Introduction
As a technology graduate, and a good student the selection of a right company to start career is a big question, although a selection can be made on perceptions however considering the importance of the question it is important that the selection of the company is based on research and data analysis rather than a simple random selection.
While I'm passionate about technology, and wish to pursue a career in a company that offers the right platform to showcase my knowledge, I am also willing to learn and gain experience since this will be the start of my career. Therefore, I decided that in order to choose the company which will give me that platform where I can perform and learn at the same time I have decided to do a feasibility tests on the available options that I have.
Purpose
This report will concentrate on developing a methodology and the process which will guide me and help me to select the right employer, after I finish my studies. In order to make this methodology helpful for other students as well, I have tried to standardize it as far as possible and create a common process which can be used to conduct a similar analysis across industries1.
Scope
In this report I will be performing a feasibility analysis of the three companies that I have chosen according to my area of interest and expertise, all the data analysis, evaluations, capability surveys will be based on the three companies only.
Expected conclusion
Considering the amount of information that I will be collecting for the activities performed during the making of this report, my prime motive would be to perform an analysis which would be able to guide me to come up with the best possible employer for me by the time I finish this work.
Overview of Alternatives . . .
Based on my understanding of the industry, I have selected three companies which are Microsoft, Sapient and Cognizant. As discussed in the previous sections that technology is something that interests me therefore I will be looking forward to analyze these three technology companies on various parameters, however before it do that here is an overview so that a little more is known about them. Mentioned below is a short comparison of the chosen companies and this will give us a brief idea about their stand and market share. We may not compare their market share as they have a different set of customers (industry wise) and the value proposition is out of scope123.
Criteria of Comparison
In the coming sections I will be discussing the differences between these three companies on various parameters and all these parameters of selection will be based on the various aspects of employee centric companies that has been gathered as a part of my research. The first criteria that I will be looking at, is the financial stability of the company as in order to have a fruitful and promising career it is important to work at an organization which is financially stable and can provide a long-term employment benefit4.
Secondly, it is important for me to work at an organization which has a good training program for fresher as I'm interested in adding more to my professional knowledge apart from gaining the work experience. The next criteria of evaluation will be the kind of role which is available /offered within the organization according to my interest and qualification. Lastly, it is important to analyze the salary which is being provided to an individual with my qualifications and role1.
Method:
In order to ensure that there is minimum bias in the evaluation which is taking place the entire selection process is divided into three steps. The first step is to perform an evaluation based on the discussed criteria, according to which research will be conducted in order to extract data related to the criteria and the same will be market on a scale of 10 where the employer with best results will get 10, 5 and 0 based on the comparisons. The next step will be to evaluate the scores of a questionnaire, where the same questions are asked from ten employees randomly chosen from a particular process, the sample size will remain the same as the process chosen for randomized selection will be of the same strength and all the employees will be sent the questionnaire however any ten responses, accepted on nCr, will form the random combination14.
The last step will be to conduct a SWOT analysis based on the details analyzed as per the format and will be manually discussed as an evaluation. The total score of the first two steps and results of SWOT analysis comparison will be able to provide us a clear idea of the conclusion that may be drawn1.
Evaluation Section: A compare and contrast of the selected companies . . .
Financial Stability
Microsoft is a fortune 500 company and has got a AAA rating from the Standard and Poor’s. Microsoft has a worth of $69 Bn, assets worth $41 Bn but $8.5 Bn in unsecured debt. It is definitely a giant and financially sound company.
Sapient has shown a good growth in the past four years and it has grown 4 folds from $174 Million to $823 Million however has also faced some steep setbacks in the past one decade. The company is financially stable however there is still long way to go.
This technology giant has really done well in the past and has shown 45% rear-over-year growth in 2010 thus reaching the 4.59 Billion mark. This year its expected to be 26% and the results of the three quarters have already shown signs that its met.
Training Program
Microsoft once again is one of the companies that have their own training and certification division with courses like MCSE, MCIP and lots more however these courses are available for non-employees as well. The internal trainings are process based and customized for internal processes6.
Sapient has an excellent training path for the new joiners and the trainings like Delivery 101, Sapient Start, Tech 101, SapeTel Simulated project and ATG are really promising and will help me to shape my knowledge and industry expertise by a great deal7.
Cognizant presents the most diverse set of employee training programs. Continuous Education, Role-based Training, Executive Training program and certification (from Microsoft, Sun, PMI, IBM Websphere and DB/2). The company also has collaboration with Harvard and many other Universities for management programs.
Role
Microsoft has a very diverse set of technology requirements and therefore there are many areas where roles according to my expertise are available4.
Sapient has a dedicated on platform application development wing and there are many where resources matching my expertise are required7.
Cognizant has roles which are related to my expertise and knowledge however they also have consulting roles in the same domain where internal movements are possible9.
Conclusion
Considering the totals scores of the research that has been conducted Cognizant stands as the most feasible option with 37.11 points and it has mostly all the features which are either a preference from my side or are mandatory as per the industry and employer norms. Hence, using the above methodology, I have been successful in dealing with the subjectivity connected to the choice of the company and the above conclusion is a result of purely data analysis.
Works Cited
x
1
Sapient.com. Training & Development. [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2011 November 12]. Available from: http://www.sapient.com/en-us/careers/training-and-development.html.
2
EDGAR Online. Annual Income Statement. [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2011 November 12]. Available from: http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/sape/financials.
3
EDGAR Online. Annual Income Statement. [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2011 November 12]. Available from: http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/microsoft/financials.
4
EDGAR Online. Annual Income Statement. [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2011 November 12]. Available from: http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/cognizant/financials.
5
Cognizant.com. Cognizant Academy. [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2011 November 13]. Available from: http://www.cognizant.com/aboutus/cognizant-academy.
6
Learning and Development. [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2011 November 12]. Available from: www.microsoft.com/learning/en/us/default.aspx.
7
Tu JI. Microsoft named best multinational workplace. [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2011 November 12]. Available from: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/microsoftpri0/2016631709_microsoft_named_best_multinational_workplace_by_gr.html.
8
Cognizant. 2011 Corporate Fact Sheet. Fact Sheet. Teaneck: ©Cognizant; 2011 Cognizant.
9
Looi PW, Marusarz T, Baumruk R. What Makes a Best Employer? Insights and Findings From Hewitt’s Global Best Employers Study. Talent and Organization Consulting. New York: FORTUNE Magazine division of Time Inc; 2004 Hewitt.
x
