It could not be valid because it doesn’t test for the right thing (in this case, honesty) or it doesn’t predict honest behavior well.
a cheater will get a good score on an honesty test, because they’re a consistent/reliable cheater
can’t be vice versa, must be valid in order to be reliable
o Agreeableness: the degree to which someone is trusting, amiable, generous, tolerant, honest, cooperative and flexible
o Conscientiousness: the degree to which someone is dependable, and organized and conform and perseveres on tasks (People with low levels tend to ignore safety rules and regulations and, thus, tend to have more accidents and injuries then people with higher levels) (MOST RELATED TO JOB PERFORMANCE)
o Emotional stability: the degree to which someone is secure, calm, independent and autonomous
o Openness to experience: the degree to which someone is intellectual, philosophical, insightful, creative, artistic and curious
– it depends. depends on the personality test (myers briggs (not valid predictor) or Big 5 (can be predictive) or another one)? also depends on the job (ex: Big 5 measuring extraversion is good for sales job)
It’s not surprising that these tasks are a valid predictor because they’re tasks that directly relate to what they’ll be doing in the job
everything that happens with the assessment center can be traced to what happens in the job (so it relies heavily on job analysis) so if the person does well in a fake situation, you can predict he’ll do well in the real job, or vice versa
Structured Interview to ask about their experience, what makes them right for the job
Drug test for obvious reasons, just want to make sure the airport security officers won’t be abusing any drugs while he’s supposed to be alert and keeping the airport safe
Background check to make sure the person isn’t undesirable, also to avoid any negligent hiring lawsuits if God forbid something were to happen
Assessment center – real life tasks commonly found in the job (requires job analysis)
application → narrowed down pool answers written situational questions → narrowed down pool does situational interviews or physical ability tests
*need to think about utility (for example, a personality test is a cheaper way to narrow the pool that a situational assessment center)
“multiple hurdle strategy”: only progress if you got over the last hurdle
as opposed to:
“clinical strategy”: where every applicant takes every part of selection process and judge
them after everyone has completed everything
“statistical strategy”: people take all the elements of the selection system but weigh them
differently (assign each part a # of points)
maybe do initial multiple hurdles, then whoever makes it goes through 3 statistical
elements (blend these strategies)
how would the airport validate the structured interview? *EXAM*
make sure the judgement of the interview actually relates to how the person does in the job?
If an applicant thinks that the selection process is unfair, they might file a…
· Applicants believe that personality traits are not job relevant
· If an applicant thinks that the selection process is unfair, they might file a discrimination charge
interview for Zappos vs Goldman Sachs
companies need to do a good job if they want good applicants, because good applicants have options, so orgs should make sure they’re not running late, the applicant is meeting with who you said they would, no typos in letters, they get back to you in a timely manner, etc.
· I.e. Google is not using as much test scores but rather found that the most innovative workers are those that are happy, and have a strong sense of mission about their work and personal autonomy
two articles agree: good leaders are CONSISTENT!
behavioral structured interviews are best according to Google exec
the crazy “how many marbles fit in a Volkswagen?” q’s aren’t important he says
they ask “can you do this?” if person says “yes” say “do it” instead of honesty test stuff
· It is also giving the results before the draft as to not affect the players interview, individual workout and film study
· Receiving the results may negatively affect the draft
· It hasn’t been proven that it would work
· Also they aren’t testing for math or any of those types of questions, but rather personality and how each player learns
predictive validation design for player assessment tool
don’t want to give results to teams before draft because then they’re only going to pick
players who did well, you’re not getting a good range of results to compare to actual
-Measurement, the centerpiece of the appraisal system, entails making managerial judgments of how “good” or “bad” employee performance was. Performance measurement must be consistent throughout the organization.
-Management, is the overriding goal of any appraisal system. Appraisal should be more than a past-oriented activity that criticizes or praises workers for their performance in the preceding year.
