You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘BADM 720’ category.

Changing Others Through Changing Ourselves

This case mentions about when we want to change others, we should change ourselves. There have many situations that we will want to change others; for example, change a child, change a student, change a unit, change a division, or change a corporation.

Actually I think about the economical environment in these few years. Most people complain about economic that cause them unemployment, and they don’t think they can change this situation but just let the time go through.  I think we cannot blame the economic for everything. Like the case says, changing others through changing ourselves. If we want to change environment, we should change our attitude, behavior, and vision. If we always think negative, we will not change result.

For example, I suffered some troubles with culture shock when I just came to the US, and at first I just want to shunned these problems and complained why I was so unlucky. In addition, I also complained why my family didn’t pay more attention and concerned about my situation more.  In that period, what I thought is only negative. However, I knew I have to change. I should be more proactive and positive. The environment  will not change for me, the only thing I can do is to learn it and get used to it. So, I have tried to learn American culture and language, and I also have kept myself positive although I got any setback. Besides, I tried to concern my family more first, talked with them frequently and let them understand my situation more, and I found they give the same concern to me. What I learned was don’t expect environment or people will change for you, and if you want to change situation, you should change yourselves first.

Organizational silence

This article let me recall a book, “Beyond Bullsh*t,” which I read in this semester. People keep silence because they don’t want to defense others, and they know most people fear to receive negative feedback. Like the book “Beyond Bullsh*t” says, people do not talk truth because they don’t believe others will also tell truth and can take the truth.

If an organization doesn’t talk truth or just talk about bullshit, it cannot improve or may waste time to get right direction. In the article, it mentions that organizational silence will cause:

  • Lack of variance in informational input.
  • Lack of critical analysis of ideas and alternatives.
  • Less effective organizational decision making.
  • Employees’ perceived lack of control.
  • Employees’ cognitive dissonance and getting more anxiety and stress.
  • Low internal motivation withdrawal turnover sabotage

Why people keep silence in their organization? When there has no trust relationship that is built in organization, people will keep silence rather than confront others.

It shock me when I saw the study result that shows only 29% of first-level supervisors thought that their organization encouraged employees to express opinions openly. Actually, organizational silence commonly happen in Asia. We don’t make our boss loss face, so in some situations we just keep silence and accept what our boss said.

Like the “Beyond Bullsh*t” says, having straight talk in an organization should build trust and teach people how to use appropriate communication by straight-talk. It’s also like the concept of servant leader, we have to believe our superiors will take care of us, and then we will do our best for them.


In this case, it mainly talks about servant leadership. What is servant leadership?

Robert K. Greenleaf in The Servant as Leader, an essay that he first published in 1970. In that essay, he said:

The servant-leader is servant first… It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead. That person is sharply different from one who is leader first, perhaps because of the need to assuage an unusual power drive or to acquire material possessions…The leader-first and the servant-first are two extreme types. Between them there are shadings and blends that are part of the infinite variety of human nature.

This book is really famous in the world,and I think it helps me to define what is servant leadership. In the Men’s Wearhouse, leader lead their employees by servant leadership, which is to serve first. To examine the whole system, you can find this company emphasizes the “people” in their organization. Although they grow really fast for expansion, they still want to take care all of employees in different distribution.  How dose this company serve the people they manage and work with? How does Zimmer use servant leadership to make company have win-win-win situation? Following are the some points I think that are really helpful to lead this company to survive from this stagnant industry.

Training. Zimmer believes that training was in large part cultural transmission, and that gave sales training and renewing and maintaining the company’s culture. In my opinion, when a company shows what the purpose for the company to their employees, it also has to let them know how to achieve it. They have to bring their people “on board.” Training is a useful way to give people tools to achieve goals, and also give people what is their purpose.

In addition, I also believe training will help employees to maximize their self-esteem. When employees get the tools that they need in their job, they use the tools in their everyday agenda, and then they become to feel good about themselves and build up their self-esteem because they do a batter job.  For my own experience, when I learned the skill how to communicate or pacify the customer’s complains, I can do the job batter in customer service department, and I would be more confident at my work. Since I have self-esteem on this job, I love this job more and have more loyalty for my company. Although training will cost funds, it help the company get win-win situation which is good for employees and company.

