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.

In this case, SMC is no growing and it try to change their CEO from  others company. The new CEO, Carl Burke, found this company has big market and excellent sales and manufacturing organization. However, he think they have to improve product developement and the area of Administration.  When he try to change and help this company, he also find there have “people” problem in their organization.  People are not united in their team. It is really common in some old company because people are too familiar with their work and they think they are right, and they usually will reject changing. Besides, because of their system, they will want to work only ob their functional area and separate clearly their responsibility. Therefore, I think it was the reason why Carl decide to bring in an outside consultant. I don’t really agree with this decision because I think Carl is a new CEO or new member in this company, and both of Carl and this outside consultant were not really understand this organization; they stood at the same starting point.

In my opinion, this is a no growing company because they were in the mature period, and I think that bringing a new outside CEO to this organization is a good idea.  The new superior could bring a new atmosphere into this company because he can use his viewpoint to see what problems do they have. However, in this situation, I don’t think it wise for a company to use an outside consultant because it will not help a lot. In this case, the consultant, Laura Wells, did the evaluation for each individual and team, but I wonder that did she really know how these people’s value in this company in six weeks? I even think maybe Carl will know these people more if he work with them and observe their personality for a period. Besides, at the end consultant just confirm about CEO’s idea, and she didn’t even suggest or teach him what should he do will be great.

Consultant was not really helpful for this company, and I think the CEO of SMC should believe himself to lead this company. He has great experience, so people in SMC probably expect him to bring some new atmosphere. In my opinion, if I were the CEO of SMC, I would believe my abaility and decision. and try to figure out how to improve this company’s system with my team. I need my team believe me, and I also have to understand them.

Get rid of the performance review

I agree with the idea of getting rid of the performance review because I never think it’s objective. When I worked in IKEA before, our manager will provides performance review to our boss, and usually I think that is useless. I had two different manager in my work period, and they provide totally different performance review to our boss. It can tell because I was closer with one of them, and she known what I was doing. My another manager didn’t care about his employee and  just wanted to know the result, so if result not good, he will think your performence bad. Therefore, I don’t think performence review can show employee’s performence well because it not objective although thay claim that is fair and objective.

However, I don’t think performence review will improve anything for a company. Because of performence review, some employees will do some work on what their manager prefer to, but actually it’s not the most important thing have to do or the thing really help the company. They just want to get high value on their performance review.

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.


All of  these two article are talking about attitude, and good attitude will provide good service and production, good service help a company to earn more money and become more efficient. Besides, good attitude will improve service and also earn a company more loyal customers that will support that company. An employee engagement also is a type of positive attitude, and it will be influenced by company’s culture and situation.

However, how to let your employee have good attitude and keep that everyday? Employees should not be forced to have a good attitude, but should develop a good attitude from their working environment. It should have a lot of way to let employee keep good attitude and bring good service to customers. First, the manager or boss should do that first. I believe that if superior provide good attitude and let employees think they really care about attitude, the employees will be influenced by them. For example, Southwest’s CEO always care about his employees and bring the joy to them, and it caused his employees love to work in this company and want to provide good service to their customers. In addition, keeping companies that growth stable and provide vision for the future will help employees have engagement in workplace. For example, when I worked in IKEA in Taiwan, I could find out most of employees thought no vision for their future in this company, and they also known the growth rate goes down and there benefit become less and less. It was very obviously that employees provide bad service and even cheating in the company.

The employer should know how to let his employee have good attitude, and keep that everyday. I think it’s not that hard because you just have to let your employees trust you and have to know what your employees want.

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

Bob Sutton’s blog “work matters”

I agree with Mr. Sutton’s opinion regarding work matters. When I was a college student, I discovered the differences among students in each type of college.  For example, in the high level schools (ex. Harvard, Stanford, etc.), students assume they are more intelligent than students from other types of colleges, also assuming that they don’t need to study as hard. In addition, they perceive education pertaining to basic grammar and skills as a waste of time. However, the students from middle level schools (ex. UNR, CSU Sacramento, etc) study diligently as they do believe themselves to be as intelligent as the students from high level schools. They also want to study the basics of every discipline and begin working on basic job skills because they are unsure about what fields they can succeed in, but they believe if they work hard and remain persistent, it will work. How about the students in the low level schools (ex. TMCC and other community colleges)? Most of them keep thinking that they are not qualified to study; therefore, they spend their time on part-time employment where the salary is not that good.

To be honest, I never think I am really smart, but I also never think I am ignorant. I strive to pursue my education because I know I must work hard to be competitive. For example, while I study in the USA, I know I need to study harder than others, given that English is not my native language. Sometimes, I question my intelligence because of how hard I have to work, but now I think it may not be a negative thing because it is teaching me how to face new challenges.

Can personality be changed?

In this reading, I agree the author’s opinion; personality can be changed. Personality changes over the life span and changes by experience, and I think it also can be taught.

In my opinion, the environment is one of the factors that could change a person’s personality a lot. Before I came to the United States, I was not a confident or positive person, and I didn’t even attempt tasks that seemed too difficult. In addition, I didn’t like to ask people to help me out because it I feared others would view it as ignorant or that I have a disability. However, after I came to the United States, the culture shock and different social environment provided me with great adversity. At first, I became very negative, had no confidence, and didn’t even talk to others very often. It really was a tough time for me, and it changed my personality a lot because I know I have to survive in this environment. I try my best to think in positive way, be more confident, ask people to help me when I really need help, and also be more organized because I know in this environment  I cannot procrastinate when it comes to my work. Today, it has already been over one year since I came to the US, and I have realized some significant changes. I have become more outgoing, more confident, and more aggressive.

Personality will change by environment, time/experience, and I know that my personality will change after I get my master’s degree, get married, and or retire.

Effects of each preference in work situation

My MBIT test result is ESFP, extraverted types, sensing types, feeling types, and perceptive types. In this paper, I think the most prominent personalities are perceptive types and feeling types. Frankly, I do not connect well with these two types because I do not think those kinds of personality help me to be a successive leader. However, that is just my opinion. After reading the two prior articles, I know I can practice to be a more thinking and judging type of person. Besides, this analysis allowed me to locate my strengths and weaknesses, so I understand what to I should go for and what I should avoid.

In the workplace, do flirtatious women really  advance in their career? In my opinion, it should depend on what kind of job. If she is a sales, I think pretty  looks, good manner, and sweet sound should help her a lot in her business. Besides, in my experience,  if you have batter looks, it’s easier to get a job in an interview, but of course you also have required skill though. However, if a woman works in a professional workplace, I think the flirtatious behavior we be very unprofessional and  inappropriate.
Moreover, I think woman who has pretty looks and used sexual behavior a lot sometimes let people think she is weak, untalented, and untrustworthy. This thought not only use on women but also men.  Do they only have attractive physical presence but have no sense? Do they just be flirtatious because they don’t have knowledge and abilities?

Finally, I have to say sometimes it is not our fault to be flirtatious because we don’t know these behavior are flirtatious. For example, according what Benton said,  I really don’t know when I say “It’s a nice day,” men will often conclude “She wants me.”

For a MBA student, I will expect myself to be a manager, and I think it’s important to know how to communication my subordinate and boss, and how to lead my team to grow up and be successful.  In my country, Taiwan, it’s more important to know how to communication with people because it is characterized by femininity and collectivism in our culture.  When we communicate with people, we have to think about what relationship we are, what will they think about us, what the environment is.

In the business school, we will think about what do we want to learn because we already have experience and know what we should strengthen. In my opinion, the communication skill is really a big deal in my career.