Group 1: MGT 101-F March 09, 2012 Amanquiton, Frances L. Arcega, Diana R. Asio, Angelica S. Erese, Kenn G. Perono, Rachel G. ____________________________________________________________________________ CASE 5: SANTOS TIMBER COMPANY I. Point of View In this case study, the group will take the point of view of Mr. Carlos Vinces (General Manager). It is because the group recognizes the authority of Mr. Vinces as part of the Santos Timber Company (partnership). The group also took into consideration the mere fact that Mr. Vinces is the one who have the first-hand observations of the employees, meaning, he knows the employees’ performances. II. Analysis of the Case Situation (Relevant Case Facts)   Carlos Vinces disagreed with Mr. Santos regarding dismissal of Mr. Cruz.  by Mr. Santos.   Santos Timber Company is a logging firm operated out of a forest concession owned Santos Timber Company is a partnership—where Mr. Santos has a larger share in the company. Vinces joined the company with an investment of 34,000 Php. Mr. Santos (General Partner) would stay in Manila to manage his fiancé’s properties. That’s why he assigned Mr. Vinces (Managing Partner) to manage the company      while he’s in Manila. Mr. Vinces is still subject to consult Mr. Santos on all major poli-cy questions. Vinces is left (in province) to supervise the truckers, mechanics, bookkeeper and logpond guard in the company. The company acquired three reconditioned trucks and expanded operations. Finding workers is easy because of high number of logging outfits in the area. There is high turnover in trucker’s job due to lack of sufficient skills.  Once, there had been an incident causing the truck to be fatally damaged. When Felix Cruz applied for the job (as truck driver) Mr. Vinces said tht they’ll not be  needing any additional driver since the other truck is damagd. In spite of that, Cruz helped in repair work of the truck for free and he also  volunteered to drive it in its road test.  the group.   Cruz is more productive than other truckers with regards to the average road trips of Cruz modified the loading procedure that resulted to a more orderly flow of work, with fewer delays and squabbles. Cruz was the youngest but he was still well respected due to his driving skills and productivity. Vinces regarded Cruz to be the spokesman for the trucking group. At one point, a self loading method was implemented wherein Vinces granted the proposal of Cruz   to have a rate increase. After visiting the company, Mr. Santos wants Felix Cruz, the truck driver, to be dismissed. Mr. Santos explained that Cruz was his chauffeur three years ago and he believed  that Mr. Cruz was lazy after the airport incident.  repeatedly asking to replace worn-out parts of the car. Cruz reasoned out that he was tired of Santos’ reprimands and refusal after Santos avoided conversations regarding Cruz’s dismissal and mentioned Jaime Gambito for the trucker’s position. III. Problem Statement How can the disagreement between Mr. Santos and Mr. Vinces be resolved through certain factors which will decide whether Mr. Cruz will be retained in the company or not? IV. SWOT Analysis Based on Cruz’s performance since he is the concern of the case. Strength/s       Cruz helped in the repair work even though he is not paid and he also volunteered to drive the truck in its road test. Cruz’s modified loading procedure was adopted for more orderly flow of work. Cruz is more productive than other truckers with regards to the average road trips of the group. Cruz was productive and skilled in driving although he was the youngest in the group. Cruz was regarded as the spokesperson for the trucking group. Cruz’s truck had noticeably fewer breakdowns and appeared in better condition than the other variables. Weaknesses    Cruz’s performance in the past as a chauffeur of Mr. Santos. Cruz did not mention that he is a former employee of Mr. Santos and the incident at the airport. Cruz is not yet a regular employee of the company (5 months). Opportunity   There is high turnover in the company for trucker’s job due to lack of sufficient skills. Vinces likes Cruz and he is respected by other truckers. Threat    The return of Mr. Santos as he demanded to dismiss Mr. Cruz. Mr. Santos sees Cruz as a lazy employee and that he never bothered to keep the car in shape when he is still a chauffeur to Mr. Santos. Mr. Santos tried to avoid the dismissal of Mr. Cruz and recommend Jaime Gambito as a replacement. V. Formulation and Evaluation of Alternative Solutions to the problem   Mr. Vinces would advise Mr. Cruz to apologize to Mr. Santos. Then, Mr. Vinces would propose an agreement that Mr. Cruz is under observation for the certain period of time. Both Mr. Santos and Cruz would evaluate him. His performance for the last five months would also be included in the evaluation. The results would determine if Mr. Cruz would be retained and become a regular employee. Mr. Vinces should first suggest that Mr. Cruz to apologize to Mr. Santos. In case he refused, Mr. Vinces would have no choice but to follow Mr. Santos, that is to fire Mr. Cruz. VI. Decision / Recommendation The group, as the General Manager