Management and Motivation:
The key notion that Weber developed in order to balance out the inherent inequalities is that of the rationalizing of the organizational structure where those who benefit the company and follow the rules and procedure enjoy incentives; whereas those who break these rules are punished. Hence if the values of the company’s structure and the goal’s of the employee can be rationalized and de-mystified then a satisfied and motivated workforce can be instituted to achieve the best organizational structure. In order to do this there needs to be a structure which ensures that at the higher the level of management there is a higher the standard of care and duty, which can be seen in the transparent structure of Vice Presidents for specified organizational roles, as discussed earlier. Weber sees it as an important factor that has shaped society and important to understanding the development of societal structure and management. Therefore the individual is the key, where rationalization is the key. Therefore rational management of individuals is important, to limit the emotions and interests of the management in respect to the rights and goal of company, as a whole, and the individual in order to create a system of fairness, transparency and accountability for the employee:
It is all to do with what sets us apart as a company. At HP we work across borders, and without limits. Global virtual teams share resources and pool their brainpower to solve business issues and meet personal goals. Each individual is valued for the unique skills, experiences and perspective they bring. That’s how we work at HP. And it’s how ideas – and people – grow.
The most important individual in any workplace is the manager and if the manager is present but ineffectual, i.e. cannot promote efficiency and motivation through responsibility and accountability, then the staff has no confidence then it reduces staff morale. This is because in effect if there is no management, which promotes bullying and discrimination in the workplace, as well as job dissatisfaction and the low staff retention. As will be discussed later accountability and transparency within the management structure is very important, therefore this increases the morale, motivation and staff retention within the company structure. This discussion will consider the structure, motivational elements and the accountability of HP and the Sony Corporation
HP v Sony as a Motivational and Organizational Role Model:
HP understands that the lack of transparency and accountability also opens the company to liability, especially in the highly regulated sector of listed companies, because corners will be cut by employees due to the lack of control and accountability. HP was listed as No. 8 of top accountable companies in the world’s top 100 companies, illustrating their commitment to accountability and transparency to the environment, society, shareholders and consumers:
HP today announced that it was ranked No. 8 overall in the Accountability Rating, the first global index that evaluates how well the world’s 100 largest companies account for their impacts on society and the environment. HP was the only U.S. company ranked in the top ten.
HP understands that main problem with non-compliance of duties of a line-manager, high-level management, director or vice president is that it results in lack of organization and without the effective control by an accountable and efficient manager then the legal liabilities of the company are increased. This is because without a sufficiently responsible and liable individual corners will be cut. In other words this individual’s behavior is putting the department of the company to a detriment, especially of privacy and data protection is breached. This would put HP a company as a whole, in a difficult position if laws are breached because the company owes a duty of care to its clients and consumers to privacy. HP being a large technology companies includes defense and government contracts, where breaches of privacy rules can have drastic consequences.
HP understands is there is a lack of accountability and transparency in the management structure then a single employee’s actions can open up the company, relevant managers and himself to civil and criminal actions; therefore an appropriate management structure needs to be adopted to ensuring accountability and efficiency into the organization. Therefore accountable and efficient actions from an efficient management structure needs to be present from the basic everyday actions to the special occasions, because how can a manager discipline an employee without accountable and transparent behavior? This is promoted in various policies of HP but an excellent illustration is HP’s approach to its approach to privacy and confidential data:
In addition we argue that accountability is a fundamental aspect in dealing with privacy management and needs to be explicitly managed to mitigate risks and increase trust in the system. Despite the efforts being made by organisations in dealing with privacy, it is very unlikely that “tamper proof” solutions will ever be provided, considering that solutions are the result of a compromise between business needs, costs and requirements. In this respect, we believe in the importance of active tracing of disclosures of confidential data and auditing by trusted third parties to collect tamper-resistance evidence about enterprise activities when dealing with confidential data.
Sony on the other hand has not got the same track history of accountability, which has a negative impact on the motivation of its employees. This is especially the case when its employees are being harmed in the international arena.
