This assignment is to create an articulate response to another students Discussion Board post. Here are the rules when replying:

Replies

Reply to at least 2 classmates. Your replies must be typed in separate Microsoft Word documents. Your replies must include meaningful and substantive contributions to the discussion. Each reply must be 200–300 words. Include a reference page, and be sure to have in-text citations for the following sources:

• At least 1 citation from Mello (2019).
• At least 1 citation from Keller (2012).
• At least 1 citation from a related scholarly journal.

*** Here is the students original post that you are replying to:

Microsoft is a technology company that everybody knows that develops and supports software and well as business solutions to customers. Microsoft currently ranks 30 on the Fortune 500 list with $110 billion in revenue and $16.6 million in profit in 2018 and employing 131 thousand people (“Fortune 500”, 2019). They have had great success but they are also dealing with a lawsuit regarding discrimination with some employees stating that they do not trust the Human Resource (HR) department and they are nonresponsive to employee concerns (Zillman & Fry, 2018). Microsoft also utilizes a stack ranking system for performance ranking that employees feel is environmentally destructive and creates division and political infighting among employees (Gassée, 2012). Several HR related issues appear to be present in Microsoft’s culture that should be addressed.

Several different HR initiatives should be implemented to help change the culture at Microsoft and improve HR relationships. The first initiative should be diversity training to eliminate legal concerns and improve performance. All employees should be treated equally regardless of age, race, sex, religion, color, and national origin (Mello, 2019). This is a federal law organization must follow but it is also a decent ethical human relationship interaction that all people should engage in. Menna and Vanka (2017) state that Diversity brings “an increase in the skills, abilities, information, experience and knowledge” and the “interaction among diverse individuals leads to positive outcomes” (p. 915). All employees of the company should be reminded though the training that diversity fosters innovation and companies that embrace this position perform better than organizations that resist (Mello, 2019). Another initiative would be to change the culture from a traditional HR to a strategic HR. In this change, HR would be a partner for employees and fully realize that employees are assets and their needs and concerns should be addressed with urgency and compassion (Mello, 2019). Changing this position allows HR to be more effective and strategy with an organization rather than just pushing procedures and policies (Mello, 2019). Implementing a strategic HR initiative should change the way employees feel about HR, so employees begin to trust and utilized HR for the guidance and resources they are designed for. Keller and Alsdorf (2012) discuss that God calls us to serve others and with a strategic HR system, HR personnel has the opportunity to serve the organizational employees and create a better environment for them to work. The third initiative would be to remove the stack ranking performance system and replace with a performance feedback evaluation system. The stack ranking system can be unfair to employees and creates tension, create unhealthy competition between employees, and reduce trust between coworkers. More commonly utilized performance evaluation methods are results-oriented incorporating rating scales, key performance indicators, and management objectives and behavior-oriented integrating 360° feedback, behavioral based rating scales, and behavior observation scales (Chen et. al., 2018). Including elements of these into a performance feedback system would tie employee performance to organizational goals and objectives, improve teamwork and trust, and provide for a healthy more employee friendly environment (Mello, 2019). The performance feedback system is much less formal, provide engaging cooperative involvement between employee and manager, and fosters building relationships (Mello, 2019).

References

Chen, Q., Tsai, S., Zhai, Y., Zhou, J., Yu, J., Chang, L., . . . Wang, J. (2018). An empirical study on low-carbon: Human resources performance evaluation. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(1), 62. doi:10.3390/ijerph15010062

Fortune 500 (2019). Fortune website. Retrieved from https://fortune.com/fortune500/

Keller, T. & Alsdorf, L. (2012). Every good endeavor: Connecting your work to God’s work. New York, NY: Penguin Books.

Mello, J. A. (2019). Strategic human resource management (5^th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.

Meena, K., & Vanka, S. (2017). Developing an empirical typology of diversity-oriented human resource management practices. Journal of Management Development, 36(7), 915-929. doi:10.1108/JMD-02-2016-0031

Zillman, C. & Fry, E. (2018, February 16). HR is not your friend, here’s why. Fortune. Retrieved from https://fortune.com/2018/02/16/microsoft-hr-problem-metoo/.

Gassée, J. (2012, August 13). How Microsoft’s human resources culture drove away talent. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/technology /blog/2012/aug/13/microsoft-human-resources-culture.

 

Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? We have qualified writers to help you. We assure you an A+ quality paper that is free from plagiarism. Order now for an Amazing Discount!
Use Discount Code “Newclient” for a 15% Discount!

NB: We do not resell papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

The post Reply to another students discussion board post appeared first on Top Premier Essays.

I’m working on a Business question and need guidance to help me study.

You are replying to another students discussion Board post. The instructions for replying are as follows:

Review another students response to D5.1 and D5.2. Summarize their findings and indicate areas of agreement, disagreement and improvement. Support your view with citations and include a reference section.

Here is the students post you are replying to:

Discussion Forum 5

D5.1 Interpreting Chi-square

D5.1a

In output 8.1 (Pearson) chi-square is not statistically significant because p = 0.056. This p level is more than the preset alpha level probability of 0.05. According to Morgan et al (2013), if this p level was less than 0.05, it means the results are statistically significant and therefore the null would need to be rejected.

D5.1b

The expected values as depicted in output 8.1 are at least 80% and the cells are greater than 5 since the minimum is 14.05 as shown in the math grade* gender cross tabulation output and also stated in the footnote under the chi-square test output. It is important because it indicates that the data met the condition of at least 5 in each cell. Additionally, this satisfy the use of the two-sided chi-square test (Morgan et al., 2013).

D5.2 Measure Strength of the Relationship

D5.2a

Because “father’s education revised” and “mother’s education revised” are at least ordinal data, the most appropriate statistics to measure the strength of the relationship would be the Kendall’s tau-b because father’s education and mother’s education are ordered variables and ordinal data. According to Morgan et al (2013), if the Cramer’s V was used for these variables, it would have treated the cross tabulation as if they are nominal even if they are ordered, thereby resulting in an error in the statistics.

D5.2b

The two statistics are different because Kendall’s tau-b measures the strength of the association if both variables are ordinal while Cramer’s V measure the strength of the relationship of two nominal variables when one or more have three or more levels (Morgan et al, 2013).

References

Morgan, G., Leech, N., Gloeckner, G., Barrett, K. (2013). IBM SPSS for Introductory Statistics
(5th Ed.). New York, NY.