Leaders should provide the vision. A leader should build a vision for employee, and let them know where they are going. I think promotion is a way to provide a vision. When employees know they will get a promotion if they achieve the goals, that will motivate them to work on it. In one of company that I worked for, they didn’t give promotion from within. They hired a lot of people for management position from outside, and this way caused the original employees to think everything in negative way. They didn’t want to improve their ability because they think they will not get any benefit from successes. Besides, they also thought they don’t have future in the company, and they will see the company as a springboard. Therefore, our company’s turnover rate was pretty high.

I like servant leadership because it provide win-win-win situation. However, in my opinion, it depend on what personality of the leader. Different personality of a leader use different leadership style, and that could develop the leadership more successful.


Why the line foreman tend to have  high turnover rate at the Lima Tire Plant??

In this case,we can find the line foremen leave the job frequently, but actually they get pretty good pay. Following are the reasons for high turnover rate in the Lima Tire Plant:

  1. Pressure. In this job, line foreman, they didn’t get training before they work on main agenda, and it caused line foreman to become more stress on their job. Besides, when they couldn’t meet forecasts, that will be a punishment for them.
  2. No real authority. They didn’t have power to control the workers, but they have to took most of  responsibility.
  3. Their superior didn’t support.
  4. Hard to get a promotion. Since they know they don’t have many possibility to get a promotion, they lose their purpose. Most people’s purpose are to get a promotion and a higher pay, and that also tell them what they have to do and why they do.
  5. No loyalty. Because of no loyalty, employees will not have strong willing to stay in company.

So, how could we improve a company’s high turnover rate? In my opinion, there have some ways probably will work.

  • Give employees a vision. They have to know a direction, and they can follow this direction to get what they want.
  • Give employees missions. They have to know who, how, when, and what should they do, so you have to provide them the missions clearly.
  • Give employees a purpose. Purpose can motivate people’s behavior, so if you give your employee a clear purpose, they can be motivated very well.
  • Give employees good pay. Salary can be a factor to motivate your employees.
  • Give employees benefit. That will show the company that are really care about their employees, and it also can increase employees’ loyalty.
  • Build an appropriate organizational culture. “People” will be a very important factor to influence turnover rate, so if the atmosphere in organization is appropriate to employees, then their will have more chance to keep them staying in the company.

I think many company have problems with high turnover rate, and this problem will influence the whole organization.Therefore, to examine why the company have high turnover, and to improve in an appropriate way.

The Layoff

This case remind me that tons of enterprise lay off their employees because the global economic crisis in early of 2009. I remember AIG, IGT, Citibank, Home Depot, Starbusks…laid off their employees to reduce thier cost. Right, layoff is the fastest way to reduce cost, but it also causes many problems. When a company decides to enforce layoff, they should know what kind of result will happen. In my opinion, there has no best way for layoff because it causes different influences and problems. When I heard which company did layoff in early of this years, I would think they must had problems now, and maybe they cannot survive from this crisis. Layoff definitely will cause stockholders or investors to have negative evaluation for the company.

In this case, he provided some way to decide how to do layoff.

1. First in, Firs out. To layoff start with middle management because they are not too far from retirement age and it also a good way to get rid of the deadwood. However, it also could cost you huge fine for lawsuit.

2. Rank-and -Yank. using  a performance-based layoff  like eliminate the lowest 10% in the performance evaluation. It sounds pretty good because it could get rid of some unproductive employees; however, can the performance evaluation really evaluate which employee is good and which is bad? Besides, we also have to think about that it may cause people competitive and scared all the time.

3.Last in, First out. To layoff the newest employees is the easiest way for layoff because the company does not need  to pay people a lot of severance. However, based on HR’s view-point, it will cause company throw good people out of work and shout to their customers. Layoff will hurt morale, and then hurt customers, finally, hurt their stockholder and investors.

4. Lose a Unit. saving money by shutting down or selling out some business beside the core business. It could refocus what is most important in their strategy. However, it also mean you have to give up the opportunity of development.

All of ways for layoff can save cost, but it also causes different kind of problems. I don’t think there has the best way, and I think what we have to discuss is how to avoid this situation before we face it.

Level 5 leadership

I love this article. It shows the level 5 hierarchy, and the most interesting thing for me is the top of the hierarchy neither talent nor communicate skill, it is the attitude – personal humility plus professional will. I think it means for a good leader, it not only need to be highly capable individual, contributing team member, competent managers effective leader, but too important need to have the attitude of personal humility and professional will.

