Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
16
NEL
PART 6
objective
systems.
objective
objective
objective
objective
objective
objective
16-1
16-2
PART 6
high-performance work
system (HPWS)
A specific combination of
HR practices, work structures, and processes that
maximizes employee
knowledge, skill, commitment, and flexibility
objective
Fundamental Principles
CHAPTER 16
Figure 16.1
16-3
Linkages
to
Strategy
SYSTEM DESIGN
Work flow
HRM practices
Support technology
Principles
of High
Involvement
The
Implementation
Process
OUTCOMES
Organizational
Employee
PART 6
Figure 16.2
PW
PW
Shared
Information
Knowledge
Development
PW
PW
Egalitarianism
16-4
Performance
Reward
Linkage
work and are therefore in the best position to recognize problems and devise solutions to them. Today organizations are relying on the expertise and initiative of
employees to react quickly to incipient problems and opportunities. Without
timely and accurate information about the business, employees can do little more
than simply carry out orders and perform their roles in a relatively perfunctory
way. They are unlikely to understand the overall direction of the business or
contribute to organizational success.
On the other hand, when employees are given timely information about business performance, plans, and strategies, they are more likely to make good
suggestions for improving the business and to cooperate in major organizational
changes. They are also likely to feel more committed to new courses of action if
they have input in decision making. The principle of shared information typifies a
shift in organizations away from the mentality of command and control toward one
more focused on employee commitment. It represents a fundamental shift in the
relationship between employer and employee. If executives do a good job of communicating with employees and create a culture of information sharing, employees
are perhaps more likely to be willing (and able) to work toward the goals for the
organization. They will know more, do more, and contribute more.2 At FedEx
Canada, at every single station across Canada, company officers and managing
directors meet with employees at 5:30 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. to review the business
data and answer questions.3
NEL
CHAPTER 16
16-5
16-6
PART 6
People want a sense that they are members, not just workers, in an organization. Status and power differences tend to separate people and magnify
whatever disparities exist between them. The us versus them battles that
have traditionally raged between managers, employees, and labour unions
are increasingly being replaced by more cooperative approaches to managing
work. More egalitarian work environments eliminate status and power difwww.nucor.com/aboutus.htm
ferences and, in the process, increase collaboration and teamwork. When this
happens, productivity can improve if people who once worked in isolation
from (or in opposition to) one another begin to work together.
Nucor Steel has an enviable reputation not only for establishing an egalitarian
work environment but also for the employee loyalty and productivity that stem from
that environment. Upper levels of management do not enjoy better insurance programs, vacation schedules, or holidays. In fact, certain benefits such as Nucors profitsharing plan, scholarship program, employee stock purchase plan, extraordinary
bonus plan, and service awards program are not available to Nucors officers at all.
Senior executives do not enjoy traditional perquisites such as company cars, corporate
jets, executive dining rooms, or executive parking places. On the other hand, every
Nucor employee is eligible for incentive pay and is listed alphabetically on the companys annual report.
Moving power downward in organizationsthat is, empowering employees
frequently requires structural changes. Managers often use employee surveys, suggestion
systems, quality circles, employee involvement groups, and/or unionmanagement
committees that work in parallel with existing organizational structures. In addition,
work flow can be redesigned to give employees more control and influence over decision
making. At Old Home Foods, one of the few independent, exclusively cultured dairy
product manufacturers in North America, all employees are involved in the decisionmaking process of the business. Its part of the Old Home Foods culture, says owner
Peter Arthur P. A. Hanson. To be a successful independent, you need to empower your
employees and let them know they are critical to success.5 Job enlargement, enrichment,
and self-managing work teams are typical methods for increasing the power of
employees to influence decisions, suggest changes, or act on their own. With decreasing
power distances, employees can become more involved in their work; their quality of
work life is simultaneously increased, and organizational performance is improved.
These four principlesshared information, knowledge development, performance
reward linkage, and egalitarianismare the basis for designing high-performance work
systems. They also cut across many of the topics and HR practices we have talked about
elsewhere in this textbook. These principles help us integrate practices and policies to
create an overall high-performance work system.