HP and Sony’s Organizational Behavior:
There are three key areas where problems are easily identifiable for the organization which are; the lack of proper organization with respect to operations; customer satisfaction; and staff morale. The first question that has to be dealt with is that HP and Sony have an international market name that is highly regarded, which is a direct result of the good organization in all areas, but especially the customer service side. It would seem that the organization’s use of splitting the key sectors under the control of a specified Vice President has a positive impact on the organization because if one considers the basics of company law a director (Vice President) holds special duties of care to the company and subsequently the shareholders and consumers . Therefore there is a specific individual to be held accountable under the law for any wrong doing under both corporate and vicarious liability because there is a direct and controlling mind of the company.
Also the fact that there is specified operations vice presidents means that regulations of company law is satisfied, as well as indicates that the company is satisfying its goal of global governance. HP and Sony are bigger than just a computer manufacturer, it is also regulated under credit laws as a financial institution and plays a large role in the stock exchange; therefore any wrong doing on the behalf of Vice Presidents and Directors can have larger repercussions for the financial markets that it trades in. This is because if it can be shown the administration process of the company has been subject to criminal, reckless or negligent dealings then the Vice President and any directors that have been subject to such decisions will be liable; as well as the company as a whole if shareholders are losing money due to these acts. Therefore the fact that the organization has set up a set of governance guidelines; as well as Standards of Business Conduct indicates that the organization understand the importance of protecting the shareholders from criminal, negligent and reckless acts. In addition it also illustrates that if a person that acts outside these internal governance guidelines then they are subject to liability for their actions, internal investigations and any possible prosecutions that arise from their breach of these codes of conducts. Therefore the organization structure of HP illustrates that the company holds the protection of the business’s reputation and the duties owed to the shareholders as ultimately important. HP is supported by the main objective purported by Dave Packard, founder of the company:
It is necessary that people work together in unison toward common objectives and avoid working at cross purposes at all levels if the ultimate in efficiency and achievement is to be obtained.
Training, Motivation and Staff Retention:
There is an added problem in respect to staff turnover in where the staff has to be adequately trained, if the staff does not have the required qualifications as set out by their job role then the company and the staff member is open for prosecution and fines/sanctions by the regulatory regimes, as well as civil suits from consumers and shareholders. These are very important rules especially in respect to the company crime, but also in respect to customer satisfaction and dealing with customer complaints. HP takes training and motivation seriously, which is supported by its training mission and mandate:
An agile and changing business can only succeed if its workforce is equally dynamic, flexible and knowledgeable. It calls for employees who are open to continuous learning – a workforce that is given every opportunity to learn, grow and develop skills to drive the company toward achieving its business goals. A key aspect of HP’s employee development philosophy is our commitment to the support of life-long learning.
Sony also understands that if their staff is not adequately trained then this will leave rise to customer dissatisfaction, as well as low staff retention and lack of motivation . Therefore the promotion of self-development is highly important in the organizational structure of HP and Sony, because the possibility of advancement and learning is a primary motivator of staff. Although a large amount is invested in training and development the benefits outweigh the costs because a satisfied and highly trained staff creates a better customer experience, less complaints increases staff retention and therefore improves the reputation of the company. HP has an excellent global reputation, which is primarily the result of customer experience due to excellent customer service which based upon training and development strategies. Sony, on the other hand, has a less accountable reputation and as this discussion will illustrate reputation can have negative effects on the overall motivation of the staff. The main benefit of this reputation is that it increases the investment and therefore income and capital within the company.
HP, Diversity and Staff Retention:
Diversity in the workplace is becoming increasingly prevalent with persons of different backgrounds, cultures, sexes, social and political choices , which HP supports as this is a key factor to staff retention. Sony also supports this approach, which is standard but the later case-study of Indonesian workers illustrates that a lot of Sony’s actions do not always correlate between the public ad privates. The HP approach creates a more interesting scene, but makes it harder for management because it is easier to oversee a homogenous group than that of a diverse group. It is essential that the manager is seen as both objective and empathetic to all employees without discrimination or bias, which HP’s inclusion agenda includes:
Creating a diverse, inclusive environment has been an ongoing journey of continuous action for many years. It has been a journey guided by deeply held values. Today, our diversity vision is one of global proportions. One that requires courageous, bold actions from many people throughout the world. We are proud to share what we have learned along the way and the aspirations we are actively working to achieve.
