;

NAME OF STUDENTREGISTRATION NO. UNIT TITLE Unit 3: Organisations and BehaviourASSIGNMENT TITLE Motivation and Teamwork in Fast Food RestaurantsASSIGNMENT NO 2 of 2NAME OF ASSESSOR Mr. Elbert Bryan R. VidalSUBMISSION DEADLINE July 27, 2012

I, __________________________ hereby confirm that this assignment is my own work and not copied or plagiarized from any source. I have referenced the sources from which information is obtained by me for this assignment.

________________________________ _________________________

Signature Date

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------FOR OFFICIAL USE

ASSIGNMENT GRADE

Common Skills Grade

A B C D E F G

1

DANANG UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICSBTEC HND IN BUSINESS (MANAGEMENT)

Assignment Cover Sheet

Unit outcomes

Outcome Evidence for the criteria

Feedback Assessor’s decision

Internal Verificatio

n

Examine the relationship

between motivational

theories

(3)

Explain the different

motivational theories and

their application within the workplace

Assess the relationship

between motivation

theory and the practice of

management

Demonstrate an

understandingof working with others, teamwork, groups and

group dynamics

(4)

Describe the nature of groups

and group behavior within organizations

Investigate the factors that lead

to effective teamwork and the influences that threaten

success

Evaluate the impact of

technology on team

functioning within a given organisation

Merit grades awarded M1 M2 M3

Distinction grades awarded D1 D2 D3

Professor’s additional feedback and comments

2

Outcome Evidence for the criteria

Feedback Assessor’s decision

Internal Verificatio

n

Assessor Name & Signature Date

IV Name & Signature Date

(Oral feedback was also provided)

STUDENT SIGNATURE DATE / /

NAME :........................................................................................

COMMON SKILLS & COMPETENCIES ASSESSED (indicated by X)

A. MANAGING & DEVELOPING SELF D. MANAGING TASKS & SOLVING PROBLEMS1. Managing own roles & responsibilities X 12. Use information sources

2. Manage own time in achieving objectives X 13. Deal with a combination of routine & non-routine tasks3. Undertakes personal and career development 14. Identify & solve routine & non-routine problems4. Transfer skills gained to new/changing

situations & contexts E. APPLYING NUMERACYB. WORKING WITH & RELATING TO OTHERS

15. Applying numerical skills and techniques5. Treat others beliefs and opinions with respect6. Relate & interact effectively with individuals & groups

X F. APPLYING TECHNOLOGY7. Work effectively as a team member 16. Use a range of technological equipment

and systems

C. COMMUNICATING G. APPLYING DESIGN AND CREATIVITY8. Receive and respond to a variety of

information17. Applying a range of skills and techniques to develop a variety of ideas in the creation of new / modified products, services or situations

9. Present information in a variety of visual forms10. Communicate in writing X 18. Use a range of thought processes11. Participate in oral & no-verbal communication

3

TASKS

SCENARIO 1:

In the fast food stores that you have analyzed in the first assignment, learn about the motivational practices and techniques they apply. For this assignment, document these practices. Entitle this document as “Benchmarking of Motivational Practices: Case Study of Fast Food Restaurants”. Pictures and other exhibits may be presented on the body of your report. In this task, make sure that;

You are able to explain the different motivational theories and their application within the workplace (3b)

You are able to assess the relationship between motivation theory and the practice of management (3c)

SCENARIO 2:

Whole Foods Is All Teams

by Charles FishmanFast Company Issue 2, page 103

Walk into a Whole Foods supermarket and it's obvious: this is not your mother's grocery store. The produce is gleaming, stacked head high, perfectly arranged, each apple stem and celery stalk facing in the same direction. The prepared foods are mouth-watering. The freshly baked breads are irresistible. The youthful staff is cheerful, knowledgeable, eager to answer questions and offer samples. There are no plastic mountains of Coca-Cola, no coupon dispensers for Tide or Crest. There are fact sheets about wheatgrass juice and residue-free beef, and posters celebrating the virtues of sustainable agriculture.