Nucor makes no secret of the
importance of its employees. Read
about its management philosophy
and incentive-based compensation
plans at Nucor at:
objective
CHAPTER 16
16-7
Figure 16.3
Shared
Information
Work flow
Self-managed teams
Empowerment
Staffing
Selective recruiting
Team decision making
Training
Broad skills
Cross-training
Problem solving
Team training
Compensation
Incentives
Gainsharing
Profit sharing
Skill-based pay
Leadership
Few layers
Coaches/facilitators
Technologies
HRIS
Communications
NEL
Knowledge
Development
Performance
Reward
Linkage
Egalitarianism
16-8
PART 6
installed in the delivery trucks to help teams of drivers balance routes among those
with larger or lighter loads.7
Similarly, when Colgate-Palmolive opened a plant in Cambridge, Ohio, managers
specifically designed teams around key work processes to produce products such
as Ajax, Fab, Dynamo, and Palmolive detergent. Instead of separating each stage of
production into discrete steps, teams work together in a seamless process to produce
liquid detergent, make polyurethane bottles, fill those bottles, label and package the
products, and deliver them to the loading dock.
By redesigning the work flow around key business processes, companies such as
Federal Express and Colgate-Palmolive have been able to establish a work environment
that facilitates teamwork, takes advantage of employee skills and knowledge, empowers
employees to make decisions, and provides them with more meaningful work.8
Staffing Practices
Many high-performance work systems begin with highly directive recruitment and
selection practices. Recruitment tends to be both broad and intensive in order to get
the best pool of candidates from which to choose. Then, by selecting skilled individuals with the ability to learn continuously and work cooperatively, organizations are
likely to make up for the time and expense they invested in selection. The good news
is that human resources information systems have made it easier for firms to compile
an inventory of their talent and search for employees with the specific skills they
need. Talented employees come up to speed more quickly and take less time to
develop. Too often organizations try to save money by doing a superficial job of hiring.
As a consequence, they run the risk of hiring the wrong people and spending more on
training and/or outplacement, severance, and recruitment of replacements. Especially
in organizations that try to stay lean, perhaps after a painful cycle of downsizing,
HPWS can be instrumental for effective performance.10
CHAPTER 16
16-9
Compensation
Another important piece of a high-performance work system is the compensation
package. Because high-performance work systems ask many different things from
employees, it is difficult to isolate one single approach to pay that works for everyone.
As a consequence, many companies are experimenting with alternative compensation
plans. In order to link pay and performance, high-performance work systems often
include some type of employee incentives. For example, an average of 10 percent of
Saturn employees pay is linked to goals for quality and training. Other organizational
incentives such as gainsharing, profit-sharing, and employee stock ownership plans
focus employee efforts on outcomes that benefit both themselves and the organization
as a whole. The Scanlon Plan, the Rucker Plan, and Improshare, three systems discussed
in Chapter 10, have been used by companies such as TRW, Weyerhaeuser, and Xaloy to
elicit employee suggestions and reward them for contributions to productivity.
High-performance work systems may also incorporate skill-based pay plans. By
paying employees based on the number of different job skills they have, organizations
such as Shell Canada, Nortel Networks, and Honeywell hope to create both a broader
skill base among employees and a more flexible pool of people to rotate among
interrelated jobs. Both of these qualities are beneficial in a high-performance work
environment and may justify the added expense in compensation. Honeywell has even
experimented with what it calls intracapitala pool of money employees can spend
on capital improvements if the company meets profitability goals.12
Recall that in addition to linking pay and performance, high-performance work
systems are also based on the principle of egalitarianism. To reinforce this principle in
plants utilizing high-performance work systems, Monsanto, AES, and Honeywell
recently implemented an all-salaried workforce. The open pay plan, in which everyone
knows what everyone else makes, is yet another feature of compensation systems used
to create a more egalitarian environment that encourages employee involvement and
commitment.13
16-10
PART 6
the modification of business processes necessary to support the change. These concerns
will be addressed in more detail shortly in our discussion of implementation issues.
