NEED FEEDBACK or REPLIES to this 4 posts below..DUE ASAP please
From an organizational development point of view it seems like the biggest problems with GM as outlined in the assigned articles are the lack of accountability and an engrained cultural history of ignoring problems. Over time the company has reached a place where the norm is to turn away legitimate complaints, threaten legal retaliation, and avoid the issue altogether by not responding, when problems arise and customers come calling.
The current CEO, Mary Barra, has publicly proclaimed that she intends to change the company’s culture (Maynard, 2014). In order to do so she will need to undertake a complete transformational intervention company-wide. She will also need to establish clear expectations for accountability when potential safety issues arise so that complaints are not lost in a bureaucratic web where they never reach the ears of people who should be taking action to ensure all problems are neutralized.
As it stands people who experience problems with GM’s products have no clear avenue to pursue help, and in many cases private citizens are advised by their own attorneys that legal action is a fruitless effort against such a large corporation (Stout, Vlasic, Ivory, & Ruiz, 2014). If GM wants to survive it will need to restructure itself with a new ethical culture, and some internal changes that ensure that problems are being communicated to all necessary parties in order for resolution to be achieved. A company as large as GM is too open to public scrutiny to be able to survive if it continues to neglect its obligations to its customers, and attempt to sweek their claims under a rug.
In the first article, it gives the impression that GM tried to sweep a major problem under the rug by throwing money at it. If it wasn’t money being tossed at families to keep quiet, it was strong-arm tactics from lawyers. Despite the evidence GM continued to claim that there was no evidence suggesting the company had done anything wrong. From an engineering and organizational development, not to mention a customer standpoint, this was simply untrue. Instead of taking responsibility, GM attempted to bribe people not to slander them. This seems very irresponsible and counter-productive to the growth of the brand and organization.
Mary Barra is attempting to change an entire culture that is pretty well set in stone at this point. I think this is a very easy problem to run in to. When people have been with an organization so long, people within the organization can feel obliged to keep them around out of a sense of loyalty. This is even in the face of better judgement. These same people are the ones who might take the stance that, “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” I can see value in this phrase sometimes, but for the most part it seems that this is a mindset that can really set a company back. If Mary Barra hopes to change the entire culture of GM, she has to realize that it must be from the top down, and in a metaphorical sense, heads may have to roll to establish the point.
The learning process in my current organization is interactive, they offer both online and classroom training that is constantly giving up to date information on the regulations of the organization. There are several classes on line that yearly requirements to refresh many of the regulations that in healthcare we abide by, HIPPA is one that we are expected to refresh yearly. This training gives every generation of the organization the ability to go over the law and then test out for the knowledge needed to maintain the expectations of the facility. The training that occurs takes into account for all generations, the SHARP class that is given is not just “death by power point” the instructor divides the room into groups and has each group work as a team, they have even worked in a Jeopardy game at the end to test the knowledge of the teams. By making the experience interactive it makes the whole group in varying ages work together. I think that future learning within my organization needs to include other ideas from different views of the organization, bringing in several employees from different work groups. Having the same group of educators train the employees can become stagnant, but by bringing in ideas from administration positions, nurses, and maintenance workers, both seasoned and new hires can give a fresh look on how training and learning can boost the organization.
In my organization there is no real hands on training. There is a computer system that we log onto and follow videos to learn. Sometimes new items are not updated fast enough. Also my boss expects me to keep up with and show everyone else. She has no idea how to make the items herself and more often than not she isn’t even aware of what new products are released and when. This is definately not conducive to a good work environment. We lose a lot of productivity due to this. Especially when I am to busy to keep up with learning the new items and much less teaching the others. At which point we can mess up the new products therefore costing the store extra money either in refunds or replacements not to mention the loss of reputation. They also do not take into account the two older employees whom have a very hard time learning via online services. I try my best to teach everyone however I believe they need to come up with a better way or have a trainer personally come in and teach everyone the new products.