This particular article published by Wall Street Journal on Tuesday, November 27^th was somewhat intriguing. I have always thought of Verizon Wireless as a company that lost its consumer appeal and user friendliness years ago. What was worse was the fact that company management did not seem to be doing anything to ensure company’s competitiveness in the future. But yesterday’s article in Wall Street Journal changed some of my earlier opinions.

Verizon, a joint venture of Verizon Communications Inc. and Vodafone Group PLC, announced that it would open up its wireless network for third-party devices. This move will allow customer to purchase the handset or any other mobile device in any retail outlet they wish and be able to use it on Verizon network. Prior to the move, customers were able to use only the devices sold and outfitted by Verizon itself.

Article goes to discuss several of the US cellular companies and in essence create a side-by-side comparison that points out some of the potential implications this move might have on the company. In addition, article describes Verizon Wireless management’s reluctance to cooperate with open standards protocols proposed by Google to the FCC. Its not surprising that amidst Verizon’s opposition to the proposed “open network” standards that would allow customers use any device they wish Verizon’s latest move to open up their own network seems like a strategically reacting move.

As article continues, it reveals Verizons plans to publish the specific details of system infrastructure that will allow developers that create mobile devices to better design their devices for seamless use on the Verizon network. Although publishing company’s system specifics is not something new, typically it comes after significant litigation and normally is preceded by a court order as it was the case in Microsoft’s European monopoly proceedings. This latest move by Verizon is seen as its managements attempt to gain a corner on the market of open standards for communications that Google is so insistent on pursuing.

Although Verizons decision might have a relatively large impact in terms of managerial restructuring and customer service for the company itself. This move also marks an important stepping-stone for wireless industry as a whole. Wireless industry in the United States is perhaps on a path to become more decentralized, flexible and more compatible with its European counterparts.

1. 2. Personal Reaction

I believe that this article has great value to business management students as it points out the importance of proactive management. Although Verizon Wireless is moving towards somewhat de-centralized wireless network model, many networks that are operating in the US today area already experiencing the benefits that this model brings. For example, AT&T allows handsets that are not sold by it’s retail stores to be used on it’s wireless networks causing many customers to switch to AT&T simply due to large variety of devices the network supports. Verizon has held on to the outdated business model that did not keep the customer in mind and now the company is attempting to play catch up.

Although Verizon will undoubtedly gain some consumer confidence and perhaps a larger market share as a result of this move, I believe the company has much larger issues. Verizon seemingly has done very little to create a network that is more compatible with other worldwide carriers. As opposed to AT&T’s GSM network Verizon Wireless still uses an outdated analog signal in some of it’s towers, as well as incompatible digital spectrum that is not used anywhere also in the world. I think that these are some of the issues that Verizon Wireless management team must consider in order for company to succeed. While opening the network for third-party devices is a step in the right direction, Verizon needs to do more to ensure that consumers see the company as a viable communication choice amidst growing competition.

One positive and innovative idea that I see coming out of this article is the fact that Verizon Wireless management is considering the history in predicting the future and is trying to speculate where technology is going to end up. One of the key remarks in the article is the fact that Verizon hopes that the wireless standards become a way of life the same way the Internet has. Verizon says that it hopes to have anything that would like to be linked to the company network on board, including computers, wireless book readers, and possibly, kitchen appliances.

I think this article shows a reality of today’s competitive and dynamic market. It shows that management no longer is able to survive simply on reactive strategies and only responding to issues and challenges as they arise. Today’s technologically savvy consumers expect more from service industry, they are no longer willing to be bound by irrational company standards of limited choices. It seems to me that if a company like Verizon were to be successful, it absolutely must engage in proactive and maybe even aggressive advancements. No longer is the best quality the only factor that captures consumer spending. Today, choices and options play overwhelmingly important role in the consumer spending decisions.

Verizon as well as many other technology companies must stay sensitive to consumer needs that go beyond the obvious quality of service. As technology industry grows it continues to offer low barriers to entry thus creating healthy competition for consumer dollars. Consumers, now more than ever before focus on environmental impact psychological appeal and physical appearance when making technology purchases. Apple Inc. has been doing a great job in capturing consumer attention with its innovative products that appeal to all levels of consumer interests. Cell phone companies must shift their thinking paradigm and begin to employ a management style that would allow them to adapt quickly to consumer needs.

Reference:

Almon S. & Dionne, S. (2007). Verizon to Open Cell Networks to Other’s Phones.

Wall Street Journal Online. Retrieved November 28, 2007, from http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119617188870905241.html

First root issue I see in this case deals with the management structure of the organization. At the very beginning case mentions that secretary gives Bill Young heads up with regards to his placement in the company and some of the expectations. The fact that administrative assistants would carelessly distribute sensitive information from the main office is worrisome, a healthy company must have trustworthy employees, in such healthy companies “grapevine” phenomenon is non-existent.

