Assuming that the two options are opposing forces in a given situation, what would be your way of choosing?
From United States, Daphne
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
50From United States, Daphne
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Both r important for the organization.but employees satisfaction are more imp than cost becoz happy employees r productive employees........ Rgds, anju godara
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Nikhil,
Yes, Anju is right. Both are important, but whenever we have to choose only one from both, that time we should go for employee satisfaction because they are assets for the organization. So, we have to keep them happy. If we don't go for it, they may leave the organization, leading to the cost of recruitment. Therefore, it is better to go for employee satisfaction.
Regards,
Pranoti Bhatt
From India, Ahmadabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Yes, Anju is right. Both are important, but whenever we have to choose only one from both, that time we should go for employee satisfaction because they are assets for the organization. So, we have to keep them happy. If we don't go for it, they may leave the organization, leading to the cost of recruitment. Therefore, it is better to go for employee satisfaction.
Regards,
Pranoti Bhatt
From India, Ahmadabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Welcome back, Mr. Gurjar,
My advice to all employers, including HR, is, "TAKE CARE OF YOUR EMPLOYEES, YOUR EMPLOYEES WILL TAKE CARE OF YOUR ORGANISATION." It doesn't mean that we should blindly follow this quote.
COST and EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION are not opposing forces. They are part of an ORGANIZATION'S OPERATIONAL FACTORS. The cost incurred for EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION must be correlated with and recovered through "EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE." It has to be a PROPORTIONAL FIGURE.
The prime responsibility of HR is EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION. "Cost" only matters to TOP MANAGEMENT or EMPLOYER because they are concerned about "PROFITS," but not EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION. The backbone of any organization is its EMPLOYEES. Without employees, an organization can't do anything irrespective of the projects in hand to be executed.
If MANAGEMENT/HR knows "How to GENERATE Rs.100 by spending/investing Rs.10," I am sure EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION IS NOT A BIG DEAL and moreover, it is "WISE MANAGEMENT."
With profound regards
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
My advice to all employers, including HR, is, "TAKE CARE OF YOUR EMPLOYEES, YOUR EMPLOYEES WILL TAKE CARE OF YOUR ORGANISATION." It doesn't mean that we should blindly follow this quote.
COST and EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION are not opposing forces. They are part of an ORGANIZATION'S OPERATIONAL FACTORS. The cost incurred for EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION must be correlated with and recovered through "EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE." It has to be a PROPORTIONAL FIGURE.
The prime responsibility of HR is EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION. "Cost" only matters to TOP MANAGEMENT or EMPLOYER because they are concerned about "PROFITS," but not EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION. The backbone of any organization is its EMPLOYEES. Without employees, an organization can't do anything irrespective of the projects in hand to be executed.
If MANAGEMENT/HR knows "How to GENERATE Rs.100 by spending/investing Rs.10," I am sure EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION IS NOT A BIG DEAL and moreover, it is "WISE MANAGEMENT."
With profound regards
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Why don't you try purchasing a TOYOTA CAMRY for the price of a TOYOTA COROLLA without compromising on QUALITY STANDARDS... Can you?
"If you pay PEANUTS, you will get MONKEY's."
With profound regards,
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
"If you pay PEANUTS, you will get MONKEY's."
With profound regards,
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi,
It was nice to read different and interesting views on the matter. Yes, company cost and employee satisfaction are both very important and strong factors, which are key to the success of the company. Company cost and employee satisfaction are not two opposite factors. These two go hand in hand. Company cost is a wide term and does not only mean salaries of employees and money spent on employee welfare and employee engagement. It also includes the cost spent on using the raw material, machinery, and overtimes, etc. When employees are not satisfied with salary and other benefits, they will work half-heartedly, so the quality will suffer, and employees may need to rework on the product to improve quality. As a result, the cost, i.e., money spent on raw materials, tools, overtime, etc., and even money spent on salary for the time workers worked on low-quality product will go in vain. So, it will cost more to the company. If after giving a little more salary and other benefits, employees are satisfied, they work at their best, and automatically the company's cost, i.e., the company's money spent on other factors, will be saved.
