INTRODUCTION

ABC Telecommunications is a publicly traded, global, manufacturing telecommunications company who primarily sells copper and fiber products to customers like Verizon and AT&T/Cingular. Like many other telecommunication companies, ABC went thru a significant down-turn around 2000. Not only did offices and manufacturing plants get shut-down throughout the world, the morale and culture of ABC changed. ABC lost a lot of their highly skilled, highly valuable employees. They have consciously tried to hire “the best of the best” but yet they are not willing to provide the salaries and benefits to get those individuals. In fact, ABC has really been focusing on cost-cutting measures the last couple of years. Employee recognition and rewards are very rare, bonuses were not given last year, locations in the US continue to get shut down, and layoffs are frequent in order to get headcount and employee expenses down. Purchases of new computers and other technology equipment are considered an unnecessary expense. Understandably, turnover is high and those who stay tend not to be satisfied. Many leave quickly; others just complain and talk about how much better the company used to be.
ABC was the organization reviewed in my OCI paper. ABC’s highest style rating was conventional and their second highest style was approval. Most employees feel the need to conform, to not get involved in any disagreements, and to have superficial relationships with their co-workers so that everyone likes them and so that they can get promoted. ABC’s weakest style was humanistic or encouraging. Training, helping, and coaching other co-workers are infrequent because the focus is on everyone getting their own stuff done and letting other co-workers figure it out on their own. In summary, ABC needs to reduce their passive-defensive styles and increase their constructive styles; by doing so they will improve employee satisfaction and morale.
In terms of my role, I am an accountant at ABC in the business unit setting. I started with ABC in January of 2006. I have seen the affects of cost-cutting and employee reduction methods. I am part of a team where management is not clear, feedback is rarely given, and communication is almost unheard of. It can make working very challenging. Yet I stay because I enjoy my job itself and because I feel ABC has a lot of wonderful people with great ideas; their ideas just need to be recognized and acted upon. ABC has the opportunity to be a great company where employees are recognized and appreciated, where turnover continues to decrease and innovation and productivity continue to increase.

PROBLEM STATEMENT
ABC has set their top company priority as cost savings rather than treating employees as highly valuable, irreplaceable assets that will provide the development, innovation, and skills necessary to differentiate ABC from other organizations and provide a competitive advantage. Every single company can offshore manufacturing, cut heABCount, and reduces expenses in order to improve the bottom line. A company may be ahead of the trend and see the benefits of these activities for a few years; however, they are not permanent competitive advantages. Employees are the only item that truly differentiates companies from one another and can create long-term success. Furthermore, it is essential for ABC to provide the necessary equipment and technology that enables employees to succeed, rather than cutting it out of the budget. Teams – building for the better tomorrow – need to be encouraged; continuous, personal growth of those team members should be emphasized. The results would be great for ABC – reduced turnover, satisfied employees, and a new competitive advantage. The idea is great – yet a few questions still remain. What makes an organization successful – what makes an organization a HPO? And what can ABC do to transform itself into a HPO?
LITERATURE REVIEW Specifically, high-performance organizations (HPOs) operate in a manner that brings out the best in people and produces sustainable high-performance results while creating high quality of work-life environments. HPOs tend to have five common characteristics. First of all, they value people as human assets. They respect diversity instead of expecting people to conform and be homogeneous. They empower all employees and use people’s talents to the fullest to advance both personal and organizational performance (Schermerhorn, Hunt, and Osborn, 2005, p. 25). Secondly, they create teams that are able to exercise self-direction and initiative to maximize their performance contributions. These teams create synergy; they are more effective as a group than each individual would be. Also, thirdly, the culture of HPOs encourages learning and continuous personal growth and development. Knowledge-sharing and continuous education is emphasized (Schermerhorn et al., 2005, p. 25). Fourthly, HPOs focus on bringing the latest information and technology together with their employees. This improves efficiency and provides people with better tools and knowledge in decision-making processes. Finally, HPOs are achievement orientated. They value their customers and attempt to provide the best customer service and satisfaction (Schermerhorn et al., 2005, p. 25).
The value of humans needs to be considered when determining the current and expected long-term success of a company. Richard Oliver stated, “While ROA (return on assets) is still a valuable measure, depending on it becomes problematic in an era when the traditional definition of ‘assets’ is becoming outmoded. The assets ROA takes into account are easy to identify and count - they're physical things such as manufacturing plants, rolling stock, and natural resource reserves or financial assets such as cash and investments. Today, however, more and more of a firm's assets are less tangible. In fact, for many if not all firms, the principle assets are intangible and hard to identify, compare, count, and value. Those assets are in the form of intellectual capital (e.g. knowledge assets, process know-how, brands, public trust) and human capital (Oliver, 2001, ¶2-3).”