I love the concept of “Humility + Will = Level 5.” For my own experience, one of my supervisor was really good at this, and that also caused that many people respect and support him. He is a really intelligent person, but he always desired to learn everything new. I remember when he was just been a supervisor, he ask a mechanic to tought him how to fabricate all of furniture in the store. First, not all of people want to learn that because that  make you look dirty. Second, mechanic usually not tought other people how to do their work because that is their skill and advantage. Third, my supervisor learned that because he think it can help him to understand more about our company. Frankly, because of his personal humility, one of our mechanic tought him all of skill, and that mechanic became very support him and gave him different opinions and suggestions in his professional field. I think his attitude is a very good leadership behavior,and he already build the trust among us.

However, such as the case of “good to great, or just good,” it also use the statistic data to analyze what is the leadership’s character, and it also started with the fact and then find the caused. It is wrong to use the result to find the reason, and it’s like the professor said “bus stuff.” To get the right people on the bus, and kick the wrong people out of bus. We can use statistic data to analyze problems, but we can’t mislead this data to get the wrong analysis.

How a Marine Lost his command in Race to Baghdad

In our class, we talk about what difference between leader and manager. A manager will do things right, and a leader will do the right thing.  How a leader to do the right thing? It may have to break rules, or may threaten your career. In this case, Col. Dowdy lose his military career because he fails to complete a mission, disobeys a direct order, breaks the rules of war. Men versus mission, in which he favored his men. Did he do the right thing? If he did the right thing, why he lost his career? In my opinion, he did the right thing because he put his men first and it will get the trust from his men. I think it is what a leader do. However, in this case, he was fired because he put his men’s welfare above his mission. To do the right thing may have to break rules, and it’s why he is a leader, not a manager. A leader will take a risk to do the right thing, but manager will not. It doesn’t mean manager unimportant, but just difference work.

For Lt. Withers Act of Mercy Has Unexpected Sequel

Like the last article, it also talk about leadership and what a leader will do. In this case, John Withers didn’t follow the order and keep two men in his place. He had known it was especially important for blacks to follow orders in an army; however, he took  the risk to help two men to live. Why he want to break rules and help them? Why he didn’t follow the order like others? I think it is what a leader do. A leader do the right thing, and John Withers know these two men cannot live just because the environment in war-time situation.  These two men have right to live, and John Withers is the only one can help them. In addition, he not only saved their life but taught them how to live. He let them use their ability to earn money, and keep them being positive. Therefore, when he left, they already could live by themselves.

I think about what will I do in this situation, or will I do the same thing like John Withers? I think it will be hard to find what is right when you do any decisions. You will not know does it is really accurate and worth to take a risk. Like the last article, the leader who do the right thing but lost his career. I don’t really know could I do the right thing like a leader, but I think if I have same situation like John Withers, I will prefer to save those two men if I can.

New Wine, Old Bottles

This article talks about servant leadership, which the Greenleat Center has created and implemented so successfully. Humility is essential to implement servant leadership.

The concept of servant leadership are used world-widely, but like the author said most o executives take “new wine” concept and mix it with “old bottle.” So, how to implement servant leadership? In the tree steps that the author mentions, I think the most necessary step is to build relationships of trust. Building relationships of trust is never easy, but if trust is build, there will have strong power to benefit all of organization like a win-win situation.

Trust can make win-win situation. Take my own experience for example, one of my English teacher work really hard on teaching us, and she really want her student can improve English greatly. Because of her effort, I believed she can help me improve my ability, and I did every extra work that she provided. She told me she feel more energy to teach student when she saw a student who is striving to learn, and I also told her I get what I want in her class and it is worth to take her class because she knew what I want and she could provide it to me. She built trust between us, and I think we also get what we want and achieve win-win situation.

Good Leadership Requires Executives To Put Themselves Last

What is good leadership? From the story of Col. Dowdy, John Withers to Michael Leven, I can tell all of them will put themselves last and there men of employee first. In an organization, most people would not put themselves last, and they may even deceive other to get a promotion.

To be a leader, you must should have follower. If you want to have follower, you must have to build trust among you and your followers. So, how to build trust among you and your followers? I think you have to know what they want, and let them know you will take care of them. I think it is just like servant leadership that  you must have to build relationships of trust. If you take care of your followers and put them at fist, they will believe it is right and worth to follow you. So, I do agree a good leadership requires executives to put themselves last.

What is the dean’s disease?

Dean’s  is when people work for a high position and become “puffed up with their own importance.” Being in the top position, the power holder become lose their original thinking and behavior.

What are the three reasons why the dean’s disease occurs?

