Global Communications

Global Communications Benchmarking

The purpose of this paper is to outline the various methods of benchmarking in the form of comparisons and contrasts of several companies. The rationale behind benchmarking is that one can make recommendations concerning the measurement of performance and further improve existing operations. It is meant to be a tool to help perfect business processes. There are numerous ways benchmarking can prove to be invaluable to any company such as one that is facing labor changes, contract disputes or internal restructuring, just to name a few. This paper will illustrate the many ways in which benchmarking enhances company performance on a multitude of levels.

Communication

Good communications between executive staff members of Global Communications and its stakeholders such as the board of directors and particularly the labor union were severely lacking. Ultimately this caused serious if not catastrophic problems for Global Communications. In large part maintaining good communications between executives of companies and their stakeholders may mean the difference between the success and failure of the company.

Two leaders in communications with employees and stake holders are Verizon and South West Airlines. Verizon utilizes a tool called Verizon LiveSource used to push training out to their employees. Southwest Airlines has great communication with their employees, and with their customers. This attention to communication includes flying their training staff to where the employees are stationed to avoid disrupting the employee's daily routine as well as being a cost savings device.

Other companies such as Ceridian, Fed Ex, AT&T and Jack in the Box have shown that maintaining good communications particularly with their employees is one of the most important tools they have in keeping employees happy and productive. Good communication with employees helps avoid the negative rumors that start via the company grapevine. In addition to excellent employee communication Ceridian, Fed Ex, AT&T and Jack in the Box all have communicated their successes and achievements to the public and their customers through their websites as well as newspaper articles and organizations they assist and work with. The positive public images portrayed by these companies through this publicity also help with the morale of their employees.

On the other hand, companies such as Hewitt, US Airways and Nextel are examples of companies that have shown us that poor communications can damage their reputations as well as create employee distrust and morale problems. This in turn causes larger than normal turnover in employees, often losing the better employees to competitors. In addition they can't avoid the negative publicity that goes along with the employee problems because disgruntled employees often will speak out against the company in the press and now even in BLOG's on the internet. This spiraling of negative communications costs the companies in terms of stock prices, and lost customers. This is very similar to what we saw with Global Communications and their employee problems.

Ethics

Global Communications has embarked upon a business tactic designed to improve cost efficiencies and enhance bottom line profitability for the organization by outsourcing its customer service function abroad. Presumably, this move will be cost efficient due to lowered per unit costs from lowered salaries and benefits paid to foreign labor. What Global Communications has not factored in their cost analysis are the future costs incurred by failing to act in an ethical manner. Stakeholder's best interests have been dismissed. Stockholders, customers, labor unions and especially employee's long-term strategic interests have been dismissed from senior management's consideration. Ethically, morally and legally the organization has abdicated its responsibility through failing to negotiate or communicate with all constituents with respect to the organizations proposed change of operations.

When organizations are faced with difficult ethical dilemmas, one in which principles conflict, where there are uncertain consequences, and where values and rights do not clearly help the organization find an answer, they must turn to parallel cases or best practices to guide its decision making process. Organizations need to look for cases that have clear correlation with instant issues by which to extrapolate solutions.

Consider the cases of US Airways, Nextel, and Hewitt Associates with their "blinded capitalism", which had dismissed the interests of its employees through short-term and instant solutions forgetting or dismissing that their companies' best resources are contained within its employee population. A parallel case would be someone driving a car while intoxicated. The car is not being used in a manner for which it was intended, and if there is a crash we could hardly blame the car manufacturer. Senior management's actions rightfully come under close legal and ethical scrutiny.

At the other end of the spectrum we find Verizon, AT&T, FedEx, Southwest Airlines, Ceridian, In-N-Out Burgers and Jack in the Box's responses to their change of operations, downsizing and expansionary plans. Even though these organizations were not to "blame", the companies senior management took into ethical consideration all of its stockholders, especially their employees. Realizing that all else (financial gain and bottom line success) result from positive employee contributions. The aforementioned organizations found a course consistent with its corporate values and the ethical expectations in both the United States and abroad. In fact these companies undertook an extensive program of education, psychological sensitivity and social service to try to help those who had been directly and indirectly affected and to prevent others from suffering undue harm; an ethically consistent path of action meant to enhance stakeholder value.

Non-Strategic Planning

Strategic planning consists of the process of defining objectives and developing strategies to reach those objectives. By labeling a piece of planning strategic we expect it to operate on the grand scale and to take in the big picture (in contradistinction to tactical planning, which by definition has to focus more on the tactics of individual detailed activities). Long range planning typically projects current activities and programs into a revised view of the external world, thereby describing results that will most likely occur. Strategic planning tries to create more desirable future results by influencing the outside world or adapting current programs and actions so as to