Organizations such as American Express and Reebok International found that the
success of any high-performance work system depends on first changing the roles
of managers and team leaders. With fewer layers of management and a focus
on team-based organization, the role of managers and supervisors is substantially different in an environment of high-performance work systems. Managers and supervisors are seen more as coaches, facilitators, and integrators of team efforts.14 Rather
than autocratically imposing their demands on employees and closely watching to
make certain that the workers comply, managers in high-performance work systems
share responsibility for decision making with employees. Typically, the term manager
is replaced by the term team leader. And in a growing number of cases, leadership is
shared among team members. Kodak, for example, rotates team leaders at various
stages in team development. Alternatively, different individuals can assume functional
leadership roles when their particular expertise is needed most.
objective
NEL
CHAPTER 16
16-11
States that are world leaders . . . through the integration of people, technology,
and business systems. Figure 16.4 summarizes the internal and external linkages
needed to fit high-performance work systems together.
Recall from Chapter 2 that internal fit occurs when all the internal elements of the
work system complement and reinforce one another. For example, a first-rate selection
system may be of no use if it is not working in conjunction with training and development activities. If a new compensation program elicits and reinforces behaviours
that are directly opposed to the goals laid out in performance planning, the two components would be working at cross purposes.
This is the true nature of systems. Changes in one component affect all the other
components. Because the pieces are interdependent, a new compensation system may
have no effect on performance if it is implemented on its own. Horizontal fit means
testing to make certain that all of the HR practices, work designs, management
processes, and technologies complement one another. The synergy achieved through
overlapping work and human resources practices is at the heart of what makes a highperformance system effective.
Figure 16.4
C
V
ny
pa
om lues
a
Comp
e
Challe titi
ng
ve s
e
HIGH-PERFORMANCE
WORK SYSTEMS
Strategy
Em
ployee
Conc ns
er
EXTERNAL FIT
Work-flow
Design
HR
Practices
INTERNAL FIT
Technologies
NEL
Leadership
16-12
PART 6
To achieve external fit, high-performance work systems must support the organizations goals and strategies. This begins with an analysis and discussion of competitive
challenges, organizational values, and the concerns of employees and results in a
statement of the strategies being pursued by the organization.16
Xerox, for example, uses a planning process known as Managing for Results,
which begins with a statement of corporate values and priorities. These values and
priorities are the foundation for establishing three-to-five-year goals for the organization. Each business unit establishes annual objectives based on these goals, and the
process cascades down through every level of management. Ultimately, each employee
within Xerox has a clear line of sight to the values and goals of the organization so
he or she can see how individual effort makes a difference.17
Efforts such as this to achieve vertical fit help focus the design of high-performance
work systems on strategic priorities. Objectives such as cost containment, quality
enhancement, customer service, and speed to market directly influence what is expected
of employees and the skills they need to be successful. Terms such as involvement, flexibility, efficiency, problem solving, and teamwork are not just buzzwords. They are translated
directly from the strategic requirements of todays organizations. High-performance work
systems are designed to link employee initiatives to those strategies.
objective
So far we have talked about the principles, practices, and goals of high-performance
work systems. Unfortunately, these design issues compose probably less than half of
the challenges that must be met in ensuring system success. Much of what looks good
on paper gets messy during implementation. The American Society for Training and
Development (ASTD) asked managers and consultants to identify the critical factors
NEL
CHAPTER 16
16-13
HR planning
Recruiting and
selection
Training and
development
Performance
management
and appraisal
Compensation
and benefits
Work organization
(e.g., teams)
Communication
systems
HR performance
measurement
Training
and
Development
Performance
Management
and
Appraisal
Compensation
Work
and
Organization
Benefits (e.g., Teams)
Communication
Systems
HR
Performance
Measurement
Cost
Value
Creation
30
20
10
20
30
+30
40
+30
10
30
+20
20
50
+40
Source: Brian Becker, Mark Huselid, and Dave Ulrich, The HR Scorecard (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001).
that can make or break a high-performance work system. The respondents identified
the following actions as necessary for success (see Figure 16.5):
Make a compelling case for change linked to the companys business strategy.
Ensure that change is owned by senior and line managers.
Allocate sufficient resources and support for the change effort.
Ensure early and broad communication.
Ensure that teams are implemented in a systemic context.
Establish methods for measuring the results of change.
