Introduction
Considering the degree of delicacy that is associated with this matter, West Midlands Designers and Architects Ltd. (WMDA) management will have to take time to keenly study all the available options, and employ wisdom together with business sense in making these sensitive choices (Cameron 1994, pp.477-479). With full knowledge that the ultimate decision lies with the owner of the firm, this report provides a well thought out plan of action that sets out to give the firm the business edge it needs and the survival choices that are necessary.
Action Recommendations
An analysis of the four choices that are available, namely: peer selection, last-in- first out (LIFO), voluntary redundancy, and selection on merit, below is a classification founded on the two guiding principles which were identified in the introduction as business edge and survival choices.
Excellent Criterion: Selection on Merit
The determination of who is to leave and who is to remain that is based on merit leaves the management with the most qualified employees who can maintain the competitive edge of the firm. It is also a reward of input in that the most productive employees are naturally rewarded. Thus the best marketers and the best designers and architects should be the last to be considered for elimination. This makes selection by merit an excellent method.
Voluntary Redundancy: Best Criterion
The fact that some members of the firm may be willing to leave without being forced eliminates the necessity to send people who are not ready to leave out of work. Asking employees you have worked with for a long time to leave is not easy. Thus voluntary leave or redundancy saves the management the trouble and guilty of sacking. Matt’s readiness to leave after being given a reasonable package is an ideal case for this option.
Peer Selection and Last In -First Out: The Least Appropriate Options to Use
A careful look at the prevailing economic circumstances leads to the conclusion that using peer selection and last in-first out options will not do the firm any economic justice. To start with peer selection, it is conventional wisdom that no one would wish to be selected by peers to leave the firm. It is even harder when the employees are friendly to each other after periods of shared work experiences. It is also possible that the less qualified workers can gang up and ask a more qualified colleague to leave simply because they hate his sleek dressing style or his cool speaking style. In simple terms, it is easily mixed with personal issues. It is therefore a bad option. The second one in this category of inappropriate options is last in first out. This one can make the management ask a newly hired but highly qualified employee to leave despite the fact that that is the kind of employee the firm needs badly. It is therefore totally unacceptable in terms of business.
The Way Forward
With due consideration of the detailed profiles of the employees, Bryony, Hiroshi, and Felicity are culprits under the criterion of merit. The organizational skills of Bryony are unnecessary at this time since the owner who founded the firm is still active and can do the organization.Hiroshi’s business mind is not needed since this is catered for by the marketers who are in plenty and the owner himself. Furthermore, his connections are not the firm’s priority at the moment. Felicity on her part is more of a socialite. Her value, based on merit, is not high compared to the remaining employees. She is actually at the bottom of the three in classification based on value to the firm.
The last employee will be eliminated based on the criterion of voluntary redundancy since he is willing to leave. Matt has made the offer of leaving provided he is given a package for leaving.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Matt is willing to leave and therefore should be given the facilitation to do so. The other three employees should be asked to leave purely on merit as a way of not only rewarding the best and most productive talent but ensuring that the firm has what it takes to maintain its edge in the architect and design world.
References
Cameron, K.S. 1994. ‘Strategies for Successful Organizational Downsizing. Human Resource Management, Vol. 33: 477-500.