Most companies’ top management is well aware that quality people, especially quality leaders, are the primary key to corporate success. Oliver states, “All the grand strategies are useless if capable management is not in place to execute them. The companies that can hire and retain top-tier managers will lead; those that cannot have little hope of catching up (2001, ¶5).”
Investing in human capital is a proven way to boost a firm's market success. Yet it is not as simple as purchasing new equipment, digging up natural resources, or building something. Rather, it is an asset that is derived solely from the creativity, innovation, and expertise of humans. (Oliver, 2001, ¶8).
It has become clear that it is crucial for organizations to hire and retain the right people and provide them with training if they expect to produce a competitive advantage. However, hiring the right people tends not to be the easiest assignment in today’s marketplace. John Robak stated, “Even well-known organizations with the best reputations are finding that they have to do much more to stand out as a preferred place to work in the new employee-centric environment. Becoming an employer of choice can be both an effective human resources strategy and a competitive business advantage for winning the battle to attract and retain loyal, high-performance talent (Robak 2007, ¶2).”
If an organization wants to become an employer of choice, they must satisfy the diverse needs of their employees. The traditional benefits of health insurance, retirement saving plans, and vacation time are now expected by most employees. Thus, a company must provide better benefit packages if they expect to attract the best employees (Robak, 2007, ¶11 & 15).
The new generation of employees is placing significant value on convenience-style benefits that provide a balance of work and family life. However, new convenience-style benefits do not have to be expensive for the employer. Providing flexible working hours, the capabilities to work from home, and unpaid leaves of absence, are inexpensive ways of enhancing the benefits package and satisfying employees (Robak, 2007, ¶11).
Some companies tend to use lay-offs as a way to decrease expenses. Although it is true that the company does save the expense of the salaries of those individuals by choosing this restructuring method, it does not make them an employer of choice. People do not want to work for companies that view employees as replaceable and do not have employees as a top concern in restructuring situations. Furthermore, the cost savings of lay-offs, plant closings, and other type of restructuring events are normally calculated only by summing up the costs of the buildings, salaries, and other operational expenses. They do no take into account the impact it has on current employees and potential future employees. The authors of “A Transaction Cost Analysis of Restructuring Alternatives” stated that issues of restructuring, such as productivity issues, are important, but not the only issues that need to be looked at. They also stated that it is important to consider the behavioral aspects of lay-offs and sell-offs. If companies do not take that into consideration, they will never become an employer of choice (Kulkarni & Fiet, ¶80).
Fortune Magazine provides a listing of the top 100 companies to work for. Many organizations strive to be a part of the Fortune ranking. One area these companies excel in is valuing their employees. In the January 22, 2007 issue, Google received the number one rating. Google provides a unique atmosphere, complete with lounge areas, a lap pool, volley ball courts, game tables, and free meals. They allow engineers to work on independent projects 20 percent of their time. Employees seem to love it there. Perhaps that is why Google receives around 1,300 resumes per day, or over one million a year. There is no doubt that Google values their human assets (100 Best Companies, 2007).
Qualcomm, a wireless company, received a ranking of 14. Some of the benefits they provide include great health and vision coverage, employee stock purchase programs, over $10K in graduate school reimbursement, and catered dinner if you work late. It is not a surprise that Qualcomm has only a one percent voluntary turnover rate. Also, in the year surveyed, 1,281 new jobs were created and 75,271 people applied for those jobs. Clearly Qualcomm is also an employer of choice (100 Best Companies, 2007).
Becoming an employer of choice does not only adhere to the HPO principle of valuing humans as assets. Employees also receive great satisfaction in learning and developing personal growth. Robak states, “Employees are not only concerned about the compensation and benefits that they receive; they also place a high value on career development. To become an employer of choice, it is important to focus on providing employees with opportunities for continuous learning and professional growth. It is imperative for (an) organization to assist employees in advancing their skills and effectively managing their own careers (2007, ¶18).”
Training is a crucial part of continuous learning and professional growth. ABC, as previously mentioned, is a manufacture of telecommunications equipment. Many telecommunication companies have placed employee training and growth at the bottom of their list of goals. However, this is not the case at Motorola. Motorola places high priority on learning because they state that the company receives $33 for every $1 invested in employee education and training. Not only is Motorola meeting the desires of their employees, they are also seeing positive returns on this investment (Oliver, 2001, ¶20).