What you won't find on the shelves, however, are the most important items in the store: the business principles by which it operates. Whole Foods Market, Inc. is the largest natural-foods grocer in the United States. It is also one of the business world's most radical experiments in democratic capitalism. Plenty of companies talk the talk of empowerment, autonomy, and teamwork. This company has spent 16 years turning those (often empty) slogans into a powerful - and highly profitable - business model. It's a strategy that's conquering new markets and clobbering the competition. Over the last few years, Whole Foods has been on a mission of rapid-fire growth. It opened its first store in 1980. As recently as 1991, it had barely a dozen stores in three states. Today it has the clout of a nationwide chain: 43 stores in ten states from California to New England, revenues of $500 million, net profits double the industry average, publicly traded shares, a goal of 100 stores and billion-dollar revenues by the end of the decade.

The Whole Foods culture is premised on decentralized teamwork. "The team," not the hierarchy, is the defining unit of activity. Each of the 43 stores is an autonomous profit center composed of an average of 10 self-managed teams -- produce, grocery, prepared foods, and so on -- with designated leaders and clear performance targets. The team leaders in each store are a team; store leaders in each region are a team; the company's six regional presidents are a team.

Whole Foods supports teamwork with a wide-open financial system. It collects and distributes information to an extent that would be unimaginable almost anywhere else. Sensitive figures on store sales, team sales, profit margins, even salaries, are available to every person in every location. In fact, the company shares so much information so widely that the SEC has designated all 6,500 employees "insiders" for stock-trading purposes.

But teamwork and information sharing aren't just about co-operation. They are also about competition -- both with other companies and within Whole Foods. Teams, stores, and regions compete vigorously to outdo each

4

other in quality, service, profitability -- and the results of those competitions translate directly into bonuses, recognition, and promotions. Recently, internal competition got so intense that company leaders asked the stores to tone it down.

"Whole Foods is a social system," Mackey, 42, explains. "It's not a hierarchy. We don't have lots of rules handed down from headquarters in Austin. We have lots of self-examination going on. Peer pressure substitutes for bureaucracy. Peer pressure enlists loyalty in ways that bureaucracy doesn't."

Democracy & Discipline

All work is teamwork. Everyone who joins Whole Foods quickly grasps the primacy of teamwork. That's because teams -- and only teams -- have the power to approve new hires for full-time jobs. Store leaders screen candidates and recommend them for a job on a specific team. But it takes a two-thirds vote of the team, after what is usually a 30-day trial period, for the candidate to become a full-time employee.

This hiring referendum affects the behavior of everyone involved in the process: the job candidate, the team, the store team leader. Store leaders take great care not to recommend people they don't think the team will approve. Recently, for example, Aimee Morgida dismissed a team candidate before the 30-day trial period was over. Morgida, a typical Whole Foods manager, is 34, college-educated, and running her third supermarket, a Bread & Circus ( one of several regional names under which the company's stores operate ) in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Her store is not only the highest revenue supermarket in the Whole Foods chain, it's also the biggest natural-foods grocery in the country.

The candidate "was shocked" by the dismissal, Morgida says. "I said, 'Three people had to talk to you about having your hands in your pockets and leaning against counters in front of customers.' This person said, 'I didn't realize it was that serious.' That [reaction] just reinforces the decision we made."

Teams themselves routinely reject candidates. According to CEO Mackey, teams don't become effective until they've rejected someone. "They're saying, 'This person isn't good enough to be on our team.' They're standing up to the leader, taking ownership of their team, saying, 'Go back and try again.'"

