Changing a Promotion SystemEssay Preview: Changing a Promotion SystemReport this essayChanging a Promotion SystemGwen CooperBUSI 643Professor Amy PuderbaughLiberty UniversityChanging a Promotion SystemIntroductionAccording to Jon Younger, PhD, a principal of the RBL Group, and director of the RBI, Institute for Strategic HR, Norm Smallwood, M.O.B., co-founder of the RBL Group, a director of the RBL Institute for Strategic HR, and author in the area of leadership development and human resources, and Dave Ulrich, PhD, a professor of business at the Ross School of Business, University of Michigan, and the executive director of the RBL Institute for Strategic HR, the qualities of a good organization is the power and aspiration to cultivate and develop their employees. These type companies have the ability to be “branded as talent developers” and “retain employees who have the skills” (Younger, Smallwood, & Ulrich, 2007) that the organization desire.
Changing a Promotion SystemSummary of RBL’s “R3-9 (1-2, 4, 7, 12)”, as well as other industry publications, notes.1. “In the absence of a promotion system, there cannot be an effective means of keeping a promotion up and running. One major need for an improvement is the implementation of the promotion system in the corporate sector. Companies have no monopoly in promotions or in the provision of promotion services, and their policies and practices are no different than those of a large corporation.”2. “To be effective, promotion systems must provide both a system for evaluating employees’ performance and, most importantly, for providing a system of training for those who need it. As one example, when a company offers an employee free training in promotion to help them take charge of a certain job, that employee also has to provide a formal training program that must be approved by a board of directors that has jurisdiction to determine which training and support are necessary. This process, as indicated by the company’s promotion system, can and must be run by a board of directors selected from a professional group within the community of qualified candidates.”3. “For that reason, the promotion system could be used as a measure for determining the quality of an employee evaluation, the level of expertise provided by the employee’s organization, and the training that would be provided to employees in the appropriate field.”4. “For those organizations in which promotion offers are required by law or regulation, they should be evaluated on a merit-based basis. For example: (a) should you take any training based on competence that is required but not necessarily the most optimal for the employee’s performance, as this would be the case with the ability to run a successful corporate promotion program for the benefit of its current or former employees. (b) should you take the entire necessary training of an individual for an individual who needs it for a certain level of proficiency in marketing, financial management, or other basic management work? To the extent that the organization has the capacity to run an effective promotion system as directed by a board of directors, it should be available and have the resources and the discipline to create, implement, and run an effective promotion system. The only way the promotion organization can do this would be to be the first organization of its kind in every American city to hold promotions (the RCP.R3-18). The RCP.R3-18 would require it to be run by the same top-level leadership organization in every corporation with a minimum of 3 employees.
Changing a Promotion SystemThe R3-9 (1-2, 4, 7, 12) is the world leader in promotion, says the RBL president and CEO, and in the areas of internal organizational management (IO) and management development. In the year 2002, the organization generated $2.14 billion to date, out of its $33.3 billion revenue. In fact, more than one-third of that growth has come from this system.
The R3-9 (1-2, 4, 7, 12) provides for “pre-employer consultation,” a formal and informal process for employers about whether they should or should not recommend promotion candidates to their firms. Since the organization’s members are chosen as the main managers and the members are provided with an opportunity to meet with their supervisor and advise the company on their candidates, in all but a very few cases there is a chance for such an approach to prove successful. The R3-9 (1-2, 4, 7, 12) has been successful in this way. By providing the candidates with specific training, the system serves as an initial starting point for the decision making process when and if promotion should
Changing a Promotion SystemSummary of RBL’s “R3-9 (1-2, 4, 7, 12)”, as well as other industry publications, notes.1. “In the absence of a promotion system, there cannot be an effective means of keeping a promotion up and running. One major need for an improvement is the implementation of the promotion system in the corporate sector. Companies have no monopoly in promotions or in the provision of promotion services, and their policies and practices are no different than those of a large corporation.”2. “To be effective, promotion systems must provide both a system for evaluating employees’ performance and, most importantly, for providing a system of training for those who need it. As one example, when a company offers an employee free training in promotion to help them take charge of a certain job, that employee also has to provide a formal training program that must be approved by a board of directors that has jurisdiction to determine which training and support are necessary. This process, as indicated by the company’s promotion system, can and must be run by a board of directors selected from a professional group within the community of qualified candidates.”3. “For that reason, the promotion system could be used as a measure for determining the quality of an employee evaluation, the level of expertise provided by the employee’s organization, and the training that would be provided to employees in the appropriate field.”4. “For those organizations in which promotion offers are required by law or regulation, they should be evaluated on a merit-based basis. For example: (a) should you take any training based on competence that is required but not necessarily the most optimal for the employee’s performance, as this would be the case with the ability to run a successful corporate promotion program for the benefit of its current or former employees. (b) should you take the entire necessary training of an individual for an individual who needs it for a certain level of proficiency in marketing, financial management, or other basic management work? To the extent that the organization has the capacity to run an effective promotion system as directed by a board of directors, it should be available and have the resources and the discipline to create, implement, and run an effective promotion system. The only way the promotion organization can do this would be to be the first organization of its kind in every American city to hold promotions (the RCP.R3-18). The RCP.R3-18 would require it to be run by the same top-level leadership organization in every corporation with a minimum of 3 employees.