Used for decisions about employee’s work conditions, including promotions, termination, and rewards
Performance appraisals can be used for administrative or developmental reasons
· Absolute judgment: an appraisal format that asks supervisors to make judgments about an employee’s performance based solely on performance standards
*most HR specialists think the disadvantages of relative judgement outweigh the advantages (ranking is vague, doesn’t give any absolute information, force managers to identify differences between people where they may be none)
This relates to goal-setting-theory which suggests that employees’ goals help to explain motivation and performance
– restriction of range error: rater only rates on a small portion of the scale, like all ratings
are on the high portion (leniency error), middle portion (central tendency error), or
lower portion of the scale (severity error)
-personal bias can also cause error, difficult to eliminate
-liking error: do you like someone because they’re a good performer? or do I rate them as
a good performer because I like them personally?
-comparability bias: do the supervisors all have the same standard? standardized
frame of reference training: making a common metric, make people think about their own biases,
make them aware of halo/horns, like showing a video to everyone and coming to a conclusion
to show people how it’s done
– The goal of appraisal from a rational perspective is accuracy, while the political perspective is utility
In the rational approach supervisors simply notice and evaluate a workers performance, thus the accuracy is critical. In the political approach both supervisors and workers are motivated participants in the measurement process, hence workers actively try to influence their evaluations either directly, or indirectly
The validity of political appraisal is more blurred since a lot of times the assessment criteria is unclear so that it can be bent towards whatever the agenda is at the moment not as accuracy-driven
utility reduces validity if it happens throughout the org on a large scale
so what if performance appraisal isn’t valid?
low moral, employees might leave org because they’re fed up
However a person may be motivated and working hard however because of the system factors may be graded harshly
we thought: performance = ability x motivation
now we have to factor in the system, how?
This relates to validity because the As have been able to validate their player performance analysis with the wins that they have had
need valid selection tools and performance appraisals to minimize the risk
the better the validity, the lower the likelihood of error
7 warning signs
Idealized future: a romanticized picture is created of what the world will look like after the goal is achieved
Goal-driven justification: current actions are justified in terms of the future achievement of goals
Public expectation: failure to accomplish the goal would be met by public perception of failure
Association of the goal with destiny: achieving the goal is conceived in terms of “rightfulness” and “destiny”
Face-saving behavior: if initial steps to achieve the goal are met with resistance or failure, the pursuit is again justified in terms of its future achievement
idealized goal: you think everything will be better/solved if you attain this goal, you think anything you do to attain it is justified, think it’s your destiny to obtain it
Recovering: develop mechanisms to adjust to setbacks, mistakes and errors
Recognize the unintended consequences of achieving a goal
Provide a strategy and justification for retreat from the goal
Identify multiple goals with multiple benefits
Project costs of continuing the pursuit after setbacks
Fostering trust: develop a culture safe for surfacing problems
Minding the gap: attend to discrepancies between present reality and ideal expectations
Cultivating dual loyalties: balance multiple roles and loyalties to different cultures
learn from experience
be able to admit to your boss that you need to readjust the goals/expectations
not all orgs have that culture where you can say that to your boss
(4 levels of framework)
By seeing the outcome after the training of the amount of money won, they can determine if it was effective
There is a four level framework to evaluate:
Participants reaction to the training at the time of the training
Participants learning of the content of the training
Participants use of their new skills and knowledge back on the job
Company’s return on the training investment
Evaluate based on customer satisfaction
Reaction to training, learning, behavior based on training, results
ROI (net benefits/costs)
50×5000= 250,000 (benefits)
500×400= 200,000 (cost)
Have to check whether there is a better opportunity cost
Question on final
$250,000 estimated increase in customer spending
$200,000 cost to train the employees and managers
estimated net gain of $50,000
In monetary terms, it will probably be successful if their estimations of increased spending are correct
You’re getting a $50,000 return on investment because of the results of the training. It’s important to determine if the increased customer spending is in fact due to the training.