So, I would like to conclude that if employees are satisfied, then the cost of the company is automatically saved.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
It was nice to read different and interesting views on the matter. Yes, company cost and employee satisfaction are both very important and strong factors, which are key to the success of the company. Company cost and employee satisfaction are not two opposite factors. These two go hand in hand. Company cost is a wide term and does not only mean salaries of employees and money spent on employee welfare and employee engagement. It also includes the cost spent on using the raw material, machinery, and overtimes, etc. When employees are not satisfied with salary and other benefits, they will work half-heartedly, so the quality will suffer, and employees may need to rework on the product to improve quality. As a result, the cost, i.e., money spent on raw materials, tools, overtime, etc., and even money spent on salary for the time workers worked on low-quality product will go in vain. So, it will cost more to the company. If after giving a little more salary and other benefits, employees are satisfied, they work at their best, and automatically the company's cost, i.e., the company's money spent on other factors, will be saved.
So, I would like to conclude that if employees are satisfied, then the cost of the company is automatically saved.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Interesting perspectives. Do you think HR is 'not' supposed to see the costs? Do high-paying companies always have the best talent? Does higher cost (salary + welfare ++ etc. etc.) mean more productivity? Does more satisfaction mean more productivity? Or am I reading your responses wrong!!!
From United States, Daphne
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From United States, Daphne
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi, First of all, I would like to say that it is not nice and polite to judge any other person's perspective. If you have different views, then mention them. I will accept those happily. Secondly, I never said that you should give a high salary or spend high costs on welfare. I said employees should be satisfied with what you offer. So, it should be up to market standards. And what you offer as welfare should be safe and innovative enough to motivate employees.
Whenever a company appoints an employee, it checks that he/she is talented enough for the job/role. So I would not like to answer this question - "Do high-paying companies always have the best talent?" However, I do not think I am answerable to anyone to explain my views. Further, I would not like to have hot discussions here. So, I will not discuss it further in this thread.
Have a good day.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Whenever a company appoints an employee, it checks that he/she is talented enough for the job/role. So I would not like to answer this question - "Do high-paying companies always have the best talent?" However, I do not think I am answerable to anyone to explain my views. Further, I would not like to have hot discussions here. So, I will not discuss it further in this thread.
Have a good day.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Chitra and SAK,
I agree with what you are saying, but most of the answers indicate that in the Cost-vs.-Employee Satisfaction equation, HR must focus on Employee Satisfaction more than Cost.
Chitra, no offense, but your views can be questioned and discussed. It is good to learn from a different perspective even if the decision could be challenging at times. We will keep it professional, though.
Regarding my misreading, SAK, the post was indicating the causal approach, so I asked. However, your clarification suggests that Cost is more important than Employee Satisfaction. Maybe you could provide an answer to explain which of those is truly meant to be.
Regards,
Nikhil
From United States, Daphne
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I agree with what you are saying, but most of the answers indicate that in the Cost-vs.-Employee Satisfaction equation, HR must focus on Employee Satisfaction more than Cost.
Chitra, no offense, but your views can be questioned and discussed. It is good to learn from a different perspective even if the decision could be challenging at times. We will keep it professional, though.
Regarding my misreading, SAK, the post was indicating the causal approach, so I asked. However, your clarification suggests that Cost is more important than Employee Satisfaction. Maybe you could provide an answer to explain which of those is truly meant to be.
Regards,
Nikhil
From United States, Daphne
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Mr. Gurjar,
You had misinterpreted my comments. I was favoring EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION but not the COST FACTORS. Yes, you are right, it is all about COST-Vs-EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION, as every organization has its own LIMITS and RUNS THE SHOW within BUDGET LINES.
"EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION" is a PRODUCTIVITY FACTOR enabling organizations to PERFORM BETTER and MUCH BETTER, but NO ORGANIZATION would love to spend "BEYOND ITS LIMITS". A portion (%) of the "PROFIT GENERATED" as agreed (ACHIEVED TARGETS) is shared between employees; this involves PLANNING and operates on applicable/accepted TERMS & CONDITIONS.