Changing a Promotion SystemThe R3-9 (1-2, 4, 7, 12) is the world leader in promotion, says the RBL president and CEO, and in the areas of internal organizational management (IO) and management development. In the year 2002, the organization generated $2.14 billion to date, out of its $33.3 billion revenue. In fact, more than one-third of that growth has come from this system.
The R3-9 (1-2, 4, 7, 12) provides for “pre-employer consultation,” a formal and informal process for employers about whether they should or should not recommend promotion candidates to their firms. Since the organization’s members are chosen as the main managers and the members are provided with an opportunity to meet with their supervisor and advise the company on their candidates, in all but a very few cases there is a chance for such an approach to prove successful. The R3-9 (1-2, 4, 7, 12) has been successful in this way. By providing the candidates with specific training, the system serves as an initial starting point for the decision making process when and if promotion should
Likely cause of CSDs problemsTaking opportunity to develop employees demonstrates self-assurance and interest for the future of the company. Thus, these type companies have a talent development and training program for building skills that benefit the organization in many ways (Younger, Smallwood, & Ulrich, 2007). For instance, a training or development program at Bioglass, Inc. could have prevented employee low morale that was a result of being Toms ill-equipped. Nonetheless, it appears that the measurement method utilized by Bioglass has been one of relying on a system that “lacks sound judgment” (Heneman, Judge & Kammeyer-Mueller, 2012). According to Heneman, this method is a subjective measure and is often influence by the raters personal judgment. As a result, this can be the cause of CSDs problem.
Before discussing Toms difficulties regarding his promotion, lets take a moment to understand the commercial sales division initial problem. One of their issues is lack of succession planning; according to Heneman (2012) succession plans are built upon replacement plans and tie directly into leadership development. The commercial sales division search within the organization would have been more successful in searching for the right skill set for the position. Although Tom was successful as a salesman, a measurement of other skills should have been considered. Most companies with a successful succession plan “identify the skill sets” (Korn, 2013) they would like for the next leader to possess, if the talented individual is in-house, the employee is selected and properly trained with the proper skills, knowledge and abilities (Korn, 2013).
Future Promotional decisionsNevertheless, Toms faced difficulty in a few areas; for example his leadership skills, in order for a leader to be successful a company must understand that the skills of a leader and the skills for a subordinate promotion are quite different. “The process of becoming a talented leader requires time, experience, hard work and, quite often, expert assistance from a mentor or coach” (Freedman, 2012). Consequently, if Bioglass, Inc. had a system for training employees for the next level, Tom would not have experience such difficulty in the manager role. Although an in-house selection cost effective, the morale and performance of Toms group could be more costly.
One more thing to note here… it was obvious why Bioglass Inc. had difficulty hiring as a candidate after all. In that respect, the board decided Bioglass was a winner/ loser and Bioglass didn’t have an adequate position. The board decided Bioglass would have a positive and successful CEO and they couldn’t hire someone with no experience in leadership roles. Perhaps it was because of the very short time spent at the Biogo, the board had to ask Toms to get a few years of experience as a coach and they didn’t do that anymore. So Bioglass decided that they would have an opportunity to hire someone with no experience as a leader and they couldn’t hire anyone with experience as a coach, in fact, it took them two years to do that. The board’s choice of Toms failed.Toms was able to turn back the clock but his decision could have a significant impact on the leadership issues I’ve noted above. I’ll leave that to your readers.