Ensure continuity of leadership and champions of the initiative.19
NEL
16-14
PART 6
Recruitment
and
Selection
Employment stability
Team-based behaviours
Strategy-focused
behaviours
High-talent staffing
level
50
Training
and
Development
Management
and
Appraisal
Compensation
and
Benefits
Work
Organization
(e.g., Teams)
Communication
Systems
50
20
30
20
40
+40
50
Figure 16.5
Build a
case for
change
Communicate
Involve
union
Navigate
transition
Evaluation
NEL
CHAPTER 16
16-15
Team-Based
Behaviours
StrategyFocused
Performance
1. Shorten product
development times
80
30
+30
20
3. Enhance productivity
4. Develop and successfully
manage joint ventures
20
10
10
High-Talent
Staffing
Level
50
40
50
top management typically played the role of sponsor/champion and spent a substantial portion of his or her time in that role communicating with employees about the
reasons and approaches to change. Major transformation should not be left to middle
managers. Rather, the CEO and the senior management team need to establish
the context for change and communicate the vision more broadly to the entire organization. For example, executives at Harley-Davidson tried to institute employee
involvement groups without first demonstrating their own personal commitment to
the program. Not surprisingly, employees were apathetic and in some cases referred
to the proposed changes as just another fine program put in place by the personnel
department. Harley-Davidson executives learned the hard way that commitment
from the top is essential in order to establish mutual trust between employees and
managers. Similarly, the CEO of a business-consulting company was adamant that his
24 vice-presidents understand a new initiative and give a short speech at an introductory session. On the day of the programs launch, however, the CEO himself did
not show up. The message to the vice-presidents was clear: The CEO didnt think the
change was important enough to become an active participant. Not surprisingly,
the change was never implemented.20
One of the best ways to communicate business needs is to show employees where
the business is todayits current performance and capabilities. Then show them
where the organization needs to be in the future. The gap between today and the future
NEL
16-16
PART 6
represents a starting point for discussion. When executives at TRW wanted to make a
case for change to high-performance work systems, they used employee attitude
surveys and data on turnover costs. The data provided enough ammunition to get
conversation going about needed changes and sparked some suggestions about how
they could be implemented.
Highlights in HRM 16.2 shows what happened when BMW bought British Land
Rover and began making changes without first talking through the business concerns.
Ironically, in this case, BMW unwittingly dismantled an effective high-performance
work system. Now that Ford owns the company, will things work differently?
CHAPTER 16
16-17
NEL
16-18
PART 6
Figure 16.6
Values
MANAGERS
Interests
Goals
UNION
CHAPTER 16
16-19
Adhering to Procedures
Once processes, agreements, and ground rules are established, they are vital to the
integrity of the relationship. As Ruth Wright, manager of the Council for Senior
Human Resource Executives, puts it, Procedure is the rug on which alliances stand.
Pull it out by making a unilateral management determination or otherwise changing
the rules of the game, and the initiative will falter. Procedure keeps the parties focused,
and it is an effective means of ensuring that democracy and fairness prevail.24
In most cases, a home-grown process works better than one that is adopted from
elsewhere. Each organization has unique circumstances, and parties are more likely to
commit to procedures they create and own.
16-20
PART 6
retrofitted, the process may occur a bit more clumsily. When Honeywell switched
to high-performance work systems, employees attended training programs and participated in the redesign of their jobs while the plant was shut down to be re-equipped
with new technology. When the new plant was reopened, self-managing teams were put
in place and a new pay system was implemented for the high-performance workforce.26
Not every organization has the luxury of suspending operations while changes are
put in place. Nevertheless, establishing an implementation structure keeps everyone
on track and prevents the system from bogging down. The structure provides a
timetable and process for mapping key business processes, redesigning work, and
training employees.
Once high-performance work systems are in place, they need to be monitored and evaluated over time. Several aspects of the review process should be addressed. First, there
should be a process audit to determine whether the system has been implemented as it
was designed and whether the principles of high-performance work systems are being
reinforced. Questions such as the following might be included in the audit:
Are employees actually working together, or is the term team just a label?
Are employees getting the information they need to make empowered decisions?
Are training programs developing the knowledge and skills employees need?
