Global Communications Benchmarking

Running head: GLOBAL COMMUNICATIONS BENCHMARKING

Global Communications Benchmarking

University of Phoenix

Abstract

Team-B has addressed the mind maps by observing the benchmarking elements to the scenario put forth by Global Communications. Using the material gathered in this scenario the team reviewed, Dell, Google, Xerox, Yahoo, General Electric Refrigeration, Hanesbrands, Inc., Kraft Foods, Hersey Foods, Mattel, and Levi Strauss. The problems that the benchmarked companies encountered when outsourcing jobs outside of the United States proved to be just as diverse in nature as the industries these organizations represent. The one synergy that several of the reviewed companies followed was that of organizational commitment. A trend in high-level competition and the pressures to meet organizational demands was apparent after developing each synopsis and the benchmark proved to be common thread to each reviewed organization.

Global Communications Benchmarking

Companies often use certain processes to improve their companies standing in the global marketplace. Companies may measure themselves against other companies in order to decipher what process will help them achieve their short and or long term goals. According to Gomez-Mejia & Balkin (2002), benchmarking is “A strategic management approach that assesses capabilities by comparing the firm’s activities or functions with those of other firms” (p. 403).

Global Communications is a telecommunications company on the verge of making a big step in reorganizing its strategies in order to improve its standing in the marketplace. The managers at Global Communications have compared its activities with other companies and have decided that changes need to be made if the company was to reach its goals. Global communication decided to use a few cost cutting measures (layoff employees, cut employee wages, close call centers, and outsource jobs) as well as introduce some new services and form alliances. The following will compare and contrast different strategies used by 10 companies to try and improve their financial standings and their overall standing in the global marketplace.

Dell

Global Communications and Dell Inc. had similar strategies when trying to solve their problem of trying to stay at the top of the industry. While the results of Global Communications strategy of laying off employees in one country and hiring 1,000 in a another country are not known, Dell Inc.’s results have been seen over the past few years. Dell decided to layoff workers, close stores, and move away from its original idea of just selling computers over the internet.

While trying to stay at the top of its industry in computers, Dell Inc. seemed reluctant in deciding to follow its competitors and sell its computers, not only on the Internet but through retailers worldwide. The International Herald Tribune (2008) stated, “HP sells its computers on the Internet and through retailers around the world, while Dell has stuck to its model of selling directly and has been criticized for poor customer service” (para. 4). Dell believed that consulting and outsourcing its services would be off the track for the company (International Herald Tribune, 2008). Dells strategy may have caused the company to drop in market share fro 17.5 percent to 14.7 percent while its competitor Hewlett Packard’s increased from 15.9 percent to 18.1 percent within a year (International Herald Tribune, 2008). To combat these losses Dell finally decided to leave the direct sales method and start selling its computer products to stores such as Walmart (Flynn, 2008).

With so much loss in market share, it is no wonder why Dell found itself struggling to find ways to keep up with its competitors and report increased earnings. In 2007, Dell decided to cut prices for consumers but this meant laying off employees in order to reduce costs. According to Kanellos (2008), “Dell has combated the slowdown by cutting pricesвЂ"a strategy that has allowed the company to gain market share but forced the company to reduce costs.

Organizational commitment suggests that companies should involve customers’ viewpoints in their decision making. When companies/organizations find themselves trying to solve a problem they need to not only, find a solution and implement it, but also are able to reassess the mistakes and learn from them. While Dell did not seem to learn fast enough from its situation, the company has started listening to its customers’ wants and needs.

Google

The pressures of trying to keep at the top of the industry forced Global Communications to make decisions that some believed was not the right decision. While the executives at Global Communications believed that cutting jobs in the United States and outsourcing over 1,000 jobs, the Union for the company employees did not believe this was the correct strategy. The internet giant Google faced a similar decision. Google started out as a college research project and grew into a company that offered services in high demand (Google.com, 2007a, para. 1).

Google had to find ways of expanding globally without loosing any of its financial gain. While Global Communications decided to cut jobs in order to realize future financial gains, Google decided to form partnerships with other companies as well as being innovative in its offerings to consumers. Google.com (2007b) stated, “As Google's search capabilities multiplied, the company's financial footing became even more solid. By the beginning of the fourth quarter of 2001, we announced that we had found something that had eluded many other online companies: profitability” (para. 3). Google added new innovations such as the Google Toolbar and AdWords, which are just a few of the innovative ideas that has helped Google to increase its market share as well as client/customer base worldwide.

With much of Google’s services in high demand worldwide Google’s partnerships with other internet giants like America On Line (AOL) only helped Google to expand its services and grow even bigger. In 2004 Google announced revenues of $805.9 million, which was a huge increase of 105 percent from the previous year (Google.com, 2007c, para. 6). While other companies