Who succeeds at Whole Foods? People who are serious about food, have a knack for pleasing customers, and can tolerate the candid give-and-take that's a necessary part of democracy -- all qualities that are hard to judge without working alongside someone for a while. Ron Megahan, 25, runs the Bread & Circus store in Wellesley, Massachusetts. It's a small, frumpy store that's begun to show its age. But Megahan is a bundle of energy and ideas, a strong-willed leader who prowls the selling floor in a green apron. He's also a fan of the hiring system -- even when teams reject candidates he proposes.

"There are people who are really good about working when the manager is on the floor," Megahan says, "but as soon as the manager disappears, they lose control." At Whole Foods, "I'm not the one you need to impress. It's your fellow team members. And they will be as tough as they can be, because ultimately [the hiring decision] will be a reflection on them."

Team members are tough on new hires for another reason: money. The company's "gainsharing" program ties bonuses directly to team performance -- specifically, sales per labor hour, the most important productivity measurement at Whole Foods. Democracy reinforces discipline: vote for someone who doesn't perform, and your bonuses may go down within months. The first prerequisite of effective teamwork is trust. At Whole Foods, building trust starts with the hiring vote. Another element involves salaries. How better to promote trust ( both among team members and between members and leaders ) than to eliminate a major source of distrust -- misinformed conjecture about who makes what? So every Whole Foods store has a book that lists the previous year's salary and bonus for all 6,500 employees --by name.

The open-salary policy is undeniably radical. But its trust-building payoff is substantial. CEO Mackey initiated the policy in 1986: "I kept hearing from people who thought I was making so much money. Finally, I just said, 'Here's what I'm making; here's what [cofounder] Craig Weller is making -- heck, here's what everybody's making.'"

5

By most accounts, rank-and-file team members don't spend much time consulting the salary book. Once the novelty wears off, and people discover that the cashier in the next aisle ( or city ) makes roughly what they make, they focus on team goals and job satisfaction. That's not always the case at higher levels. According to Morgida, store leaders "tend to be more interested" in the salary book, "looking at their earnings potential if they go to this store or take that job."

Mackey leads a team composed of headquarters employees and regional presidents. He says the open-salary policy does spark disagreements -- but disagreements with a purpose. "I'm challenged [on salaries] all the time," he says. "'How come you are paying this regional president this much, and I'm making this much?' I have to say, 'Because that person is more valuable. If you accomplish what this person has accomplished, I'll pay you that too.' It leads to deeper conversations than you'd have otherwise."

Anything worth doing is worth measuring. It's one of the most popular aphorisms in business: what gets measured gets done. Whole Foods takes that simple proposition to remarkable extremes -- and then shares what it measures with everyone in the company. Mackey calls it a "no-secrets" management philosophy. "In most companies," he says, "management controls information and therefore controls people. By sharing information, we stay aligned to the vision of shared fate."

The curious team member at any level of the company has access to nearly as much operating and financial data as anyone in Austin. In Ron Megahan's Bread & Circus, for example, a sheet posted next to the time clock lists the previous day's sales broken down by team. Another sheet lists the sales numbers for the same day last year. Once a week, Megahan's store posts a fax that lists the sales of every store in the New England region broken down by team, with comparisons to the same week last year, as well as year-to-date totals. Another weekly fax gives sales information for every store in the company, although it doesn't break down sales by team.

There's more. Once a month, stores get detailed information on profitability. The report analyzes sales, product costs, wages and salaries, and operating profits for all 43 stores. Because the data is so sensitive, it is not posted publicly. But it is freely available to anyone who wants to see it. And store managers routinely review it with their team leaders. Since individual teams make decisions about labor spending, ordering, pricing -- the factors that determine profitability -- the reports are indispensable. It's hard to overstate how devoted Whole Foods is to measurements. Once a year, for example, it conducts a morale survey to probe employee attitudes. This is a no-holds-barred exercise. The company asks questions about rank-and-file confidence in team leaders, store leaders, and regional leaders. It asks about fears and frustrations. It asks where the company seems to be straying from its values.

