Management’s job isn’t about maintaining a higher level of efficiency, but managing a business with a “win-win” culture. Maintaining that “win-win” culture means keeping employees engaged and taking steps to make them feel valued. The Renova Solution includes a “pay-for-performance” plan, in which each employee earns bonuses and rewards for meeting specific targets set by management.
In the “Pay-for-Performance” plan, employees have to “merge” their reward objectives with those of their managers and, to the extent possible, the goals of the company itself. As a result, employees expect to earn more for a particular performance than they did before the change.
You must be able to reward your employees for their performance to keep them engaged. The Harvard Case Study Solution identifies where the biggest problems are in the organization and develop an appropriate strategy for making those problems better. This plan is supported by a number of detailed performance goals.
In particular, we noticed that the Murphy’s case study also identified areas where performance was poor. (We were just looking at Murphy’s corporate case study. However, Murphy’s case study is also available as a book, over 400 pages, which we are using.)
Murphy’s case study identified areas where management was ineffective at working with the employees to get the desired results. What it also did was identify the same weaknesses as the Murphy’s company. Therefore, we considered this a case of “Team Unevenness.”
However, when Murphy’s case study was compared to Renova’s, Murphy’s achieved its mission with a much higher rate of success. The Renova case study revealed that management was able to take steps to improve productivity in areas that had been neglected and resolve problems that hadn’t been identified and corrected. This helped Murphy’s return to profitability in just a few months.
The Murphy’s case study showed that good leaders lead by example. Employees want to follow a leader who is viewed as “authentic.” They want to believe in the person’s ability to create successful work.
Murphy was able to overcome this challenge because it operated according to an “Empathy” strategy. Employees who worked in Murphy’s wanted to succeed because they felt that they were part of a team that was doing its best to achieve the organization’s goals. They also believed that Murphy was a “win-win” organization.
But that’s not all that Murphy did differently. They focused on each person’s strengths and placed those strengths at the center of its operation. They said that by focusing on strengths rather than weaknesses, they were able to bring out the best in each employee.
They made each employee an important part of the company. If they failed to perform their roles, they were quickly replaced by someone who could fulfill the company’s goals.
The difference between Murphy’s and Renova is that Murphy was able to do this because it learned the lessons that Murphy had learned before he went off and got his MBA. By identifying the problems and strengths of each individual employee, Renova was able to use that information to develop a plan that was more effective than Murphy’s ever dreamed of. Now, Murphy’s is a successful Fortune 500 company.