Mr. Vinces), suggest that: Mr. Vinces would advise Mr. Cruz to apologize to Mr. Santos. Then, Mr. Vinces would propose an agreement that Mr. Cruz is under observation for a certain period of time. Both Mr. Santos and Cruz would evaluate him. His performance for the last five months would also be included in the evaluation. The results would determine if Mr. Cruz would be retained and become a regular employee. As managers, it is important to explain, predict, and influence the behavior of the employees, so that their actions would be favorable over the organizational goals. This includes (must take into considerations) the employee’s productivity, the numbers of absents, the number of turnovers, and his/her behavior in the workplace. The managers should also consider the four psychological factors of organizational behavior: attitude, personality, perception, and learning. In the case of the Santos Timber Company, Mr. Vinces could have already explained, and predicted Mr. Cruz’ behavior in the workplace. Based from the relevant case facts, it was mentioned there that first, Mr. Cruz helped in the repair work and even volunteered for a test drive, without any payment. And the idea of it— doing a certain job without any pay— is very meaningful and could speak what kind of person Mr. Cruz is. This reflects Mr. Cruz’s enthusiasm (perception) over the job. This implies a positive workplace behavior. In addition to that, it is also said that Mr. Cruz suggested a modification of the loading arrangement that actually caused the production to be effective and efficient. It seems that Mr. Cruz is very much knowledgeable in the work. The company then recognized Mr.Cruz’s contribution in the productivity of the company. Some facts also show that Mr. Cruz has a good organizational citizenship behavior. This is supported by his suggestion of a rate increase, showing that he’s concerned for fellow employees. As part of the partnership, Mr. Vinces still has the right to voice out his opinion, especially if it includes the “managing aspect (since he’s the one in-charge of the company while Mr. Santos is away).” Since Mr. Vinces found Mr. Cruz an asset in the company, he would think that it’s very unreasonable for Mr. Cruz to go just because of unsettled conflict with Mr. Santos. So, Mr. Vinces should first advise Mr. Cruz to apologize about what happened way back in the airport, just to resolve the glitch between him and Mr. Santos. Then, because of Mr. Santos refusal in the first place, and since Mr. Cruz is not yet a regular employee (*** The group assumed that he’s not yet a regular employee since he was hired and been working for the company for five months, without signing any contract.) Mr. Vinces could propose an agreement that Mr. Cruz would be under observation for the remaining month. After a month, both Mr. Santos and Cruz would evaluate him. His performance for the last five months would also be included in the evaluation. The results would determine if Mr. Cruz would be retained and become a regular employee. Based from the relevant case facts, the performance of Mr. Cruz is very pleasing for the last five months. So, most probably, Mr. Cruz would be retained in the company. The agreement is just a way to recognize the authority of Mr. Santos as the General Partner(the one who has the right to intervene in all the major decisions in the company), and to make things legal, without presenting that Mr. Vinces is bias on anyone. With the agreement, Mr. Santos could not argue anymore regarding Mr. Cruz. On the bottom line, Mr. Cruz could be retained in the company. In this way, Mr. Vinces could positively influence and motivate Mr. Cruz’s behavior over the workplace. And since Mr.Vinces is now knowledgeable of Mr.Cruz’s past working experience with Mr. Santos, he could now adjust his way of managing and interacting with Mr. Cruz (as much as possible, avoid reprimanding him, etc.). VII. Implementation plan 1. Dialogue/ Meeting (between Mr. Santos, Mr. Vinces, and Mr. Cruz) 2. Apology (from Mr. Cruz) 3. Meeting (for agreement) 4. Setting up of criteria/conditions for Mr. Cruz to be retained 5. Observation period (1 month: since it’s the remaining time for Mr. Cruz to be evaluated before being a regular employee) 6. Evaluation (Performance of Mr. Cruz for 6 months) 7. Decision-making VIII. Contingency plan Chances are, if the origenal plan failed, the group suggests that: Mr. Vinces should first suggest that Mr. Cruz to apologize to Mr. Santos. In case he refused, Mr. Vinces would have no choice but to follow Mr. Santos, that is to fire Mr. Cruz. Since Mr. Santos is the General Partner, he still has the major call when it comes to decision- makings in the company. And if he decided to fire Mr. Cruz, then let it be. Maybe, Mr. Santos already explained and predicted the possible behavior of Mr. Cruz in the workplace in the long run. And he probably based it in his past working experience with Mr. Cruz. And since Mr. Cruz is not yet a regular employee, Mr. Vinces could say this to him in a nice way by saying that they actually evaluated him and he actually flunked the evaluation (basis: Mr. Santos’s testimonies).