This is difficult to achieve because it is normal for a manager whose demographics are the same as a certain cleavage in the workplace to emphasize with that group; however personal feeling cannot overtake their position of authority and obligations as a manager. Therefore it is essential that a manager does not judge on the basis of difference, rather uses this difference and diversity to create a more cohesive group through communication of personal experiences and ideas. HP manages to achieve this through a specified set of codes, policies and practices and deals harshly with any breaches of them. This follows a learning process, but a harsh regulatory approach because as Tinsley indicates is that we cannot ignore these differences and pretend everyone is the same; instead it is important to build on and explore cultural, gender and ethnic differences. This is definitely the approach that HP has taken upon and as theorist Nkomo argues that it is the “challenge before us is understanding the interactive effects of multiple diversity. This raises the thorny research problem of how to determine the relative saliency of the different identities that an individual may bring to the work team.” A challenge that HP has sufficiently tackled and its organizational structure definitely has taken aboard promoting diversity in the workplace, which has in turn increased staff retention and creating a better consumer experience.
One of the approaches to diversity that HP has taken has been explored by the organizational behavior theorist Tinsley who argues that it is necessary to explore the differences of groups in the workplace to make a more cohesive work team. Not all responses of HP has taken to managing diversity in the work place is to take just this approach. There also is an approach where further regulation of the workplace in order to promote diversity and cohesion therefore the demographics of the workplace needs to be explored. This can be seen in the work/life navigation tools which explore different attributes of the workplace and home. This approach has been supported by McGrath, Berdahl and Arrow separates the work groups into five different clusters of attributes, which are; personal demographics; knowledge and skills; beliefs and ethics; personality and behavior; and organizational demographics. The correlation of these clusters will forces different members into different groups within the larger workgroup. This makes in and out groups and the way to deal with it in not through exploration of differences amongst group members to increase understanding and empathy; rather it is through intervention and rule making to create an objective standard of treatment to all members and to treat all members the same.
These two approaches will have different effects on the work group, because one is based on understanding and exploration, whilst the other is through sameness and suppression at the management level. The first approach is better for combating the isolation of members into in and out groups, but is very hard to implement because it focuses on communication and teambuilding, aspects that usually interfere with business costs and demands . The second approach of suppressing difference and treating people the same will perpetrate the stereotypes and prejudices between the different individuals and groups and strengthen the possibility of in and out groups. This approach is easier to implement through a workplace agenda and set of rules, in addition if these rules are broken it is easier to justify punishment if a rule is broken rather than a lack of communication and refusal to participate in learning and exploring the diversity within the group . HP approach current approach to managing diversity and inclusion in the workplace is the Tinsley approach; however HP also understands through its implementation of code, policies and practices that there needs to be some uniformity through structures and rules on the appropriate manner to treat work colleagues therefore explores and implements the McGrath et al approach also.
HP has creates a very strict policy in respect to discrimination and appropriate behavior, which was acted upon in the case of the breach; regardless of the member’s racial background. To deal with the differences in different skills there are sessions to promote teambuilding and explore the best approach to the work group’s promotion of diversity and inclusion. Therefore HP understands that teambuilding sessions there was a better understanding amongst the group to create a less prejudice between the members, because their differences were essential the cohesive group regardless of their ethnic or skill background, which is part of HP’s inclusion policy . Therefore there needs to be a balance in the approach taken towards diversity .