Are employees being rewarded for good performance and useful suggestions?
Are employees treated fairly so that power differences are minimal?
Second, the evaluation process should focus on the goals of high-performance
work systems. To determine whether the program is succeeding, managers should look
at such issues as the following:
Are desired behaviours being exhibited on the job?
Are quality, productivity, flexibility, and customer service objectives being met?
Are quality-of-life goals being achieved for employees?
Is the organization more competitive than in the past?
NEL
CHAPTER 16
16-21
objective
16-22
PART 6
Recall that in Chapter 2 we said that organizations can create a sustainable competitive advantage through people if they focus on four criteria. They must develop
competencies in their employees that have the following qualities:
Valuable: High-performance work systems increase value by establishing ways to
increase efficiency, decrease costs, improve processes, and provide something
unique to customers.
Rare: High-performance work systems help organizations develop and harness
skills, knowledge, and abilities that are not equally available to all organizations.
Difficult to imitate: High-performance work systems are designed around team
processes and capabilities that cannot be transported, duplicated, or copied by
rival firms.
Organized: High-performance work systems combine the talents of employees
and rapidly deploy them in new assignments with maximum flexibility.30
NEL
CHAPTER 16
16-23
These criteria clearly show how high-performance work systems in particular, and
human resources management in general, are instrumental in achieving competitive
advantage through people.
However, for all their potential, implementing high-performance work systems is
not an easy task. The systems are complex and require a good deal of close partnering
among executives, line managers, HR professionals, union representatives, and
employees. Ironically, this very complexity leads to competitive advantage. Because
high-performance work systems are difficult to implement, successful organizations
are difficult to copy. The ability to integrate business and employee concerns is indeed
rare, and doing it in a way that adds value to customers is especially noteworthy.
Organizations such as Wal-Mart, Microsoft, and Southwest Airlines have been able to
do it, and as a result they enjoy a competitive advantage.
objective
We conclude our discussion of high-performance work systems by noting their applicability to small and medium-sized organizations. While many of the examples used to
illustrate the popularity of HPWSs come from large, well-known companies, the
philosophies, principles, and techniques that underlie HPWSs are equally appropriate
to the management of enterprises of all sizes. It would be wrong to think that the four
principles of HPWSs identified by Lawler (sharing information with employees, linking
pay to performance, training and developing employees, and fostering an egalitarian
work culture) are somehow unique to Fortune 1000 organizations. Nor would it be correct to surmise that the anatomy of HPWSs is applicable only to large corporations.
Progressive organizations of all sizes have successfully implemented team-based work
systems, implemented staffing practices that select high-quality employees, developed
training programs that continually update employee skills, and utilized compensation
practices that support specific organizational goals. The key is that they have done these
things in a coordinated, integrative manner. These smaller organizations have simply
achieved a system approach to organizational design that combines HR practices, work
structures, and processes that effectively utilize employee competencies.
Readers of this text will find the principles of HPWSs of great assistance as they
manage human resources, regardless of organizational size.
objective
objective
SUMMAR Y
objective
objective
PART 6
16-24
KEY TERMS
external fit, 16-12
high-performance work system
(HPWS), 16-2
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
1. Do you think the four principles of high involvement provide an adequate context for designing
high-performance work systems? What other
concerns or guidelines for developing highperformance work systems would you suggest?
2. In many cases, organizations use teams as a part of
their high-performance work systems. Could such
systems be useful in organizations that do not use
teams? What special concerns might you have to
address?
3. Although both internal and external fit are important concerns with high-performance work systems,
which do you consider more critical and why?
NEL
CHAPTER 16
16-25
INTERNET EXERCISE
The principle of employee involvement is critical to the
success of HPWS. As a purchaser of this text, you have
online access to Canadian HR Reporter. Go to the
article on Employee Engagement, in Vol 18, Issue 15,
HRM Experience
Assessing the Strategic Fit of High-Performance Work
Systems
High-performance work systems (HPWSs) are potentially powerful tools for managing
employee commitment, involvement, and excellence. However, ensuring that all of the HR
practices support one anotherand the principles underlying the HPWSis not always easy.