  1. They control the resources. The power holders as deans can influence faculty because they know and control the most important resources. Because they control the resources, they can decide most of main decisions including reward power. He can influence who can get a promotion or provide salary increases, so colleges may not tell him the truth or even flatter him. Consequently, it’s dangerous for the dean because they don’t really know what is realities, and it will cause bias for dean’s ideas and decision.
  2. Strategic praise. Since the dean control the resources and hold the power, he will become the target of flattery. People want to have good relationship with dean by having intension,  so they will become “yes men” or even alway complimented to the dean. Therefore, the dean think they are really that good as what they said. They believe they can be really intelligent and do everything good, but actually they are not.
  3. The taste for power. It’s really hard to keep morality with the power because the taste for power is really good. I think everyone can understand it because there have too many examples in our government. They become misuse their power when they get too many benefit from it.

I think most of people can not avoid to temptation when they get the highest position and wield most power in an organization, so how do we prevent the dean’s disease?  I think it is what a leader have to learn because they will face these problems. The case shows two way to prevent the dean’s disease. One is to check out dean applicants, the other is to look at their past record. I think to look at their past record is a greater way to prevent the dean’s disease. When we look back  on what we thought originally, we will find what  difference is it and remind us do we overestimate ourselves.


In this case, it talks about “group think.” Group think is really powerful to influence results, but can “group think” really help an organization to make good decisions and improve themselves a lot? I think yes or no. Sometimes “group think” could be right, but sometimes will be wrong. If “group think” is wrong, I think it will be harmful. In our world, we have many situation that have to deal with group think, from a team project with your classmate to a project that you have to provide to your boss with your co-worker in your team. Although I also think in group discussion people usually will disagree or have a lot of opinion on every single tiny thing, but actually I like “group think” because it help me to get more idea and stimulate my potential, and it also help a group to get a same goal to pursue.  , it

How can “group think” be really harmful? Frankly, “group think” usually decides the decision, and people have to follow this thought. If it’s a right, it will help the group a lot because they have the same idea and purpose. However, it it’s wrong, people cannot find where is wrong, or they don’t even ever wonder or doubt the decision that the group decide. Maybe some people will doubt the ”group think,” but it is hard for them to against the group decisions because people will think they are not cooperative. Besides, when all of people think it is right, you will not doubt that. It let me think about the movie, North country, that talked people have perception that males are more powerful and have higher social position than females. Because our culture taught us this perception and all of us think it like a common sense, it very hard for them to doubt what wrong is it. Nowadays, we think it ridiculous, but if you live in that day, how will you react for all gender unequal situation?

Good to great, or just good

This article mentions about statistical time series problems. Form the book of Good to Great, the author used a set of screens to sift through 1435 companies and identify a list of 11 elite firm that mean business greatness. After identifying these 11 firms, he tried to find what factors cause these companies successful.

What problems behind this research that looks like perfect?  Good to Great provides absolutely no evidence that applying the GTG principles to other firms during other time periods will lead to anything other than average business performance. The problem for GTG is he found the fact first, and the came back to find reasons that caused the fact. In statistic, you cannot go to find what the fact is first and then find what will be caused the fact.

From this case, what I learned  is to keep in mind there has a big mistake about doing test on statistic. We can get diamonds from the data mine, but we have to make sure to use the data in correct way.

In this case, Arrow Electronics try to solve high turnover of their talented salespeople because it influence their sales and revenue very well. They call those salespeople ” W-2-hoppers.” The biggest problem for these people is no loyalty for their company; if they cannot earn more money from this company or other company provide better salary and opportunity to them, they will leave the original company and even bring all of their customer away with them. In addition, these “w-2-hoppers” are pretty attractive for most companies, and companies will hope them to increase their sales and revenue. However, the increasing of growth rate is temporary, and the decision of hiring “w-2-hoppers” become really short-sighted. Therefore, how to deal with this problem? Kaufman, the CEO of Arrow Electronics, use the college-recruiting plan. They tried to hire salespeople directly out of college and train them for the job, but it does not work because they are too young to have a sense of loyalty. In my opinion, I think it would be the problems of company’s culture. How do they motivate their salespeople? How to reward them when they have good performer? Why a employee dose not have loyalty for company? I think it is because they dislike and disagree their company, or they do not find advantage and future from the company. Therefore, in my opinion, if you want to keep your talented salespeople, you have to know what they want. If you

Moreover, Arrow Electronics also struggle with Employee Performance Review (EPR) system, and they wonder that how effective of this system. Should they abandon this system or still keep it? Kaufman asked “How cab it be possible that on a scale of 1-5?” I believe that the performance evaluation is not a effective and useful tool to measure  how’s your employee  performance. There have some bias that exist in this system:

1. Most manager does not like to discriminate their employees, so scores of everyone are similar. It cause the result meaningless. You cannot tell who is worthy to give promotion.

