Managing Workplace Performance (Verizon Communication INC)

The balance score card was a taproom taken by the Human Resource department, towards appreciateing the quality of their own operations. The point of marketing J. Randall McDonald thought of referring to the framework for the Balanced Score Card (Datar & antiophthalmic factor Epstein, 2001), as set by Kaplan and Nortan in their book, to assess the implementation of the HR and both in term of quantitative and qualitative measures.ImplementationThe carrying out of the balanced score card approach, for the performance measurement, was strategically implied by GTE. The HR department outlined five factors to categorize the measure to be include in the score card. They were (Datar & antiophthalmic factor Epstein, 2001)Talent To invest and advocate in a diverse and talented workforce.Leadership Groom the prospective leaders, assess their contributions and attributes. Holding them responsible and giving them incentives for tasks accomplished.Customer service and support evolve the custo mers with the complete knowledge of the confederations products and services. Foster a customer-oriented approach. nerveal integration Establishing healthy relations with the internal customers/employees and supporting the free precipitate of information.HR capability Investing in the necessary technologies to improve the productiveness of the employees (Cascio, 2002) and assess the performances of individuals for job rotation and enrichment.To stick certain performance measures, for the balanced score card, the HR department formed a squad named PMA. This team was responsible for assessing the overall situation and categorizing different developed as vigorous as suggested performance measures under the five categories defined above.The feedback from the presidents of the different divisions of the comp any(prenominal) had a huge amount of questions gathered to be answered. These questions involved issues regarding (Datar & antiophthalmic factor Epstein, 2001)The competencies of the workersPlacement of workers at the correct jobGTEs concerns towards encouraging g a participative environmentProductivity and efficiency of the Human resource of the organizationCost effectiveness of providing services to customersCost of employees derangementEmployees reward and compensation schemeJustification and Cost-Bene go bad analysis of the investment in the HR by the companySome of the questions posed in Exhibit 2 (Datar & group A Epstein, 2001) which seem superfluous areAre we investing in emergence our HR? Of course they are, in fact that is the reason why they initiated to develop such a scorecard. Are we using technology to improve HR efficiency? Yes, the company is already investing and employing technology in ameliorate the work performance of its employees. Some of the questions that should have been included areHow loafer the company ensure that employees really get the advantage of the investments done on them? How to make the employees realize that the company really cares for their development? Are we recruiting the overcompensate people for the company? What makes the employees, existing as well as prospective, to fit in the company? The number of existing as well as prospective employees should always be balanced against the revenues.However, the non-financial measures also play a vital role in the assessment of the performance of the employees. As per the working of the authors Christopher D. Ittner and David F. Larcker, the activities performed should be checkly linked to the operations, productivity, costs (reductions) and revenues of the company when linking the non-financial measures with productivity and performance of the employee(s) special care should be taken (Christopher & adenylic acid Larcker, 2003). Making ineffective use of controls to measure employees performance might instead lead to employees and customers dissatisfaction. As identified by the two authors, Ittner and Larcker, out of the four mistakes GTE was making the early and the Third one.First Mistake Not linking measures to strategy.By developing the scorecard, the HR only attempted to justify these investments against the short tem incentives such as step-up in sales and/or productivity. However they did not analyzed, at any stage, whether there move was consistent with the overall corporate strategic objectives (Gareth & Charles, 2005). This can be proved by the forecasted increase, by the managers, in the revenues from 1997 finished out till 2006 at 10% per annum. This seemed ridiculous when the figures of high employees turnover and low customer retentions were revealed.Third Mistake Not setting the discipline performance targets.Mr. MacDonald needed to have set the right targets to be achieved by each individual that he hired, trained and placed within the organization. When be their roles and responsibilities, Mr. Randall should have taught the workforce to better understand their targets in correspondence with t heir positions. stopping pointThus in the end we can say that GTE, despite cosmos the largest local landline telephone provider in the U.S., had the difficulties with its employees, which are an summation to any company. The company should exercise a more participative approach, to be successful. It was estimated, as per the article, that 1% increase in the Employee Engagement Index (EEI) reflected a direct increase of 0.48% in the level of customer satisfaction, which is a positive result.ReferencesDatar Srikant & J. Epstein Marc (2001) Verizon Communication INC, Implementing a Balanced Scorecard Harvard fear Review.D. Ittner Christopher & F. Larcker David (2003) sexual climax Up Short on Nonfinancial Performance Measurement Harvard Business Review. Gareth R. Jones, Jennifer M. George & Charles W. L. Hill (2005) Principles of Management. McGraw-Hill Cascio Wayne (2002) Managing Human Resources Productivity, Quality of Work Life, Profits McGraw-Hill/Irwin