In nonmonetary terms, you can see if the training resulted in the business meeting a goal, like here it would be better customer service.
look at employees’ reactions, learning, behaving, *results! (that’s in order of what managers are most interested in)
Return on Investment is a result we can look at to evaluate
ROI = net benefits/cost
KNOW how to do this for exam, don’t just show benefit versus cost, do ROI
opportunity cost, that’s why you can’t just do benefit vs cost
***before you jump to this program because there’s a 25% ROI, think about if there’s another use
of the $200k that could get me a better ROI than 25%
maybe do a pilot period first in just one part of the company
· Also how he approaches a strike
· This connects to performance appraisal in the sense that employers make work just to fit the outcomes of the performance appraisal
· Employers don’t actually analyze the situation of different options, but rather just go with the obvious route to be able to get a good appraisal
· Enhance performance by understanding the means
· Not asking: women fail to apply to promotions
· Blending in: women prefer not to stand out
· Remaining silent: getting your point of view out there is an important part of your career
· From this determine what the job entails, and how a person who works at this does a good job
· After determining the parameters and how critical the job is to the company, can the compensation be determined.
· Equity (fairness)
· According to the labor market model of pay equity, the wage rate for any given occupation is set at the point where the supply of labor equals the demand for labor in the marketplace. In general, the less employers are willing to pay (low demand for labor) and the lower the pay workers are willing to accept for a given job (high sup- ply of labor), the lower the wage rate for that job.
what is not consistent/captured with the Supply & Demand/market model for compensation: equity, employer choices/strategy (preventative wages), government regulation, unions (only cover less than 10% of the workforce → but Union Threat Effect makes companies want to treat their employees well so they won’t want to unionize)
· Benchmark jobs: those that are similar or comparable in content across firms
· They analyze how much of a value does this job add and determine how much the pay will be
Companies frequently use previous experience, seniority, and performance appraisal ratings to determine how much an employee is to be paid within the range for their job. The objective of this is to achieve individual equity.
Chargers- high school kids (16+) required to volunteer at Chargers games in order to participate in other extracurriculars. The Chargers would donate a certain amount of money depending on how many hours were worked. When you do the math, the kids were “earning” less than minimum wage and working pretty long shifts doing low level jobs.
Unpaid internships are just a way companies can get free labor just by saying they’re giving the kids an “experience”, which may be true, but that doesn’t mean you don’t have to pay them if they’re actually producing output.
1. the internships is similar to training which would be given in an educational environment
2. the internship experience is beneficial to the intern
3. the intern does not displace regular employees, works under close supervision of existing staff
4. the employers provides the training derives no immediate advantage from the intern and might actually be impeding the operations by providing the training
5. the intern isn’t entitled to a job after completing the internship
6. both the employer and intern understand that the intern is not entitled to wages for the time spent interning
It would also be hard to enforce, maybe it would push more people to work under the table.
also: those six rules are very unclear/vague, intern & company might have different definitions of “benefit”, etc.
must file a complaint with DoL, students reluctant to do this because jeopardizes future employment, letter of rec
It might be difficult for them to recognize and address corruption or unethical behavior because they use rationalizations to neutralize any bad feelings they get from participating in it.
rationalization tactics: denial of responsibility, denial of injury, denial of victim, social waiting (I’m only stealing napkins, not silverware!), higher loyalty (I steal napkins because I’m more loyal to my poor family than this restaurant), the ledger (even things up, I paid $15 for a burger, I deserve a napkin), socializing newcomers into corrupt practices (social cocoon: what’s happening at work becomes disassociated with your home life, where you may act with different values)
ways to help/prevent this
headline test: making people aware of/confront the unethical situation, would you feel good if it was printed in the newspaper?
put focus on process, not just the outcome
have an ethics code
role models/ethical leadersv
Walmart de Mexico paid bribes to get construction permits in different parts of the company.
