First, we need to look at the reason we are in this current situation and in doing so, our objectives must come out clearly. Looking at the strategy review of where the organization needs to be by 2015, we realize that it has not been able to achieve much. The reason for this is all the politics surrounding the strategy.
Secondly, sales are under-represented at the main board of directors. There is proper representation of all other departments of the organization but when it comes to sale, a major source of information for purposes of the way forward there is little representation (Arnold, 2010).
The work force has a huge impact on the performance of the organization and their thoughts have not been put into consideration while carrying out decisions of the company. Lack of clear set goals and objectives can be very dangerous when pursuing a strategy since it leads to redundancy which is another reason we are in this current situation (Barro, 2008).
For us to move forward we must be able to critically understand where we are as an organization because one can never achieve set goal without knowing their status and what needs to be done in order to get there.
We have broken this down in inline with the objectives of delivering the mission.
Winning the customer
In winning the customer, there is lack of the required skills and training in terms of management among the sales managers. The distribution channels are scattered all over. When it comes to salesmen, we realize 50% do not any visits at all and the remaining carry out a very minimal number of visits. There is no effort put in trying to achieve the sales target that have been set and if there is any little or no consideration is given to time deadlines. With the help of the information provided by BUSOM Consulting, we noticed a sales staff turnover of 50% (Wickham, 2008).
Servicing the customer
Here service centers and policy processing is very vital. Currently the cost of doing business in the organization is too high. There no self-managed teams on Customer Service Action line caused by a low control for team leaders. Present and very vivid is an increasing error rate which currently stands at 20% (O’Mahoney, 2010).
Managing the business
The total cost of running the company is high and a reduction of such costs as secretariat, property, legal and actuarial would come in handy (Beins, 2004).
In pursuit of the objectives you need to understand what to consider for purposes of formulating a course of action. That is why the relationship between performance improvement, group strategy and overview review. A look at the relationship between these three will help in formulating a way forward for the organization. Let’s look at each one of these items and how they relate to each other (Blanchard, 2008).
We must consider measuring the output of all the processes and procedures starting with operations review which has produced 1200 action plan but only 30% has been implemented. This process is has been given high profile in the organization that is why it should be considered. It is sad news though that it has not been very effective perhaps due to the nature of the manger in charge, our consideration here is the level of priority that this project has attracted. We can say that this project has not been much of a success, being able to achieve only 30%, hence the focus of the organization on this project should be considered including allocation of resources, energies and time (Bruke, 2009).
In reduction of cost we must consider the review of the organizational strategy and from the information from BUSOM this strategy has been there for a year and has not been able to achieve much hence failing in achievement of it performance improvement goal. It is clear that this strategy has lacked in efficiency. We should also look at the relationship between the group strategy and the operation review. The issue here is the contribution of the operation review to where the organization needs to be in 2015 (Course, 2008).
For purposes of knowing what to do next we must analyze the consideration we made and come up with possible solutions to these issues ailing the organization. We will use the same formula as we did in the considerations in analyzing the relationship between operations review, performance improvement and group strategy and what they mean to the organization. In this section we will also discuss possible solutions to these issue and their merits and demerits if they exist (Covey, 2003).
In the analysis of the performance improvement in relation to both the operation review and the group strategy, not much has been achieved. Politics have crippled the efficiency of the group strategy (Mcneill, 2009). This means that most of the people at the management level have put their personal interest before the interests of the organization as a whole. The group strategy is casing the organization since it’s very expensive. Two courses of actions can be pursued here:
- Scrap the strategy and develop a new one with new project mangers
- Outsources human resource for project management
Operations Review and Group Strategy
When it comes to the analysis of the operations review and its relation to performance improvement and group strategy the lack of social skill by the manager of this project has probably the reason for the little success of this project. This mean the manager is wrong for the job; he does not have the skill needed. We tried to limit our interaction to this project and relied on information provided. Two courses of action can be pursued here:
Lastly is the analysis of the group strategy, its relation to the performance improvement and operation review. It is very vital that the group strategy achieves the set targets in delivering the mission by 2015. This means that the company needs to do away with the politics if it wants to be able to increase the output of the firs processes (Krugman, 2009). This can be done through:
- Reconstructing the objectives of the group strategy.
- Replacement of project managers.
- Amalgamation of TUP and TUA.
In conclusion, we would love to recommend that if it is possible the company goes ahead and amalgamate TUP and TUA customer service functions) involving job losses. Training is also very important especially to sale mangers and their involvement in the decision making process since they are in direct contact with the clients. In servicing the customer, customer relationship management system will come in handy since it will. Finally, in general management, the company should consider adoption of a well-integrated enterprise resource planning system (William, 2006).
Arnold, R. A. (2010). Macroeconomics. Chicago: Cengage Learning.
Barro, R. J. (2008). Macroeconomics: A Modern Approach. Chicago: Cengage Learning.
Baym, V. (2008). Accurate forced-choice recognition without awareness of memory retrieval. Learning and memory , 454-459.
Beins, B. (2004). Research Methods: a tool for life. Michigan: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon.
Blanchard, O. (2008). Macroeconomics. Carlifonia: Pearson Hall.
Bruke, J. (2009). Report writing. New York: Cengage.
Course, O. U. (2008). Thinking Critically. New York: Open University Worldwide.
Covey, S. R. (2003). 7 Habits of Highly Influential People. New York: Hay House Incorporated.
Patrick Mcneill, S. C. (2009). Research Methods: Third Edition. Chicago: Cengage Learning.
Paul Krugman, R. W. (2009). Macroeconomics. New York: Worth Publishers.
William m., J. P. (2006). Research Methods Knowledge Base. Chicago: Cengage.