from her supervisor, she finally quit her job. ``I had to take care of my health.’’
Though many individuals recall bullies from their elementary school days, some are realizing that bullies can exist in the workplace as well. And these bullies do not just pick on the weakest in the group, rather, any subordinate in their path may fall prey to their torment, according to Dr. Gary Namie, director of the Workplace Bullying and Trauma Institute. Dr. Namie further says workplace bullies are not limited to men-women are at least as likely to be bullies. However, gender discrepancies are found in victims of bullying, as women are more likely to be targets.
What motivates a boss to be a bully? Dr. Harvey Hornstein, a retired professor from Teachers College at Columbia University, suggests that supervisors may use bullying as a means to subdue a subordinate that poses a threat to the supervisor’s status. Additionally, supervisors may bully individuals to vent frustrations. Many times however, the sheer desire to wield power may be the primary reason for bullying.
What is the impact of bullying on employee motivation and behavior? Surprisingly, even though victims of workplace bullies may feel less motivated to go to work every day, it does not appear that they discontinue performing their required job duties. However, it does appear that victims of bullies are less motivated to perform extra-role or citizenship behaviors. Helping others, speaking positively about the organization, and going beyond the call of duty are behaviors that are reduced as a result of bullying. According to Dr. Bennett Tepper of the University of North Carolina, fear may be the reason that many workers continue to perform their job duties. And not all individuals reduce their citizenship behaviors. Some continue to engage in extra-role behaviors to make themselves look better than their colleagues.
What should you do if your boss is bullying you? Don’t necessarily expect help from coworkers. As Emelise Aleandri, an actress and producer from New York who left her job after being bullied, stated, ``Some people were afraid to do anything. But others didn’t mind what was happening at all, because they wanted my job.’’ Moreover, according to Dr. Michelle Duffy of the University of Kentucky, coworkers often blame victims of bullying in order to resolve their guilt. ``they do this by wondering whether maybe the person deserved the treatment, that he or she has been annoying, or lazy, they did something to earn it,’’ states Dr. Duffy. One example of an employee who observed this phenomenon firsthand is Sherry Hamby, who was frequently verbally abused by her boss and then eventually fired. She stated, ``This was a man who insulted me, who insulted by family, who would lay into me while everyone else in the office just sat there and let it happen. The people in my office eventually started blaming me.’’
What can a bullied employee do? Dr. Hornstein suggests that employees try to ignore the insults and respond only to the substance of the bully’s grip. `stick with the substance, not the process, and often it won’t escalate,’’ he states. Of course, that is easier said than done.
Questions:
1) Of the three types of organizational justice, which one does workplace bullying most closely resemble?
2) What aspects of motivation might workplace bullying reduce? For example, are there likely to be effects on an employee’s self-efficacy? If so, what might those effects be?
3) If you were a victim of workplace bullying, what steps would you take to try to reduce its occurrence? What strategies would be most effective? What strategies might be ineffective? What would you do if one of your colleagues was a victim of an abusive supervisor?
4) What factors do you believe contribute to workplace bullying? Are bullies a product of the situation, or are they flawed personalities? What situations and what personality factors might contribute to the presence of bullies?
CASE 2
THANKS FOR NOTHING
Thought it may seem fairly obvious that receiving praise and recognition from one’s company is a motivating experience, sadly many companies are failing miserably when it comes to saying ``thanks’’ to their employees. According to curt Coffman global practice leader at Gallup, 71 percent of U.S. workers are ``disengaged’’, essentially meaning that they could care less about their organization. Coffman states. ``We’re operating at one-quarter of the capacity in terms of managing human capital. It’s alarming.’’ Employee recognition programs, which became more popular as the U.S. economy shifted from industrial to knowledge-based, can be an effective way to motivate employees and make them feel valued. In many cases, however, recognition programs are doing ``more harm than good’’ according to Coffman.
Take Ko, a 50-year-old former employee of a dot-com in California. Her company proudly instituted a rewards program designed to motivate employees. What were the rewards for a job well-done? Employees would receive a badge which read ``U Done Good’’ and, each year, would receive a T-shirt as a means of annual recognition. Once an employee received 10 ``U Done Good’’ badges, he or she could trade them in for something bigger and better—a paperweight. Ko states that she would have preferred a raise. ``It was patronizing. There wasn’t any deep thought involved in any of this.’’ To make matters worse, she says the badges were handed out arbitrarily and were not tied to performance. And what about those T-shirts? Ko states that the company instilled a strict dress code, so employees couldn’t even wear the shirts if they wanted to. Needless to say, the employee recognition program seemed like an empty gesture rather than a motivation.
Even programs that provide employees with more expensive rewards can backfire, especially if the rewards are given insincerely. Eric Lange, an employee of a trucking company, recalls the time when one of the company’s vice presidents achieved a major financial goal for the company. The vice president, who worked in an office best of Lange, received a Cadillac Seville as his company car and a new Rolex wristwatch that cost the company $10,000. Both were lavish gifts, but the way they were distributed left a sour taste in the vice president’s mouth. He entered his office to find the Rolex in a cheap cardboard box sitting on his desk, along with a brief letter explaining that he would be receiving a 1099 tax form in order to pay taxes on the watch. Lange state of the vice president, ``He came into my office, which was right next door, and said, `can you believe this?’’ A mere 2 months later, the vice president pawned the watch. Lange explains. ``It had absolutely no meaning for him.