Furthermore, Oliver states, “The most successful technology and biotech companies are only as good as the executives and engineers they employ. Their differentiation and continual innovation come not from existing products and patents, but from those that are continually coming down the pipeline. Keeping employees educated and developing them for future challenges has become the only sustainable competitive advantage (Oliver, 2001, ¶21).”
Teams are also a crucial part of high-performance organizations. In order for teams to excel, it is important that those team members have opportunities to interact with each other outside of the professional team setting. When employees create relationships with each other, chances are the team will be more successful. Employees also enjoy relationship building activities, which will in turn also provide for greater employee satisfaction (Anklam, Cross, and Gulas, 2005). “Encouraging and creating opportunities for employees to get together with co-workers, both inside and outside of the company, can be viewed as another valuable perk for many workers. Generally, people enjoy opportunities that allow them to connect with their co-workers in a more personal and informal way. Organizations that take the time to create fun opportunities for employees to socialize and build friendships with one another will benefit from the greater collaboration and teamwork that naturally result on the job (Robak, 2007, ¶16).”
Furthermore, being part of a team enables employees to work on personal growth and development. Irving Burling, author of Win Without Greed, stated, “You can improve the chance of success of the venture by involving associates throughout the organization in the end result.” When a person lets others become involved, focuses on teamwork, and does not have to take the glory for positive effects, someone can clearly be successful. (Burling, 2003, p. 26).
The benefits of training are not only believed by John Robak, author of “Employer of Choice,” Irving Burling, and Motorola. A 2000 study conducted by the American Society for Training and Development examined the average annual training expenditures of more than 500 U.S.-based publicly traded firms. The study concluded that those firms in the top half of the group, or the firms that spent the most on training, had a total stockholder return 86% higher than firms in the bottom half, and a 46% higher than market average return (Oliver, 2001, ¶9).
One key way of enabling employees to grow professionally is by providing ways for knowledge to be transferred on to other employees. The authors of “Expanding the World of Vision” stated, “True learning occurs in the transfer and creation of knowledge among individuals.” Knowledge transfer can occurs by multiple ways, including internal conferences, one-on-one training, newsletters, and brown bag lunch meetings (Anklam et al., 2005, Summary, ¶35).
Also, although this may require some time commitment from employees, the cost of knowledge transfer should be very inexpensive to companies. Employees also have the flexibility to transfer this knowledge when it fits into their work schedule. In addition, the methods of transferring knowledge can be altered to fit with the time constraints and flexibility that employees need (Anklam et al., 2005). Training, such as the transfer of knowledge from other co-workers, can provide immediate improvements in the organization. However, those types of training are not the only ones companies need to focus on. Training should also be geared towards the development of a culture with a commitment to learning. Training like this would show managers and their subordinates how a company’s strategy is linked to the goals of management and each person’s individual roles. Furthermore, when employees have a clear understanding of the missions and values of a company, it ensures that employees proceed in the right direction for the learning process (Lopez, Peon, and Ordias, 2006, Training, ¶18).
Providing technology to employees is also very important. Many organizations tend to shy away from upgrading computers and other technical equipment in order to save money. However, companies need to also consider the increased efficiency that new technical equipment provides. If employees are able to reduce the amount of time spent on a certain task, realistically they should have more time available for other projects. Thus, it can benefit the company by getting more accomplished and possibly even needing less staff. Also, new equipment is sometimes able to provide employees with better tools and aids in making company decisions. Having the means to provide a better analysis and steer the company towards the better way for the future is very important for a company’s success.
Not only does a company need to invest in technology, they need to provide their IT department with the resources necessary to provide support of those technologies. If the company does not have the means to support their technical assets, then they are of very little help. At the same time, if a company has knowledgeable staff ready to assist others with all programs and equipment, then the company will be very successful and be able to use their technology to their advantage. Oliver stated, “In today's companies, the information technology department is already stretched between desktop support, network maintenance, the intranet, the extranet, communications technology, and any e-commerce initiatives underway. Knowledge management and e-learning programs add another area that requires continual attention and maintenance. If these programs are to succeed, upper management must fully commit to them and allocate the necessary resources to make them successful (Oliver, 2001, ¶23).”