If I happen to be an entrepreneur, I have my "TARGETS TO BE ACHIEVED" on TOP OF THE PRIORITY, while keeping in mind THE OPERATIONAL EXPENDITURE or so-called COST FACTORS. Here, COST FACTORS include EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION LEVELS. I should be knowing "HOW TO ACHIEVE MY TARGETS WHILE ENSURING MY EMPLOYEES' SATISFACTION LEVELS, BUT NOT IGNORING THEM, AS THEY ARE PART OF MY BUSINESS OPERATIONS/ACTIVITIES".
Therefore, both are not OPPOSING FACTORS; they go hand-in-hand. If I knew how to get things through my employees, I should also know how to SATISFY them. This is the BASIC LOGIC.
In INDIAN CONTEXT, most organizations concentrate on "MORE PROFITS - NOT JUST PROFIT", the best example of TYPICAL INDIAN MENTALITY, as we are least worried about PERFORMING ASSETS (our EMPLOYEES), hence ATTRITION RATIO IS HIGH, RETENTION STRATEGIES ARE NOT PRACTICED EFFECTIVELY, etc. Whereas, if you study WESTERNERS' APPROACH, they purely operate on "GIVE & TAKE POLICY". They know "HOW TO RETAIN THEIR EMPLOYEES (SATISFACTION LEVELS ARE MET TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT) WHILE MAKING EVERYTHING CLEAR IN BLACK & WHITE".
If you need further clarifications, kindly feel free to revert. I will provide you a sufficient amount of inputs while ensuring your SATISFACTION LEVELS.
With profound regards
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
You had misinterpreted my comments. I was favoring EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION but not the COST FACTORS. Yes, you are right, it is all about COST-Vs-EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION, as every organization has its own LIMITS and RUNS THE SHOW within BUDGET LINES.
"EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION" is a PRODUCTIVITY FACTOR enabling organizations to PERFORM BETTER and MUCH BETTER, but NO ORGANIZATION would love to spend "BEYOND ITS LIMITS". A portion (%) of the "PROFIT GENERATED" as agreed (ACHIEVED TARGETS) is shared between employees; this involves PLANNING and operates on applicable/accepted TERMS & CONDITIONS.
If I happen to be an entrepreneur, I have my "TARGETS TO BE ACHIEVED" on TOP OF THE PRIORITY, while keeping in mind THE OPERATIONAL EXPENDITURE or so-called COST FACTORS. Here, COST FACTORS include EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION LEVELS. I should be knowing "HOW TO ACHIEVE MY TARGETS WHILE ENSURING MY EMPLOYEES' SATISFACTION LEVELS, BUT NOT IGNORING THEM, AS THEY ARE PART OF MY BUSINESS OPERATIONS/ACTIVITIES".
Therefore, both are not OPPOSING FACTORS; they go hand-in-hand. If I knew how to get things through my employees, I should also know how to SATISFY them. This is the BASIC LOGIC.
In INDIAN CONTEXT, most organizations concentrate on "MORE PROFITS - NOT JUST PROFIT", the best example of TYPICAL INDIAN MENTALITY, as we are least worried about PERFORMING ASSETS (our EMPLOYEES), hence ATTRITION RATIO IS HIGH, RETENTION STRATEGIES ARE NOT PRACTICED EFFECTIVELY, etc. Whereas, if you study WESTERNERS' APPROACH, they purely operate on "GIVE & TAKE POLICY". They know "HOW TO RETAIN THEIR EMPLOYEES (SATISFACTION LEVELS ARE MET TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT) WHILE MAKING EVERYTHING CLEAR IN BLACK & WHITE".
If you need further clarifications, kindly feel free to revert. I will provide you a sufficient amount of inputs while ensuring your SATISFACTION LEVELS.
With profound regards
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Well put, SAK.
We see, however, that most HR professionals talk about interventions on employee satisfaction without addressing the costs adequately. This causes a disconnect between HR and management. I was once providing a development service, and this HR professional was a Ph.D. However, he became extremely uncomfortable when we started speaking of intervention pay-offs and impact analysis (paybacks or returns, etc.). I feel that if you restrict it to the 'conventional HR domain', the function becomes platonic.
Yet, finding the balance is not always easy. I am looking for responses where people have integrated these into their decisions. Some examples would work well on this thread.
