Module 10 and 11: Acquire and Appraise evidence from Stakeholders Flashcards
(9 cards)
Consider the following two scenarios
Scenario 1
The CEO of a small Swedish knife factory notices that the number of manufacturing errors has increased with 15 percent over the past 2 years. After a thorough analysis it was found that the most common error is excessive grain growth due to too high forging heat. The manager thinks this is a technical issue, most likely due to a dysfunctional heat treat oven: the oven’s temperature should be between 1475-1500°F, but the analysis has shown that sometimes the temperature is above 1600°F. He therefore considers replacing the oven. When he discusses this idea with some experienced workers, however, they point out that in the past 2 years the company’s number of sales has rapidly grown, and therefore had to hire new - mostly young and inexperienced - workers. They therefore advice to give these new workers extra training. Based on this insight, the CEO decides to first ask a befriended CEO from company that uses the same oven whether he has encountered similar problems.
Scenario 2
The manager of a call center notices that the center’s performance has dropped in the past 6 months. All key performance indicators, such as average speed to answer, average call duration, and average abandonment rate, have dropped. To increase performance, she decides to introduce a new performance management system that closely monitors the center’s kpi’s and provides direct, individual feedback to each call center agent. When she discusses her decision with the agents, they react indifferently to her plans and instead complain about a decision the manager made half a year ago: instead of promoting the most senior and trusted agent to the role of supervisor she hired an external, less experienced candidate. The agents complain that since this new supervisor came in things started falling apart: the supervisor tends to micromanage, frustrating the agents with his unwillingness to grant them trust and autonomy. The manager, however, dismisses the agent’s complaints: in her view the new supervisor is doing an excellent job, so she decides to introduce new performance system anyway.
Which scenario involves an example of stakeholder evidence?
Scenario 2
In the second scenario of the previous question, the manager of the call center decides to disregard the call center agents’ subjective feelings and perceptions regarding their new supervisor and to introduce the new performance management system. When asked about the rationale for her decision she states “I am an evidence based manager, so I make decisons based on objectifiable facts, not subjective feelings and emotions”.
Do you agree that the manager should disregard the stakeholders’ subjective feelings and emotions? Check all that apply.
No, because even though stakeholders’ feelings and perceptions are highly subjective and maybe even irrational, it has an actual impact on them.
No, because the stakeholders may affect the outcome of the manager’s decions.
Consider the following scenario
An external audit of an Italian human services charity exposed thousands of dollars were spent for purposes that are not related to the charity’s mission. For example, money that was meant to assist poor residents was used to purchase luxury cars and sponsor a college baseball tournament. In addition, the audit report revealed that the charity’s chair has stayed on a 108-foot yacht owned by one of the charity’s contractors that was paid more than $2 million for fundraising and promotional services.
When the board of trustees discusses the audit report during a public hearing, all those present react furiously. A spokesperson of the charity’s staff declares that all employees are deeply ashamed for their organization’s behavior. The most important donors say that they are shocked and officially announce that they will withhold their donations until the charity’s board of directors is fired. When the news hits the national media, it gets worse. The Italian tax authorities declare that the chair and several senior managers will be sued for fraud, and several welfare organizations that are dependent on the charity’s grants announce that they will sue the board for malpractice.
In this scenario, what type of stakeholders are the following groups?
- The charity’s staff and managers
- The public at large and the news media
- The Italian tax authorities
- Internal stakeholders
- indirect stakeholders
- secondary stakeholders
Consider the following scenario
In 2018 athletic shoe manufacturer Nike decided to select controversial American football player Colin Kaepernick as the face of its new global advertising “Just Do it Campaign.” The company even decided to give Kaepernick his own branded line of shoes. Kaepernick had not played in America’s National Football League (NFL) since 2016. Kaepernick claims the NFL blacklisted him for protesting in 2016. Kaepernick, who is black like most NFL players, protested against police killings of African-American men by kneeling during the national anthem. His protest drew a lot of criticism – even Donald Trump, president of the United States, called Kaepernicks protest a “sign of great disrespect for US troops”. Nike, however, stated that sticking with Kaepernick is important because it demonstrates the company’s commitment to free speech, diversity, and human rights.
