The thing about this book, and many others of similar vein from the same period, are two basic assumptions:
I am a big fan of your work on risk communication and have been following it for years. I am currently researching best practice for communicating job layoffs, and wondered if you would apply your models to communicating bad news about jobs.
For example, would this comment hold true in a job crisis? More often than not, they are already pondering what might go wrong, imagining the worst and wishing there were some way to get it out onto the table and get the facts.
I would think that employees would be expecting layoffs. Speculating about when and who is a big part of the rumor mill in an organization, and people would rather know than constantly live in fear about what might happen.
So I think not telling them is very unproductive, and in our current economic climate irresponsible.
Most companies tend to keep their employees in the dark. Publicly listed companies have of course a regulatory framework to consider, but your risk communication model is an interesting one to contemplate. They mostly knew or sensed that a downsizing was on the way, and the event itself is like the other shoe dropping.
Would it be kinder — and better business — for employers to be candid? In the current economic climate, a very high percentage of employed people fear for their jobs. This is a huge drain on morale and productivity — and a significant threat to workplace safety as well.
It also inhibits consumption and damages the economy, as millions pull back on spending in anticipation of possible joblessness to come. The widespread expectation of joblessness is thus a self-fulfilling prophesy. Here are the four groups: These employees are experiencing completely unnecessary anxiety, with all its impacts on morale, productivity, safety, consumption, and quality of life.
If it were the norm for companies to level about their labor plans, these employees would enjoy a reprieve. The risk would be knowable, explicit, confirmed.
But when the layoffs come, they will be taken by surprise, logistically and emotionally. If their employer bothered to say so explicitly, it would simply confirm what they already believe.
Bottom line of this audience segmentation: Most employees are better off knowing whether layoffs are in the offing or not.
No employees are worse off knowing. I understand that candor may have some downsides for an employer. And perhaps employees who knew that layoffs were coming rather than just fearing that layoffs might be coming would perform less well; they might focus on job-hunting, or take sick days, or even engage in a little pilfering or sabotage.
There are some ways in which it might be better for the employer to let the layoffs come as a shock: But at least in risk communication terms, candor about the prospect of layoffs is good strategy. Based on this distinction, I categorize risk communication into three tasks: The risk is both high-hazard and high-outrage; people are rightly upset about a genuinely serious risk.
Losing your job is a crisis. For that matter, knowing or suspecting that others in your organization are likely to lose their jobs is also a crisis, even if you are confident of keeping yours. Layoff survivors suffer from survivor guilt; they must endure the disruption of the layoff itself and the pressure once the layoff is over to do more with less; they lose friends and acquaintances; they have reason to worry about the possibility of another layoff down the road.
The two goals in crisis communication are to help people bear their feelings, especially their anger, fear, and misery — that is, their outrage — and to help them cope effectively with the serious hazard they face.
There is also a precaution advocacy element in talking about possible future layoffs. Employees who imagine that their job is more secure than it actually is are in a high-hazard, low-outrage situation.
They need and deserve to be warned. And as always when the crisis is your doing, layoffs have an outrage management component too.
But my outrage at you for laying me off may or may not be justified. But first I want to address just one way in which many employers have unwisely set themselves up as targets for employee outrage and broad societal outrage with regard to layoffs: When a company grows, it needs more people to accomplish its objectives.
I have no objection to a company pointing out that its new or expanded factory will mean more jobs.Product Strategy Of Honda. The American Honda Motor Company was established as a subsidiary by Honda in During the 's the type of motorcycles brought by Americans underwent a major change.
Motorcycle registrations increased by over , in five years from reviews of Western Governors University written by students. If you essay to run for student council, you might lose to the girl who promises more recess, longer lunches, and less homework.
noun - A short literary composition on a single subject, usually presenting the personal view of the author.
Pizzeria del Causamali pizzeria business plan executive summary. Pizzeria del Causamali is a start-up restaurant which will fill an empty niche. Management: products delivered on time, costs controlled, marketing budgets managed.
There is a temptation to fixate on growth at the expense of profits. It's fast and easy, with LivePlan. BUSM Strategic Management HKMA. Final Exam Advice. 1. The final exam consists of two parts.
2. The exam will be marked out of 50 marks and is worth 50% of your final mark. 10 Principles of Leading Change Management: My favorites - do the rationale and emotional together and leverage informal solutions.
Sample essay on change management Article on change in healthcare, but infographic is cool. Find this Pin and more on Management, Strategy.