Walmart de Mexico executives knew about the bribery and actively hid it from headquarters.
When HQ found out, they shut down the investigation and no one was disciplined. They kind of swept it under the rug and instead of firing the chief executive who kind of spearheaded all this, they moved him to vice chairman of Walmart (I’m assuming to get him out of a position where he could continue that kind of behavior).
relates to Anand reading — sort of an ends justify the means situation
bribery is super common in Mexico and may have seemed necessary if Walmart wanted to expand their business in Mexico
maybe it didn’t seem too unethical because no one spoke up or it just seemed an acceptable way of doing things in Mexico (socialization)
incrementalism: started off with a little bribe, Walmart helped customers avoid sales taxes (so maybe down the road bribery doesn’t sound so bad)
no leaders as role models in this case
Walmart had an internal investigation (difficult for org to see its own corrupt practices because of rationalization and socialization)
Walmart does have an ethics code, but this shows that it may not be sufficient
the “do only what you get paid for” syndrome (ex: teachers and standardized testing), unethical behavior, negative effects on the spirit of cooperation, lack of control, difficulties in measuring performance, psychological contracts (which are very resistant to change), the credibility gap (which is employees thinking the programs aren’t fair), job dissatisfaction/stress, and potential reduction of intrinsic drives (overjustification effect from psych)
can create a culture where payment is expected when an employee has to do anything, even though some situations in the business need the employees to cooperate and act without extra pay
preventing these pitfalls: piece-rate systems, using incentive programs as part of a broader HR system, building employee trust, promoting the belief that performance really makes a difference, using multiple layers of rewards, increasing employee involvement, stressing the importance of acting ethically, and using motivation and nonfinancial incentives
negative light on “big business”, more regulation, more negative feelings toward corporations
concerns about highly paid executives: more likely to engage in antisocial behavior (cheating, lying, cutting off other drivers) which could mean they’re more likely to engage in questionable business activities, like the bribery described in the Walmart de Mexico case
lower-income level people realize that pay isn’t going to get them through the day, but social bonds will
higher-paid people are more socially isolated
baseball teams with smaller variance in salary work better, more teamwork/cooperation
people who are upset about what’s going on may result in them taking extreme actions
-federal legislation: all employers must provide SS and unemployment insurance benefits
-union influence: examples: pensions and health insurance plans
even influencing groups in other sectors, like “hey, if the teachers’ union got dental benefits, maybe we at the plumbers union can get them too”
-union threat effect: Walmart will now offer dental and vacation benefits because they don’t want their employees unionizing, keep them happy
must be a VIABLE threat, how likely is it that they would unionize? if it’s not likely, then there is no threat of unionizing
so if Walmart doesn’t give dental because they don’t have to (no union threat), Safeway (who has a union) will say they won’t offer dental because Walmart isn’t (and Walmart can afford lower prices because of that)
cost savings of group plans: employers can provide benefits for much less money than it would take for employees to get them on their own, spread the risk among a bigger pool
o A government program that provides income for retirees, the disabled, and survivors of deceased workers and health care for the aged through the Medicare program
o Provides income for retirees, the disabler and survivors of deceased workers
o Health care for the aged through the Medicare program
workers’ comp: pays for medical care expenses for people with job-related injuries/illness; income for survivors of someone who died of work-related reasons, higher payroll tax (employer tax) for higher-risk jobs, STATE, about 60%
***NO FAULT SYSTEM, even if worker was being idiot
GOOD EXAM QUESTION
two workers recklessly driving a forklift, one gets injured who was driving, still gets
workers comp (but could still be fired)
unemployment ins: temporary income for people during periods of involuntary unemployment, funded by a tax paid by employers (orgs that lay off a lot of people frequently pay a little more) combo of federal and state, part of SS?, about 30% of your lost earnings
· Contractual rights: based on the law contracts, union contracts, implied contracts, individual employment contracts etc. Based on legal writing
· Verbal agreements
· At the discretion of the employer, management rights
· Management rights: rights of the management to make tasks, hire, promote, assign people, etc.