At times, certain HR practices may support the HPWS while others actually may work against
the principles. But if all the HR practices are not aligned, the system may be doomed. It takes
only one misaligned practice to crash the whole system. Recall that the HPWS principles
include the following:
Shared information
Knowledge development
Performancereward linkage
Egalitarianism
Assignment
The figure on the following page lists the main HR practices used at Egan Clothiers, Ltd.
Working in teams of four to six, assess the extent to which you believe each HR practice
supports (or works against) each of the HPWS principles.
1. For each cell in the matrix, insert a number indicating the extent to which you believe
the HR practice supports the principle or is counterproductive. The scale runs
from 5 (strongly counterproductive) to 5 (very supportive). Zero indicates neither support
nor detriment.
2. When you are done filling in each cell, add the numbers across each row to determine how
supportive each HR practice is of all of the principles. Which HR practice is most supportive of the HPWS principles? Which HR practice is of most concern?
3. Add each column to see how the overall set of HR practices supports each principle.
Which principle is most strongly supported? Which principle is the biggest concern?
4. Add the rows and/or columns to see how well the HPWS is supported overall. What
changes would you recommend to improve the system?
NEL
16-26
PART 6
STRUCTURE
Egalitarianism
Knowledge
Performance
Development Reward Linkage
Cross-functional team
Department rotation
Row
Row
1
2
Row
Row
3
4
Row
Row
5
6
Row
Row
Row
7
8
9
HR PRACTICES
STAFFING
Select for experience
Promote from within
TRAINING
Retail selling skills
Customer service
REWARDS
Results appraisal
Forced distribution
Individual incentives
TECHNOLOGY
HR Info System
Post performance
SCORING KEY
Row 10
Row 11
Column 1
Column 2
Column 3
Column 4
TOTAL
BIZFLIX EXERCISES
CHAPTER 16
case study
HPWS Transforms
Nevada Plant into
One in a Million
16-27
QUESTIONS
1. What are the key aspects of Ocean Sprays high-performance work system?
2. Do you think the system achieves both internal and external fit?
3. What other HR practices might the company consider implementing?
Source: Condensed from Andrea Foote, One in a Million: Ocean Spray Henderson Has Parlayed Hard
Work and Dedication into a Remarkable Operations Milestone, Beverage World 122, no. 8 (August 15,
2003): 2229.
case study
HPWS at Xerox
Corporation
NEL
16-28
PART 6
version of empowered teams, what it called family groups. These family groups
became the cornerstone for high-performance work systems throughout the companys service organization around the globe. Xerox service managers realized that
they could improve productivity if responsibility for decision making moved closer to
the point of customer contact. As empowered work groups evolved, the company
began to realize that the groups could not function effectively unless other aspects of
the company changed as well. Employees complained that they were evaluated and
rewarded as individuals despite being organized as teams. Team members were not
receiving the kind of information they needed to make decisions. This led Xerox
to consider the entire system in which teams operated. And thus high-performance
systems were born.
Perhaps the best example of a transition to HPWS is the Ohio Customer Business
Unit (CBU), based in Columbus, Ohio. High-performance work systems were not
introduced overnight, but through an incremental process that has taken nearly ten
years. The first few steps were timid ones, consisting primarily of training in team
dynamics and facilitation skills. Next, Xerox realized the importance of analyzing and
reengineering work processes. All of the primary processes such as reliability, parts
planning, and team facilitation were analyzed and documented. In each work group,
process owners were identified and each team member took on a different role.
As process owners, team members had decision-making responsibility and
accountability for such day-to-day decisions as work scheduling and for larger decisions such as hiring and performance reviews. The new responsibilities created some
problems. Work-group members were expected to make decisions, but they often
lacked relevant information.
In response, Xerox created a management information system to track and summarize key business indicators. Most of the business information is updated monthly.
Some information, such as expense reports, is updated weekly. The system also
provides teams with indicators of customer satisfaction levels several times a month.
At each team meeting, members share information about the companys business plan
and its financial performance.