Also, some technical improvements can actually save companies money. The new phenomenon of e-learning has produced training budget savings of 40 to 60% for large organizations such as the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, Rockwell Collins, IBM, and even ABC’s external auditors, Ernst & Young. Smaller companies also agree with these findings. Oracle estimates e-learning saves them around $100 million each year. E-leaning also saves Cisco around $240 million per year. Beyond the importance of saving organizations money, e-learning can also provide more flexibility and therefore more satisfaction for employees (Oliver, 2001, ¶22).
The final part of being an HPO is being achievement orientated and valuing customers. Peter Drucker made a very powerful statement that is truly the heart of the meaning of business life. ‘There is only one valid definition of business purpose: to create a customer (Drucker, 1954, p.20).”
Treating employees as human assets, allowing them to grow professionally, and providing them with the resources they need, will end up causing employees to naturally place more value and care towards their customers. Southwest Airlines is known to be one of the best organizations to work for. Colleen Barrett, CEO of Southwest Airlines, feels that success begins with leadership commitment to all employees. She stated, “If senior leaders regularly communicate with employees, if we’re truthful and factual, if we show them that we care, and we do our best to respond to their needs, they’ll feel good about their work environment and they’ll be better at serving passengers (Schermerhorn et al., 2005, p. 27).”
The former CEO of Wells Fargo, Richard Kovacevic, also has similar opinions about employees and the positive results on customers. He stated, “Talented, professional, motivated people who care…that’s our competitive advantage (Schermerhorn et al., 2005, p. 24).”
In summary, a lot of data is out there on how companies need to treat employees as assets and allow them to grow, give them the necessary technology, provide team environments, and value their customers. When companies learn to provide an organizational culture that focuses on high-performance, chances are they will be very successful. Perhaps even the next Google.
ANALYSIS
ABC’s culture is currently less than ideal. ABC’s primary issue is that it has traits of a traditional organization rather than an HPO. Ideas are ignored and there are few opportunities for learning, whether it is learning for individuals or company-wide. Little time is set aside for it, and cross-training is thought to be inefficient. Teams are not a priority, as people work alone, do the same thing repetitiously, and are rarely given opportunities to use problem solving skills. Managers typically tell people exactly what to do, rather than involving them in decision making and sharing their power. Open communication is not common, nor is it common to find managers at ABC who attempt to motivate their employees and value them. People are not rewarded for new ideas, furthering education, or doing an exceptional job. The employees are not allowed to take part in decisions related to technology, so their technology could actually be hurtful rather than helpful since it may not be the technology needed and few people know how to operate it. A primary focus on customers does not exist, as few employees have interactions with customers and are not knowledgeable on better ways to serve them. Employees are also typically unaware of how their job responsibilities have an impact upon the organization and the customer. Due to this, the financial results of the company tend not to be as high as desired (Blanchard, 2007; Boyett & Boyett, 1998).
Another issue with ABC is that many managers tend to create the Set-Up-to-Fail syndrome. Managers tend not to communicate what they want and the reasons behind their requests. When that is coupled with few reward programs and minimal employee appreciation, the productivity of employees drops. In terms of McGregor's Theory X and Theory Y, many managers at ABC tend to follow Theory X. They feel workers need to be closely supervised and do not put a lot of trust into them. They also believe that employees work only for money, not for any personal development and satisfaction of a job well done. Managers need to move more towards Theory Y and acknowledge that employees can be ambitious and desire increasing responsibilities. They need to attempt to improve conditions so that employees can be creative and do well (Theory X and Theory Y, 2007, ¶2,3,&7).
Also, just as little time is set aside for training of regular employees, little focus is given on training managers. Many are first-time mangers and do not know what they need to do to be effective. Many put forth the effort to be successful, but are never given the training to make them successful. Others have been in management roles for decades and need to revisit their management styles and determine if they are effective in today’s society. Plus, those managers tend to forget what it was like to be a non-manager. They forget how important it is for them to show interest in their subordinates (Lencioni, 2007). Others, whether they are new to management or not, get wrapped up with the typical busy schedules and intensive tasks of being a manger and are not willing to give up their precious time to make connections with employees. These managers fail to recognize that their primary job is making sure employees have what they need to be productive and effective. There may also be others who are afraid to try to get to know employees on a personal level. They may not know how to act or are afraid they would step into inappropriate territory. When these managers are not given training to remind them of the necessity of getting to know employees and how to do so, many will not take the steps needed for that relationship. In turn, employees may feel anonymity and believe that their job is irrelevant and their contributions are immeasurable (Lencioni, 2007).