Which two of the following stakeholders could affect this decision?
Nike’s shareholders
Nike’s customers
Consider the following scenario.
In 2019 the German car manufacturing company Volkswagen announced that it will reduce €5.9 billion of costs by reducing the workforce and eliminating up to 7,000 positions. However, the company’s board decided that existing workers in Volkswagen’s German operations will not face layoffs for the next 10 years. Volkswagen will achieve this by not filling empty jobs. For instance, Volkswagen will not hire replacements for retiring workers.
Which stakeholder group(s) may experience harm from this decision?
employees
Read the following scenario that is based on the article “While Nestlé extracts millions of liters from their land, residents have no drinking water” that was published in The Guardian in 2018 .
The question of who owns Canada’s water is hard to answer. Water is supposed to be regulated by the federal government, and according to the Canadian constitution, they have the duty to consult ‘First Nations’ and to make sure other parties do the same when extracting any natural resource, including water, from indigenous land. This legal ambiguity has allowed Nestlé - the world biggest bottling company that sells mineral water such as Acqua Panna, San Pellegrino, Perrier, and Vittel - to move in and extract water for next to nothing: Nestlé pays the province of Ontario only $390 USD per million liters, but pay the ‘Six Nations’ nothing.
Six Nations is another term for an indigenous group that includes the Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, Seneca and Tuscarora First Nations. Nestle is extracting up to 3.6 million liters of water daily from Six Nations treaty land, without their approval. Moreover, “ninety-one percent of the homes in our community aren’t connected to Nestlé’s water treatment plant”, says Michael Montour, director of public works for Six Nations. Some communities have no water at all. Others have water in their taps, but it is too polluted to drink.
The land was given to the Six Nations under the 1701 Nanfan Treaty and the 1784 Haldimand Tract. And although this treaty may be 300 years old, for the Six Nations it is alive and present. Many are outraged at Nestlé’s practices, including JD Sault, a mother of two. “Nestlé is taking out water for free, so why don’t they dispense it to people?” Sault said. “It’s the indigenous resources they are taking.”
Many environmental activist groups and NGOs support the Six Nations and point out that access to clean drinking water is a basic human right. Nestlé does not agree. In fact, the former CEO of Nestlé, Peter Brabeck-Letmathe, praised the commodification of water: “One perspective held by various NGOs – which I would call extreme – is that water should be declared a human right … The other view is that water is a grocery product. And just as every other product, it should have a market value.”
What is the impact of Nestlé’s decision to extract water from indigenous land on the stakeholder The Six Nations
There is both a practical and an ethical impact
Which two factors determine the trustworthiness of evidence acquired from stakeholders?
The extent to which the evidence is representative for all stakeholders
The extent to which the stakeholders could freely express their views and feelings
Read the following scenario:
A large multinational company decides to survey its most important stakeholders – the customers - to understand their satisfaction with the new service the company has been providing for two months. For this purpose, the company’s 40 largest clients are invited to complete an online survey about their experiences.
Which of the following might negatively affect the trustworthiness of the outcome?
The 40 largest clients may not be representative for the company’s total population of clients.
Read the following scenario:
The CEO of a mid-sized company that offers customer service centers notices that in the past 6 months the company’s client satisfaction score has dropped from 7.6 to 6.2. When the CEO discusses this disturbing decrease with four experienced call center agents they state that many of their colleagues feel that their supervisors display abusive and/or uncivilized behavior. The CEO is quite shocked by this revelation, and decides to run focus groups to gather more evidence. A random sample of 40 agents is selected to participate in four focus groups that will be led by an experienced external moderator. In addition, the focus groups will take place in a special room with a large one-way mirror covering one wall. The supervisors will be behind the mirror (unseen) so they can observe what the agents say and learn from it.
Which of the following might negatively affect the trustworthiness of the outcome of the focus groups?
The presence of the supervisors behind the one-way mirror