Regards,
From United States, Daphne
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
We see, however, that most HR professionals talk about interventions on employee satisfaction without addressing the costs adequately. This causes a disconnect between HR and management. I was once providing a development service, and this HR professional was a Ph.D. However, he became extremely uncomfortable when we started speaking of intervention pay-offs and impact analysis (paybacks or returns, etc.). I feel that if you restrict it to the 'conventional HR domain', the function becomes platonic.
Yet, finding the balance is not always easy. I am looking for responses where people have integrated these into their decisions. Some examples would work well on this thread.
Regards,
From United States, Daphne
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Mr. Gurjar,
I am sharing my practical experiences, and they can be verified at any point in time. During my service period with KHAJA EDUCATION SOCIETY, GULBARGA, as SECRETARY GENERAL, third in the HIERARCHY (after VICE-PRESIDENT), I had made many decisions that are recorded in the history of KES, as none dared to succeed in taking such bold decisions. I am not boasting.
I was the one who had stopped INCREMENTS for various employees (FACULTY), particularly DOCTORS & ENGINEERS who were working in name only, without understanding the purpose of their employment. Even the OWNERS did not consider various factors that could help their educational institutions prosper. Prior to my joining, there was NO ANALYSIS of STUDENT PERFORMANCE/RESULTS - SUBJECT WISE / SEMESTER WISE, that could help study FACULTY PERFORMANCE by associating it with INSTITUTIONAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS. There was also no CONSTRUCTIVE FEEDBACK SYSTEM to evaluate STUDENT-FACULTY RELATIONSHIPS.
Many were against me and opposed my OPERUS MORANDI, including the PRESIDENT, because he was worried that STAFF WOULD RESIGN, but he never considered, "HOW CAN I TAKE MY EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS TO THE PINNACLE OF GLORY?" "HOW CAN I COMPETE WITH MARKET REQUIREMENTS & OTHER UPCOMING INSTITUTIONS?" "WHAT IS THE BEST I CAN DO IN FAVOUR OF MY EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS?" "HOW CAN I ENHANCE THE STANDARDS OF MY INSTITUTIONS TO PROMOTE THEM NATIONALLY?"
Considering the COST FACTORS, KES offered the best remuneration in the region, supporting EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION, but it was NOT TARGET-DRIVEN, resulting in HUGE LOSSES TO THE ORGANISATION, DECLINE IN STUDENT PERFORMANCE, and MUCH MORE. KES did not achieve its TARGETS because they DID NOT FOCUS ON A GIVE-AND-TAKE POLICY, nor was there a PRACTICAL PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SYSTEM in place.
When there is "NO MANAGEMENT SUPPORT," whatever GOOD we employees want to do, neither will we be allowed to do nor asked to do. I prefer the WESTERN APPROACH. If I SUCCEED in delivering my responsibilities while ACHIEVING MY TARGETS, I should be paid THE BEST; else, REMUNERATION should be PROPORTIONAL to the extent of my success. I consider this approach the best.
In this world, there is NO VALUE FOR HONESTY, SINCERITY, LOYALTY, and much more. If we support BAD, then we are THE GOOD GUYS.
I WONDER WHETHER ORGANISATIONS ARE JUST TRYING TO SURVIVE OR EXCEL/SUCCEED IN THEIR MISSION. Very soon, I shall post a new thread on a similar TOPIC.
If you have any queries, please feel free to revert.
With profound regards.
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I am sharing my practical experiences, and they can be verified at any point in time. During my service period with KHAJA EDUCATION SOCIETY, GULBARGA, as SECRETARY GENERAL, third in the HIERARCHY (after VICE-PRESIDENT), I had made many decisions that are recorded in the history of KES, as none dared to succeed in taking such bold decisions. I am not boasting.
I was the one who had stopped INCREMENTS for various employees (FACULTY), particularly DOCTORS & ENGINEERS who were working in name only, without understanding the purpose of their employment. Even the OWNERS did not consider various factors that could help their educational institutions prosper. Prior to my joining, there was NO ANALYSIS of STUDENT PERFORMANCE/RESULTS - SUBJECT WISE / SEMESTER WISE, that could help study FACULTY PERFORMANCE by associating it with INSTITUTIONAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS. There was also no CONSTRUCTIVE FEEDBACK SYSTEM to evaluate STUDENT-FACULTY RELATIONSHIPS.
