Generic Benchmarking for Global Communications

Running Head: GENERIC BENCHMARKING FOR GLOBAL COMMUNICATIONS

Generic Benchmarking for Global Communications

Lisa Harman, Erica James, Mike Jefferies

University of Phoenix

Dr. Tom Riggins, Ph.D.

MBA500

25-June-2004

Generic Benchmarking for Global Communications

Global Communications is facing many challenges with their new vision. By looking at how other companies have addressed these issues and the corresponding outcomes, Global Communications will be able to make educated decisions on the steps they will need to take.

Three major challenges face Global Communications. Organizational communication is the first. This entails issues such as language or personal barriers and choosing the right channels to communicate information effectively internally and externally. The second challenge is the emotions that play into these decisions. Many different types of emotions and attitudes will be present among the managers, employees and in the community. How Global Communications deals with these emotions will be very important to the success of their transition. The last issue is that of the organization's commitment. Global Communications needs a method for maintaining job satisfaction and customer satisfaction while implementing their solutions.

Six different companies have been used to benchmark Global Communications' challenges. They include Pfizer, General Motors, Delta Airlines, Toyota, Caterpillar Inc. and Ford Motor Company. While each company has faced similar issues, there are varying approaches. Global Communications will benefit from evaluating each and selecting which methods will work best given the situation and circumstances.

Organizational Communication

A great deal of documentation exists proving communication is key to the success of any organization, especially those undergoing change. This has become even more evident after researching six companies that all faced dilemmas comparable to what Global Communications is currently experiencing. Although all had variations in their strategy as well as results, one common thread remained: communication was key to achieving the desired results. The better the communication was with each other and with employees, the better the outcome.

The synopsis on General Motors shows they faced a similar situation when it appeared they might be better off closing a plant and opening a new one in another country. For General Motors, their commitment to communicating with the workforce ultimately resulted in a win-win for everybody. Through negotiations they were able create an environment where the employees were working toward a common goal in order to maximize the potential payoff for themselves while easing the company into the change they wanted.

By contrast, the other companies used communication to help avoid possible loss of jobs. Pfizer, Delta Airlines and Toyota all decided to create environments in which their employees were able to take some kind of ownership of what change would look like within the company. All showed a strong commitment toward making their employees feel as if they were important to the success of the organization. Pfizer allowed workers to come up with ways to save the company money, Delta's management took pay cuts right alongside their workers, and Toyota took time to teach each employee "The Toyota Way", which fostered a sense of pride in their work. Each of the companies drew a connection between managers and subordinates for a common purpose and used communication to ensure that everyone understood each other's commitment to the final product. Ford and CAT maintained open negotiations with the workforce which resulted in the restructuring of the job duties and plants. This process of give and take allowed for both parties to achieve a sense of success and accomplishment.

Global Communication is now faced with an important choice. Should they communicate that a decision has been made to close U.S. call centers and get feedback from employees on how the move could best be handled? Or, should they return to the drawing board and see if workers may be able to offer alternatives to the closures? With any option, communication about the ultimate choice will be important in gaining commitment from the organization. Job satisfaction of the employees will be directly related to the effectiveness of the communication strategy, which includes media, timing and the actual message.

Emotional Intelligence

"Emotional Intelligence (EI) is the ability to perceive and express emotion, assimilate emotion in thought, understand and reason with emotion, and regulate emotion in oneself- and others." (McShane & VonGlinow, 2005, p.15). Whenever a company is about to undergo change, it is important to be aware of how individuals directly involved may feel about the change and what steps can be taken to recognize and possibly mitigate issues that arise due to the emotion of the situation. "That's because the emotions people experience and their judgments about various aspects of work make a difference in the organization's performance, customer loyalty, and employee well-being." (McShane & VonGlinow, 2005, p.2). Over time, when a company does a good job of managing emotions and change, inspiring others and supporting teamwork and collaboration, they will be rewarded with employees who have a positive attitude toward the organization and the different characteristics of it. This is referred to as Relationship Management under the wider umbrella of Emotional Intelligence and it takes practice to develop.

The six companies researched have different levels of maturity when it comes to emotional intelligence. For the purposes of this exercise, three categories are used: reactive, proactive, and defuse. General Motors (GM) and Delta airlines recognized they had to find a way to keep their employees happy despite layoffs, pay cuts, and changes in benefits. In order to plan their strategy on how to do that they first had to understand how employees would react to the announcement of the changes. After taking an in-depth look at possible reasons employees would be upset, they each devised a strategy to counter those emotions. General Motors knew they could not avoid layoffs and that unless they found a way to give the disgruntled employees an inventive to work hard, production