Introduction
The management of human resources has always been a critical aspect of an organization’s success. Whether it is about encouraging employees to perform better or making tough decisions for the company’s overall growth, human resource strategies play a significant role. Two articles, one related to Ford’s unique proposal to its underperforming workers and another discussing the flaws in reward systems, provide interesting insights into these critical aspects of human resource management.
Ford’s Proposal
In Nora Eckert’s article, Ford is suggesting a choice for its underachieving workers: either accept a severance package or enroll in a performance enhancement program. This approach appears to strike a fair balance, ensuring equitable treatment of employees while maintaining the company’s productivity levels (Eckert 1). However, opinions on this matter are subjective and depend on the perspective one adopts.
From Ford’s standpoint, it is a strategic maneuver that could eliminate low-performers and potentially reduce costs. Nonetheless, employees might view it as a stressful decision, particularly if external circumstances are hindering their performance. Personally, I support Ford’s proposition as it provides employees with a second chance to improve their performance and retain their position, rather than facing abrupt termination.
Views on Reward Systems
Steven Kerr, in his article, criticizes the prevalent reward systems in organizations, arguing that they often reward behavior A while hoping for behavior B, leading to dysfunctions within the organization. The systems, he argues, often reward the wrong behaviors, thereby not encouraging the desired outcomes (Kerr 7).
One example that stood out is that of workers being rewarded for the quantity and quarterly earnings rather than the quality of their sales, long-term growth, and environmental responsibility (Kerr 12). This resonated with me as it demonstrated the short-sightedness of some reward systems. Rewarding quantity over quality can lead to long-term damage, such as loss of customer trust and reduced repeat business.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Ford’s offer to underperforming employees is both a clever move and a testament to the complex art of managing people. It emphasizes the importance of finding fair solutions that satisfy everyone involved. Conversely, Kerr’s article serves as a powerful reminder of the potential conflict between a company’s ambitions and the behaviors it encourages. This underscores the need for rewards to be carefully designed, prioritizing long-term goals over short-term gains. The insights shared in both pieces could greatly influence future HR strategies.
Works Cited
Eckert, Nora. “Ford to Offer Some Underperforming Workers Choice of Severance or Performance Improvement.” Wall Street Journal. 2022.
Kerr, Steven. “On the Folly of Rewarding A, While Hoping for B”. Academy of Management Exclusive, vol. 9, no. 1, 1995, pp. 7-14.