· There are limits to management rights such as zoning laws, advertising laws, etc.
if there are no individual contracts where parties agree in writing, no handbook, no negotiated agreement (collective bargaining agreement), it is pretty much at employer’s discretion but with some limits
right to run a business: manager has right to decide their return policy, social responsibility, location, strategy, advertising etc.
some have limits on them (location- zoning laws, advertising- no cigs for kids)
If employers can engage in collective action, then employees also Balances the power between employer and employee
Physicians feel disrespected by the managers of the hospital, since they sometimes reject the opinion of physicians
This is true for some of these since some have an employee contract in which it explicitly spells out the terms of employment, hence they know what is expected before having to unionize
They are all hired for a certain period of time hence their contract spells out most of the conditions
Employers in the US try to prevent their employees from joining together in a union because:
Wages are higher for unionized workers, putting them at a disadvantage with competition
Unionized firms are less profitable
There is no impact in productivity
Lower turnover in unionized firms
There might be more training in unionized firms
Management discretion decreases
Unions constraint what managers can and cannot do with a particular employee
Main 2 Reasons: DECREASED profitability and DECREASED management discretion
· The National Labor Relation Board remedy five illegal practices which are:
1. Interfering with, restraining, or coercing employees to keep them from exercising their rights to form unions, bargain collectively, or engage in concerted activities for mutual protection.
2. Dominating or interfering with the formation or administration of a union or providing financial support for it.
3. Discriminating against an employee to discourage union membership. Discrimination can include not hiring a union supporter, or not promoting, firing, or denying a pay raise to an employee who is a union member or who favors union representation.
4. Discharging or otherwise discriminating against an employee who has filed charges or given testimony under the act’s provisions.
5. Refusing to bargain collectively with the union that employees chose to represent them.
False. The NLRB can help with discrimination based on union membership, however.
***EXAM: must be specific to union-related activity for NLRB to get involved
NLRB is only for unions!!
· Union shop clause: a union arrangement that requires new employees to join the union 30 to 60 days after their date of hire
· Unions negotiate a union shop clause in their contract to provide greater security to union employees and prevent nonunion employees from receiving union services without paying union dues
A union probably wouldn’t like it.
It’s good for the new employee if they don’t want to join the union and pay the dues for something they don’t want to be a part of.
It may also be good for the employer, because some applicants may be turned off once they learn about the union (if they don’t want to join one)
The overemphasis American corporations have been forced to give in recent years to maximizing shareholder value without regard for the effects of their actions on other stakeholders
With increasing pressures from Wall Street in the aftermath of the contests for corporate control in the 1980s, executives turned more and more of their attention to meeting the short-term expectations of analysts and to restructuring operations to boost earnings
This relates to employee interest since there is a lot of emphasis being put on the top management, which is shown by the ratio in compensation
This issue relates to the Landrum-Griffin act since workers had no protection whatsoever in the corporation, and had to trust in them. However there were layoffs since this had proven to increase their stock price. There was a shift in focusing on the core competencies, hence this affected workers.
There can be potential corruption of corporation and employers
The Landrum-Griffin act: was enacted in 1959 to protect union members and their participation in union affairs, allows the government through the Department of Labor to regulate union activities:
1. Each union must have a bill of rights for union members to ensure minimum standards of internal union democracy.
2. Each union must adopt a constitution and provide copies of it to the Department of Labor.
3. Each union must report its financial activities and the financial interests of its leaders to the Department of Labor.
