1. I believe that UPS’ approach to talent management has a limited degree constrain on its organic growth and competitiveness. I see evidence of UPS's overcoming obstacles to the best of its abilities and balancing between changing market needs and internal, long-time policies and tradition. This is not to say that there aren’t any lessons to be learned and places for improvement. The UPS article starts with a description on a management committee. Straight from the beginning we get insight to UPS approach to talent management with a quote by CEO, Rogers: “So you’re convinced that we can’t locate this talent internally or develop it in the smart computer-trained kids working in our districts?” This is the gist of UPS's approach, which is, “given the proper tools, our people could do anything". In the 80's, although it had the most extensive ground network, UPS had fallen behind in certain technological innovations which required strengthening of its technological teams (later to be called Information Systems). In 1985 UPS had 700 personal computers in operation and in 1986 that number jumped to 4,000. Although the need to hire people from the outside was recognized as a necessity by most employees at UPS, it was not completely accepted. In his article, Cappelli brings four principles for talent management; the first principle is the most relevant in UPS case and says that talent management is an investment, not an entitlement. UPS indeed hired from the outside, but without skipping a significant investment in a slow and costly process of transfers and hires from within. I believe, this approach of internal transfers should be seen for what it is, an investment. From what was brought in the article, it seems that UPS did not succumb entirely to out-side hires nor did they over-force inside transfers, but it was enough to respect and withhold "promotion-from-within policy". Conger & Ready write in the article, processes should support most CEOs’ top concerns: driving performance and creating an effective climate. As I wrote, I believe UPS's approach was balanced and the decision to invest in internal hiring alongside external hires support an effective climate. In order to ensure that UPS has the human capital ready for organic growth I would recommend an improvement to the evaluation of the recruiting and promotion processes which will support the company in future decisions between "hiring VS promoting". The lessons which could be implemented from the P&G example brought by Conger & Ready are; (1) Comparison of an employee's performance to the baseline set during the interviews in order to evaluate the effectiveness of the recruiting process. (2) Evaluation of the success rate of its key promotions in order to evaluate the effectiveness of the promotion process. I would conclude that UPS was able to generate an environment of vitality which is, I believe UPS's "not so" secret weapon and greatest competitive asset. According to Conger & Ready vitality is a product of three defining characteristics: commitment, engagement, and accountability. Commitment and engagement are product of a unique profit-sharing and stockownership plan which cause many UPS employees to consider their UPS employment a lifelong commitment and accountability is achieved in the words of the article: "structure and accountability were emphasized… sweetened with recognition, reward, and daily encouragement for a job well done".
2. UPS’ approach to controlling the way in which its employees do their job is shown on the package car example. "UPS maintained a precise and comprehensive system of measuring performance by route. For this reason little personal supervision of car drivers was required once the initial training was completed." Collins & Clark study assists in concluding that UPS's Top Management Teams (TMT) social networks (mainly internal) will strongly support their human resource (HR) practices and thus their approach to controlling the way in which its employees do their job will remain appropriate as UPS grows, moves into new areas and geographic areas. Collins & Clark argue in their article that TMT social networks are a source of competitive advantage in hi-teqch firms and that a set of network- building HR practices including mentoring, incentives, and performance appraisals to encourage the development of business relationships-are significantly related to TMT networks. UPS had an emphasis on corporate-wide communication and was able to build a strong TMT network. This was supported by publications informing employees about national and local UPS news, weekly meetings between department representatives and top management committee discussing each department’s accomplishments and objectives (with meeting notes then disseminated to the 15,600 managers at UPS) and lastly a conference each spring with top 200 company managers to discuss future strategic plans and present organizational accomplishments.
3. UPS has shown throughout time a strong preference to investment and development of in-house employees as well as reluctance to hire from outside to make up for any shortfall. This approach is key for competitiveness, and in the words of Conger & Ready "Companies apply focus and drive toward capital, information technology, equipment, and world-class processes, but in the end, it’s the people who matter most." This is why I believe that UPS's approach is still appropriate regardless of the change in UPS’s external environment. Human capital is far more important in the long run and I believe there is a truth in UPS's approach that “given the proper tools, our people could do anything". It’s is all about balance and not going to any extremes (internal hires alone OR immediate approach to external hires to fill gaps on the spot).
4. The relatively low turnover at UPS seems to be beneficial for a company such as theirs. I say "seem" as I feel as if I am lacking information about employee performance and turnover percentage in UPS and in the market in general (for comparison) in order to accurately assess this question. In their article, Park and Shaw support my statement by showing that turnover rates damage organizational performance under any circumstances and should be mitigated and eliminated. Siebert and Zubanov claim that while turnover rates among the commitment system will always damage the performance (supporting my claim), whilst the performance of the secondary system will peak at a certain turnover rate since some turnover is needed in order to weed out inefficient employees (article states 15%, however I lack information to compare UPS to this figure). In general, I would like to quote an employee regarding the turnover to conclude my claim "…told me about the low turnover, I knew the company was doing something right.".
5. Managers from various regions and districts exchanged information, forged common objectives, and communicated best and worst performances and technological innovations. Upon returning to their districts and departments, the district managers presented a summary of the issues discussed at the conference to a more immediate group of managers in a modified, day-long presentation that usually included a lunch or dinner.
In addition to the interaction between departments and districts, significant emphasis was placed on communication within areas. Standard methods such as performance appraisals and opinion surveys were used to communicate opinions and performance levels in specified task areas. For verbal communication, districts held Pre-work Communication Meetings (PCMs). A PCM was a three-minute meeting held prior to the start of every work day in the hub or package center to discuss either specific questions about work tasks or larger issues involving competition and strategic direction. Either the immediate supervisor or a representative from a staff function such as customer service or safety would attend a driver or sort PCM and speak about a related issue concerning that
2 “Behind the UPS Mystique: Puritanism and Productivity,” operation. Customer service representatives alone gave over 50,000 PCMs a year. For more personal, one-on-one communication, a managerial tool called the “Talk, Listen, Act” (TLA) program was used to encourage closer coordination and interaction between managers, supervisors, package handlers, and drivers. A TLA was a scheduled meeting that gave employees protected time to express concerns, make suggestions, or simply establish more informal relationships with their managers. TLA meetings were required and monitored by the company for each employee and his or her immediate manager.
6.