SOLUTIONS ABC has several options on ways to improve the company and become an HPO. There is not just one set formula that must be followed in order to get there. The implementation of the transformation to a HPO can occur at a pace desired by ABC. For example, ABC could immediately place HPO transformation as the top importance, put together multiple groups of teams to aid in the process, devote certain time members solely to the project, bring in consultants if necessary, and get managers trained and geared up for the changes.
If ABC does not want sure a quick, dramatic change, ABC could instead complete the process very gradually and go about it by a variety of ways. One option is to go thru the five pieces of being an HPO in order, and make the necessary changes to each section before moving on to the next one. For example, ABC could first do what is needed to value employees as assets and then move on to creating great teams, and so on. Another option is for ABC to look at what needs to be done and rank them in priority, regardless of what category they fall in. Items of top priority would be ones whose change would have the greatest positive impact on employees and the company.
Also, another way of changing ABC into a HPO is by doing what is easiest first. Although the bigger issues will need to be tackled at one point, choosing this method allows a lot to get done right away, and lets employees become more familiar with the process before the bigger items are brought on.
One more option would be to allow the groups the options to pick what they want to work on and in what order, regardless of priority, difficulty, or what section it falls under. This way would enable the groups to feel more part of the process and work on items that are of most interest to them. For example, someone may care a lot about redesigning the benefits package but not care about technology implementation. Although certain individuals will have to be a part of the processes in certain areas (the manager of Comp & Benefits should be part of the benefits package redesign), there could still be some flexibility that can be determined by those groups.
Beyond how gradual and by what means the changes occur, ABC also has some variety on what is actually changed. To become an HPO, it is crucial for a company to hit on all five main parts of being a HPO. However, it is not necessary for them to do every last item suggested as a way to value employees as assets. One company may primarily focus on improving benefit packages and providing facilities like Google’s. Others may work on employee recognition programs, providing better feedback, and encouraging employees. It just depends on what the culture of the company needs and wants the most.
The same goes for training. Although it is good to use a variety of training and personal growth methods, no company has to follow all of them. Some companies may focus on knowledge transfer from other employees, while other companies may prefer to send their employees to seminars. Teams can also be organized in a lot of ways. They can be temporary or permanent and very in size and meeting frequency. They can also just be a group of engineers working on a project, or people in all different departments working on setting up volunteer programs.
In terms of technology, some companies may prefer to invest more in computers, while others may prefer software systems. Although it is necessary to have some balance (for example, having old computers with all types of new software programs typically does not work well together), organizations have the flexibility in choosing what technology is best for them to invest in.
Being achievement orientated and valuing customers is essential for all HPOs. Every company needs to treat their customers well and provide quality products or services on a timely basis, but there is flexibility available there. Some companies focus on customization and please their customers that way. Others focus on only standard products and being able to manufacture a part at a low cost and very quickly.
Companies can chose the variety of methods of what and how the culture is changed. It is just essential for ABC to change, because else employees will continue to get more frustrated and leave the company. Turnover will continue to rise and ABC may even get a very negative connotation by the workforce. If ABC does not keep a stable staff, it will be very difficult for them to be successful. Also, when people feel devalued or do not have the capabilities to grow at all professionally, they tend not to perform the best. When people are not trained, major mistakes can occur and people can be severely injured. Additionally, when education and improving a company’s technology is downplayed, the company will fall behind and have difficulties remaining competitive. Also, if teams are not stressed, ABC will continue to lose the synergy that teams can provide. Finally, if the company becomes unstable, employees are not happy and are not provided training and personal growth, technology is poor, and teams do not exist, they will not be achievement orientated and will not truly value customers.
ABC does not want this to occur. It would be a lot more beneficial for them to transform into an HPO that focuses on some of the items that are part of the five different areas of being an HPO. By becoming an HPO, ABC will not have near as many staffing issues, as turnover will be reduced and satisfaction will increase. ABC will also become a positive name in the workforce and will have more, better quality applicants. Customers will be valued more and treated better. Ultimately, ABC will create a competitive advantage.
A couple of things ABC can do to recognize the need to move to becoming an HPO is do a company-wide survey on the areas that employees feel need the most improvement and what they feel needs to be done. ABC can also compare Fortune Top 100 companies to themselves and recognize the areas in which they are lacking in and what needs to be improved the most. By doing so, it will be clear to ABC that the transformation needs to occur.