Brutally honest stuff -- the results of which, like almost everything at Whole Foods, becomes public information. The company describes the results of the morale survey in its annual report to shareholders. According to the most recent annual report, team members in the northeast region are disgruntled with the company's health insurance changes; employees in southern California worry that the Whole Foods gainsharing system "is increasing competition among teams and lowering overall store cooperation"; stores in Houston, Chicago, and west Los Angeles report low confidence in their leadership.

Does Mackey worry that Whole Foods distributes too much information to too many people across the company? Hardly. "If you're trying to create a high-trust organization," he says, "an organization where people are all-for-one and one-for-all, you can't have secrets."

Be your own toughest competitor. "All-for-one" doesn't imply complacency. Whole Foods is serious about accountability -- far more serious than lots of tough-talking companies with less humane values. Teams are expected to set ambitious targets and achieve them. But accountability does not imply bureaucratic oversight. At Whole Foods, pressure for performance comes from peers rather than from headquarters, and it comes in the form of internal competition.

Competition is ubiquitous at Whole Foods. Teams compete against their own goals for sales, growth, and productivity; they compete against different teams in their store and against similar teams in different stores and regions. This competition is a major reason why performance information is so available. It becomes the gauge by which every team can measure itself against every other team. Ron Megahan's little supermarket in Wellesley won't ever surpass Aimee Morgida's store in total sales -- but it can try to beat it in growth rates, employee morale, customer service, and other performance indicators.

6

The main vehicle for competition at Whole Foods is an elaborate system of peer reviews through which teams benchmark each other. The "Store Tour" is by far the most intense. On a periodic schedule, each Whole Foods store is toured by a group of as many as 40 visitors from another region. It's not a casual visit. The touring group includes regional leaders, store team leaders and associate store team leaders, and leaders from two operating teams ( say, grocery and nutrition ) who work intensively with their colleagues in the store. The tour is a two-day mix of social interaction, reviews, performance audits, and structured feedback sessions.

Sometimes competition becomes excessive. About a year ago, senior executives began sensing that the hoopla and preparations surrounding store tours were getting out of hand, even becoming counter-productive. "People were over-buffing their stores to the point that the tours weren't truly representative of what the store was like," says Chris Hitt, 46, president of the northeast region for Whole Foods. Hitt has been with the company since it was just four stores and a warehouse. "People were coming in at two in the morning to get ready, making special T-shirts for the tour, putting together four-color booklets. They were exhausting the staff. It was hell week. People have toned it down since then."

The TCS review ("The Customer Snapshot") is another key exercise. Ten times a year, each store is toured by a headquarters official or regional leader and rated on 300 different items. Unlike store tours, the TCS is a surprise inspection. It lasts a full day, and the ratings carry great weight inside Whole Foods. Once a month, every store's TCS results go to every other store. The ratings become yet another way for stores and teams to compete with each other. "What this has built in the company," says Whole Foods President Peter Roy, 39, "is a culture of incremental progress."

Lateral learning -- finding out what your colleagues are doing right and carrying those practices into your organization -- has become a driving force at Whole Foods. Ron Megahan routinely examines printouts of the top-selling products in other stores and regions to find out what he can learn. "This isn't rocket science," he says. "I want to see the products that are moving in another region." John Mackey puts it another way: "If you don't cross-pollinate, you become a hick."

Sustainable SuccessWhole foods market has spent 16 years refining its culture of democracy and discipline. That culture is about to be put to its most serious test. The company wants to jump from 43 stores to 100 stores by the year 2000, and at least to double sales to $1 billion. The question isn't whether it can make the numbers, but whether it can become a billion-dollar company without losing its character.

