Organizational Behavior
Many employees from Apple.inc concur that the working environment is great, and that the organization offers diverse opportunities for progress and career development. These comments from workers there indicate the level of satisfaction in the global Information Technology firm which leads in the field of innovation (Stone, & Vance, 2009). However, some employees have repeatedly complained of the company’s global enterprise. The high levels of secrecy which are imposed on the employees are discouraging and make the workplace an unattractive place. If I were to take after Steve Jobs and manage Apple Inc., I would look towards changing the secrecy policy which is too strict for employees.
It is apparent that offering attractive salaries and career development opportunities for employees is one aspect that makes apple a desirable place to work. The secrecy operations in the firm are challenging not only in the workforce but also for the management in some levels. The actual secrecy prohibits employees from discussing publicly in blogs and other forums on the inner workings which include the new technology being developed by the organization. For the benefits of the requirement in promoting secrecy among workers reduces the risk of other firms duplicating the technology published by Apple.inc (Stone, & Vance, 2009). In this perspective, the policy on secrecy is not all wrong because the firm maintains its competitive advantage while working with in a competitive market. Furthermore, sharing the new concepts being developed by the firm leads to loss of authenticity of the core idea in the development of a new technology. The loss of authenticity in this perspective has shortcomings on the image of Apple.inc because the company looks at operating as a global leader in world technology.
Without overlooking the said benefits of maintaining the secrecy policy in the workplace, as a manager I would change the policy and ban it from the organization. The secrecy policy in the organization is punitive rather than beneficial because those who go against it in any way may lose their positions in the workplace (Stone, & Vance, 2009). The rule tries to maintain tight control over the information within the company. Any employee who attempts to leak news about the ongoing processes to design new technology can be fired from the organization. The firm goes to the extent of providing disinformation to the employees regarding the new and upcoming product and project plans. In this perspective, Apple Inc. promotes a culture where the employees are and remain unaware about the plans being made by the organization and the top management. An organization must work with a plan, which indicates the mission and objectives as well as how these objectives will be achieved. The secrecy policy which provides a chance for misinformation to the employees is not good as it does not adhere to the objectives of planning within organizations. Furthermore, it is necessary for an organization as large as Apple Inc. to keep the employees updated in terms of the new ideas in order to create the momentum within the organization. Misinforming the employees makes them feel as if they are outsiders to the organization or as though they are not trusted enough to hold the secrets of the organization. Finally, the practice discourages the employees from sharing their ideas in innovation because they feel that the organization has a divine plan that it intends to follow.
The workers feel paranoid about the security of information within the firm. The case was also seen during the passing of the late founder Steve Jobs who had a battle with pancreatic cancer. However, abiding with the company`s secrecy policy, the employees did not provide the media and public with any significant information about the kidney transplants and the medical condition of the leader (Stone, & Vance, 2009). As the top executives declined to address the issue during press briefings, they continued to address other matters. The secrecy has to have limits on the information that should remain secret to the employees and other individuals. The sickness of the CEO may have led to a loss in the number of shareholders, thus validating the use of secrecy in this perspective. However, on the same hand, it did not allow for enough time to mourn the leader. Providing any information on the workings of the company was viewed as crossing Mr. Jobs (Stone, & Vance, 2009). From some perspective, the policy on secrecy in Apple Inc. promotes and authority to the senior executives which appears as a form of dictatorial leadership in the organization. Furthermore, secrecy limits the communication within the organization because employees are not willing to initiate the conversations about the new processes in the organization. Secrecy reduces the sharing of ideas among employees which may contribute to the failure of some projects due to the lack of brainstorming. The case seen in secrecy at Apple Inc is one whereby the employees working on special projects in the organization are allowed to interact for short periods with the other employees who could be termed as “regular or normal” employees.
The secrecy culture does not only affect the external workings of the organization but also the internal operations. In this regard, the employees who work on top-secret projects have to go through a maze with numerous security doors as they swipe their badged until arriving at their offices again where they must enter their numeric passes. Creating an organization where employees feel safe to operate and free to interact with each other is the core principle of my management style in Apple Inc. The multiple security systems make the employees feel as if their moves are being monitored closely by the organization, of course monitoring is important but not in an approach that makes the employees feel scared. The employees are assets to the organization which means that scaring them through close monitoring gives them a bad image about the organization (Stone, & Vance, 2009). Although the employees understand the purpose of the close monitoring by their superiors, it is necessary to ensure that the organization retains the autonomy of employees thus allowing them to create the favorable organization.
Most importantly, in my management approach, I understand the meaning and benefit of secrecy but it should only apply on the new technology being researched or developed in the organization. Issues such as release dates of the company products should be discussed by the employees because such announcements will create an eager mood among the individuals in the market. In this perspective, the eager buyers will purchase the pieces produced by the company because they were anxious about the technology. However, I am against the issue of allowing employees to discuss on blogs and social media the research being conducted in the company about new products. Leaking such information attracts other companies in the technology industry to engage in similar research and develop almost similar products. I agree that patenting and copy righting works but the ideas discussed by employees may be manipulated to present other products (Stone, & Vance, 2009). Additionally, in these discussions the employees may sequentially speak about the weaknesses that have been established among the new products being developed. In this perspective, the potential buyers who could have purchased the product after release already know the advantages and weaknesses of the product prior to release. Furthermore, the industry in technology devises requires surprises where the buyers of these gadgets receive new experiences from the items they purchase.
Additionally, the limitation of communication with the shareholders should be prevented and this will be my role as the manager. The stakeholders must be continuously updated on the progress of the company as they desire to understand how their investments are growing. Consequently, the secrecy code should bar the stakeholders from discussing the information they receive from the company with other individuals because it may transpire to loss of originality in the ideas (Burkes, 2014). As the manager, I will limit the discussions on upcoming technologies among the employees and other outsiders from other firms. However, while dealing with my employees, I have to allow communication and discussions in their midst in order to attain the highest quality of technology products. Quality increases because the discussions lead to brainstorming and raising better ideas about the products. In this perspective, my management style in Apple Inc revolves around establishing an organization with lower levels of secrecy and communication barriers.
Reference List
Burkes, P. 2014. 'Pay secrecy' is a deterrent to working harder, study shows. Newsok, 6 July. Retrieved on 20th Nov. 2014, from http://newsok.com/pay-secrecy-is-a-deterent-to-working-harder-study-shows/article/4985693
Stone, B., & Vance, A. 2009. Apple’s Obsession with Secrecy Grows Stronger. New York Times, 22 June. Retrieved on 20th Nov. 2014, from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/23/technology/23apple.html?_r=0
