The two retail companies picked are Walmart and Costco whose 2017 Financial statement links are provided below: WALMART https://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/ wmt/financials?query=income- statement COSTCO https://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/ cost/financials?query=income- statement Both organizations are well known brands and position themselves well with their customer base. Walmart’s value proposition is “We save people money so they can live better”. On the other hand, Costco’s value proposition is “All-in-one convenience and everyday affordability”. Both retailers focus on cost saving for their customers. Looking at their financial statements and by analyzing them a few key areas are evident when comparing the two organization. Looking at the current ratio and quick ratio we can determine the short-term solvency of each organization. The current ratio can be determined by dividing the assets by the liabilities. Walmart’s current ratio sits at 0.86 while Costco’s sits at 0.99. The quick ratio is c
As Organizational Leaders, what does this phenomenon tell you about observed behaviors and those you may not see?
As Organizational Leaders, what does this phenomenon tell you about observed behaviors and those you may not see?
Environment is an early predication of one’s observed behavior. When one is a participant in a meeting, there are expectations that vary given one’s environment. A meeting with a particularly high-ranking manager would require an expectation of reverence and even silence while the speaker shares his message. If the same participant were a part of a brain-storming session to help solve a common problem, he might have the opposite expectation and feel compelled to openly, randomly and rapidly express thoughts which is often a healthy part of the brain-storming effort. To a more painful degree, a lesser-respected employee who leads a meeting might be more often interrupted or questioned in their message. There is a push-pull in observed behaviors.
As an Organizational Leader, we must make some assumptions but they can only be made if we have a fair understanding of to whom we are speaking. If we had a part in hiring these people and know their character well, we may know what behavior to expect from them. Is there already an apparent assumption as to the nature of the meeting and should we expect their level of fear/consciousness to that assumption to bring them a predisposed behavior? As an Organizational Leader, we are given a position to lead and by that, we must make ourselves aware of many variables in our environments.
To a varying degree, there too must be an understanding on our part, as Organizational Leaders, to set a tone or to at least understand what the common attitude toward certain situations will likely be and try to proactively stimulate a positive tone or culture. This could be visualized in an example of a football coach who knows his team has little chance of winning. How can he motivate his team to win if he knows that is clearly not likely to happen? He must find attainable goals for his team and maybe address individual goals for separate groups within his team. Maybe he also focuses on using the tough game as a means to hone skills and even set an achievable goal of accepting that a loss is likely but a goal would be to find ways within each player to improve themselves. Can that be a better goal that instead of weakening the resolve of the players individually, and as a team, to strive to simply seek ways for each to work together to learn from the experience and possibly, in a post-mortem style meeting, share what each observed and learned.
To the behaviors we may not see, we must keep a conscious focus on understanding the presumed attitudes/assumptions of our audience/employees and try to address those concerns up front, and hopefully put their mindset in a place where the meeting can be more production and eventually lead to better “buy in” from each member.
To a varying degree, there too must be an understanding on our part, as Organizational Leaders, to set a tone or to at least understand what the common attitude toward certain situations will likely be and try to proactively stimulate a positive tone or culture. This could be visualized in an example of a football coach who knows his team has little chance of winning. How can he motivate his team to win if he knows that is clearly not likely to happen? He must find attainable goals for his team and maybe address individual goals for separate groups within his team. Maybe he also focuses on using the tough game as a means to hone skills and even set an achievable goal of accepting that a loss is likely but a goal would be to find ways within each player to improve themselves. Can that be a better goal that instead of weakening the resolve of the players individually, and as a team, to strive to simply seek ways for each to work together to learn from the experience and possibly, in a post-mortem style meeting, share what each observed and learned.
To the behaviors we may not see, we must keep a conscious focus on understanding the presumed attitudes/assumptions of our audience/employees and try to address those concerns up front, and hopefully put their mindset in a place where the meeting can be more production and eventually lead to better “buy in” from each member.
How does this impact the broader context of an organization, particularly when trying to gather authentic data on organizational behavior?
As Organizational Leaders, we are expected to work in a fluidity of managerial motion so as not only to understand the future but to value the lessons/observations of the past. In doing so, we define ourselves with an appreciation of the audience/employee/member in such a way that they see our management as respectful to their concerns, appreciative of their knowledge. Each employee has, to varying degree, a knowledge and experiential set that they willingly or unknowingly, will apply to our message or our leadership. While their perspective will define their bias, they are likely to apply a confirmation bias, an opinion, if you will, that will influence their opinion of your management decisions/efforts. While our message/leadership is key, we need to find connecting forces with our employees in such a way that they will feel more involved in the process, moving forward.
If an organization shows faith/appreciation in its leaders, and its leaders share a similar faith/appreciation in their employees there will be less distance between the observable actions and those unseen.
Even in this discussion exercise, we likely all feel some level of the Hawthorne Effect. We want to submit intelligent answers/observations and likely will feel apprehension in our discussion until we feel a greater level of trust in not only our peers, but in our own ability to speak to the level in which this class and to a greater extent, an MBA will demand.
If an organization shows faith/appreciation in its leaders, and its leaders share a similar faith/appreciation in their employees there will be less distance between the observable actions and those unseen.
Even in this discussion exercise, we likely all feel some level of the Hawthorne Effect. We want to submit intelligent answers/observations and likely will feel apprehension in our discussion until we feel a greater level of trust in not only our peers, but in our own ability to speak to the level in which this class and to a greater extent, an MBA will demand.
Comments