Second issue that I see is more or less a symptomatic issue and deals with management as well. The fact that VP of personnel was not being consistent in his information is a problem. Although he mentioned that the Columbia Federal Savings Bank (CFSB) employees are “one happy family” and that “we take care of each other”. He continued on to say things that implied former branch manager was fired due to his inability to “handle” the situation at hand.

As case goes on another root issue that comes to mind is the fact that employees at Bill’s branch do not follow the conflict resolution protocols (assuming there are some). As described in the case an employee rushed into Bill’s office, spewed off complaints and stormed out, that’s not acceptable.

Fourth issue in this case is symptomatic. I would like to address it because I feel that the people doing the evaluation are seemingly confused about the purpose of evaluations. As Bill indicates after Bernadette appeared to be workings towards gender re-assignment her evaluations were negative although the performance seemed to have gone unmentioned.

Lastly another symptomatic issue that I would be concerned with is the fact that according to the secretary, VP of personnel at CFSB wants to fire Bernadette. Action like that especially without merit will put the whole organization in legal jeopardy and it seems to me that a VP of personnel would know that better than anyone.

Although the issues are plentiful, there are several of them that must be dealt with right away. First root problem that needs to be addressed immediately is the leak of information. Even though Bill is a friend with the secretary she had no business divulging anything that she overhears in the office. I think that this problem is one that must be corrected immediately because leaks within an organization are not good for the over all health of the organization.

Second issue that must be dealt with promptly is the fact that employee discrimination against Bernadette is somewhat unwarranted and after the final gender re-assignment operation it will become illegal as well. The longer this behavior continues the less desensitized people become and it will be more difficult to remedy this situation if it continues. Although the discrimination issues are important I believe that they are symptomatic and once the employees are educated and are taught to be more tolerant the problem will no longer persist.

Thirdly, a root problem that I see as needed to be dealt with right away assuming it’s true is the fact that a VP of personnel would want to fire an individual that’s been a loyal and knowledgeable employee because of sexual orientation. Even though this particular case is a little out of ordinary, sexual orientations as well as gender issues are not under control of a company and are not considered to be work-related items. In fact questions about sexual orientation and other social aspects of people’s life’s are some of the topics that are off the table during interview and so forth. Hence an employee should be evaluated largely on performance, as it is pertains to the reasons why he or she is there in the first place.
Problem One: Leak of information from the main offices.

Alternatives: Notify all administrative personal about liability that will be inquired if they are to be found engaging in gossiping. Second, educate administrative assistants about confidentiality of their work.

Problem Two: Management Inconsistencies

Alternatives: Seminar on upper management behavior. Second, informing management on how their image reflects on the organization as a whole. Third, work with upper management on individual basis to achieve synergy of operations and procedures.

Problem Three: Grievance Reporting Procedures

Alternatives: Revising policy and making it a mandatory read for all employees. Second, provide a seminar on conflict resolution and/or proper way of dealing with conflict in workplace.

Problem Four: Performance Evaluation Issues

Alternatives: Educate employees on reason why work evaluations are done. Second, implementing a suggestion box on overall workplace improvement. Thirdly, working with people on one to one basis to help with tolerance in workplace.

Problem Five: VP’s reasons for termination.

Alternatives: Educating upper management about legal ramification of unjust termination. Second, implementing an evaluation process prior to termination that will deal with reasons for termination and their relevance.
My first recommendation would be to make certain that Marie knows that leaks of information from main office will not be tolerated. I would also be sure to make it widely known that employees are expected to adhere to privacy policy and are not to share interdepartmental information.

Because it is more difficult to educate upper management, I would hire an independent consultant to do some sort of training about what it means to be a consistent and trustworthy boss. I would urge the management of the CFSB to use discretion when communicating with employees and know that everything they say reflects on the company at large.

As mentioned before I would most certainly implement a clear policy on how to proceed with dispute or complains and how to document them. Having a process that is efficient and official will prevent from having to deal with potentially dangerous legal situations. Documenting grievances in the organization will also make it for good practice and will spur only constructive criticism.

Due to the fact that Bernadette’s performance evaluations were negative due to the recent gender change situation I would try to take care of some of the root problems described above and let this problem work itself out. However I would probably educate employees that performance evaluations must be done based on performance and not on personal feelings.

I think that after taking care of the preceding issues with regards to tolerance and educating upper management, the last issue I mention regarding VP expressing his intent on firing someone due to their sexual orientation will work itself out. I believe that when people learn to be tolerant of each other they will avoid unnecessary judging and will work together towards a better workplace.