Specifically, I feel ABC should have the top-level managers provide initial communications to all employees on what ABC is transforming to and the goals of the transformation, so involvement is promoted. A specific transformation team should be created, and relevant additional teams can also be created as necessary. Monthly updates, such as newsletters, should be sent out to employees to aid with the transitions. Employees should also be provided contact information in case they have any questions along the way. During the process, managers should continue to be involved and show excitement to the transformation.
While I feel it is essential to have a big kickoff and get people motivated, I also think ABC should transform the organizational gradually. A two-year plan would work well because it provides enough time to analyze and implement correctly, yet quick enough that employees should really be able to see the effects of the transformation. Also, I feel that ABC should go about it by prioritizing what needs to be done first in each section. This way, I feel employees will be able to see some results relatively quickly and be really positive about the process of transformation. Also, this method would be quite efficient for the various groups because they all will have things to work on at the same time and will have some flexibility at moving at their own pace.
Specifically, ABC should implement an employee recognition program and focus on providing better feedback to employees. They should also allow engineers some time to develop projects of their choice and encourage employees to have a work-life balance by allowing employees to work varied shifts whenever possible. ABC should also put knowledge-transfer programs into place and highly encourage employees to obtain more education. Teams should also be implemented and used more heavily in future decision-making processes, such as mergers/acquisitions, budgeting, and ideas for new products. Computers, software programs, and such should be analyzed and updated in different areas where their technology is falling behind. The IT team supporting these should also be reviewed and training, as well as additional staff, should be provided if needed. ABC should also hire, train, and reward the best customer service and sales people, as they are who encourages our customers to continue to come back.
I would begin by having one group work on an employee recognition programs and another working on enabling engineers to work on projects of their choice. Another group would develop a team to solely work on mergers and acquisitions, as ABC desperately needs to join forces with a wireless company. In terms of technology, I would have the team first do an analysis of the computers being used by employees and get rid of all of those that are not functioning properly or are more than five years old. Finally, the last team would work with the sales and customer service to find out the areas they need training on the most and perform it. The groups would continue to go down the list of what must be completed in each section and make sure each is implemented and working effectively – according to both the group who implemented it and the other employees affected by it. By following this method, ABC is bound to become a successful HPO with a sustaining competitive advantage.

REFLECTIONS
This assignment has provided me with a great learning experience that will help my future capabilities of making decisions in my personal life, as a graduate student, and in my professional career. Prior to this experience, I have written many undergraduate papers that provided scholarly research as evidence of my points. However, all of those papers were about one topic that was factual (such as Sarbanes Oxley Regulations). I may have expressed my opinion at some point (such as regulations were needed but I feel SOX went too far), but nothing similar to this assignment. Never have I been required to analyze a company’s current culture, find the reasons behind its negative aspects, determine ways in which it can be improved, find research to support my beliefs, provide multiple solutions on how a company can transform, and state the future effects, depending on whether or not the company chooses to transform.
This paper was one of the hardest papers I have had to write, but also the one that has taught me the most about my problem solving and creative thinking skills. This assignment has made me recognize the thought processes that management needs to have and how I need to change myself in order to better contribute to my company. I have learned to question why things are the way they are and to research the reasons; to analyze my findings and to recognize when changes need to be made. I typically always have the attitude “go with the flow” and have always done things the way I was told to do them because that is the way it has always been done. I never used to question it, but I realize the importance of that now. Time is precious; if I can reduce or at least simplify my tasks, I will improve my job responsibilities and create a benefit to the company. This in turn, will show that I am capable of providing innovative solutions and creating positive results for the organization.
Even before this project, I have recognized some areas at ABC that could be improved to better satisfy employees and create better results for the company. However, not until now could I pinpoint what the underlying issues are and legitimate reasons as to why they exist. Also, prior to this exercise, I had the attitude of “Why doesn’t someone do something about this.” Well, although ABC does have the ability to transform into a better company, it is not as simple as it would first seem. My research for this paper has taught me how many different things ABC would need to change in order to become a HPO. I first thought that valuing employees as assets, using teams, and encouraging personal growth was pretty simple. Now I realize the reasons why many companies never make those transitions. It requires a major time commitment from employees throughout the companies. Also, high-level employees have to be willing to put in the hard work to get there and truly believe in the end result else the transition can never occur.
In summary, I am grateful for the learning opportunities provided by this project. I learned a lot about the ways I can improve myself and the company in the future. I have realized the difficulties in determining the underlying issues at companies and finding multiple solutions. I have learned how I can provide more qualitative discussion points in school, how to use my critical thinking skills in my personal life, and ways to analyze data for the benefit of my organization.