Get help from the best in academic writing.

HRM Response: (200 words response) 1 – Rose – Discussion Forum Week

HRM Response: (200 words response)

1 – Rose – Discussion Forum Week 6 – Working for the Best: The Container Store

When thinking about employee achievements and how they can be recognized, two immediate tools come to mind. The first is a bonus that can be attained yearly or quarterly. Attainment is achieved through performance which would be monitored not only by the employee but their management as well. Another way to recognize employee achievement would be through providing discounted stock offerings or equity within the enterprise in question. I believe this would be a game-changer if the ability to purchase was also tied to performance, meaning the better you perform, the deeper discount or more you can buy. Monetary compensation does not always motivate people to achieve. I happen to be one of those people. While yes – monetary compensation is a great reward, I enjoy added responsibilities that sharpen my skills. In return, this often leads to financial compensation in the end. Ultimately a sound recognition system should include items outside of cash to appeal to all employees. The best factors that have given me the most motivation have been stretch assignments. Stretch assignments for me are often outside of my traditional wheelhouse, requiring out-of-the-box logic for resolution. As a result, I can be challenged and create a solution to a problem. My last stretch assignment was longer than most. It ended up being three months versus most projects running no more than two weeks. My diligence paid off as I learned a new skill set that is in use for a promoted role. The most significant time I was discouraged from completing work was when there was no recognition of above-average performance. Lack of acknowledgment was an issue for me as predecessors had seen mention and moved on to more lucrative roles. As a result of being stuck, I became very disgruntled and contemplated leaving the company altogether. The Container Store has a lock on the ideas of equity and investment in employees. By proactively empowering employees, The Container Store experiences many tangible benefits. Productivity increases are directly met with pay increases of 50% to 100% above the industry average in wages. The Container Store also has record low employee turnover in comparison to industry counterparts. These ideas of employee investment are in direct correlation with the Shared Organizational Strategy. The Container Store seeks to share as much information as possible with employees creating personal autonomy and a sense of belonging or family. (EIU Case Study, 2013).

References – EIU Case Study. (2013). Retrieved 18 November 2021, from (Links to an external site.)


RESPONSE 1 (200 words):

2 – Morrissette

Employees can be rewarded for good job performance through profit sharing, gainsharing (specific performance goals/targets), bonuses, raises, etc.…  It is suitable for employees to be recognized for their achievements on the job.  Leaders should always recognize employee achievements.  It helps build/boost morale and motivates employees.  Celebrate the small wins, encouraging employees to strive harder to achieve the considerable/larger goals.  Individuals feel good when appreciation is shown for what they have accomplished.

I also understand that not all employees desire extrinsic rewards.  Some have intrinsic values (take pride in knowing they are doing a good job); this is all the motivation they need.

The factor that played a role in motivating me to perform at my best would be appreciated.  I have experienced situations where leaders did not show any appreciation towards employees for doing a good job.  The only thing that mattered was the bottom line, which I understand is that they are the business to make money (profit), but showing a little appreciation to those who contributed to profit margins would be nice.  It can be very discouraging always to do your best to achieve specific goals or reach particular organizational objectives, and no matter what, it is never good enough.  Once morale becomes low, it is hard to get individuals reenergized towards performance goals; some quit.

 By being selective in their hiring process, the container store helps create a dynamic culture within their stores/organization.  This process, in turn, helps with how they treat the customers by having a great customer service experience people will continue to do business with them.  Their concept around hiring (1 great employee = 3 good employees) helps increase productivity.  That mindset supports their pay strategy where they pay 50-100% above industry standards.  Then it becomes a win-win for employees and the company.  Organizational culture can go a long way in building a successful business/business strategy.  If employees feel valued and appreciated, they will work to achieve strategic goals set by upper management.  I believe it was Sir Richard Branson that said, “If you take care of your employees, your employees will take care of your customers.” It is crucial to meet employees’ financial needs and their emotional needs, and their sociological needs.  Feeling like family and feeling valued creates the desired workplace for employees.  To look forward to going to work and being around your coworkers helps with retention and reduces turnover. In addition, leaders need to provide employees with the available resources to put them in a position to be successful. This can be done through coaching, mentoring, etc…  As a leader, understanding your employees and their goals (professional/personal) can give insight as to how you can assist them with achieving their goals.  The container store cross training their employees helps with job enrichment and can help the stores ability to develop future leaders. In addition, empowering employees to make decisions and not micromanaging makes for a more autonomous work experience/environment.

