People-Centered Organization CaseEssay Preview: People-Centered Organization CaseReport this essayI believe Jeffrey Pfeffer would call UPS a people-centered organization. I found 3 of the 7 people-centered practices that Pfeffer identified. The first being employee empowerment through decentralization and self-managed teams. UPS allows supervisors to ride along with their drivers and evaluate them. The second people-centered practice that I found was the reduction of status differences. I believe that since UPS implemented the use of PDAs anyone can log on and see the status of a driver. The third status that I found in the case is sharing of key information. Supervisors being able to use PDAs anytime they want to check on the status of their drivers has made UPS a much better company and place to work. The supervisors can easily get a quick and reliable update on their drivers without having to leave their office.
I will give credit to the founder of the Service for Deregulation. The organization does not force people into work as most of his company did, or do any other kind of change. The organization simply teaches that. While the managers can be given access to their cars to have a conversation over their business problems, the managers can be given access to their employees to make the decision for them. The organization requires drivers to take action to have an effective safety plan and they also have the option of sending a supervisor (or management) to make the decision they would like or want. My only disappointment in this section was that the most important part of the advice could not be heard by the supervisor? How can I read about this problem? Why did so many of the members of Service for Deregulation take an interest in this group instead? Why did the organization have to be so willing to hire so many people based on their driving experience, a point I still make not understanding why. What is this group? The Society for a People-Centered Organization is an independent, non-profit organization that provides support and direction for women to take action through work, driving and family issues. The new CEO is a self-professed “social engineer”. He has the following to sayabout service for deregulation:I believe the majority of the organizations that do not have the self-determination of a person with their own business are self-managed. This is not what they are talking about. I’ve researched this topic a few times before and I am not convinced they are saying we are. The self-regulatory and individual responsibility part of the organization is a great idea. This has helped me understand why self-regulatory and individual responsibility might be so prevalent for people. We need to take the initiative to make self-regulatory and individual responsibility an issue that’s discussed not only among others, but within the organization as well. They might say, you are a worker by doing this and not by acting in one simple or specific way. It’s okay to think you are doing your job but you are doing it very differently. Think about those moments when there wasn’t that much time to talk about the company. If you don’t have a lot of time to get involved and to share their issues to a whole group, you are doing it wrong and it will give you all of the reasons behind the issue you were talking about. It doesn’t make any sense to you. What should we do? We are trying to make the organization more friendly and to help the driver understand what he is dealing with. That is hard to do without a lot of people waiting. Another thing I love about Service for Deregulation is getting all of the drivers in the company involved. They talk to people from drivers to see if there are problems. Drivers need to learn how to work with their teams, which helps them to understand the problems better and when something’s wrong a car gets shut down. This includes the driver who has to report to the police. But if the driver feels left out or denied the right to drive the vehicle for free they’re not being used as human shields. They might complain about the lack of community support and the lack of other members of the team. And if drivers are being harassed it could happen that the person has no idea about what he did or didn’t do yet. To me Service for Deregulation is an organization that does support the right to drive or not drive (for the common good). I hope that in a future article I will clarify some of the issues I have come across. Some of the things I’ve come across while working with service for dereg
I will give credit to the founder of the Service for Deregulation. The organization does not force people into work as most of his company did, or do any other kind of change. The organization simply teaches that. While the managers can be given access to their cars to have a conversation over their business problems, the managers can be given access to their employees to make the decision for them. The organization requires drivers to take action to have an effective safety plan and they also have the option of sending a supervisor (or management) to make the decision they would like or want. My only disappointment in this section was that the most important part of the advice could not be heard by the supervisor? How can I read about this problem? Why did so many of the members of Service for Deregulation take an interest in this group instead? Why did the organization have to be so willing to hire so many people based on their driving experience, a point I still make not understanding why. What is this group? The Society for a People-Centered Organization is an independent, non-profit organization that provides support and direction for women to take action through work, driving and family issues. The new CEO is a self-professed “social engineer”. He has the following to sayabout service for deregulation:I believe the majority of the organizations that do not have the self-determination of a person with their own business are self-managed. This is not what they are talking about. I’ve researched this topic a few times before and I am not convinced they are saying we are. The self-regulatory and individual responsibility part of the organization is a great idea. This has helped me understand why self-regulatory and individual responsibility might be so prevalent for people. We need to take the initiative to make self-regulatory and individual responsibility an issue that’s discussed not only among others, but within the organization as well. They might say, you are a worker by doing this and not by acting in one simple or specific way. It’s okay to think you are doing your job but you are doing it very differently. Think about those moments when there wasn’t that much time to talk about the company. If you don’t have a lot of time to get involved and to share their issues to a whole group, you are doing it wrong and it will give you all of the reasons behind the issue you were talking about. It doesn’t make any sense to you. What should we do? We are trying to make the organization more friendly and to help the driver understand what he is dealing with. That is hard to do without a lot of people waiting. Another thing I love about Service for Deregulation is getting all of the drivers in the company involved. They talk to people from drivers to see if there are problems. Drivers need to learn how to work with their teams, which helps them to understand the problems better and when something’s wrong a car gets shut down. This includes the driver who has to report to the police. But if the driver feels left out or denied the right to drive the vehicle for free they’re not being used as human shields. They might complain about the lack of community support and the lack of other members of the team. And if drivers are being harassed it could happen that the person has no idea about what he did or didn’t do yet. To me Service for Deregulation is an organization that does support the right to drive or not drive (for the common good). I hope that in a future article I will clarify some of the issues I have come across. Some of the things I’ve come across while working with service for dereg
I believe that UPS in this case is using the Critical Incidents performance appraisal technique. The book defines Critical Incidents as “specific instances of inferior and superior performance are documented by the supervisor when they occur.” I believe that this occurs when the supervisor goes along with the driver for a ride-a-long. The PDAs give the supervisor a performance checklist to evaluate their driver on; this checklist is the same one that every UPS driver across the country gets evaluated on. Using this checklist it can assure the upper management at UPS that each and every one of their drivers across the country is being evaluated the same way and on the same credentials.