Introduction

The telecommunications industry is ever evolving and Global Communications has failed to adapt. An industry that was characterized by local monopolies in the 1980s has seen a shift in recent years towards the global market (Cansfiled 2007). In recent years excess competition has led to a decrease in over 50% of Global Communications stock. Questionable decision making and internal communication have forced leadership to a decision of outsourcing call centers to foreign countries and a push through new products towards globalization. This paper attempts identify: The issues and opportunities that all Global Communications stakeholders face, the gap that needs to be bridged, and the end state visions the company will adopt to reinvent itself.

Issue and Opportunity Identification

Global Communications is faced with increased industry competition and their stock value has depreciated over 50 % during the past three years. Global faces a great deal of competition in local and international long distance services. Cable companies have stepped in and provided robust portfolio of products to consumers at the cost of market share for Global communications. The result of this increased competition and the rise in call center costs have caused management to devise an aggressive plan to address these issues. This plan calls for outsourcing of call centers to foreign countries and a move towards the global market, offering consumer and businesses, a well rounded portfolio of products. The implementation of this plan will result in massive lay-offs for union workers and a 10% salary reduction for retained employees. The board and management have both agreed to this plan, but the union does not and was not included in the decision making process.

Stakeholder Perspectives/Ethical Dilemmas
The authors of Practice Pointers in Participatory Planning and decision making found that a good way to identify appropriate stakeholders is to start by asking:
1. Whose behavior has to change for the effort to succeed?
2. Who is likely to mobilize for or against what is intended?
3. Who does the decision affect the most?
4. Who is responsible for what is intended?
Note. From “Practice Pointers in Participatory Planning in World Bank Sourcebook (ch.3).”, Retrieved from http://www.worldbank.org/wbi/sourcebook/sb0302t.htm#B2.

Once Stakeholders have been identified the company must recognize conflicting values and ethical dilemmas that result.
The Global Communications scenario represents three groups of stakeholders: Stockholders, management, and union employees. The hurried decision of management to re-organize corporate strategy and staffing failed to take into account one key stakeholder, that of the union workers. While both management and stockholders have a vested interest in company profitability, management failed to recognize the employees’ interest in job security. The lack of honesty and integrity on management’s part to violate a contract that was recently negotiated will have lasting impacts on trust and possible legal ramifications. Knicki and Kretner found, “Dominating is appropriate when an unpopular solution must be implemented," (2004 p.57). While dominating can be necessary in the short-term, in order to move forward with its vision and end state goals the company will need to resolve the union conflict. Moving towards its long-term goals Global will have to improve on re-building employee trust and effective communication. Effective communication is vital to all organizations because it coordinates employees, fulfills employee needs, supports knowledge management, and improves decision making. (Glinow & McShane, 2004). The poor communication between management and union employees has led to internal rumors and created conflict. Glinow and McShane wrote “The grapevine can be a source of inaccurate rumors, it functions positively as an early warning signal for organizational changes.”, (2005, p. 74).

End State Visions

The previous section discussed the various stake holders and the conflicting values and interests. The next part of the process for Global Communications to realize its long-term goals is determine a solution that considers the involved parties while attempting to avoid conflicts from repeating in the future (University of Phoenix 2007).
Global Communications will become a profitable, worldwide leader in communications servicing consumers and small businesses. Global Communications will offer its local and international clients a wide range of communication tools, including phone, cable, and wireless broadband internet. Global will create strong working relationships, with internal and external customers through communication, commitment, and integrity.
Before this end state can be realized the company needs to find a way to close the gap between current issues and the final goal (Sapriel 2007). The following section will look at possible solutions for that gap.

Gap Analysis

A Gap Analysis defined by author Michael Burns (2007) as a “needs difference” the difference is between the current practice and needs versus the end result desired (Burns 2007). Global Communications in its present state faces many obstacles including: Excess competition, diminishing stock price, increased operating costs, and an unhappy workers union. In order to reach the end-state goals discussed in the previous section the company must formulate a plan to bridge this gap. It has been written that when creating a gap analysis confirming and prioritizing each issue from one to five, five being critical, one being low, is an tool for deciding what is essential for success (Burns 2007). In the case of Global Communications the above issues are each critical in achieving the companies end state goals. The issue of excess competition and stock price are not directly in Global Communications control, but the management team has determined the expansion of product lines and a move towards globalization will create additional market niche for the company.
The company will likely need to use a dominating style of conflict resolution in the current situation, but needs to move toward an integrating (problem solving) method for resolving the underlying problems, rather than current symptoms ( Kreitner & Kinicki 2004). In the current situation a compromise is unlikely due to the differences in goals and power (Kinicki & Kreitner, 2004).
The outsourcing of call centers to foreign countries has become a necessary reality sue to increasing operating costs. The decrease in union benefits from the recent contract has not been enough to combat the rising costs and with the new to foreign call centers the company will gain a 40% decrease in call center overhead. The possible 15% retention employees will help reduce animosity, but the company will need to provide extensive career counseling an possible severance packages for those let go.

