Introduction
Recently, there have been predation and poaching of employees in Advancement Corporation by a competitor. The company now feels that it is paramount that a solid strategy is constituted to ensure that staff and scientists are recruited, trained and retained within the pharmaceutical firm. The prevalent incumbent poaching presents a high risk exacerbated survival crisis that could injure and subsequently drive Advancement Corporation into inefficiency or losses. At worst, the company may be pushed into severe economic crisis as a result of being forced to recruit consistently and train new scientists who again take time before they can place the firm back to competitive levels. The focal point of the paper is to address how as the project manager and acting deputy CEO, I will curb the prevalent poaching of the employees to maintain the productive, sales and competitive edge of the firm.
For the joint interview with the departmental heads, the list of ten questions that will be asked are as follows: (Each head is required to answer all the questions). All members must openly and honestly participate in the meeting process (PMBOK, 2013). It is also of paramount importance that the questions be administered in a transparent manner.
What is your understanding of the current situation?
Why do you think the company is poaching on our best employees?
Do think they will succeed in convincing them to resign?
Do you think that our employees would prefer that company over ours, and if so, why?
If you were in that management, what tactics would you use to poach employees from our firm?
What is your opinion on how we should counter the situation?
What is the role of your department in this firm?
What is your understanding of strategic alliance and a joint venture to the organizational goals and objectives?
Between having best scientist recruited to our labs for advanced research and the actual sales of the pharmaceutical products, which one is more important?
How do you and how will you ensure that the set objectives of this firm are met within the required specifications?
Following the conflict between the two departmental heads, the strategy for addressing the same will include:
Communication techniques
The first and most paramount step to resolving any conflict involves communication. The communication model that will be engaged when dealing with the disputes among the two executive directors is the transactional model. The model asserts that all the parties involved should be all receivers and senders of the message (Munter, 2006). Graphically, the technique will be as follows
The communication will entail
Problem description
Asking questions
Getting feedback
Listening
Clarifications
Considering the sensitive nature of the meeting, purposeful and result oriented planning is key to the overall positive outcome of the meeting. The planning process will entail:
Write down the purpose of the meeting.
List the members of the meeting.
Allocate date and sufficient time for the meeting.
Send a timely and official notice to the two executive directors.
Write down the specific agenda for the meeting.
Send the two executive directors reminders at a certain set time. Probably two days ahead.
Once the plan is complete, I will come up with agenda which is as follows:
Review the initial employee poaching situation.
Examine the current conflict predicament.
Find out the source of conflict.
Establish a common ground
Discuss possible alternatives
Come up with a solution.
The company has already existing goals and objectives. Therefore, the meeting objectives and agendas should ensure that both executives are on the same page regarding the crisis facing the firm. Therefore, for the closure of the meeting, the following goals should be met.
Everyone understands the crisis facing the business.
Everyone appreciates why cooperation between them will lead to achieving the overall objectives.
Find the solution to the poaching crisis.
The prospectus of the meeting is to ensure that both departmental heads not only meet their set goals and objectives but also have them reconciled for the purpose of ensuring continuity and competitive edge of the firm and more importantly to curb the employee predation by the competitor organization (Larson & Gray, 2011). Therefore, to ensure that the goals are met, the following evaluation criteria will be used.
Consistently and continually monitoring the level and extent to which the two departmental heads work together.
Measuring or evaluating the productivity capacity achieved by the two executives working together.
Evaluating the effective change in the employee recruitment, training, and retention as a result of the cooperative effort of the two heads.
Evaluating the overall change in sales and marketing as a consequence of the collaborative effort of the two leaders.
Conclusion
The process of reconciling the conflicting executive directors will form the basis for conceiving, planning and executing an organizational strategy towards addressing the employee poaching predicament in Advancement Corporation. Additionally, the corporate prospectus, goals, and objectives will be achieved at a more harmonious and advanced level.
References
Larson, E. W., & Gray, C. F. (2011). Project management: The managerial process.
Munter, M. (2006). Guide to managerial communication. Pearson Education India.
PMBOK. (2013). Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® GUIDE) (5 ed.). Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073-3299 USA, USA: Project Management Institute, Inc.