4. The government regulates union elections, and union members have the right to participate in secret ballot elections.
5. Union leaders have a fiduciary responsibility to use union money and property for the benefit of the membership and not for their own personal gain. Members can sue and recover damages from union leaders who fail to exercise their fiduciary responsibilities.
era of the charismatic CEO
relates to landrum-griffin act: deals with the relationship between unions and their members, so if union is doing something wrong, maybe the member can’t be negatively affected by it? like can’t be held responsible?
Union Acceptance Strategy: a labor relations strategy in which management chooses to view the union as it employee’s legitimate representative and accepts collective bargaining as an appropriate mechanism for establishing workplace rules
o Consistent with a mixed motive view
· Union avoidance strategy: a labor relations strategy in which management tries to prevent its employees from joining a union, either by removing the incentive to unionize or by using hardball tactics
· Union substitution/proactive human resource management: a union avoidance strategy in which management becomes so responsive to employees needs that it removes the incentives for unionization
· Union suppression: a union avoidance strategy in which management uses hardball tactics to prevent a union from organizing its workers or to get rid of a union
Know what is on and off the table for negiotations
o Provisions for union members to serve on the company’s board of directors and benefits for retired union members
o Allowing management to use the union label to put on its product, settlement of unfair labor practices, and including supervisors in the labor contract
negotiating for retired people’s benefits, legal for employer to say they don’t want to discuss that because law says unions rep current employees and not former (retired) and therefore it is not a permissive topics
drug testing employees: mandatory
drug testing applicants: permissive
unions can ONLY strike over MANDATORY bargaining topics
unions and employers can’t negotiate ILLEGAL topics
Highly skilled workers still benefit from the right to strike since it is a lot more difficult to be replaced
employer advantage: to stop everything from economic harm
· Economic strike: a strike that takes place when an agreement is not reached during collective bargaining. Initiated by employees. Employee can bring permanent workers
o Employers are turning to lockouts to press their unionized workers to grant concessions after contract negotiations
o Opera locked out its orchestra and singers for more than a week before settling the dispute
o 130 day lock-out by the NFL and 161 NBA
o American Crystal Sugar locked employers our and hired replacement workers (Federal laws allows for the employers to hire workers, however they cannot replace the others)
o Sotheby’s locked out 43 art handlers
o Armstrong World Industries locked out 260 workers at its ceiling tile plant
o West River nursing home in Milford, Conn., where management locked out 100 workers on Dec. 13, companies see lockouts as a way to wrest concessions and set an example for workers at their other facilities.
· Puts employers at a distinctive advantage, places pressures on employees
· Union contracts have two advantages which are:
o Provides employee with an advocate dedicated to representing the employee’s case to management, the union steward. Under any other conditions, the employee is represented by either a manager or agent of the manager, such people cannot be entirely dedicated to the employee
o Arbitration: the decision of the arbitrator who is a neutral individual selected from outside the firm, is binding on both parties, compensated by both the manager and union (50/50). Unlike grievance panels, composed of people on the company payroll, the arbitrator has no personal stake in the outcome and can make a tough decision without worrying how it will affect his career
In non-union setting, a manager/HR person is the advocate of the employees (problem: where do their loyalties lie…?)
Final step: arbitration with an arbitrator (neutral person who decides who is right)
who decides who the arbitrator is? employer, probably!