Sony – Publicly a Good Motivational Organizer in the West – Privately Bad in the East:
Sony will purport that its actions of setting up shop will aid the country through sustainable development, such as Indonesia, by the following means; technology introduction; education to use the technology; and job creation would have a trickle down effect to boost the economy of the country, which in turn would pass on a better standard of living to the average person and create better working conditions for the workers. Sony has been tracking the works of environmental groups to neutralize their effects:
A leaked document written by Sony Corporation, obtained by IPS, outlines a presentation made in July to fellow electronics companies at a conference in Brussels illustrating the various activities of environmental groups. It names specific US activists who seek to regulate waste caused by the electronics industry. The presentation describes the various campaigns of Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, the European Environment Bureau, the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, and the Northern Alliance for Sustainability. It then suggests that a counter-strategy by the industry would be discussed at the meeting.
Therefore in 2000 Sony was not really adhering to its corporate governance image and protecting the environment, but finding ways to avoid environmental and developmental concerns. This is supported by their actions towards the female workforce in Indonesia and Japan where their needs and health concerns were ignored. When the work conditions were reduced the women went on strike and Sony fired the workforce. This is completely against the corporate civil governance image that Sony like to portray, but illustrates that the rights and laws of workers are negotiable in certain countries when it comes to large TNCs. Although the IMF seemed to be supporting the workers, it was a mere threatening letter, how about real sanctions like large fines; otherwise such companies will purport civil governance on one hand but their actions portray their economic interests are far more important:
IMF, which claims a membership of 23 million worldwide, threatened in a letter to the Sony corporation chairman in Japan a public campaign “to taint the image” of Sony for its “serious human and labor rights violations” in Indonesia.
In a recent accountability report in 2005 Sony only made 41 out 100, therefore indicating its failure to keep up its promises in Global Corporate Governance . Instead its activities have been to hide its real impacts on society and the environment. As the Financial Times reported in response to a similar report dealing with 40 companies surveyed by GlobeAScan there has been a extreme failure of TNCs to keep up to their social responsibility problems, rather than promoting sustainability the actions of companies, especially Sony is to hide their actions that are harming society and the environment in language that portrays the opposite:
The survey of 40 international companies – including Dupont, HP, Procter & Gamble, Sony and Vodafone – examines their approach to developing products or processes that respond to economic, social and environmental pressures. The report, entitled The Innovation High Ground, says social and environmental concerns must be explicitly considered when setting strategy and designing products. Few companies are doing either, let alone both.
However the reality of the situation has arguably turned out to be quite different. This can be illustrated by the effects on the indigenous peoples, in reference to the activities of Sony this is best illustrated by the Indonesian workers, who have had their women subjugated to poorer pay and working conditions than their male counterparts. This is because in the type of work, i.e. factory, manufacturing work, this is closer to the traditional role of women. Therefore the traditional globalization arguments that corporations, such as Sony, are arguing are giving them a foothold in the country but the exploitation of workers rather than their sustainable development is occurring. This has negative effects on it customers, which causes a bad reputation and de-motivation in the workers throughout the company.
Therefore the private motives of Sony are economics and the use of the developing world as a place of exploitation for cheap labor, which satisfies the economic theory of supply and demand, and the economics of buying power. In the developed world products that are sought after will be produced and coveted; and through the international media, through advertisements, television programs and films this need for material items is encouraged. The biggest and brightest advertisements are by the TNCs and these are what the individual covets and buys. In addition in the developed world if these advertisements purport good global governance, this will eliminate any fears of guilt from buying these products at the expense of the poor manufacturing workforce. Therefore the public swallows the public face without proper investigation and accountability procedures, because materialism is promoted over global governance. Luckily over the last decade accountability has been promoted by NGOs and many consumers are investigating and boycotting products that do not comply with good global governance. However, as this essay will illustrate, companies such as Sony continue to exploit its workers, society and environment but just hide it with bigger propositions of global governance, as be can seen below in Sony’s global governance agenda:
Sony recognizes the importance of preserving the natural environment that sustains life on earth for future generations and helps humanity to attain the dream of a healthy and happy life. Sony is committed to achieving this goal by seeking to combine ongoing innovation in environmental technology with environmentally sound business practices.