Many were against me and opposed my OPERUS MORANDI, including the PRESIDENT, because he was worried that STAFF WOULD RESIGN, but he never considered, "HOW CAN I TAKE MY EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS TO THE PINNACLE OF GLORY?" "HOW CAN I COMPETE WITH MARKET REQUIREMENTS & OTHER UPCOMING INSTITUTIONS?" "WHAT IS THE BEST I CAN DO IN FAVOUR OF MY EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS?" "HOW CAN I ENHANCE THE STANDARDS OF MY INSTITUTIONS TO PROMOTE THEM NATIONALLY?"
Considering the COST FACTORS, KES offered the best remuneration in the region, supporting EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION, but it was NOT TARGET-DRIVEN, resulting in HUGE LOSSES TO THE ORGANISATION, DECLINE IN STUDENT PERFORMANCE, and MUCH MORE. KES did not achieve its TARGETS because they DID NOT FOCUS ON A GIVE-AND-TAKE POLICY, nor was there a PRACTICAL PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SYSTEM in place.
When there is "NO MANAGEMENT SUPPORT," whatever GOOD we employees want to do, neither will we be allowed to do nor asked to do. I prefer the WESTERN APPROACH. If I SUCCEED in delivering my responsibilities while ACHIEVING MY TARGETS, I should be paid THE BEST; else, REMUNERATION should be PROPORTIONAL to the extent of my success. I consider this approach the best.
In this world, there is NO VALUE FOR HONESTY, SINCERITY, LOYALTY, and much more. If we support BAD, then we are THE GOOD GUYS.
I WONDER WHETHER ORGANISATIONS ARE JUST TRYING TO SURVIVE OR EXCEL/SUCCEED IN THEIR MISSION. Very soon, I shall post a new thread on a similar TOPIC.
If you have any queries, please feel free to revert.
With profound regards.
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Definitely keeping employee morale up by periodic recognitions, keeping them engaged, challenging employees, and involving them in the business process will keep the employees satisfied.
If an organization is always striving to achieve the above because you cannot pinpoint one practice as being universal for all organizations, we need to understand what parameters of satisfaction you want to achieve for your employees. If the management and the employee are on the same page, the organization will definitely benefit, and costs will be taken care of, or cost will not be the pain point for the HR. A satisfied employee is what the HR goal should be.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
If an organization is always striving to achieve the above because you cannot pinpoint one practice as being universal for all organizations, we need to understand what parameters of satisfaction you want to achieve for your employees. If the management and the employee are on the same page, the organization will definitely benefit, and costs will be taken care of, or cost will not be the pain point for the HR. A satisfied employee is what the HR goal should be.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Take care of your employees, your employees will take care of your organization should be the motto of every HR. Regards GG
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi,
Greetings,
This is Sudhir. I want to discuss the HR profession because employee satisfaction is very important. At the same time, we have to recruit candidates for a lower CTC while ensuring they are qualified. HR is responsible for managing, controlling, and monitoring in the right direction. We need to identify the needs of the organization as well as handle employee grievances according to their requirements.
Regards,
Sudhir Kumar
sudhirkumar.hr@gmail
From India, Visakhapatnam
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Greetings,
This is Sudhir. I want to discuss the HR profession because employee satisfaction is very important. At the same time, we have to recruit candidates for a lower CTC while ensuring they are qualified. HR is responsible for managing, controlling, and monitoring in the right direction. We need to identify the needs of the organization as well as handle employee grievances according to their requirements.
Regards,
Sudhir Kumar
sudhirkumar.hr@gmail
From India, Visakhapatnam
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Disciplined employee welfare will give the organization highly effective productivity. HR has to take care of employee welfare, such as providing tea and snacks at specified times. Employees should not leave the duty spot before tea time, and they should not stay after tea time. Similarly, HR can provide tea in the employees' workspace so that they do not need to leave for tea or snacks. HR can identify time-wasting sources and prevent employees from spending time on them.
Additionally, HR can manage both employee satisfaction and cost efficiency by reducing time spent on tea/snack breaks and restricting smoking or chewing tobacco within the office, factory, or worksite premises.