2. Manager cannot remember all of employees’ performance or keep their value until they do the evaluation. In addition, I do not think my manager really know the good performance that I did because they don’t even see that. Will this mean I do not perform well?

3. The evaluation depend on managers. In the case, they call it “Willson factor.” If you close with manager, you can get higher score. Or if your manager is strict, it will be tough to get high value in your evaluation. I think it is unfair, isn’t it?

I cannot say the performance evaluation is useless, but honestly it is not effective. How can you spend a lot of your budget to use an effective system? I will suggest Kaufman to abandon this system.

span.jajahWrapper { font-size:1em; color:#B11196; text-decoration:underline; } a.jajahLink { color:#000000; text-decoration:none; } span.jajahInLink:hover { background-color:#B11196; }

SAS Institute

In this case, I figure out some points that help this company has competitive, and following are my summary about this company.

1. This is a private company, so he doesn’t need to really care about the requests of stockholder, and it easier for him to put customer at first position.

2. Care about market-share growth more than how much money he will earn.

3. Their company culture is freedom , fun, and creativity, so their employees are really love to work for this company. It also cause their employee have proactive attitude, and the company have low turnover rate.

4. Employees are this company’s important  capital, and they provide good benefit and workplace for them.

5. They use long term decision and bottom-up decision in this company, so the first line’s sales can provide the idea what their customers really want.

6. How this company motivate their employees? They don’t use sales commission system that most of the companies usually use, so their employee will care about what their customers really need and make a long term decision for this company. Besides, SAS Institute give bonuses with no formula, and I think it’s also motivate them to keep trying hard not restrict by a bonus limit.

7. The don’t use contract workers and no contract programmers provided by temporary help agencies. I think it also a long term decision for this company because contract worker usually have no loyalty.

8. The organizational structure just have three or four level, so it people can communicate easily and quickly.

9. Employees will have a lot of movement in this company, so they can understand more about this company and get more different skills.

10. They will not tell their employees what is good performance and what is not, and they just give them the tools what they need and train them the skills what they want.

Actually I never heard this company before, but I can understand why this company can be a the ninth largest independent software firm in the world. The most impressive thing is he doesn’t use sales commissions system to motivate their employees to get higher sales. In Taiwan, sales commissions system is used really common in companies. Under this system, most of the sales are not really care about how to make the benefit for customers but how to get higher commission. I think it’s shortsighted and not really motivate sales to get good performance. Therefore, the case of SAS Institute let me think  about that does sales commissions system really motivate employees? If ir is, does this motivation keep for long time?

Moreover, I agree with this company that doesn’t use contract worker a lot. I had experience about using contract worker, and it exists many problems. Contract workers do not have loyalty for our company because they will probably not stay in this company for a long time, and they may not work really hard for you.

Finally, could it continue to succeed with the same management practices that had brought it to its present position? Frankly, I don’t think so. the scale of SAS Intitute becomer bigger and bigger, their management way will also be changed. They will have more employees, so I don’t think they can use the same organizational structure, and it will  become harder for using bottom-up decision. I think the culture could be keep, but the stucture will be changed. It’s also have to think about how to deal with people for different culture when they work on international business. I think it cannot be same system in every place, and they have to figure out how to change. I believe they will continue to succeed in the future if they keep their advantages and adjust their organization to international style and diversity.


In this case, I will compare with the case of SAS Intitute because they use totally different system to motivate their sales .

Sales-per-hour Incentives

I think we should discuss about how this system operate in a company because I think it still really commonly use in many companies; maybe not in USA, but still in Taiwan. Does sales-per-hour Incentives really work on motivating employees? Will the motivation  sustain for a long time? What kind of culture they will have if companies use sales-per-hour incentives?

In SAS Institute case, they do not use sales commission system to motivate their sales because they do not think it will really motivate employees. I agree with this opinion because it is a way to do long term decision.