Such experiences resonate with employees who may find more value in a sincere pat on the back than gifts from management that either are meaningless or aren’t conveyed with respect or sincerity. However, sincere pats on the back may be hard to come by. Gallup’s poll found that 61 percent of employees stated that they haven’t received a sincere, ``thank you’’ from management in the past year. Finding such as these are troubling, as verbal rewards are not only inexpensive for companies to hand out but also are quick and easy to distribute. Of course, verbal rewards do need to be paired sometimes with tangible benefits that employees value – after all, money talks. In addition, when praising employees for a job well-done, managers need to ensure that the praise is given in conjunction with the specific accomplishment. In this way, employees may not only feel valued by their organization but will also know what actions to take to be rewarded in the future.
Questions
1) If praising employees for doing a good job seems to be a fairly easy and obvious motivational tools, why do you think companies and managers don’t often do it?
2) As a manager, what steps would you take to motivate your employees after observing them perform well?
3) Are there any downsides to giving employees too much verbal praise? What might these downsides be and how could you alleviate them as a manager?
4) As a manager, how would you ensure that recognition given to employees is distributed fairly and justly?
CASE 3
WILL GEORGE W. BUSH BE A GREAT PRESIDENT?
What does it take to be a great U.S. president? A survey of 78 history, political science, and law scholars rated the U.S. presidents from George Washington to Bill Clinton. Here are the presidents who were rated ``Great’’ and ``Near Great.’’
Great
George Washington
Abraham Lincoln
Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR)
Near Great
Thomas Jefferson
Andrew Jackson
James Polk
Theodore Roosevelt
Harry Truman
Dwight Eisenhower
Ronald Reagan
Among recent presidents, Presidents Nixon, Ford, and Carter were ranked ``Below Average’’ and Presidents G. H. W. Bush (the first President Bush) and Clinton were ranked ``Average’’.
So what explains these ratings? The following are some qualities of presidents who have stood the test of time.
1. Great presidents are transformational leaders who engender strong emotions – that is, you either love them or you hate them (it’s hard to hate someone who made little difference). And great presidents enact a vision that may not respond to popular opinion. Lincoln and FDR were beloved, and hated, by millions.
2. Great presidents are bold and take risks, and almost all great presidents emerge successfully from a crisis. A great president is perceived as ``being there’’ when a crisis emerges and taking bold action to lead the nation out of the crisis – for example, Lincoln in the Civil War and Roosevelt in WWII.
3. Great presidents are associated with a vision. Most people, for example, are able to associate the great presidents with defining moment where a clear set of principles was articulated – for example, FDR’s speech to Congress after the attacks on Pearl Harbor, and Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address.
4. Great presidents are charismatic. They are engaging, articulate, and expressive, which helps capture the public’s attention and rallies people around a president’s cause. One leadership expert argues that the best presidents create colorful personas with their language by using words with basic emotions – for example, good versus evil or love versus hate.
So what about President George W. Bush (the second President Bush)? Shortly after his second inauguration, President Bush embarked on an ambitious agenda of legal reform, transforming the Social Security system, tax reform, and revising immigration laws. One writer commented, ``Bush has always thought big, and always believed you earn political capital by expending it.’’ However, the closeness of the 2004 election (Bush received 51 percent of the vote and Kerry received 48 percent) suggests that Bush may not have overwhelming support.
Questions
1. How would you rate President George W. Bush on the four characteristics outlined at the beginning of the case? How would you contrast his reaction to Hurricane Katrina with his reaction to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001? What do you think his handling of these two events says about his leadership?
2. Do you think leaders in other contexts (business’, sports, religious) exhibit the same qualities of great or near-great U.S. presidents?
3. Do you think being in the right place at the right time could influence presidential greatness?
Case 4
A UNIQUE TRAINING PROGRAM AT UPS
Mark Colvard, a United Parcel manager in San Ramon, California, recently faced a difficult decision. One of his drivers asked for 2 weeks off to help an ailing family member. But company rules said this driver wasn’t eligible. If Colvard went by the book, the driver would probably take the days off anyway and be fired. On the other hand, Colvard was likely to be criticized by other drivers if he bent the rules. Colvard chose to give the driver the time off. Although he took some heat for the decision, he also kept a valuable employee.
Had Colvard been faced with this decision 6 months earlier, he says he would have gone the other way. What changed his thinking was a month he spent living in McAllen, Texas. It was part of a UPS management training experience called the Community Internship Program (CIP). During his month in McAllen, Colvard built housing for the poor, collected clothing for the Salvation Army, and worked in a drug rehab center. Colvard gives the program credit for helping him empathize with employees facing cries back home. And he says that CIP has made him a better manager. ``My goal was to make the numbers, and in some cases that meant not looking at the individual but looking the bottom line. After that 1-month stay, I immediately started reaching out to people in a different way.’’
CIP was established by UPS in the late 1960s to help open the eyes of the company’s predominantly white managers to the poverty and inequality in many cities. Today, the program takes 50 of the company’s most promising executives each summer and brings them to cities around the country. There they deal with a variety of problems- from transportation to housing, education, and health care. The company’s goal is to awaken these managers to the challenges that many of their employees face, bridging the cultural divide that separates a white manager from an African American driver or an upper-income suburbanite from a worker raised in the rural South.
Questions
1. Do you think individuals can learn empathy from something like a 1-month CIP experience? Explain why or why not.
2. How could UPS’s CIP help the organization better manage work-life conflicts?
3. How could UPS’s CIP help the organization improve its response to diversity?
4. What negatives, if any, can you envision resulting from CIP?
5. UPS has 2,400 managers. CIP includes only 50 each year. How can the program make a difference if it includes only 2 percent of all managers? Does this suggest that the program is more public relations than management training?
6. How can UPS justify the cost of a program like CIP if competitors like FedEx, DHL, and the U.S. Postal Service don’t offer such programs? Does the program increase costs or reduce UPS profits?
CONTACT:
DR. PRASANTH MBA PH.D. DME MOBILE / WHATSAPP: +91 9924764558 OR +91 9447965521 EMAIL: prasanththampi1975@gmail.com WEBSITE: www.casestudyandprojectreports.com
International business studies
CASE I
A GLOBAL PLAYER?
This is one game that India has permanently lost to its arch-rival Pakistan - manufacturing and exporting sports goods. Historically, when India and Pakistan were one before 1947, Sialkot, now in Pakistan, used to be the world's largest production centre for badminton, hockey, football, volleyball, basketball, and cricket equipment. After the creation of Pakistan, Jalandhar became the second centre after Hindus in the trade migrated to India. Soon Jalandhar overtook Sialkot and till the early 1980s it remained so. However when the face of the trade began to change in the 1980s and import of quality leather and manufacturing equipment became a necessity for quality production, Pakistan wrested the initiative as India clung it its policies of discouraging imports through high duties and restrictions. As it was, the availability of labor and skills was a common factor in both Sialkot and Jalandhar, but with Sialkot having the advantage of easier entry, most of the world's top sports manufactures and procedures developed an association with local industry in Sialkot that continues even today. Ten years later, in the early 1990s, when Manmohan Singh liberalised the norms for importing equipment and raw material required for producing sports goods, it was too late as majority of the global majors had already shifted base to Sialkot.
In 1961 the late Narinder Mayor started the first large scale sports goods manufacturing unit, Mayor & Company, thereby laying the foundation of an organized industry. Even today, more than 70 percent of the industry functions in an unorganized manner. Starting with soccer balls, Mayor expanded to produce inflatable balls like volleyballs, basketballs, and rugby balls. Today his two sons Rajan & Rajesh have built it up into five companies engaged in a wide array of businesses, though sports goods remain the group's core business. While the parent trading company, Mayor & Company, remains the leading revenue-earner to the tune of Rs. 55 crore annually out of a total group turnover of Rs. 85 crore-plus, Mayor's second venture, the Indo-Australian Mayor International Limited, is spinning another Rs. 15 crore. Mayor International is a 100 per cent export-oriented unit (EOU) exclusively manufacturing and exporting golf and tennis balls.
The product portfolio of the company comprises the following:
Inflatable Balls
• Soccer balls and footballs (Professional, Indoor, Match and Training, leisure toy)
• Volley balls, rugby balls (Volley balls and Beach Volley Balls)
• Australian rugby, hand balls (English League, Union and touch) (Australian rules, Australian Rugby League balls with laces)
Boxing Equipment
• Boxing and punching balls (Boxing and Punching Balls, Head Gear, Gloves, Punching Mitts and Kits Punching Bags & Bag Sets)
• Gloves
• Goal keeper's gloves (Football / Soccer)
• Boxing gloves
Cricket Equipment
• Worldwide distributor for Spading Cricket Bats, Balls and Protective equipment.
HOCKEY EQUIPMENT
• Worldwide distributor for Spading Hokey Sticks, Balls & Protective equipment
Based in Delhi, Rajan Mayor, 41 is the CMD of the group, which also comprises an IT division working on B2B and B2C solutions; Voyaguer World Travels in the tourism sector; a houseware exports division specializing in stainless steel kitchenware, ceramics, and textiles; and a high school. Younger brother Rajesh, 34, is the executive director and looks after all the divisions operating in Jalandhar. Technical director Katz Nowaskowski divides his time equally between India and Australia, where he looks after the group’s interests. “While inflatable balls are our prime competence in our core business, we are presently focusing on golf balls, for which we are the sole producers in South Asia. Out of a total Rs. 300 crore of sports goods business generated in domestic market, most of which is supplied by the unorganized players, golf balls constitute a miniscule amount and therefore we came up with a 100 per cent EOU for producing golf balls. Later the same facility was utilized with little moderation for tennis balls too,” says Nowaskowaski.
Clarifying that the sports good industry in India only includes playing equipment and not apparels or shoes, D K Mittal, chairman of the Sports Goods Export Promotion Council and joint secretary in the Ministry of Commerce, has certified Mayor group as the number one exporter since 1993 till date, barring 1996. However, SGEPC secretary Tarun Dewan points out that being the number one exporter does not mean that Mayor is the number one brand being exported. “Actually we have tie ups Dunlop, Arnold Palmer, and Fila for manufacturing golf balls. For footballs and volleyballs we have association with Adidas, Mitre, Puma, Umbro, and Dunlop. We manufacture soccer World Cup and European Cup replicas for Adidas, which is a huge market. Only 400 balls used for actual play in the World Cup are manufactured in Europe & that too only for sentimental reason, otherwise we are capable of delivering products of the same, if not better quality. Now since we manufacture balls for them, we cannot antimonies them by producing balls of similar quality with our own brand name. Secondly, I agree that competing with such big quaint in the world market in terms of branding is a task that is well beyond our reach at the moment. However, we are trying to brand ourselves in the domestic market and that is one of the prime focus in the coming year,” says Rajan.
Coca-Cola, Unilever, McDonald’s, American Airlines, Disney club, and other such big brands come up with huge orders at tines for golf balls with their logos for promotional schemes. However, there is no mention of the producing country since these companies do not want to show that balls they deliver in the US are being produced in Asia, “Not only is our quality good enough; labour in India is cheap enough to churn out a much less expensive product in the end. Yet, the main threat to our industry comes from countries like Taiwan and China, who have already cornered a chunk of world markets in tennis, badminton, and squash rackets. This is primarily because of two reasons – slow response to our needs in tune with the market requirements from the government and lack of infrastructure. And most importantly, tags ‘Made in China’ or ‘Made in Taiwan’ are more acceptable in the West than ‘Made in India’ or ‘Made in Pakistan’. One of the mottos of the Mayor group has been to make ‘Made in India’ an acceptable label in the West. For that we stress quality, timely delivery, and competent rates. Yet, a lot depends on perception value, which in our case is sadly on the negative side, much owing to our government’s stance over the years. Things might be improving, but the pace is very slow and as our economy drifts towards a free market scenario supinely, it might just prove to be too little too late in the end,” says Rajesh.
Today, Mayor group is sitting pretty as its competitors, Soccer International Sakay Trades, Savi, Wasan, Cosco, Nivia and Spartan are only trying to catch up in the inflatables category. With 1.2 million dozen golf balls, Mayor is way ahead of its competitors. The company is planning to enhance its manufacturing capacity to 1.5 million dozen golf next fiscal. With approval from the world’s two top golf associations – the US PGA and RNA of Scotland, demand for its product is not a problem, the company’s senior marketing officials point out. With the markets in Mayor’s current export destinations – Europe, North America, Australia, and Nw Zealand – all set to expand in the coming years after the present slump, Mayor wants to expand its sports goods business that caters to 60 per cent of its overall exports. Though 40 per cent of exports come from house ware manufactured in Delhi and Mumbai, with export centres in the same countries for its sports goods, just about maintaining this business at its present state, and concerning entirely on sports goods is what the mayors are intent on.
With nearly 2000 skilled workforce; quality certification from ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 14001: 2004; and having spread to more than 40 countries, Mayor and Company is obviously sitting pretty.
Questions
1. What routes of globalization has the Mayor group chosen to go global? What other routes could it have taken?
2. What impediments are coming in the Mayor group’s way becoming a major and active player in international business?
3. Why is ‘Made in India’ not liked in foreign markets? What can be done to erase the perception?
CASE 2
AT THE RECEIVING END !
Spread over 121 countries with 30,000 restaurants, and serving 46 million customers each day with the help of more than 400,000 employees, the reach of McDonald’s is amazing. It all started in 1948 when two brothers, Richard and Maurice ‘Mac’ McDonald, built several hamburger stands, with golden arches in southern California. One day a traveling salesman, Ray Kroc, came to sell milkshake mixers. The popularity of their $O. 15 hamburgers impressed him, so he bought the world franchise rights from them and spread the golden arches around the globe.
McDonald’s depends on its overseas restaurants for revenue. In fact, 60 percent of its revenues are generated outside of the United States. The key to the company’s success is its ability to standardize the formula of quality, service, cleanliness and value, and apply it everywhere.
The company, well known for its golden arches, is not the world’s largest company. Its system wide sales are only about one-fifth of Exxon Mobil or Wal-Mart stores. However, it owns one of the world’s best known brands, and the golden arches are familiar to more people than the Christian cross. This prominence, and its conquest of global markets, makes the company a focal point for inquiry and criticism.
McDonald is a frequent target of criticism by anti-globalization protesters. In France, a pipe-smoking sheep farmer named Jose Bove shot to fame by leading a campaign against the fast food chain. McDonald’s is a symbol of American trade hegemony and economic globalization. Jose Bove organized fellow sheep farmers in France, and the group led by him drove tractors to the construction site of a new McDonald’s restaurants and ransacked it. Bove was jailed for 20 days, and almost overnight an international anti-globalisation star was borne. Bove, who resembles the irrelevant French comic book hero Asterix, traveled to Seattle in 1999, as part of the French delegation to lead the protest against commercialization of food crops promoted by the WTO. Food, according to him, is too vital a part of life to be trusted to the vagaries of the world trade. In Seattle, he led a demonstration in which some ski-masked protestors transhed at McDonald’s/ As Bove explained, his movement was for small farmers against industrial farming, brought about by globalization. For them, McDonald’s was a symbol of globalization, implying the standardization of food through industrial farming. If this was allowed to go on, he said, there would no longer be need for farmers. “For us”, he declared, “McDonald’s is a symbol of what WTO and the big companies want to do with the world”. Ironically, for all of Bove’s fulminations against McDonald’s, the fast food chain counts its French operations among its most profitable in 121 countries. As employer of about 35,000 workers, in 2006, McDonald’s was also one of France’s biggest foreign employers.
Bove’s and his followers are not the only critics of McDonald’s. Leftists, anarchists, nationalists, farmers, labor unions, environmentalists, consumer advocates, protectors of animal rights, religious orders and intellectuals are equally critical of the fast food chain. For these and others, McDonald’s represents an evil America. Within hours after US bombers began to pound Afghanistan in 2001, angry Pakistanis damaged McDonald’s restaurants in Islamabad and an Indonesian mob burned an American flag.
McDonald entered India in the late 1990s. On its entry, the company encountered a unique situation. Majority of the Indians did not eat beef but the company’s preparations contained cow’s meat nor could the company use pork as Muslims were against eating it. This left chicken and mutton. McDonald’s came out with ‘Maharaja Mac’, which is made from mutton and ‘McAloo Tikki Burger’ with chicken potato as the main input. Food items were segregated into vegetarian and non-vegetarian categories.
Though it worked for sometimes, this arrangement did not last long. In 2001, three Indian businessmen settled in Seattle sued McDonald’s for fraudulently concealing the existence of beef in its French fries. The company admitted its guilt of mixing miniscule quantity of beef extract in the oil. The company settled the suit for $10 million and tendered an apology too. Further, the company pledged to label the ingredients of its food items, and to find a substitute for the beef extract used in its oil.
McDonald’s succeeded in spreading American culture in the East Asian countries. In Hong Kong and Taiwan, the company’s clean restrooms and kitchens set a new standard that elevated expectations throughout those countries. In Hong Kong, children’s birthdays had traditionally gone unrecognized, but McDonald’s introduced the practice of birthday parties in its restaurants, and now such parties have become popular among the public. A journalist set forth a ‘Golden Arches Theory of Conflict Prevention’ based on the notion that countries with McDonald’s restaurants do not go to war with each other. A British magazine, The Economist, paints an yearly ‘Big Mac Index’ that uses the price of a Big Mac in different foreign currencies to access exchange rate distortions.
Questions :
1. What lessons can other MNCs learn from the experience of McDonald’s?
2. Aware of the food habits of Indians, why did McDonald’s err in mixing beef extract in the oil used for fries?
3. How far has McDonald’s succeeded in strategizing and meeting local cultures and needs?
CASE 3
THE ABB PBS JOINT VENTURE IN OPERATION
ABB Prvni Brnenska Strojirna Brno, Ltd. (ABB-PBS), Czechoslovakia was a joint venture in which ABB has a 67 per cent stake and PBS a.s. has a 33 per cent stake. This PBS share was determined nominally by the value of the land, plant and equipment, employees, and goodwill, ABB contributed cash and specified technologies and assumed some of the debt of PBS. The new company started operations on April 15, 1993.
Business for the joint venture in its first two full years was good in most aspects. Orders received in 1994, the first full year of the joint venture's operation, were higher than ever in the history of PBS. Orders received in 1995 were 21/2 times those in 1994. The company was profitable in 1995 and ahead of 1994s results with a rate of return on assets of 2.3 per cent and a rate of return on sales of 4.5 per cent.
The 1995 results showed substantial progress towards meeting the joint venture's strategic goals adopted in 1994 as part of a five-year plan. One of the goals was that exports should account for half of the total orders by 1999. (Exports had accounted for more than a quarter of the PBS business before 1989, but most of this business disappeared when the Soviet Union collapsed), In 1995 exports increased as a share of total orders to 28 per cent up from 16 per cent the year before.
The external service business, organized and functioning as a separate business for the first time in 1995, did not meet expectations. It accounted for five per cent of all orders and revenues in 1995, below the 10 per cent goal set for it. The retrofitting business, which was expected to be a major part of the service business, was disappointing for ABB-PBS, partly because many other small companies began to provide this service in 1994, including some started by former PBS employees who took their knowledge of PBS-built power plants with them. However, ABB-PBS managers hoped that as the company introduced new technologies, these former employees would gradually lose their ability to perform these services, and the retrofit and repair service business would return to ABB-PBS.
ABB-PBS dominated the Czech boiler business with 70 per cent of the Czech market in 1995, but managers expected this share to go down in the future as new domestic and foreign competitors emerged. Furthermore, the west European boiler market was actually declining because environmental laws caused a surge of retrofitting to occur in the mid-1980s, leaving less business in the 1990s. Accordingly ABB-PBS boiler orders were flat in 1995.
Top managers at ABB-PBS regarded business results to date as respectable, but they were not satisfied with the company's performance. Cash flow was not as good as expected. Cost reduction had to go further. "The more we succeed, the more we see our shortcomings", said one official.
Restructuring
The first round of restructuring was largely completed in 1995, the last year of the three-year restructuring plan. Plant logistics, information systems, and other physical capital improvements were in place. The restructing included :
• Renovating and reconstructing workshops and engineering facilities
• Achieving ISO 9001 for all four ABB-PBS divisions (awarded in 1995)
• Transfer of technology from ABB (this was an ongoing project)
• Installation of an information system
• Management training, especially in total quality assurance and English language
• Implementing a project management approach.
A notable achievement of importance of top management in 1995 was a 50 per cent increase in labour productivity, measured as value added per payroll crown. However, in the future ABB-PBS expected its wage rates to go up faster than west European wage rates (Czech wages were increasing about 15 per cent per year) so it would be difficult to maintain the ABB-PBS unit cost advantage over west European unit cost.
The Technology Role for ABB-PBS
The joint venture was expected from the beginning to play an important role in technology development for part of ABB's power generation business worldwide. PBS a.s. had engineering capability in coal-fired steam boilers, and that capability was expected to be especially useful to ABB as more countries became concerned about air quality. (When asked if PBS really did have leading technology here, a boiler engineering manager remarked, "Of course we do. We burn so much dirty coal in this country, we have to have better technology").
However, the envisioned technology leadership role for ABB-PBS had not been realised by mid-1996. Richard Kuba, the ABB-PBS managing director, realised the slowness with which the technology role was being fulfilled, and he offered his interpretation of events :
"ABB did not promise to make the joint venture its steam technology leader. The main point we wanted to achieve in the joint venture agreement was for ABB-PBS to be recognised as a full-fledged company, not just a factory. We were slowed down on our technology plans because we had a problem keeping our good, young engineers. The annual employee turnover rate for companies in the Czech Republic is 15 or 20 per cent, and the unemployment rate is zero. Our engineers have many other good entrepreneurial opportunities. Now we've begun to stabilise our engineering workforce. The restructuring helped. We have better equipment and a clean and safer work environment. We also had another problem which is a good problem to have. The domestic power plant business turned out to be better than we expected, so just meeting the needs of our regular customers forced some postponement of new technology initiatives."
ABB-PBS had benefited technologically from its relationship with ABB. One example was the development of a new steam turbine line. This project was a cooperative effort among ABB-PBS and two other ABB companies, one in Sweden and one in Germany. Nevertheless, technology transfer was not the most important early benefit of ABB relationship. Rather, one of the most important gains was the opportunity to benchmark the joint venture's performance against other established western ABB companies on variables such as productivity, inventory, and receivables.
Questions
1. Where does the joint venture meet the needs of both the partners? Where does it fall short?
2. Why had ABB-PBS failed to realized its technology leadership?
3. What lessons one can draw from this incident for better management of technology transfers?
CASE 4
PERU
Peru is located on the west coast South America. It is the third largest nation of the continent (after Brazil and Argentina), and covers almost 500,000 square miles (about 14 per cent of the size of the United States). The land has enormous contrasts, with a desert (drier than the Sahara), the towering snow-capped Andes mountains, sparking grass-covered plateaus, and thick rain forests. Peru has approximately 27 million people, of which about 20 per cent live in Lima, the capital. More Indians (one half of the population) live in Peru than in any other country in the western hemisphere. The ancestors of Peru’s Indians were the famous Incas, who built a great empire. The rest of the population is mixed and a small percentage is white. The economy depends heavily on agriculture, fishing, mining, and services. GDP is approximately $115 billion and per capita income in recent years has been around $4, 300. In recent years the economy has gained some relative and multinationals are now beginning to consider investing in the country.
One of these potential investors is a large New York based that is considering a $25 million loan to the owner of a Peruvian fishing fleet. The owner wants to refurbish the fleet and add one more ship.
During the 1970s, the Peruvian government nationalized a number of industries and factories and began running them for the profit of the state. In most cases, these state-run ventures became disasters. In the late 1970s, the fishing fleet owner was given back his ships and allowed to operate his business as before. Since then, he has managed to remain profitable, but the biggest problem is that his ships are getting old and he needs and influx of capital to make repairs and add new technology. As he explained it to the New York banker: “Fishing is no longer just an art. There is a great deal of technology involved. And to keep costs low and be competitive on the world market, you have to have the latest equipment for both locating as well as catching and then loading and unloading the fish.”
Having reviewed the fleet owner’s operation, the large multinational bank believers that the loan is justified. The financial institution is concerned, however, that the Peruvian government might step in during the next couple of years and again take over the business. If this were to happen it might take and additional decade for the loan to be repaid. If the government were to allow the fleet owner to operate the fleet the way he has over the last decade, the loan could be repaid within seven years.
Right now, the bank is deciding on the specific terms of the agreement. Once these have been worked out, either a loan officer will fly down to Lima and close the deal or the owner will be asked to come to New York for the signing. Whichever approach is used, the bank realizes that final adjustments in the agreement will have to be made on the spot. Therefore, if the bank sends a representative to Lima, the individual will have to have the authority to commit the bank to specific terms. These final matters should be worked out within the next ten days.
Questions
1. What are some current issues facing Peru? What is the climate for doing business in Peru today?
2. What type of political risks does this fishing company need to evaluate? Identify and describe them.
3. What types of integrative and protective and defensive techniques can the bank use?
4. Would the bank be better off negotiating the loan in New York or in Lima? Why?
CASE 1
BULLYING BOSSES
It got to where I was twitching, literally, on the way into work,’’ states Carrie Clark, a 52-year-old retired teacher and administrator. After enduring 10 months of repeated insults and mistreatment from her supervisor, she finally quit her job. ``I had to take care of my health.’’
Though many individuals recall bullies from their elementary school days, some are realizing that bullies can exist in the workplace as well. And these bullies do not just pick on the weakest in the group, rather, any subordinate in their path may fall prey to their torment, according to Dr. Gary Namie, director of the Workplace Bullying and Trauma Institute. Dr. Namie further says workplace bullies are not limited to men-women are at least as likely to be bullies. However, gender discrepancies are found in victims of bullying, as women are more likely to be targets.
What motivates a boss to be a bully? Dr. Harvey Hornstein, a retired professor from Teachers College at Columbia University, suggests that supervisors may use bullying as a means to subdue a subordinate that poses a threat to the supervisor’s status. Additionally, supervisors may bully individuals to vent frustrations. Many times however, the sheer desire to wield power may be the primary reason for bullying.
What is the impact of bullying on employee motivation and behavior? Surprisingly, even though victims of workplace bullies may feel less motivated to go to work every day, it does not appear that they discontinue performing their required job duties. However, it does appear that victims of bullies are less motivated to perform extra-role or citizenship behaviors. Helping others, speaking positively about the organization, and going beyond the call of duty are behaviors that are reduced as a result of bullying. According to Dr. Bennett Tepper of the University of North Carolina, fear may be the reason that many workers continue to perform their job duties. And not all individuals reduce their citizenship behaviors. Some continue to engage in extra-role behaviors to make themselves look better than their colleagues.
What should you do if your boss is bullying you? Don’t necessarily expect help from coworkers. As Emelise Aleandri, an actress and producer from New York who left her job after being bullied, stated, ``Some people were afraid to do anything. But others didn’t mind what was happening at all, because they wanted my job.’’ Moreover, according to Dr. Michelle Duffy of the University of Kentucky, coworkers often blame victims of bullying in order to resolve their guilt. ``they do this by wondering whether maybe the person deserved the treatment, that he or she has been annoying, or lazy, they did something to earn it,’’ states Dr. Duffy. One example of an employee who observed this phenomenon firsthand is Sherry Hamby, who was frequently verbally abused by her boss and then eventually fired. She stated, ``This was a man who insulted me, who insulted by family, who would lay into me while everyone else in the office just sat there and let it happen. The people in my office eventually started blaming me.’’
What can a bullied employee do? Dr. Hornstein suggests that employees try to ignore the insults and respond only to the substance of the bully’s grip. `stick with the substance, not the process, and often it won’t escalate,’’ he states. Of course, that is easier said than done.
Questions:
1) Of the three types of organizational justice, which one does workplace bullying most closely resemble?
2) What aspects of motivation might workplace bullying reduce? For example, are there likely to be effects on an employee’s self-efficacy? If so, what might those effects be?
3) If you were a victim of workplace bullying, what steps would you take to try to reduce its occurrence? What strategies would be most effective? What strategies might be ineffective? What would you do if one of your colleagues was a victim of an abusive supervisor?
4) What factors do you believe contribute to workplace bullying? Are bullies a product of the situation, or are they flawed personalities? What situations and what personality factors might contribute to the presence of bullies?
CASE 2
THANKS FOR NOTHING
Thought it may seem fairly obvious that receiving praise and recognition from one’s company is a motivating experience, sadly many companies are failing miserably when it comes to saying ``thanks’’ to their employees. According to curt Coffman global practice leader at Gallup, 71 percent of U.S. workers are ``disengaged’’, essentially meaning that they could care less about their organization. Coffman states. ``We’re operating at one-quarter of the capacity in terms of managing human capital. It’s alarming.’’ Employee recognition programs, which became more popular as the U.S. economy shifted from industrial to knowledge-based, can be an effective way to motivate employees and make them feel valued. In many cases, however, recognition programs are doing ``more harm than good’’ according to Coffman.
Take Ko, a 50-year-old former employee of a dot-com in California. Her company proudly instituted a rewards program designed to motivate employees. What were the rewards for a job well-done? Employees would receive a badge which read ``U Done Good’’ and, each year, would receive a T-shirt as a means of annual recognition. Once an employee received 10 ``U Done Good’’ badges, he or she could trade them in for something bigger and better—a paperweight. Ko states that she would have preferred a raise. ``It was patronizing. There wasn’t any deep thought involved in any of this.’’ To make matters worse, she says the badges were handed out arbitrarily and were not tied to performance. And what about those T-shirts? Ko states that the company instilled a strict dress code, so employees couldn’t even wear the shirts if they wanted to. Needless to say, the employee recognition program seemed like an empty gesture rather than a motivation.
Even programs that provide employees with more expensive rewards can backfire, especially if the rewards are given insincerely. Eric Lange, an employee of a trucking company, recalls the time when one of the company’s vice presidents achieved a major financial goal for the company. The vice president, who worked in an office best of Lange, received a Cadillac Seville as his company car and a new Rolex wristwatch that cost the company $10,000. Both were lavish gifts, but the way they were distributed left a sour taste in the vice president’s mouth. He entered his office to find the Rolex in a cheap cardboard box sitting on his desk, along with a brief letter explaining that he would be receiving a 1099 tax form in order to pay taxes on the watch. Lange state of the vice president, ``He came into my office, which was right next door, and said, `can you believe this?’’ A mere 2 months later, the vice president pawned the watch. Lange explains. ``It had absolutely no meaning for him.
Such experiences resonate with employees who may find more value in a sincere pat on the back than gifts from management that either are meaningless or aren’t conveyed with respect or sincerity. However, sincere pats on the back may be hard to come by. Gallup’s poll found that 61 percent of employees stated that they haven’t received a sincere, ``thank you’’ from management in the past year. Finding such as these are troubling, as verbal rewards are not only inexpensive for companies to hand out but also are quick and easy to distribute. Of course, verbal rewards do need to be paired sometimes with tangible benefits that employees value – after all, money talks. In addition, when praising employees for a job well-done, managers need to ensure that the praise is given in conjunction with the specific accomplishment. In this way, employees may not only feel valued by their organization but will also know what actions to take to be rewarded in the future.
Questions
1) If praising employees for doing a good job seems to be a fairly easy and obvious motivational tools, why do you think companies and managers don’t often do it?
2) As a manager, what steps would you take to motivate your employees after observing them perform well?
3) Are there any downsides to giving employees too much verbal praise? What might these downsides be and how could you alleviate them as a manager?
4) As a manager, how would you ensure that recognition given to employees is distributed fairly and justly?
CASE 3
WILL GEORGE W. BUSH BE A GREAT PRESIDENT?
What does it take to be a great U.S. president? A survey of 78 history, political science, and law scholars rated the U.S. presidents from George Washington to Bill Clinton. Here are the presidents who were rated ``Great’’ and ``Near Great.’’
Great
George Washington
Abraham Lincoln
Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR)
Near Great
Thomas Jefferson
Andrew Jackson
James Polk
Theodore Roosevelt
Harry Truman
Dwight Eisenhower
Ronald Reagan
Among recent presidents, Presidents Nixon, Ford, and Carter were ranked ``Below Average’’ and Presidents G. H. W. Bush (the first President Bush) and Clinton were ranked ``Average’’.
So what explains these ratings? The following are some qualities of presidents who have stood the test of time.
1. Great presidents are transformational leaders who engender strong emotions – that is, you either love them or you hate them (it’s hard to hate someone who made little difference). And great presidents enact a vision that may not respond to popular opinion. Lincoln and FDR were beloved, and hated, by millions.
2. Great presidents are bold and take risks, and almost all great presidents emerge successfully from a crisis. A great president is perceived as ``being there’’ when a crisis emerges and taking bold action to lead the nation out of the crisis – for example, Lincoln in the Civil War and Roosevelt in WWII.
3. Great presidents are associated with a vision. Most people, for example, are able to associate the great presidents with defining moment where a clear set of principles was articulated – for example, FDR’s speech to Congress after the attacks on Pearl Harbor, and Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address.
4. Great presidents are charismatic. They are engaging, articulate, and expressive, which helps capture the public’s attention and rallies people around a president’s cause. One leadership expert argues that the best presidents create colorful personas with their language by using words with basic emotions – for example, good versus evil or love versus hate.
So what about President George W. Bush (the second President Bush)? Shortly after his second inauguration, President Bush embarked on an ambitious agenda of legal reform, transforming the Social Security system, tax reform, and revising immigration laws. One writer commented, ``Bush has always thought big, and always believed you earn political capital by expending it.’’ However, the closeness of the 2004 election (Bush received 51 percent of the vote and Kerry received 48 percent) suggests that Bush may not have overwhelming support.
Questions
1. How would you rate President George W. Bush on the four characteristics outlined at the beginning of the case? How would you contrast his reaction to Hurricane Katrina with his reaction to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001? What do you think his handling of these two events says about his leadership?
2. Do you think leaders in other contexts (business’, sports, religious) exhibit the same qualities of great or near-great U.S. presidents?
3. Do you think being in the right place at the right time could influence presidential greatness?
Case 4
A UNIQUE TRAINING PROGRAM AT UPS
Mark Colvard, a United Parcel manager in San Ramon, California, recently faced a difficult decision. One of his drivers asked for 2 weeks off to help an ailing family member. But company rules said this driver wasn’t eligible. If Colvard went by the book, the driver would probably take the days off anyway and be fired. On the other hand, Colvard was likely to be criticized by other drivers if he bent the rules. Colvard chose to give the driver the time off. Although he took some heat for the decision, he also kept a valuable employee.
Had Colvard been faced with this decision 6 months earlier, he says he would have gone the other way. What changed his thinking was a month he spent living in McAllen, Texas. It was part of a UPS management training experience called the Community Internship Program (CIP). During his month in McAllen, Colvard built housing for the poor, collected clothing for the Salvation Army, and worked in a drug rehab center. Colvard gives the program credit for helping him empathize with employees facing cries back home. And he says that CIP has made him a better manager. ``My goal was to make the numbers, and in some cases that meant not looking at the individual but looking the bottom line. After that 1-month stay, I immediately started reaching out to people in a different way.’’
CIP was established by UPS in the late 1960s to help open the eyes of the company’s predominantly white managers to the poverty and inequality in many cities. Today, the program takes 50 of the company’s most promising executives each summer and brings them to cities around the country. There they deal with a variety of problems- from transportation to housing, education, and health care. The company’s goal is to awaken these managers to the challenges that many of their employees face, bridging the cultural divide that separates a white manager from an African American driver or an upper-income suburbanite from a worker raised in the rural South.
Questions
1. Do you think individuals can learn empathy from something like a 1-month CIP experience? Explain why or why not.
2. How could UPS’s CIP help the organization better manage work-life conflicts?
3. How could UPS’s CIP help the organization improve its response to diversity?
4. What negatives, if any, can you envision resulting from CIP?
5. UPS has 2,400 managers. CIP includes only 50 each year. How can the program make a difference if it includes only 2 percent of all managers? Does this suggest that the program is more public relations than management training?
6. How can UPS justify the cost of a program like CIP if competitors like FedEx, DHL, and the U.S. Postal Service don’t offer such programs? Does the program increase costs or reduce UPS profits?
No comments:
Post a Comment