Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
All organizations are driven by the desire to attain their objectives through the utilization of minimum resources for maximum benefits. Organizational objectives may include increased productivity, profit margins, and competitiveness as well as growth and expansion. To attain these broad objectives, organizations must come up with strategies. A strategy is a plan of action that stipulates a set of activities, resources and time for the implementation of a proposed business idea. Strategies are what drive organizations forward by giving them a competitive edge over other organizations.
In the present day business environment characterized by globalization, any person can do business in any part of the world due to improved means of communication, transport and cultural diversity. Consequently, having a business strategy is no longer a matter of choice but a matter of survival in the business world. Those organizations which do not embrace the idea of strategy are doomed to fail or become irrelevant and thus obsolete (Leat 30).
Some of the strategies adopted by organizations are in the form of employee differentiation frameworks namely the 20-70-10 differentiation framework and the categorization of employees as A, B, or C players. These two frameworks have been used by many organizations with a significant success rate. Some organizations use one framework while others integrate the two frameworks with a view of attaining good results.
The 20-70-10 framework has to do with ranking employees based on their performance. Organizations can rank employees based on top performing 20% followed by the second performing 70% then the worst-performing 10%. According to Welchas, the top 20% are showered with goodies such as promotions, training, and scholarships among others because they are believed to be the strategic engines of organizations (Welch and Suzy 18).
The group is highly motivated and usually aspires to do better. The 70% group forms the bulk of organizations’ workforce. This group exhibits moderate performance and is very crucial for organizations. Even though it does not play a crucial role in the strategic development of an organization, the group is technically responsible for the day to day running of organizations. It also serves the purpose of keeping the top 20% on its toes because those in the top 20% know that some employees from the 70% group may catch up with them. The 10% group, on the other hand, is the worst-performing and in many organizations, it is considered for demotions and in worst cases for dismissal.
The strength of this framework is that it is based on fairness. It rewards those who deserve to be rewarded while at the same time challenging those who are underperforming to pull up their socks. The overall result is a workforce that is highly motivated and increased competitiveness. The pitfall of the framework is that at some times, it can be politicized. Some managers are known to reward their cronies or those who are loyal to them at the expense of hard-working employees. Those who are critical of the managers or those who try to challenge the status quo are relegated to the category of 10% to silence them.
The framework assumes that employees are motivated by categorization which is based on their performance. However, this assumption has been faulted for the simple reason that such categorization may inhibit teamwork among the employees.
The categorization of employees as A, B, or C players has to do with coming up with a business strategy first, then selecting those employees who have the capabilities to implement the strategy effectively. The framework operates by categorizing positions in the organization as A, B or C. A positions are considered as strategic positions and are thus occupied by carefully selected employees. These positions usually constitute 15% of the entire workforce. B positions are considered as support positions in the sense that they support the A positions. They are filled by individuals of average capabilities. C positions are considered nonstrategic in the sense that they are mostly concerned with indoor activities and are occupied by individuals with nonstrategic skills.
This framework assumes that any workforce strategy is all about the execution of a specific business strategy. The assumption is itself a pitfall because it does not value the intrinsic value of work. The strength of the framework is that it has a big potential for organizational growth because of all the positions back to each other. Positions are backed by B positions while B positions are backed by C positions. This ensures that organizations can attain their strategies effectively.
I would use the 20-70-10 framework to assess my employees because it is fair and nondiscriminatory. I would measure the performance of employees through periodic appraisals. After the appraisals, I would dismiss or place under probation the poorly performing employees.
For differentiation of employees to be equitable and productive, there is a need for organizations to have in place a culture of hard work, honesty, and fair employment practice. The country in question should also embrace individualism instead of collectivism because research has indicated that employee differentiation works best in individualistic cultures like in the United States. These factors would ensure that employee differentiation is based purely on merit and the desire to move organizations forward but not on organizational politics (Claudio 27).
Works Cited
Claudio, Fernández-Aráoz. Great People Decisions: Why They Matter so Much, Why they are so hard, and how you can master them, Hoboken, NJ: Wiley & Sons, 2007. Print.
Leat, Mike. Exploring Employee Relations, London: Routledge, 2012. Print.
Welch, Jack, and Suzy, Welch. Winning, New York: Harper Collins, 2005. Print.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.