In Nordstrom case, I think sales-per-hour incentives is a “negative reinforcement.” I remember that professor told us how he lets students come to class every time. He gave extra credit point for students if they come to class; however, he also took the points out if student absence. So, what will students do if they have one absence? That is kind of punishment. and people hate punishment. In Nordstrom, sales may work really hard to achieve their target; however, if they don’t achieve the target one time, or two time, what will they do? They will feel punishment and useless, especially when everyone can know your performence. That has so many pressure, and it causes sales to give up after they tried their best for a long time.

Southwest Airlines: Using Human Resources for Competitive Advantage

I took Southwest Airline for many times for traveling, and I really love this company so much; I think I am one of his loyal customer. In my experience of Southwest, I love they provide lower price, free 2 suitcases shipping, arriving and departing on-time,  and good quality  service.  I don’t feel surprise about their successive and strong growth rate because they totally worth it.

In this Southwest case, I am really impressed about this company’s culture. They care about their employees and place them in the most important positions in their company. Most companies claim that their customers are the most important thing to them, but they usually don’t provide good service to their customer. I think the main reason is their employees just do the routine work  for their customers, so they may not provide what the customers really want. However, Southwest employees love their job a lot because they find joy in their work place. I remember one experience when I took Southwest airline  to LA, and one of the flight attendants just sang and performed during the flight; it greatly impressed me because that was the first time I felt really happy on a  flight (actually I hate flying on airplanes a lot. ) I think the Southwest employees provide good service and efficient work because they love their company and want to help their company earn more money. In my opinion, allowing employees to serve their customers the way they want is more useful than pushing them to do it, and this will greatly improve their overall attitudes. If your employees hate your company, and they stay in your company just because they have no other choice, their attitude will be very passive. Therefore, I agree with putting employees first and customers second place because if you care more about your employees, your employees will care more about your customer.

Moreover, I think low cost is also a reason for Southwest’s competitive edge. Southwest usually provides the lowest price to their customer; actually I think they’re much cheaper than other airlines. Some factors that contribute to their competitive price include omitting full course meals sticking with only soft drinks and nuts, as well as maintaining only one style of aircraft ( given that other companies maintain multiple styles). Both of these techniques greatly lower costs, especially having only one model as it makes training pilots much easier, while reducing airplane-maintenance costs. Also, because “checking in” has become less complicated than other airlines, and customers for Southwest do not need to provide a ticket (only confirmation), it reduces the amount of staff and total work hours, saving Southwest great amounts of money on payroll. These strategies allow Southwest to have competitive rates, while making it difficult for other airlines to follow.

Two Football Coaches Have a Lot to Teach

I really enjoy on this reading because one of my previous boss  always  screamed at his employee. He is very impatient and explosive, so most of his employee cannot stay in that company for a long time. I think it always has negative influence to use angry word or scream at employee.  Some managers think screaming at employees will motivate them to improve their performance; however, it usually doesn’t work. Take my ex-boss for example, the average of time that employees stay in this company is less than one year, and it let this company has to spend more cost on training new employees.  Besides, his employees usually have a lot of pressure when they work, so it also caused bad performance. Therefore, I don’t think screaming at employees will help a leader work well.

Get Healthy or Else

It can understand why most of company want their employees to take care themself because they have to save on unbelievable medical costs. Normally company will use some reward way to encourage their employees to be healthy like receive discount on gym, smoking-cessation program, or vacation. I think these ways are really useful not only because save medical cost, but also help company to get others benefit. First at all, if employees can be  healthier, it will help the company to be more productivity. Employees will not take off frequently because of sick, or they will have more energy and can pay more attention on their work. Moreover, giving some program or help to employees to be health will provide a good corporate image to the public.  If a company sell the healthy product on his business, but most of their employee  are overweight, obese, and smoked, it definitely will influence the company’s image. Therefore, I think it should have advantage to let employees take care of their health.

Jesica’s story

It is really ridiculous and unbelievable story, and let me feel heart crushing. From this article, I can believe it still have a lot of medical error that was unknown in the real world, and we really should pay more attention on the problem of medical error.

In Taiwan, it also have a very famous medical error event that happened couple years ago. One nurse want to give a shot for eight infant, and she didn’t double check the medicine of the shots, so she gave the wrong shots to eight infants. It caused most of the infants died and have sequela, and one of the infant’s parent will be really hard to get pregnant again.  This event was the headline more than one week, and it let people pay more attention on Taiwanese medical error’s problem.

In Jesica’s story, I think it also let a lot of people care about medical error in the United States, and I also think it should have more effective way to avoid these error. The key could be the mental problem of those doctor and nurse because maybe they are tired and bored about their everyday work.