Running Head: CHARLIE’S SPOT-OUT SERVICES

Charlie’s Spot-Out Services
TUI University
Nicole M. Hawkins
MGT 511
Module 3
Session Long Project
Dr. Kyle Steadham

Introduction As with any organization, the creation and implementation of a total benefits package is not something that a manager can throw together. There is much to consider and plan before it can be massed out to the organization. After reading the background information, and conducting additional research this SLP will lay the foundation for the Charlie’s Spot-Out Service as it pertains to the total rewards system and his managers/employees.
Extending the Plan to Parts Washers? To date, I do not feel that this incentive package as it is should be carried over to the rest of the organization, at least not yet. Based on the information provided, Charlie is somewhat satisfied with the outcome, however; questions remain, each should be addressed and a solution developed and implemented prior to introducing the plan to the rest of the company.
Questions that remain unanswered are; why, and/or how, was the quality to output ratio allowed to diminish? Must the washed parts be verified by the manager, or is there a better way to verify how many parts have been washed? If so, then a follow-on question would be, is h/she only counting the total items washed, or is h/she also checking for quality of work (washing) as well?
In my opinion, the reduction from hourly, to incentive pay was a good idea; Charlie wanted to raise the bar on productivity. In Charlie’s mind, he figured by implementing an incentive plan, he would be able to increase Williams productivity, reduce the number of hours the machines were running; which in-turn would reduce fuel costs; that would allow Charlie to either maintain or exceed his projected profit margin, and William to have a slight increase in pay.
Charlie’s objective reduces costs by setting a benchmark; this based on the average rate of work, wash 25 parts per hour. Where Charlie went wrong; he did not figure on the reduction of quality to output ratio thoroughly. William, in his mind, should have a calculator tallying how many items, in how short of a time, he would need to meet the minimum his desired benchmark ($300).
Charlie, in my opinion needs to verify how his other businesses are running before implementing such a plan; as one plan does not fit all. The background information is vague; thus there is a great deal of hypothesizing to contend with. If Charlie has similar issues at his other establishments then could he proceed; but not first without bringing in his manager, and placing answers to the questions that remain unanswered; quality/manager count.
If Charlie is not having the same issues at the other establishments; the other workers are productive benchmark achieved 25 per hour, and the quality is no issue, then he may possibly need to look at letting William go. This is not to say that Charlie could not implement this incentive, but he could end up with similar quality/count related issues.
Other Employees on Similar Plan In my opinion, I say no. Though this would depend on how each role or position is calculated or quantified. If there are similar concerns with less output, and lost profit, then it may be necessary. However; one incentive plan that is stretched across several different jobs may cause a worker(s) to be even less productive; quality may continue to reduce, and profit margins lost. What would be interesting to know is how the positions overlap or not; if they did that would open a whole other area of questions. Though research, a total rewards strategy that there are six (6) elements that define and organizations strategy that attracts, motivates, retains, and engages employees, they are; compensation, benefits, work-life effectiveness, recognition, performance management and talent development. Charlie used one store as a pilot to test his theory, useful information was