Write an essay in which you answer the following prompts: (3 pages)
Answer questions 1 and 2
Strategic Selection: A Review of Two Companies
Managers are proactively improving the employee selection process with various strategies that will ideally enhance corporate success. Some of these strategies focus on improving the quality of the individuals who apply for work, as well as those individuals who are actually hired into the organization. Other strategies target the selection process itself and seek to improve the various activities involved in proper hiring. The overriding theme of these efforts is that the staffing/ selection function is a key component of an organization’s strategy because the process ideally provides highly motivated and qualified employees who can ultimately impact the financial and operational well-being of a company.
Hallmark Cards is one company that emphasizes selection. It recently developed a recruiting metric called a “staffing index” that enables management to track the degree to which newly hired employees are performing as expected on the job. A series of evaluations are conducted over time, and scores are compared to obtain a longitudinal perspective on the quality of the hiring decisions.66
UnitedHealth Group is another organization that has improved its selection activities with
Proper strategic planning and execution. The company’s Vice President of Recruitment Services
Decided to modify hiring procedures within the organization by splitting job candidates into two
Basic groups. The first group of individuals was comprised of high-level professionals who would
Be recruited by internal staffing specialists, while the second group included various staff and line
Personnel who would be acquired with outsourcing contacts. This “two-pronged” strategy enabled the company to save money through increased control and efficiency.67
These various strategic selection approaches enable companies to improve the manner in which employees are hired and placed within a hierarchy of jobs. Many other strategies could be employed in different employment situations to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of selection. Overall, these efforts should increase the degree of fit between employees and organizations and increase the completion of strategic objectives.
1. Compare and contrast the two selection strategies used by the organizations discussed in the case.
New employees at Sun Microsystems begin their orientation sessions after being hired with a com- puter game. It is part of an attempt to integrate new people, improve the image of the company, get feedback, and start training. Looking over the shoulder of a new employee, one would see the person playing a computer game called “Dawn of the Shadow Spectors,” battling evil forces that are trying to destroy Sun’s network. Before Sun changed its orientation program, an employee’s first day at work consisted mostly of filling out paperwork, as in most companies. Some new employees waited 2 weeks to get e-mail, and people who worked remotely sometimes waited weeks or months before meeting their managers. The chief learning officer at Sun said, “We wanted to make a better first impression,” unlike that made on an employee’s first day if the company/manager is not ready and the person just sit there. That can make a bad impression that is lasting. Now at Sun the onboarding starts as soon as a person accepts a job. The new employee logs on to the company’s new hire website and learns about the company by playing video games. The person sees a welcome video from the CEO and connects with other employees via social net- works. New employees also fill out their W-4s, I-9s, and other paperwork on the website. Sun, which has about 34,000 employees, believes orientation should start the moment a person is hired and continue until the person is productive. A Houston-based company, El Paso Corporation, which employs about 5,000, has a different onboarding process. New hires attend a first-day orientation and then another a month later. During their first week at the company, they get an e-mail with links to everything from ordering business cards to joining the credit union. Before the new system was instituted, employees sometimes waited to even get a computer. One company official noted that new employees “were here but just sit- ting around because they didn’t have the tools to work.” Now they have a workspace, computer, and network access on their first day. An advertising agency in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, takes yet a different approach. Zimmerman Advertising, which has about 1,000 employees, wants employees to understand the company, so new hires log on and learn from the new hire website what the company does, its client philosophy, and about its leadership. Then they meet for an hour with the CEO who talks about how he built the company. New hires get a 30-, 60-, and 90-day training checklist that must be completed on time and signed by their supervisor. They also have an opportunity to provide feedback via the website. Modern onboarding systems help new employees understand what the company is all about so they are prepared to integrate into it, says Zimmerman’s Vice President of HR.70
QU E S T I O N S
1. The case introduces three companies of very different sizes with three different onboarding approaches. What differences do you see in their approaches? What similarities?
2. Are there important ideas missing from all three approaches? If so, what are they?
3. Which approach sounds best? Why?
Write an essay in response to the following prompts:
Gunderson Lutheran Health System in La Crosse, Wisconsin, is a health care delivery company that includes a 325-bed hospital, several specialty medical practices, and 41 clinics. In a recent year, they saw 1.4 million outpatient visits. The network has 6,834 employees including physicians, medical staff, managers and supervisors, and senior leaders. The age of their health care managers was a concern when asked whether they had a ready supply of leaders to step in. Upper management felt that growing leaders internally made sense from the standpoint of continuity and cultural fit. The HR staff researched best practices in talent management and development. The result was the establishment of a Talent Development Review Group including the top leaders. This group became accountable for developing leaders, making necessary development happen, and overseeing the growth of high-potential (high-po) talent. The Review Group followed five steps in their process.
1. They spent two years building a tiered leadership competency model that included criteria for executives, directors, and managers to ensure the right mix of KSAs. The tiered model defined behaviors and competencies necessary to demonstrate excellence in each role. The competencies were used for behavioral interview questions and for position descriptions, and they formed the basis for 360-degree feedback.
2. The next step was to identify high-potential talent. The Review Group picked candidates for consideration in each of four pools. Pool members had to demonstrate willingness to:
• Participate in leadership assessment
• Receive feedback and coaching
• Take on development opportunities
• Invest the necessary time
In the five years after the program began, 60 high-po employees at all levels of leadership were identified, assessed, and had their career paths discussed.
3. Once high-pos had been identified and invited into a pool, it was time to assess the talent. The high-pos took assessment tools to identify strengths and development needs. Each candidate and the Review Group determined an initial strategy for closing gaps in the candidate’s readiness.
4. A variety of tools were used to develop plans for individual high-pos, including stretch assignments, role expansion, job rotations, coaching, onboarding, continuing education, mentoring, project assignments, and committee assignments.
5. Tracking progress included setting milestones and success metrics to make sure candidates would build the necessary skills. The effect of the development activities on performance was measured as well, with feedback from peers, colleagues, and superiors. The Review Group continues to look at progress annually. While numbers tell a positive story, another big change has been in the culture among the top leaders, who now see talent development as a strategic necessity.
|Due By (Pacific Time)||11/23/2013 12:00 am|
out of 1971 reviews
out of 766 reviews
out of 1164 reviews
out of 721 reviews
out of 1600 reviews
out of 770 reviews
out of 766 reviews
out of 680 reviews