arbitrators could also have backgrounds of siding with one side over the other, employer
and employee can look into that
· The Model Guild failed because the modeling agencies resisted the idea of unionizing and many models worried that agencies would blacklist them for union ties
· The employment concerns are the long work hours, the environment in which young models are in, and that they need protection
· Transparency in pay, not hiring models that seem to be sick,
· They are supervised by coaches, not faculty, therefore there compensation would be unrelated to education
reasons they aren’t: they get free school, housing, etc, being an athlete is enhancing their college education experience, school is the main reason they’re at Northwestern, not sports
· It doesn’t surprise me that the quarterback agreed with the coach, since he is the runner-up to be the quarterback, hence its in his best interest to be on the coach’s good side
· The university is technically paying for them to be athletes and represent their university
· Maybe a better health care plan of some sort may be good to have however Frantz makes extremely valid points
But they are also students
It’s important to know this because even if they get fired as RAs they are still students at GW
· Many employee groups joined unions after 1973 because of the passage of Massachusetts General Law in 1973, which granted full collective bargaining rights to most state and municipal employees
· Labor law encourages a lot unionization since it gives them the right to do so, and by having the law on their side workers can almost accomplish anything as longs as its within the law guidelines
only allowed CB for private employees, not public employees
· The RAC doesn’t collectively bargain, as does a union
· The composition of the RAC is decided by the Residence life (employer)
· The RAC can serve as a union since they are protesting or advocating for rights of employees and improvement of work conditions
· If is were a union there had to be an election process, the residence life wouldn’t be there
· It would be illegal for the RAC to be a union as it is, because it is not permitted for employers to choose the representatives
· Compensation issues
· Unfair practices when it came to punishment, meaning that if they did the same thing as some of their residents they would get fired, however residents would get just a warning
· Their residents had more rights than they did
· These are legitimate concerns since it affects the way they perform their jobs
· It can also affect their personal lives when residents do things such as leaving threatening notes on their doors
· Unionization could change Residence Life since they will try to get more respect and with more joining the union they will be able to get the response they want
· Exit, voice, loyalty, neglect
· However other workers don’t deal with the same things as RAs, also they get paid more
· Its not a 24hr job
· They have different working conditions, hence different requests
· Also clerical workers would be considered more of a job since it probably doesn’t have a GPA requirement, and they don’t act as leaders for others in their community
· Unions prefer smaller bargaining units
· The university tried to threaten the RAs with the possibility of eliminating the RA program because of budget cuts, and if the union was successful they wouldn’t be able to accommodate
· Also threatening with benefits
· From a strategic perspectives I would rate it an 8
· Some of the RAs started to become concerned, and doubting their support for the union
· Since they were threatened with the university having budget cuts, then there would be no gain with a union, and even the possibility of losing the job
strategic perspective: good
ethical perspective: bad
RAs voted in favor… now university (employer) must bargain in good faith
In the US there is only independent union
Companies in China don’t have a well established labor relations strategy
Since the government has discouraged strikes.
Laws and social norms favor employers
· Since Egypt had a strong industrial base, the labor had a large effect
· For the Egyptians the mahalla cotton mill set the tone for the rest of the industrial sector since it was the flagship of Egyptian industry
· With the first strike came many other in other factories as well as the biggest one that occurred on April 6th, which got worldwide recognition
· Labor relations were terrible in Egypt, and they had the control for many years, however with the protests beginning to happen and change, there was a sense of hope within the workers
· People started to realize that if they took a stance on something thy believed in , they could inspire and accomplish change
· With Mahalla being the first, other followed and realized the power and change they could achieve by standing up for their rights
· And this inspired other who weren’t in the industrial sector
article said the whole revolution may have roots from a pay dispute at a cotton mill that began five years before this article was written
this one little old woman organized a strike which grew into this national work stoppage day and the workers eventually won but the labor-relations part of the revolution was kind of forgotten about with all the noise about politics
· Career blockage: people feel that when they work abroad, their counterparts in their home office are climbing the corporate ladder
· Culture shock: people cannot adjust to a different cultural environment. The expatriate may try to impose his own values into the company, and these many times do not align. Lack of cultural intelligence, or the inability to relate to people of different cultures
· Lack of predeparture cross-cultural training: some companies offer no training to expatriates
· Overemphasis on technical qualifications: traits that may make you successful in the home office may not work in abroad
· Getting rid of a troublesome employee: sometimes sending a troublesome employee abroad may cause even more troubles
· Family problems: many times family issues affect expatriates abroad.
