Creating High Performance Organizations
Its 7:30 on a July morning, and already a crowd has gathered for the opening of Trader Joe's newest outpost, in Manhattan's Chelsea neighborhood. The waiting shoppers chat about their favorite Trader Joe's foods, and a woman in line launches into a monologue comparing the retailer's West Coast and East Coast locations. Another customer suggests that the chain will be good for Chelsea, even though the area is already brimming with places to buy groceries, including Whole Foods and several upscale food boutiques (Kowitt, 2010). Trader Joe’s has taken a typical trip to the grocery store and turned it into an extravagant experience. All the while they’ve figure out how to keep the costs lower than any of its competitors. What has Trader Joe’s done that is so unique and so different than its competitor’s? Trader Joe’s is what I would consider a High Performance Organization (HPO). High-performance organizations are the exemplars of successful businesses. They represent real-world models of a modern managerial ideal: organizations that excel in so many areas that they consistently outperform competitors for extended periods of time (Insitute for Corporate Productiivity, Inc, 2010). Many organizations strive to be High Performance Organizations (HPO’s). Some go by more traditional ways of reaching that goal but never quite reach the level they desire. What does it take to create an HPO? What are the differences between HPO’s and traditional organizations? My analysis of this issue will go in depth with recommendations that follow the 5 domains of a High Performance Organization. I will use Trader’s Joe’s corporate culture to show why they continue to grow and outperform their competitors. Lastly I will show comparisons of HPO’s and traditional organizations and why HPO’s perform on a much larger scale. Problem Statement
The problem with traditional organizations is that they exercise a more bureaucratic system to accomplish tasks. Organizations of this type stress rules, policies, and procedures; specify techniques for decision making; and emphasize developing well-documented control systems backed by strong middle management and supported by a centralized staff (Schermerhorn, Hunt, Osborn, & Uhl-Bien, 2010). With this type of structure more emphasis is set on management to improve efficiency. Employees are generally not viewed as an asset or part of a team; they are viewed more as instruments. The biggest challenge with this type of organization is that most employees are not fond of the structure. Organizations that operate in a bureaucratic atmosphere usually have problems with high turnover rates and low employee job satisfaction. There are five facets of job satisfaction: * The work itself-responsibility, interest, and growth
* Quality of supervision-technical help and social support * Relationships with coworkers-social harmony and respect * Promotion opportunities-chances for further advancement * Pay-adequacy of pay and perceived equity vis-à-vis others (Schermerhorn, Hunt, Osborn, & Uhl-Bien, 2010) Job satisfaction is important because there is a direct correlation between an employee’s level of satisfaction and their productivity. Organizations should strive for high levels of job involvement, how committed and employee is to their job, because the employees will likely go above and beyond for their organization. Literature Review
What most HPO’s have done to achieve their level of success has been to break away from the traditional bureaucratic model of business organization to a more organic and flexible one (VIP Innovations, 2010). HPO’s tend not to think of the employees in individual terms, they like to put people in teams. Managers in HPO’s are treated more as leader’s of teams, and don’t give too much direction. The teams are given a task and the planning, coordination, and execution of the task is allowed...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document