From India, Kumbakonam
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Additionally, HR can manage both employee satisfaction and cost efficiency by reducing time spent on tea/snack breaks and restricting smoking or chewing tobacco within the office, factory, or worksite premises.
From India, Kumbakonam
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Absolutely, employee satisfaction is very important. At the time of recruitment itself, we have to recruit people with a good attitude. If the attitude is good, definitely you can train them and you can get better productivity from them. If you provide a conducive atmosphere for these people, surely you can get optimum results from the employees; then automatically, you can control the HR cost with the existing staff.
R. DHAMODHARA KANNAN
From India, Tiruchchirappalli
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
R. DHAMODHARA KANNAN
From India, Tiruchchirappalli
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Ask the Fortune 500 companies how they manage their employees, and you will get the answer. Costs and employees are complementary to each other. Management will not sacrifice either for the sake of the other. It requires a lot of prudent decisions to debate such topics. HR plays a crucial role as the mediator in this scenario.
KK
From Switzerland, Kirchberg
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
KK
From Switzerland, Kirchberg
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Interesting perspectives...
Thanks SAK. So, your real-life example was tilting towards the costs rather than the satisfaction :-)
Boss, we are talking about a decision where both were 'opposing factors.'
KK, I agree with you. But I feel that is one of the reasons why HR stays in the mid-nurse. Somehow, costs are discounted heavily in the analysis when HR is talking about interventions meant to improve employee satisfaction.
RDK, what exactly is your position? I guess it is employee satisfaction.
Sudhir, I am not able to fully relate to what you said.
Kalpana and GG, we are speaking of a situation where both are opposing factors. So, please bear that in mind and clarify your position with a good example. That will help us understand the context better.
Reg, Nikhil
From United States, Daphne
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thanks SAK. So, your real-life example was tilting towards the costs rather than the satisfaction :-)
Boss, we are talking about a decision where both were 'opposing factors.'
KK, I agree with you. But I feel that is one of the reasons why HR stays in the mid-nurse. Somehow, costs are discounted heavily in the analysis when HR is talking about interventions meant to improve employee satisfaction.
RDK, what exactly is your position? I guess it is employee satisfaction.
Sudhir, I am not able to fully relate to what you said.
Kalpana and GG, we are speaking of a situation where both are opposing factors. So, please bear that in mind and clarify your position with a good example. That will help us understand the context better.
Reg, Nikhil
From United States, Daphne
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Mr. Gurjar,
I don't think so or remember even a single Fortune 500 company/organization that is solely concerned about or has given topmost priority to employee satisfaction without correlating it with cost factors. Hence, they are not opposing factors but have to go hand-in-hand.
At times, the scenario in public limited companies or government organizations may/will definitely differ because none is worried about dividends except employee satisfaction (here, employee satisfaction is blessing him with everything without even considering his performance). If you wish, you can find out more. You will find my analysis 100% genuine.
Also, to save tax, there are numerous ways organizations have adopted just to prove that they are rewarding their employees as if employee satisfaction is at the top of their list.
I conclude by saying that the cost versus employee satisfaction is about employee productivity and organization growth factors but not opposing factors.
I recommend you do self-analysis rather than just asking individuals, which will never help you to conclude concretely. You will find answers for all your queries.
With profound regards,
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I don't think so or remember even a single Fortune 500 company/organization that is solely concerned about or has given topmost priority to employee satisfaction without correlating it with cost factors. Hence, they are not opposing factors but have to go hand-in-hand.
At times, the scenario in public limited companies or government organizations may/will definitely differ because none is worried about dividends except employee satisfaction (here, employee satisfaction is blessing him with everything without even considering his performance). If you wish, you can find out more. You will find my analysis 100% genuine.
Also, to save tax, there are numerous ways organizations have adopted just to prove that they are rewarding their employees as if employee satisfaction is at the top of their list.
I conclude by saying that the cost versus employee satisfaction is about employee productivity and organization growth factors but not opposing factors.
I recommend you do self-analysis rather than just asking individuals, which will never help you to conclude concretely. You will find answers for all your queries.
With profound regards,
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Gathering data for an AI comment.... Sending emails to relevant members...
Join Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.
COST INPUTS IN DECISION MAKING.ppt
HR Manual (Employee Hand Book).doc
EFFICIENT DECISION MAKING technic.pdf