RESPONSE 1 (200 words):


Specify your classmate’s failed product. 

Briefly summarize their product failure and why they thought it failed.

Do you agree with their analysis? Why or why not. 

1 – Bradley – Post 1

                The product failure that I will be discussing are Burger King’s “Satisfries”. Burger King is a fast-food restaurant that was founded in Jacksonville, Florida in the year 1953 by Keith Kramer. Kramer bought rights to a special grill machine which broiled burgers. Burger King is still known for its flame broiled burgers and is home of the extremely popular burger, “The Whopper”. (Daskowski)

                In 2013, Burger King introduced a new product call, “Satisfries”.  The fries offered a healthier alternative to Burger King’s traditional fries. The fries healthier option included a batter that was less porous, so the fries absorbed less of the cooking oil when fried; thus, creating a french fry that contained 20% fewer calories than the traditional fries. (Sauter, Comen, Frohlich, Stebbins). Burger King expected the Satisfries to be so popular that customers would be willing to pay for a 19% markup compared to the traditional fries. (Associated Press) Unfortunately, the quick failure of Satisfries ended the 2013 year with a sales deficit of 2.7%. Total revenue compared to 2012 was also down by half a million. Burger King attempted to salvage the money lost on the Satisfries by quickly re-offering the Chicken Fries, which had been a success in 2005. The decision to replace the Satisfries with the Chicken fries proved to be the best financial option for Burger King. (Nusca)

                In my opinion, Satisfries failed for several reasons. The first reason was that Burger King didn’t advertise the new product very well. There are numerous reports of customers simply not knowing the difference between the two fries and why there was a price difference. Which explains the second reason for the product’s failure; the cost. When people are going to a fast-food restaurant, they are looking for value. Burger King failed to capture not only the initial sale of the Satisfries due to poor marketing and higher price point, but also failed to capture the returning customer. The third reason it failed was because, in general, people are not looking for healthy options when dining at a fast-food restaurant. All reason combined; Burger King produced a product that failed within a year of its release.


2 – Frink, Post 1

New Coke was a new product introduced by the Coca-Cola corporation in 1985. Perhaps calling it a replacement product would be more fitting however. Coca-Cola was a household name and had become a quintessential American company following the second world war. However, the company was worried about the market share loss by its flagship product, Coca-Cola. In order to try and make it more appealing they altered the recipe of the soft drink to make it sweeter. In focus groups only about 10-12% of subjects strongly opposed the new flavor, so there were no overt warning signs that the new product would be a massive failure. (Pendergrast) Furthermore, company stock went up after the public announcement and market research showed that 80% of Americans were aware of the new product within days. (Hays)

Public resentment of the new product ran high particularly in the southern US, which had traditionally been the best market for the company. Many saw it as a betrayal to both the product and tradition. Even worse, the company’s biggest rival, Pepsi had a field day. Pepsi ran many TV ads and even took out a full page ad in the New York Times claiming victory in the cola wars. (Hays, Pendergrast). On the afternoon of July 11, 1985, Coca-Cola executives announced the return of the original formula, 77 days after New Coke’s introduction. ABC New’s Peter Jennings interrupted the show General Hospital with a special bulletin to share the news with viewers. (Top 10)

In the end perhaps Coca-Cola’s own Marketing Vice President summed it up best when he said in a 1999 interview with SKI magazine: “Yes, it infuriated the public, cost us a ton of money and lasted for only 77 days before we reintroduced Coca-Cola Classic. Still, New Coke was a success because it revitalized the brand and reattached the public to Coke.”

I believe the company was too desperate to gain market share and thus acted hastily. They were losing market share due to increased competition, not due to less interest or love for their product. Furthermore, completely replacing the tried and true recipe with the New Coke was perhaps the worst idea. If they had simply added it to their product lineup instead of replacing, all these problems, negative publicity and profit loss would have been avoided. 

Pendergrast, M. (2000). For god, country, and Coca-Cola (2nd ed.). Basic Books.

Hays, C. L. (2005). The real thing: Truth and power at the Coca-Cola Company. Random House Trade Paperbacks.

Top 10 bad beverage ideas – TIME. (2010, April 23).,28804,1913612_19


Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *