Answered: write in essay discussing Critically…

write in essay discussing Critically discuss the potential impact of reducing individual bonuses on the motivation and engagement of employees within the case study organisation.

Purchasing and Supply Chain Management

6th Edition

ISBN:9781285869681

Author:Robert M. Monczka, Robert B. Handfield, Larry C. Giunipero, James L. Patterson

Publisher:Robert M. Monczka, Robert B. Handfield, Larry C. Giunipero, James L. Patterson

Chapter12: Purchasing And Supply Chain Analysis: Tools And Techniques

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 7DQ

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Discuss the benefits that accrue when an organization has a good understanding of employee needs.
What is the first step in defining an organizations pay-for-performance strategy?
Create a Group Control System Step 1. From into groups of three to five students. Each group will assume that another student group has been given an assignment of writing a major paper that will involve research by individual group members that will be integrated into the final paper. Each group member has to do his or part. Step 2. Your assignment is develop a list of rules and identify some statistics by which to control the behavior of members in that group. Brainstorm and discuss potential to govern member behavior and consequences for breaking those rules. Step 3. First, select the five rules that you think are most important for governing group member behavior. Consider the following situations that rules might cover; arriving late for a meeting: missing a meeting: failing to complete a work assignment; disagreements about desired quality of work; how to resolve conflicts about paper content; differences in participation , such as one person doing all the talking and someone else talking hardly at all; how to handle meetings that start late; the use of an agenda and handling deviations from the agenda; and any other situation that your group a cover. Step 4. Now consider what statistics could be developed to measure the behavior and outcome of the group pertaining to those five rules. What kinds of things could be counted to understand how group is performing and whether members are the following rules? Step 5. Discuss the following questions. Why are rules important as a means of control? What are the advantages and disadvantages of having many rules (hierarchical control) versus few rules (decentralized control) for a student group? How can statistics help a group ensure? appropriate behavior and a high-quality product? Step 6. Be prepared to present your conclusions to the Class.
Create a Group Control System Step 1 Form into groups of three to five students. Each group will assume that another student group has been given an assignment of writing a major paper that will involve research by individual group members that will be integrated into the final paper. Each group member has to do his or her part. Step 2 Your assignment is to develop a list of rules and identify some statistics by which to control the behavior of members in that group. Brainstorm and discuss potential rules to govern member behavior and consequences for breaking those rules. Step 3. first, select the five rules that you think are most important for governing group member behavior. Consider the following situations that rules might cover: arriving late for a meeting; missing a meeting; failing to complete a work assignment; disagreements about desired quality of work; how to resolve conflicts about paper content; differences in participation, such as one person doing all the talking and someone else talking hardly at all; how to handle meetings that Start late; the use of an agenda and handling deviations from the agenda; and any other situation that your group thinks a rule should cover that your group thinks a rule should cover.
What does a pay-for-performance strategy mean for a company?
Cousins Jeri Lynn DeBose, Tish Hoover, and Josephine (Joey) Parks looked forward to meeting up during the Christmas holidays to compare notes on the results of midyear teacher evaluations. All were public school teachers in districts scattered over the state. In the pressured search for new levels of teacher accountability demanded by legislators, the state department of education joined 16 other States in implementing a new teacher evaluation system. The goal is to hold teachers account-able for student learning progress in the classroom. Under the guidance of the National Council for Teacher Quality, criteria varies by State, but in most cases, 40 percent of each teacher's accountability score would be based on the principal's evaluation and ranking based on personal observation, 30 percent would be based on personal observation by a master teacher from outside the district, and the Other 30 percent would be based on student test score gains. The state department of education would set a performance goal each school district, and the principal would set a performance goal for each teacher. In preparation, the State conducted intensive training sessions for principals and designated master teachers who would conduct the evaluations based on four class observations per teacher. Officials used standardized achievement tests to derive value-added scores that measure student learning over the year. Teacher ratings were I —5, with I am being the lowest and 5 representing near perfection. The publication of the first year's evaluations stirred interest and controversy, particularly among teachers who worried about the possible long-term effects on job retention and tenure. Now, with the first-year evaluations in hand, the three cousins pored over their experiences. The three represented different types of school systems within the state. Jeri Lynn worked for a metropolitan system in the state capital. The system included many low-income students whose first language was nor English, and several schools within the system were teetering on the brink of State takeover if improvement in student scores didn't materialize this school year. Tish worked in a county System dominated by upper-income residents, and Joey taught in the rural community in which all three grew up. The rural community had high unemployment, and a low percentage of graduates went on to college. As a result, the cousins came to the table with differing teaching experiences. "The numbers are all over the place," Jeri Lynn remarked as she studied the pages. "The whole system is flawed, and they need to make changes," Joey said. " It's too subjective. The principal and master teacher observations are subjective because there are personal factors that affect a true outcome." "Yeah, look at the numbers from your upper-income district," Jeri Lynn said to Tish. "How can 60 percent of the teachers score 5s?" Tish chuckled. "Yeah, lucky us. Our schools are overflowing with children from wealthy families. These are the kids who will apply to Ivy League schools. I can tell you that the principals are going to avoid confrontation on all fronts. No principal is going to give any indication that their students are receiving an education that's less than perfect, and that means cramming the rankings with 5s. They claim a higher level of motivation for students, and thus the selection of an elite team of educators. So with those pressures, I don't think we get personal feedback that IS accurate." "At the other end of the spectrum, we have my rural district," Joey said. "The big problem is that the principals know everyone and have longstanding relationships with everyone in the county, so I think scores are based on personal history. We could almost predict who would get high or low scores before the observations. For principals, it can go back as far as his daddy and my daddy hated each other in high school, and now I get to evaluate his daughter "I think that in many cases, principals feel pressure to align scores with state expectations. The stare expected my district to have high scores and expected rural schools such as yours to be lower," Tish said. "But isn't that partially offset by lower goals for the rural school distracts responded Joey. "The key to the accountability system is the principal in each school," Jeri Lynn suggested. "With several of the schools in Metro teetering on the edge of state takeover by the end of the year, we had lots of strict principals who wanted to hold our feet to the fire with lower scores." "l thought the whole idea was to provide the teachers With feedback so that we would know the areas where we need improvement," Tish said. "The principals were supposed to conduct two observations in the fall and two more in the spring," Jeri Lynn said. think that's asking too much of them when they already have so much on their plates. I think a lot of them are skimping on their visits. know I only had one observation last semester, and I'm sure Mr. Talley just faked the second set of numbers. The master teachers make only two observations a year, which may be more objective but counts for less." "I'm wondering, too, how a principal measure performance in a course area outside his area of expertise, such as math," Joey said. "If the guy has a phobia about math, anything the teacher says or does is going to 100k brilliant—thus a 5." Tish and Jeri Lynn looked at each other and laughed. Maybe we picked the wrong subjects," Tish said. "My question is one of perception," Jeri Lynn said. "A large percentage of my students are ELL. That affects their scores. How do you measure a 3 in my situation against a 5 for Tish? At the end of the school year, little Carlos is thrilled that his reading in English has improved, but there's no Big Bang here. a slow steady improvement that may not actually show up in big strides for a couple of years: "So, the question is how do they create a system that is fair?" Tish asked. "And accurate," added Jeri Lynn. What do you see as the major strengths and flaws in the feedback control system used in the schools in this scenario? What changes do you recommend to overcome the flaws?
Cousins Jeri Lynn DeBose, Tish Hoover, and Josephine (Joey) Parks looked forward to meeting up during the Christmas holidays to compare notes on the results of midyear teacher evaluations. All were public school teachers in districts scattered over the state. In the pressured search for new levels of teacher accountability demanded by legislators, the state department of education joined 16 other States in implementing a new teacher evaluation system. The goal is to hold teachers account-able for student learning progress in the classroom. Under the guidance of the National Council for Teacher Quality, criteria varies by State, but in most cases, 40 percent of each teacher's accountability score would be based on the principal's evaluation and ranking based on personal observation, 30 percent would be based on personal observation by a master teacher from outside the district, and the Other 30 percent would be based on student test score gains. The state department of education would set a performance goal each school district, and the principal would set a performance goal for each teacher. In preparation, the State conducted intensive training sessions for principals and designated master teachers who would conduct the evaluations based on four class observations per teacher. Officials used standardized achievement tests to derive value-added scores that measure student learning over the year. Teacher ratings were 1-5, with I am being the lowest and 5 representing near perfection. The publication of the first year's evaluations stirred interest and controversy, particularly among teachers who worried about the possible long-term effects on job retention and tenure. Now, with the first-year evaluations in hand, the three cousins pored over their experiences. The three represented different types of school systems within the state. Jeri Lynn worked for a metropolitan system in the state capital. The system included many low-income students whose first language was nor English, and several schools within the system were teetering on the brink of State takeover if improvement in student scores didn't materialize this school year. Tish worked in a county System dominated by upper-income residents, and Joey taught in the rural community in which all three grew up. The rural community had high unemployment, and a low percentage of graduates went on to college. As a result, the cousins came to the table with differing teaching experiences. "The numbers are all over the place," Jeri Lynn remarked as she studied the pages. "The whole system is flawed, and they need to make changes," Joey said. " It's too subjective. The principal and master teacher observations are subjective because there are personal factors that affect a true outcome." "Yeah, look at the numbers from your upper-income district," Jeri Lynn said to Tish. " How can 60 percent of the teachers score 5s?" Tish chuckled. "Yeah, lucky us. Our schools are overflowing with children from wealthy families. These are the kids who will apply to Ivy League schools. I can tell you that the principals are going to avoid confrontation on all fronts. No principal is going to give any indication that their students are receiving an education that's less than perfect, and that means cramming the rankings with 5s. They claim a higher level of motivation for students, and thus the selection of an elite team of educators. So with those pressures, I don't think we get personal feedback that IS accurate." "At the other end of the spectrum, we have my rural district," Joey said. "The big problem is that the principals know everyone and have longstanding relationships with everyone in the county, so I think scores are based on personal history. We could almost predict who would get high or low scores before the observations. For principals, it can go back as far as 'his daddy and my daddy hated each other in high school, and now I get to evaluate his daughter." "I think that in many cases, principals feel pressure to align scores with state expectations. The stare expected my district to have high scores and expected rural schools such as yours to be lower," Tish said. "But isn't that partially offset by lower goals for the rural school distracts responded Joey. "The key to the accountability system is the principal in each school," Jeri Lynn suggested. "With several of the schools in Metro teetering on the edge of state takeover by the end of the year, we had lots of strict principals who wanted to hold our feet to the fire with lower scores." "I thought the whole idea was to provide the teachers With feedback so that we would know the areas where we need improvement," Tish said. "The principals were supposed to conduct two observations in the fall and two more in the spring," Jeri Lynn said. think that's asking too much of them when they already have so much on their plates. I think a lot of them are skimping on their visits. know I only had one observation last semester, and I'm sure Mr. Talley just faked the second set of numbers. The master teachers make only two observations a year, which may be more objective but counts for less." "I'm wondering, too, how a principal measure performance in a course area outside his area of expertise, such as math," Joey said. "If the guy has a phobia about math, anything the teacher says or does is going to 100k brilliant—thus a 5." Tish and Jeri Lynn looked at each other and laughed. Maybe we picked the wrong subjects," Tish said. "My question is one of perception," Jeri Lynn said. "A large percentage of my students are ELL. That affects their scores. How do you measure a 3 in my situation against a 5 for Tish? At the end of the school year, little Carlos is thrilled that his reading in English has improved, but there's no Big Bang here. a slow steady improvement that may not actually show up in big strides for a couple of years." "So, the question is how do they create a system that is fair?" Tish asked. "And accurate," added Jeri Lynn. Is a 1-5 grading System by principals and master teachers a valuable part of a feedback control system for teachers? Why?
Cousins Jeri Lynn De Bose, Tish Hoover, and Josephine (Joey) Parks looked forward to meeting up during the Christmas holidays to compare notes on the results of midyear teacher evaluations. All were public school teachers in districts scattered over the state. In the pressured search for new levels of teacher accountability demanded by legislators, the state department of education joined 16 other States in implementing a new teacher evaluation system. The goal is to hold teachers account-able for student learning progress in the classroom. Under the guidance of the National Council for Teacher Quality, criteria varies by State, but in most cases, 40 percent of each teacher's accountability score would be based on the principal's evaluation and ranking based on personal observation, 30 percent would be based on personal observation by a master teacher from outside the district, and the Other 30 percent would be based on student test score gains. The state department of education would set a performance goal each school district, and the principal would set a performance goal for each teacher. In preparation, the State conducted intensive training sessions for principals and designated master teachers who would conduct the evaluations based on four class observations per teacher Officials used standardized achievement tests to derive value-added scores that measure student learning over the year. Teacher ratings were 1-5, with I am being the lowest and 5 representing near perfection. The publication of the first year's evaluations stirred interest and controversy, particularly among teachers who worried about the possible long-term effects on job retention and tenure. Now, with the first-year evaluations in hand, the three cousins pored over their experiences. The three represented different types of school systems within the state. Jeri Lynn worked for a metropolitan system in the state capital. The system included many low-income students whose first language was nor English, and several schools within the system were teetering on the brink of State takeover if improvement in student scores didn't materialize this school year. Tish worked in a county System dominated by upper-income residents, and Joey taught in the rural community in which all three grew up. The rural community had high unemployment, and a low percentage of graduates went on to college. As a result, the cousins came to the table with differing teaching experiences. "The numbers are all over the place," Jeri Lynn remarked as she studied the pages. "The whole system is flawed, and they need to make changes," Joey said. "It's too subjective. The principal and master teacher observations are subjective because there are personal factors that affect a true outcome." "Yeah, look at the numbers from your upper-income district," Jeri Lynn said to Tish. "How can 60 percent of the teachers score 5s?' Tish chuckled. "Yeah, lucky us. Our schools are overflowing with children from wealthy families. These are the kids who will apply to Ivy League schools. I can tell you that the principals are going to avoid confrontation on all fronts. No principal is going to give any indication that their students are receiving an education that's less than perfect, and that means cramming the rankings with 5s. They claim a higher level of motivation for students, and thus the selection of an elite team of educators. So with those pressures, I don't think we get personal feedback that is accurate." "At the other end of the spectrum, we have my rural district," Joey said. "The big problem is that the principals know everyone and have longstanding relationships with everyone in the county, so I think scores are based on personal history. We could almost predict who would get high or low scores before the observations. For principals, it can go back as far as 'his daddy and my daddy hated each other in high school, and now I get to evaluate his daughter "I think that in many cases, principals feel pressure to align scores with state expectations. The stare expected my district to have high scores and expected rural schools such as yours to be lower," Tish said. "But isn't that partially offset by lower goals for the rural school distracts responded Joey. "The key to the accountability system is the principal in each school," Jeri Lynn suggested. "With several of the schools in Metro teetering on the edge of state takeover by the end of the year, we had lots of strict principals who wanted to hold our feet to the fire with lower scores." "I thought the whole idea was to provide the teachers With feedback so that we would know the areas where we need improvement," Tish said. "The principals were supposed to conduct two observations in the fall and two more in the spring," Jeri Lynn said. think that's asking too much of them when they already have so much on their plates. I think a lot of them are skimping on their visits. know I only had one observation last semester, and I'm sure Mr. Talley just faked the second set of numbers. The master teachers make only two observations a year, which may be more objective but counts for less." "I'm wondering, too, how a principal measure performance in a course area outside his area of expertise, such as math," Joey said. "If the guy has a phobia about math, anything the teacher says or does is going to 100k brilliant-thus a 5." Tish and Jeri Lynn looked at each other and laughed. "Maybe we picked the wrong subjects," Tish said. "My question is one of perception," Jeri Lynn said. "A large percentage of my students are ELL. That affects their scores. How do you measure a 3 in my situation against a 5 for Tish? At the end of the school year, little Carlos is thrilled that his reading in English has improved, but there`s no Big Bang here. a slow steady improvement that may not actually show up in big strides for a couple of years: "So, the question is how do they create a system that is fair?" Tish asked. "And accurate," added Jeri Lynn. How might the state control the accuracy of principals who are conducting teacher evaluations? Explain.
Chris Dykstra, responsible for loss prevention at Electronics took a deep breath before he launched into making his case for the changes that he was proposing to the company's shoplifting policy. He knew that convincing Ross Chenoweth was going to be a hard sell. Ross, the president and CEO was the son of the founder of the local, still-family-owned consumer electronics chain based in Phoenix, Arizona. He'd inherited not only the company, but also, his father's strict moral code. "I think it's time to follow the lead of other stores," Chris began. He pointed out that most Other retailers didn't bother calling the police and pressing charges unless the thief had shoplifted merchandise worth more than $50 to $100. In contrast, Westwind currently had a zero-tolerance policy toward theft that Ross's father had put in place when he started the business. Chris wanted to replace that policy with one that prosecuted only individuals between IS and 65 who had stolen more than $20 worth of goods, and who had a previous history of theft at Westwind. In the case of first-time culprits under IS or over 65, he argued for letting them Off With a strict warning, regardless of the value of their ill-gotten goods. Repeat offenders would be arrested. "Frankly, the local police are getting pretty tired Of having to come to Our stores every time a teenager sticks a CD in his jacket pocket," Chris pointed out. "And besides, we just afford the costs associated with prosecuting everyone." Every time he pressed charges against a shoplifter who'd made Off with a $10 item, Westwind lost money. The company had to engage a lawyer and pay employees Overtime for their court appearances. In addition, Chris was looking at hiring more security guards to keep up with the workload. Westwind was already in a losing battle at the moment with mass retailers who were competing all too successfully on price, so passing on the costs of its zero-tolerance policy to Customers wasn't really an option. " Let's concentrate on catching dishonest employees and those organized-theft rings. They're the ones who are really hurting us," Chris concluded. There was a long pause after Chris finished his carefully prepared speech. Ross thought about his recently deceased father, both an astute businessman and a person for whom honesty was a key guiding principle. If he were sitting here today, he`d no doubt say that theft was theft—that setting a minimum was tantamount to saying that stealing was acceptable, just as long as you steal too much. He looked at Chris. "You know, we've both got teenagers. Is this really a message you want to send out, especially to kids? You know as well as I do that there's nothing they like better than testing limits. It's almost an invitation to see if you can beat the system." But then Ross faltered as he found himself glancing at the latest financial figures on his desk—another in a string of quarterly losses. If West-wind went under, a lot of employees would be looking for another way to make a living. In his heart, he believed in his father's high moral standards, but he had to ask himself: Just how moral could Westwind afford to be? Continue Westwind's zero-tolerance policy toward shoplifting. It's the right thing to do—and it Will pay Off in the end in higher profitability because the chain's reputation for being tough on crime Will reduce overall losses from theft.
Chris Dykstra, responsible for loss prevention at Electronics took a deep breath before he launched into making his case for the changes that he was proposing to the company's shoplifting policy. He knew that convincing Ross Chenoweth was going to be a hard sell. Ross, the president and CEO was the son of the founder of the local, still-family-owned consumer electronics chain based in Phoenix, Arizona. He'd inherited not only the company, but also, his father's strict moral code. "I think it's time to follow the lead of other stores," Chris began. He pointed out that most Other retailers didn't bother calling the police and pressing charges unless the thief had shoplifted merchandise worth more than $50 to $100. In contrast, Westwind currently had a zero-tolerance policy toward theft that Ross's father had put in place when he started the business. Chris wanted to replace that policy with one that prosecuted only individuals between IS and 65 who had stolen more than $20 worth of goods, and who had a previous history of theft at Westwind. In the case of first-time culprits under IS or over 65, he argued for letting them Off With a strict warning, regardless of the value of their ill-gotten goods. Repeat offenders would be arrested. "Frankly, the local police are getting pretty tired Of having to come to Our stores every time a teenager sticks a CD in his jacket pocket," Chris pointed out. "And besides, we just afford the costs associated with prosecuting everyone." Every time he pressed charges against a shoplifter who'd made Off with a $10 item, Westwind lost money. The company had to engage a lawyer and pay employees Overtime for their court appearances. In addition, Chris was looking at hiring more security guards to keep up with the workload. Westwind was already in a losing battle at the moment with mass retailers who were competing all too successfully on price, so passing on the costs of its zero-tolerance policy to Customers wasn't really an option. "Let's concentrate on catching dishonest employees and those organized-theft rings. They're the ones who are really hurting us," Chris concluded. There was a long pause after Chris finished his carefully prepared speech. Ross thought about his recently deceased father, both an astute businessman and a person for whom honesty was a key guiding principle. If he were sitting here today, he`d no doubt say that theft was theft—that setting a minimum was tantamount to saying that stealing was acceptable, just as long as you steal too much. He looked at Chris. "You know, we've both got teenagers. Is this really a message you want to send out, especially to kids? You know as well as I do that there's nothing they like better than testing limits. It's almost an invitation to see if you can beat the system." But then Ross faltered as he found himself glancing at the latest financial figures on his desk—another in a string of quarterly losses. If West-wind went under, a lot of employees would be looking for another way to make a living. In his heart, he believed in his father's high moral standards, but he had to ask himself: Just how moral could Westwind afford to be? Adopt Chris Dykstra's proposed changes and show more leniency to first-time offenders. It is a more cost effective approach to the problem than the current policy, plus it stays close to your father's Original intent.