The communication system wasnt the only thing that had to be modified to
support high-performance work systems. Teams had to be tied together by common
objectives and incentives. They had to be compensated in a way that fostered
collaboration between team members and motivated them to work toward team
goals. As a result, Xerox moved to a pay-for-performance compensation system called
Workgroup Excellence, which rewards the performance of a team as a whole. Then,
within each team, rewards are distributed on the basis of such factors as experience.
Some managers struggled with the new work systems. To increase their understanding, some were sent to Xeroxs service operation in Phoenix, Arizona, which had
also been experimenting with empowered teams. There they learned that the key to
managerial support for work groups was to have managers structured into the work
groups themselves. Only after experiencing team dynamics and acquiring the skills to
work in teams were the managers able to address the needs of the teams they oversaw.
The Ohio CBU became the top service organization within Xerox, with customer
satisfaction levels around 94 percent on service calls. It also has the lowest maintenance expenses per vehicle of any service unit within Xerox. Evidence of success for
other high-performance work systems at Xerox is easy to find. Service organizations
reported increases in all their target areas. Customer satisfaction increased by as much
as ten points, with each point representing millions of dollars of business. Employee
satisfaction improved 15 percent. Increases of 10 to 15 percent in response time and
reliability occurred as well.
NEL
CHAPTER 16
16-29
QUESTIONS
1. If you were a manager at Xerox, what concerns would you have with the way the
work systems?
3. Why do you suppose some Xerox managers resisted the new systems?
Source: Martha A. Gephart and Mark E. Van Buren, The Power of High Performance Work Systems,
Training & Development 50, no. 10 (October 1996): 2136; Julie Demers, Service Drives a New Xerox
Program, CMA Management 76 no. 3 (May 2002): 3639.
case study
Iamss Pet
Project
Iams Pet Food Company holds quarterly communication meetings with its employees
at all of its 11 major facilities worldwide and has been doing so since 1985even after
being acquired by Procter & Gamble in 2000. Several members of the leadership
team, including the owner and the president, have attended every one of these meetings. This method of communication helped pump the companys growth. In 1985,
Iams had about $50 million in sales, with a couple of hundred employees in three
major locations. At the end of 2004, its sales were over $1.6 billion, and the company
had thousands of employees worldwide.
In 1985, Iamss HR Department performed its first employee attitude survey. The
overall scores on the 21-question survey were very good. But one statement on the
survey had a very low score, which caught the attention of the ownership and the leadership team. The statement was: We do not get enough information about how well
our work group and company are doing. Employees were telling management that
they felt left out of the picture as the company was growing. Something was not right
when it came to communication.
This was a wake-up call to the ownership and leadership team because the company philosophy was built around Culture, Customers, Products, and People (CCPP).
Because top management truly believed in this philosophy, they felt it was critical to
improve the overall communication process in the company. Management decided
they needed to report information to the employees as if they were shareholders, even
though Iams was a privately held company.
The leadership team also knew that if they did not take action to improve communication, a third party might be needed to represent Iams employees in communications with Iams management. This could put even more distance between
management and employees and further complicate the open communication process
management envisioned. The process they finally settled on was to hold informationsharing Quarterly Meetings as if their employees were indeed shareholders.
HOW IT WORKS
How does this Quarterly Meetings communication process work? Iams employee
quarterly meetings are held four times a year at the home office, R&D, the plants, and
key international locations. Senior managers travel to each location and share business results, as well as other pertinent information (future plans, products, strategies,
NEL
16-30
PART 6
and so on). The leadership at each of the companys locations also shares local results.
This is done in a group setting with all employees attending the meeting.
The importance of real two-way communication became clear when this process
became a platform for all types of improvements. First, this forum allows all
employees to become active shareholders as they receive up-to-date key company
results. This is important, because each employee is on a bonus incentive plan tied
into sales, profit, and ROI.
The forum also allows for open dialogue between the employee audience and
senior management after the presentations are completed. The meetings allow a great
amount of information to be passed along in a timely manner and add to team speed.
Even though quarterly all-employee meetings would seem to take away from team
speed and production, they really have enhanced both.
BUILDING TRUST
Another important aspect of the quarterly meetings is the trust that develops between
employees and management. The meetings are characterized by total openness,
acceptance of criticism, demand for feedback, a nonthreatening atmosphere, and
honest responses to open-ended questions, without prefabricated answers. This type
of atmosphere creates a learning process for all participants in the meetings.