Conclusion The telecommunications industry is ever evolving and Global Communications has failed to adapt. Global has developed an aggressive strategy to combat increasing costs and sagging stock prices. The company in the needs to recognize the opportunities and risks associated with this plan as well understanding the values and interests of all vested stakeholders. In order for Global to reach the end-state goals it needs to adopt a problem solving method and implement more of an integrative method of negotiation. Field studies have found that conflict decrease as goal difficulty and goal clarity increase (Kreitner & Kinicki 2004). If theses changes are incorporated the end visions can me fulfilled resulting in a stable and profitable company.

References

Burns, M. (2007). Work in process. CAmagazine, 11(4), p. 16.
Cansfield, M. (2007). Telecoms need to raise the game. Brand Strategy, 7(3), 48-50.
Kreitner R. & Kinicki A. (2004). Organizational behavior (6th ed.). New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies. McShane, S. L., & Von Glinow, M. (2005). Organizational behavior: Emerging realities for the workplace. New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies.
Sapriel, C. (2007). Talking the long view. Business Source Complete, 5(24),351-354, Retrieved December 18th, 2007 from EBSCOhost database. Smith, K.G., Locke, E.A., Barry, D. (1990), Goal setting, planning and organizational performance: an experimental simulation, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 46 pp.118-34. The World Bank Participation Source book Chapter 3
Chapter III: Practice Pointers in Participatory Planning and Decisionmaking , Retrieved December 19, 2007 from, http://www.worldbank.org/wbi/sourcebook/sb0302t.htm#B2

Table 1
Issue and Opportunity Identification
Issue Opportunity Reference to Specific
Course Concept
(Include citation) Concept
Global faces a great deal of competition in local and international long distance services. Cable companies have stepped in and provided robust portfolio of products to consumer at the cost of market share for the telecom industry. Global created a partnership with a cable company to offer satellite broadband internet and video services Recognizing the opportunities and risks involving with changing company focus “Today’s realities of leadership include increasing competition and intensity, reducing cycle times and costs, and improving productivity while at the same time growing the business and meeting increasing customer and Wall Street expectations” (U of P White paper 2004). Decision Making
The company did not recognize trends in the industry Which have resulted in a rash decision to reorganize the company and change its focus. In reaction to this decision the board has approved a plan to move technical call centers to other countries at the expense of local union jobs. Inexpensive, technical, non-union labor for call centers. The move has potential to decrease unit costs by 40% Workplace communication has a significant effect on organizational performance (McShane & Glinow, 2005). Communication
Global communications already suffering from a recent contract negotiation in which the employess took a benefit cut have widen the gap with the proposal of union worker lay-offs. The company can learn from the current situation and in the future adopt an integrative process for process for negotiating an using a “win-Win” conflict resolution model Tjosvold’s cooperative conflict model calls for three desired outcomes: Agreement, Stronger relationships, Learning. (Kinicki & Kreitner, 2004).
Compromising This is a give-and-take approach involving moderate concern for both self and others. Compromise is appropriate when parties have opposite goals or possess equal power” (Kinicki & Kreitner, 2004). Managing Conflict
Global Communications when a decision to outsource call centers to foreign countries and lay-off union emplyees Both of these distributive approaches create win-lose situations and can lead to conflict, as compared to the win-win situations created by integrative negotiations (Kinicki & Kreitner, 2003, p. 504 Global Communications can improve current and future business relationships when negotiating to by better understanding all vested interests and rights “Distributive negotiation involves traditional win–lose thinking. Integrative negotiation calls for a progressive win–win strategy” (Kinicki & Kreitner, 2003, p. 71).
“An agreement can be found that is better for both parties than what they would have reached through distributive negotiation. This is an integrative negotiation” (Kinicki & Kreitner, 2003, p. 71). Distributive negotiations

Table 2
Stakeholder Perspectives
Stakeholder Perspectives

Stakeholder Groups
The Interests, Rights, and
Values of Each Group

Stockholders Interest: Company profitability, Right: return on investment, Values: Social responsibility, and honesty
Senior Leadership Interests: Company profitability, Values: performance, efficiency
Employees Interests: Job security, Salary and benefits, Values: fairness, honesty Rights: Integrity, honesty

Table 3
End State Goals
End-State Goals

Develop better communication for both customer and employees
Provide service for both local and international markets
Reduce operating costs
Better decision making from management for long –term goals