- What do you think is the most demotivating part of Harper’s job?
- There are several demotivating aspects of Harper’s job, such as losing her mentor/boss that she got along well with and taking on new responsibilities. However, having to navigate the new role and tasks without reward or recognition is likely the most demotivating since it creates a fruitless environment and can often make an employee feel like they are being taken advantage of. Harper did not get an additional financial compensation increase or title change – yet she is doing more work than before.
- If you were an HR manager meeting with Harper’s supervisor, David, what advice would you give to help them re-engage Harper?
- I would suggest to first make more time for Harper, creating a more open form of communication to allow her to 1. get to know David better and 2. discuss her struggles with her workload and new tasks. I would also encourage David to find ways to make Harper feel appreciated such as establishing a flexible work schedule to allow her to have more time to herself, financial increase (bonus/raise) and title change. Lastly – an employee who feels overwhelmed will likely need a lot of support, I would advise David to either hire an additional person to take on some of Harper’s roles or restructure the team so that responsibilities are split evenly.
- What would be the downside of losing Harper as an employee?
- Harper has been with the company for 4+ years and is already aware of the ins and outs of it. Losing an employee that has been around so long usually means losing the knowledge/experience that that employee had developed and maintained. Along with the technical debt that Harper would leave behind, when a senior employee such as Harper leaves other employees may begin to question their satisfaction/happiness. This may lead to a trend of high turn over and leaves behind a team of constantly new and inexperienced employees.
Author Archives: Nickos
The Founder Assignment
- What makes Ray Kroc and the brothers different from each other?
- When comparing the McDonald brothers and Ray Kroc, it becomes clear that some of their major differences lie in their moral compass, ambition, and business approach. The McDonald brothers focus on doing the “right” thing – looking out for the employees, providing quality services and goods, and staying true to their words. Ray Kroc is the opposite – valuing profit over quality all while be exploitive. Though they are both ambitious, the McDonald brothers had enough ambition to follow their dreams but not beyond that. When they became overwhelmed or discouraged, they sized back and focused on their one goal whereas Ray Kroc continued pushing limits in the face of adversity. Lastly – they approach running their businesses completely different. The McDonald brothers focus on maintaining quality and are overly cautious of their practices. In contrast, Ray Kroc takes huge risks – going as far as refinancing his house – in order to achieve his goals.
- Do you think the McDonald’s brothers did the right thing by selling out to Ray Kroc? Did Ray Kroc give the brothers a good deal?
- I think the McDonald brothers did the right thing but not in the right way. I’m sure they were aware of their demise the moment “handshake” deal was brought up. I’m surprised they did not have their own legal counsel present to advise against that. Selling their name made sense since it was clear that Ray Kroc had the upper hand with his expanding franchises and financials – but they could have asked for more. The amount they did settle for was significant for the time and likely allowed them to retire comfortably.
- How did the local store franchisees make money?
- The local store franchisees made money by being given the blue prints, “secret” works, training, and name recognition of the McDonald brand. They were able to invest a lump sum in the beginning to get started and reaped the benefits of owning a restaurant that was already established and well known.
- How did Kroc make money? How was that different than the franchisees, running the local stores?
- Kroc first made money by selling the franchise rights to the entrepreneurs and receiving a percentage of the profits from that location. However, it became clear that this was not entirely sustainable or as profitable as he thought it would be due to the high overhead costs. Kroc then switched to instead owning the land on which the restaurants were built, allowing him to get a steady stream of rental income and regain control of the real estate assets. When he bought he McDonald brothers out, he became sole owner and thus owned stock and shares in the growing business. The franchisees running the local stores only earned money from the profits of their specific location sales, they did not own the stocks or shares of the overall companies.
- Does this film change your view of McDonald’s?
- This film did change my view of McDonald’s – particularly the final scene where Ray Kroc literally stares at himself in a mirror and blatantly lies about the beginnings of the company. He erases the hard work, effort, and ingenuity of the McDonald brothers and gives no acknowledgement to their major contributions. It made me feel less inclined to support McDonald’s – knowing that there are many other mom and pop shops that offer similar if not better food and service.
Unit 6 Assignment: Patagonia’s Social Responsibility
Patagonia is one of my favorite brands to wear – not only because they are great quality and design, but also due to their notoriety for being one of the most socially responsible companies on the market. One look at mission statement and it becomes clear that they put ethics at their forefront. For their 50th anniversary, they have renewed their core values and issued the following statement: “we’re looking forward, not back, to life on Earth. Together, we can prioritize purpose over profit and protect this wondrous planet, our only home.”
The products are long-lasting, repairable, and recyclable. They source sustainable materials and hold their suppliers to the highest environmental and social standards in the industry. 86% of their products are Fair Trade Certified sewn and they are a a founding and accredited member of the Fair Labor Association. Here are some of the programs they have founded and/or are involved with:
- Regenerative Organic Certified: Initiative to grow food and fiber on farms using high organic standards that aim to rehabilitate soil, respect animal welfare, and improve lives of farmers.
- Migrant Workers: Establishes standards for supply chain and employment of workers that are over seas. Ensures that no one is paying to work with or for Patagonia.
- Working With Factories, Farms, and Mills: Promotes fair labor practices and good working conditions in factories, leads efforts to reduce environmental and social impact of farming.
- Living Wage: Supports Global Living Wage Coalition allowing for workers to afford a decent standard of living for themselves and their families.
- Responsible Purchasing Practices: Company wide initiative that focuses on ethical purchasing that is mutually benefits both the brand and supplier.
- Environmental Responsibility Programs: 89% of their fabrics this season are made with preferred materials, 100% of their down is responsibly sourced, 100% of the virgin cotton in their clothes is grown organically.
Lastly, in September of last year the owner of Patagonia, Yvon Chouinard, gave away the company in a move that made headlines. Valued at about $3 billion, Patagonia’s ownership was transferred to a specially designed trust and non profit organization that ensures its profits will be used to combat climate change and protect underdeveloped land around the globe. Their owner, the leader of the company, made ethics and sustainability a priority in his actions and example.
Of course, all of the above are data points from their corporate office so I thought it would be best to share a real world experience I had with the brand. This previous holiday season, I had stopped by the Patagonia shop in SoHo to purchase a winter coat for my father. As I was checking out, the employee went out of their way to show me how to fix any potential snags/rips that may happen with the jacket. He gave me some special tape for spot fixes and encouraged me to bring the coat back to the store for any major repairs. Their commitment to repairable and recyclable clothing is much more sustainable than cheap fast fashion and their willingness and proactiveness to assist with repairs shows that they stand by their core values. On my way out, the employee also reminded me that they would be closed from December 25th to January 1st to give their employees a much needed paid break. This practice is a RARITY in today’s retail world, but here they are staying true by their words of providing a standard and healthy work balance for their employees.
In truth, I do not have any recommendations on how the company could be more ethical, socially responsible, or sustainable for I feel they are the epitome of all those things. Their initiatives and programs have been leading example for retailers alike and they have proven that despite all these “expensive” measures, they can still be profitable!
Nickos Leondaridis-Mena
Hi everyone! I'm Nickos and I'm a business administration major. I'm from the great state of Maryland and I've had the chance to live in Florida, California, Tennessee, and now I'm living in New York. Here is my BMCC email address: nickos.leondaridismena001@stu.bmcc.cuny.edu