The Trust Factor is a personal growth issue for everyone. For instance, a unique
feature at every meeting is the president or a senior vice-president speaking directly to
new employees in front of all employees about the companys vision, values, and
strategies as a welcome to the company. This sets the tone for the whole meeting and
encourages employee trust and participation. The secret of success is in an honest,
plainly worded presentation of facts, placing all the cards on the table. Sharing
important company information and organizational performance results with the
entire company community shows a genuine concern from leadership.
Finally, holding these meetings on a regular basis is critical to building trust. As a
result, all team members now hold themselves publicly accountable for what they say
they are going to do. When this happens, trust comes alive. More and more positive
performances start to happen within the organization.
Through this process, expectations of high performance for every member of the
organization (including the leaders) are communicated. It is a two-way street: The
leadership looks for feedback and ideas from every level of the company and
employees are kept well-informed, focused on company goals, and motivated to
follow through. Confidence and trust are continually established between the leadership and the members because they truly understand one another and have the
opportunity to talk to each other.
Through this process the leadership of the company keeps everyone focused on
the vision, mission, strategies, and goals of the organization. Because this is done
every quarter, major changes, missed directions, and communication issues can
quickly be corrected and action taken to get back on course.
ADMINISTRATION
Holding company-wide meetings is always a challenge. Deciding where to hold them
and the best time of the week to hold them is tricky. The Iams Company uses local
high school auditoriums and community centres as well as its own meeting rooms
at remote locations. The best days of the week for Iams are Thursday, Friday, or
Monday; the meetings are spread out over a three-week period to reach the various
NEL
CHAPTER 16
16-31
locations. Human Resources orchestrates the agenda, the mechanics, and the
delivery.
At the end of the program, all local and home office leadership stands in front of
the audience to answer questions. If a member of the leadership team does not know
an answer, he or she is charged with finding the answer, getting back to the individual
questioner, and posting it for everyone to see. This shows that the leadership can be
trusted to follow through and respond to employeesthat they care about and
respect their employees.
THE RESULTS
So what does this communication process do for the company? First, it provides direction to the entire company team. It provides the answers to what is being done, where
the company is going, and how it will get there.
Second, it provides definition. It helps everyone understand why certain actions
are being taken, certain products made, certain methods used. It helps establish the
importance of everyones job in the overall scheme of things. It sets the definitions for
quality and productivity. It responds to individual and group concerns about company social and administrative programs. Most important, it explains why we are
doing the things we do.
Third, it is about drive. It provides for the spirit of togetherness. It makes the
vision, values, and strategies of the company come alive to everyone. It keeps the team
focused and moving forward toward the common goal.
Finally, this forum is an opportunity for senior management to develop their
leadership skills. Having location, division, or department heads stand before those
they lead and provide current performance updates and answer questions develops
their leadership abilities. Answering why and how, clarifying issues that might be
starting to fester, handling questions without threatening the individualthese are
some of the critical elements company leadership must master. Iamss management
gets plenty of opportunities to demonstrate courage, passion, integrity, and
empathy.
THE COST
This type of program requires a great deal of effort and cost: shutting down part or all
of an office or plant operation for three to four hours once a quarter, the time and
travel of presenters, and IT and audiovisual support. Is this type of human resource
strategic effort worth the cost and effort involved? Each company or organization will
have to make that determination, depending on its size and number of locations. For
Iams, the benefits are real and this forum supports the concepts of performance management and management performance.
HR CATALYST
HR leadership can be the strategic catalyst to move this type of organizational communication forward. Creativity needs to come forward no matter what the size of
the organization to make this two-way communication process become a reality.
Communication technology (such as videoconferencing) is readily available to
support the effort. But never forget the power of face-to-face contact and the importance of top managements willingness to be there to answer the organizations
questions. Current business events continue to point toward the need for establishing trust.
NEL
16-32
PART 6
QUESTIONS
1. What aspects (principles, practices, and so on) of high-performance work
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
NEL
CHAPTER 16
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
NEL
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
16-33
16-34
26.
27.
28.
PART 6
29.
30.
NEL