· Creates problem of adaptability to foreign environment and culture
· Increases the “foreignness” of the subsidiary
· May involve high transfer, salary, and other costs
· May result in personal and family problems
· Has disincentive effect on local-management morale and motivation
· May be subject to local government restrictions
Even if there are disadvantages, there are also advantages of using expatriates:
Cultural similarity with parent company ensures transfer of business/management practices
Permits closer control and coordination of international subsidiaries
Gives employees multinational orientation through experience at parent company
Gives employees a multinational orientation through experience at parent company
Establishes a pool of internationally experienced executives
Local talent may not yet be able to deliver as much value as expatriates can
Provides broader global perspective
personal/family problems for that person
subject to local govt restrictions
management problems, motivation probs
costly: salary, training, transport
**moral of the local employees who were after a promotion but outsider got it instead
might not be as friendly/social because they see you as taking an opportunity away from them
o Loss of status: returning expatriates experience a substantial loss of prestige, power, independence and authority
o Poor planning for return position: uncertainties regarding their new career assignment may provoke much anxiety in returning employees
o Reverse culture shock: living and working abroad can change a person, especially if they have internalized some of the foreign country’s norms and customs
while you’re gone, someone kind of took your spot (like as the “go-to” person)
loss of professional status, loss of personal status
Emphasize cultural sensitivity as a selection criterion
Establish a selection board of expatriates
Require previous international experience
Explore the possibility of hiring foreign-born employees who can serve as “expatriates” at a future date
Screen candidates spouses and families
Develop an effective selection program not only for expatriates, but also for those locals who will help the expatriate manager carry out his or her mission
Training: cross-culture training sensitizes candidates for international assignment to the local culture, customs, language, tax laws, and government. Ideally, the training process should begin nine to twelve months before moving
Information-giving approach lasts less than a week, and merely provides indispensible briefings and a little language training
Affective approach: one to four weeks, focuses on providing the psychological and managerial skills the expatriate will need to perform effectively during a moderate-length assignment.
Impression approach (1-2 months): prepares the manger for a longer assignment with greater authority and responsibility by providing field experience, and extended language training
Training upon arrival
Position the international assignment as a step toward advancement within the firm
Provide support for expatriates
Provide career support for spouse
Provide the expatriate with a disposable income that is equivalent to what he or she would receive at home
Provide an explicit add-on incentive for accepting an international assignment
Avoid having expatriates fill the same jobs held by locals or lower-ranking jobs
· He attempted to live the same way the locals did, and completely grasp the colloquial mannerisms
· Goldstein had to wait to be without her friends in order to immerse herself into the culture, and not even that much
This is due to the fact that racism is cultural in France
Babear and the Montaigne Institute have persuaded about 300 companies to sign a charter pledging to oppose discrimination and make their companies ” reflect the diversity of France”
France can’t rely on something like the 4/5 rule because American-style affirmative action programs are illegal under French law, and are viewed as antithetical to French culture and society
“If I hire someone not because he’s competent but because he is black, immediately everyone in the company is going to think that blacks are unqualified” Bebear said, to him affirmative action should principally mean better education, so that minorities will have :the same level of confidence as the others
Illegal to gather data from employees, such as ethnicity, social class, etc.
Was due to WWII
people are not being hired because of their name/any resume info hinting at race, SES, demograf
in France, people with French names are way more likely to be hired
companies are taking too long to implement the anon resume rules
people are still being kinda ~discrim against
no ⅘ rule because affirmative action programs are illegal in France
want to hire someone based off merit, not because they’re a certain race
French not allowed to have databases tied to an employee’s race/ethnicity, any demographic data on their workforce
because of WW2, Nazis used to use company databases to find out how they needed to indentify
· This shows that French students are proactively protesting and trying to change laws, even if sometimes it resorts to violent actions
· Americans college students may protest against
American protest: privacy issues, pay issues
employment at will
law saying no EAW for people under 26 in first two years of employment
young people feel it’s targeted at them
US: do more for social equality reasons, human rights issues