One way to transfer a culture's values is to transfer people who embody them. Today when Whole Foods opens a store, it looks for company veterans willing to accept major roles at the new location. In general, the company likes to recruit up to 30% of the new staff from its existing supermarkets. The recently opened Georgetown Bread & Circus in Washington, D.C. is typical. Its staff includes a produce team leader from a Providence, Rhode Island store; meat and seafood team leaders from its Austin stores; a grocery team leader from Boston; a beer/wine/cheese team leader from North Carolina; a front-end team leader from Ron Megahan's store in Wellesley.

Peter Roy says sustainable growth has been a worry at Whole Foods from the beginning. But he's philosophical about the challenges ahead: "When we went from one store to two, people said, 'It's not going to be the same feeling; you're getting too big.' When we opened the third store, people said that would push us over the edge. Now we're opening store 43, and the company is definitely getting too big! But it's not the size of the company that creates the feeling. It's the core values. It's like making yogurt or sourdough bread. You can't dilute it too quickly."

Assess the case study above. In your analysis,

Describe the nature of groups and group behavior within organizations (4a) Investigate the factors that lead to effective teamwork and the influences that threaten success

(4b) Evaluate the impact of technology on team functioning within a given organisation (4c)

GRADING

7

Pass is achieved by meeting all the requirements defined in the assessment criteria. (Refer page 2 of the assignment brief)

Merit Select and apply appropriate methods (M2)

Characteristics / Possible Evidence – Appropriate methods/techniques have been applied in motivational theories, team development and analyzed impact of technology on team functioning.

Present and communicate appropriate findings (M3)

Characteristics / Possible Evidence – An appropriate structure and approach has been used and logical and coherent arguments has been presented related to motivational theories as well as teamwork, groups and group dynamics.

Distinction Take responsibility for managing and organizing activities (D2)

Characteristics / Possible Evidence – demonstrated independence and substantial activities have been planned, managed and organized related to practice of management and groups and group dynamics.

Demonstrate convergent, lateral and creative thinking (D3)

Characteristics / Possible Evidence – problem have been solved with evidence of good understanding of organizational performance and impact of technology on team functioning.

Common Skills Grading

To achieve a PASS, student’s answers should display clear presentation of information / data collected. As a member in group discussion, students should contribute positively.

To achieve a MERIT, student’s answers should display clear, concise presentation of information / data collected. As a member in group discussions, student should contribute positively towards others’ opinions and offer constructive advice / suggestions.

To achieve a DISTINCTION, student’s answers should display clear, concise and analytical presentation of information / data collected. As a member in group discussions, student should contribute positively and offer constructive advice / suggestions. Information should share with all members of the group.

PRESENTATION

1. The assignment should have a cover page that includes the assignment title, assignment number, course title, module title, Lecturer/tutor name and student’s name. Attach all the pages of assignment brief/cover sheet with your report and leave them blank for official use.

2. This is an individual assignment.

3. Ensure that authenticity declaration has been signed.

8

4. Content sheet with a list of all headings and page numbers.

5. A fully typed up professionally presented report document. Use 12 point Arial or Times New Roman script.

6. Your assignment should be word-processed and should not exceed 2,500 words in length.

7. Use the Harvard referencing system.

8. Exhibits/appendices are outside this limit.

9. The assignment should be not contain a bibliography – but should contain a list of any references used in the assignment.

NOTES TO STUDENTS FOR SUMMISSION

Check carefully the submission date and the instructions given with the assignment. Late assignments will not be accepted.

Ensure that you give yourself enough time to complete the assignment by the due date.

Do not leave things such as printing to the last minute – excuses of this nature will not be accepted for failure to hand-in the work on time.

You must take responsibility for managing your own time effectively.

If you are unable to hand in your assignment on time and have valid reasons such as illness, you may apply (in writing) for an extension.

Failure to achieve a PASS grade will results in a REFERRAL grade being given.

Take great care that if you use other people’s work or ideas in your assignment, you properly reference them in your text and any bibliography.

NOTE: If you are caught plagiarizing, you could have your grade reduced to zero, or at worst, you could be excluded from the course.

9