Case 4 Training

1. What do you think of Apex’s training process? Could it help to explain why employees “do things
their way” and if so, how? There is a weak accountability system. The person assigned to perform
training is likely to very low motivation (a departing employee). With no formal descriptions the trainer
will teach “their way” of accomplishing tasks. There is no training documentation. One receives training
in “how to train.” There are no outcomes measures to determine if the training was successful.

2. What role do job descriptions play in training? Job descriptions set the boundaries of jobs in terms
of required knowledge and skills. By understanding the job description, a trainer can define the learning
requirements for a new or transitioning employees.

3. Explain in detail what you would do to improve the training process at Apex (make sure to provide
specific suggestions, please). Every position would have a formal (written) description. Training
procedures would be documented for each position. Supervisors would be formally accountable for
training.

Case 3 Compensation

Sandy Caldwell, the new Human Resources Manager for Hathaway manufacturing, wanted to improve
teamwork at every level of the organization. As part of the process of implementing cultural change,
Sandy introduced a new pay for performance system. The reaction to the change was immediate and
“100 % negative”.

1. Does the pay for performance plan have value? Management wants to provide incentive for team
performance. Their motives are fine. Properly crafted (and with employee involvement) a pay for
performance system may add value at Hathaway.

2. What advice would you give Regina and Sandy as they consider their decision? Most scholars
suggest that pay for performance works best (in the US), when it has both an individual and a team
component. Further, Regina and Sandy need to consider ways of engaging the workforce in the
design/decision process. This involvement will likely provide better ideas, identify potential problem
areas with proposed systems before they are implemented and aid in the implementation process.

3. What mistakes did they make in adopting and communicating the new salary plan? How might
Sandy have approached this major compensation change a little differently? Sandy failed to
involve significant stakeholders in the process. Their input would likely have identified potential
weaknesses in her system. Further, by not involving others, the change in pay came largely as a
surprise. Employees take their pay seriously; surprises are not welcome. Sandy already had
agreement on issues like mission. She could have used that agreement to begin a dialog on linking
compensation more directly to the effectively accomplishing the mission.
4. Assuming the new pay plan were eventually accepted, how would you address the fact that in the
new performance evaluation system, employee’s inputs affect their peers’ pay levels? Typically,
plans have two levels – a team component and an individual component. It is important for the
team to realize that the company does best when the whole team succeeds, and that team success
also requires individual performance.