It has already been touched on that the effects of Sony are much wider than their economic effects. However although there has been bad outcomes with this company in the developing world, for example Indonesia, this is down to the lack of ethical and moral decision making in these companies. Sony’s focus has been too much on economics, as opposed to other considerations. This will be further illustrated with Sony’s reduction of working conditions for female workers in Indonesia in favor of minimizing costs. It was lobbying and the IMF that stopped these actions and not the local government, which illustrates that Sony has such an influence in Indonesia’s economics that they can influence and make decisions that would be sanctioned in the developed world. However this influence is equally apparent in the developed world , via lobbying and securing of economic interests, which got the IMF involved and the threat of international sanctions. This has resulted in a bad reputation for Sony, which causes a de-motivated workforce especially when discrimination is a key factor of its policies.
Summary:
HP has a system of organizational behavior that promotes the best for the employee, shareholder, consumer, company, society and even the environment. Sony, on the other hand, has not the same record because it has this on its website, but it seems to be limited to the west as the case of Indonesia has illustrates. This seems to be a hard paradox to solve but its promotion of global citizenship, diversity, transparency, accountability and the rights of the employee has created a successful balance between these competing interests. The most important aspect that HP focuses on is that the company, its management structure and employees have to be responsible; otherwise this successful balance in organizational would not be achieved:
A company cannot be a good global citizen without running its daily business responsibly. This involves a commitment to corporate governance and business ethics, and putting that commitment into practice.
Bibliography:
Accountability Rating, 2005, Results of 2005 Accountability Rating can be found at: http://www.accountabilityrating.com/results.asp
Baron & Greenberg (2002) Behavior in Organizations Eighth Edition, Prentice Hall
Beres et al, 2003, Accountability and Enforceability of Enterprise Privacy Policies, HP
HP Benefits which can be found at Jobs at HP: http://h10055.www1.hp.com/jobsathp/content/Informations/benefits.asp?Lang=ENen
HP Corporate Governance Guidelines and Standards of Business Conduct can be found at www.hp.com
HP Corporate Objectives can be found at www.hp.com
HP Diversity and Inclusion can be found at www.hp.com
HP Diversity can be found at Jobs at HP: http://h10055.www1.hp.com/jobsathp/content/Informations/diversity.asp?Lang=ENen
HP Governance and Ethics can be found at www.hp.com
HP Investor Relations can be found at www.hp.com
HP Policies and Practices that Support Diversity can be found at www.hp.com
HP Press Release, HP Recognized as Top U.S. Company for Reporting Social and Environmental Impact, June 24th 2005 can be found at: http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/press/2004/040624b.html
HP Training and Development can be found at Jobs at HP: http://h10055.www1.hp.com/jobsathp/content/informations/trainingdevelopment.asp?Lang=ENen
Working at HP can be found at Jobs at HP: http://h10055.www1.hp.com/jobsathp/content/informations/workingathp.asp?Lang=ENenHP Executive Team can be found at www.hp.com
Financial Times, 2005, A Responsible Balancing Act, Financial Times June 1st 2005
Jakarta Post, 2000, Indonesia: International Union Steps into Sony Dispute, Jakarta Post July 25th 2000
Knight, 2000, US: Sony Corporation Tracks Environmental Organizations, Corp Watch News can be found at: http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=563
Kraakman, 1999, Vicarious and Corporate Civil Liability Harvard Law School can be found at: http://encyclo.findlaw.com/3400book.pdf
McGrath, Berdahl & Arrow, 1995, in Jackson & Ruderman, 1995, Workteam and Diversity: Paradigms and Perspectives, APA
Nahavandi, A. (2003). The art and science of leadership, Prentice-Hall
Nkomo, 1995, Identity and the Complexity of Diversity in Jackson &
Ruderman, 1995, Workteam and Diversity: Paradigms and Perspectives, APA
Sony Global www.sony.net
Sony Global, Sony Group Environmental Vision, Corporate Social Responsibility can be found at: www.sony.net/SonyInfo/Environment/environment/management/vision/index.html
Stewart & Associates, Leadership Models and Theories, can be found at: www.stewart-associates.co.uk
Tinsley, 1994, Special Issue on Racial Identity and Vocational Behavior, Journal of Vocational Behavior 44
Weber, 1976 edn., The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, London, Unwin