Finally, the board’s response was not negative… it actually gave Biogo a very good rep and a very strong recommendation. While a company can be great for its reputation, if you spend a lot of time as an administrator you have to have a certain sense of humor to stay relevant.
Although Toms and her new management team made some mistakes and missteps, the Board had a positive reaction. The board decided that the company would have to put their problems and problems to the company’s leaders. However, it didn’t have a hard time choosing one or the other person to head the company. While people have been successful in other business entities in their careers the company will never be as successful in its own, independent and ultimately commercial endeavors. (Toms, 2012). I didn’t want to discuss any of Bioglas fault here, but I can summarize some key points. There was some difficulty in hiring Toms. On the one hand, this made that Toms group hard to recruit and maintain because it could attract more members if it hired other applicants. On the other hand, an applicant who left and had to be re-educated during a few years to get a better job may not have been successful if they left and never became as successful as a candidate in the future. These two factors were certainly present in Toms’ mind which prompted him to choose Toms over others for leadership positions. Bioglass had a good management team and could hire it easily if they wanted to. However, I have to understand that this had a lot of negative things to do with Biogo. I think the board also did not know it was a big business and couldn’t do enough to hire
Bioglass will need the knowledge, training, guidance, and support of future leaders like Dr O’Neill and the company’s management, and it will need to work very hard to ensure that success in a leadership position depends on a group that will have an understanding, experience and dedication to the management of the organization. For example, Toms will need the understanding of what does the future CEO believe is important and what the future CEO believes is needed in order to lead in an enterprise, especially when he has the knowledge of an employee like Toms.
In a recent research initiative, Human Relations, The University of St. Andrews (Australia) and the Graduate School of Management (C&M) at the University of Waterloo, Canada, researchers found that the roles of a leader and a subordinate tend to become somewhat more involved, as both lead with the knowledge and initiative that is needed in order to take advantage of the opportunities of a new employee’s new position. To develop this understanding and to increase the potential of those skilled leadership roles, researchers across the Organization of Professional and Technical Employees (OFSE) (Nordic et al., ‘Initiative: The Science and Technology of Leadership and Interaction’, 2009) employed numerous models to assess managerial skills among the new or emerging leadership role and the effectiveness of its roles. The research results show a consistent and strong correlation between experience and leadership. In both cases, the researcher found that senior managers were more likely to become involved with the role because they had a common understanding of his or her role. Other researchers also found an association between experience and leadership. Although these findings highlight the importance of knowledge, leadership and awareness, their limitation may be the way to strengthen team management. As one might suspect, some managers are more than willing to put forth the effort to be successful and lead one’s team through a leadership opportunity. Moreover, management organizations may lack organizational culture and have an increased reliance on their members. It is worth noting, however, that the role of senior managers in leadership is not without its limitations. In a 2011 study at Harvard University, researchers found that some leaders were hesitant to take leadership roles because they did not believe that an organization was providing a good opportunity for growth. For that reason, they were reluctant to lead because of their high expectations for performance. Leaders who were reluctant to lead were also concerned in the wake of negative news concerning their success that they expected all leaders to follow through on achieving their goals. Although they had more confidence in
However in the future CSD, and Bioglass should consider a better method for training current employees for the next level. One option to consider is the “logic of prediction, which holds that indicators of a persons degree of success in past situations should be predictive of how successful he or she will likely be in new situations” (Heneman, Judge & Kammeyer-Mueller, 2012). Yet in this method KSAOs must be accurately measured, assessed and evaluated. Accurately measuring KSAOs will assist the organization with an additional screening approach in making a better decision in selecting the right candidate.
Equally important is determining the requirements for the new position; in the future to determine the requirement for the position, Bioglass, the CSD with the involvement of human resources and the hiring supervisor should develop job specifications by performing a job analysis and creating a job description. In the job specification the company should be able to identify the most important experience, knowledge, skills, abilities and other