Follow ALL directions. Analytically write response to discussion post. No plagia

Follow ALL directions. Analytically write response to discussion post. No plagiarism. Must use scholarly references and be complete by tomorrow at noon EST. The directions are ad follows:
Note: This collaborative project requires you to delve into a selection of relevant literature, analyze competing perspectives, and consider ethical issues associated with a workplace problem. You’ll work on your own and in collaboration with other group members, much as you will in a team-based workplace. This collaborative discussion requires you to post at multiple points through the week, both contributing your own ideas and responding to others.
We’ve placed this project early in the course so you’ll benefit from seeing how others approach these tasks as you’re working on your own project. You’ll work together in a small group during Modules 3 and 4, with the group project presented to the class during Week 4. Remember, you must individually demonstrate mastery of the Collaboration competency to successfully complete the Capstone.
Case study: G2Q is a multinational company specializing in the commodification of water. In response to company shareholders’ demands for higher revenue, the company has adopted increasingly aggressive practices in its quest to acquire controlling rights to regional water resources around the globe. As part of that initiative, the company secretly proposed a profit-sharing agreement with some local leaders in a South Pacific location in exchange for the right to divert more surface and spring water to expand their bottled water production. This has resulted in local protests and work slowdowns at the local plant, which in turn decreased productivity and financial losses.
In an attempt to return to profitability, G2Q brought in managers from company headquarters to displace indigenous people previously hired in supervisory and leadership roles. None of the incoming managers speak the local language, and most complain about what they consider to be substandard living and working conditions.
Most of the employees are members of ethnic minorities from the host country with distinct differences in cultural norms and language preferences. For example, some behave as though they speak no English, while others refuse to make eye contact with managers. Still others appear to agree with everything managers say, then ignore their directions.
One former manager who quit, married a local, and lives in a nearby village has advised the incoming managers that “things are done differently over here” and cautions them against rushing to judgment. That presents a dilemma, as the company CEO has promised all managers a sizeable bonus if the plant regains its formerly profitable status within two years. Otherwise, the company will close down that location, firing the managers and leaving hundreds of people with little hope of finding other employment.
Directions:
Issues thread: Individually, draw upon the literature and byWednesday contribute an informed position about issues noted in the case study. Here’s a list of possible issues to jump-start the process and to inform your work:
Ethnocentrism
In-group favoritism
Outgroup bias
Cultural inequities
Intergroup conflict
Organizational values
Ethical decision-making
Economic impact
Social Justice
Cross-cultural theory

Published

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.